Offline edby

  • *
  • Posts: 1079
    • View Profile
Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:
« Reply #40 on: October 25, 2018, 05:32:56 PM »
If you're high enough above the flat earth that you are being affected by UA then you would remain at a constant distance from the earth without any propulsion, for the same reason the stars do, but you would feel that acceleration so you'd be as heavy as you are on earth.
Are you sure? You only feel acceleration in a car or plane because just one part of your body is being accelerated by surface contact. But if every part is affected, you would feel nothing. Just as we feel nothing in free fall, because the effect (whether of UA or gravity) is on every part of us.

*

Online Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 9748
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:
« Reply #41 on: October 25, 2018, 09:20:41 PM »
What specifically is UA affecting?

1. Just the Earth?
2. Earth, Sun, and Moon?
3. Earth, Sun, Moon, Stars?
4. Everything?
None of these answers are correct. It affects everything that finds itself in the current of Dark Energy. That happens to cover most things external to Earth, but that's merely a consequence rather than the definition.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

*

Offline RonJ

  • *
  • Posts: 786
  • ACTA NON VERBA
    • View Profile
Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:
« Reply #42 on: October 25, 2018, 09:29:53 PM »
On the flat earth the earth is being pushed by the dark force from the bottom side, but you are being shielded by the earths mass.  That means that the dark force is pushing on the earth and the earth is pushing on you.  That way you feel the force on your feet due to the acceleration imparted by the earth to you.  In space where you are being influenced by the same dark force, you would indeed maintain a constant distance from the earth without propulsion, just like you said.  Yes, you technically would be just as heavy as you are on the earth, only you would have no way of telling as you would just be floating around without touching anything.  My contention is that on the side of the moon that faces the earth, you would be weightless.  On the opposite side of the moon you would weigh the same as on the earth since the mass of the moon would shield you from the dark force.  In the same manner, if you could actually travel to the opposite side of the earth, you would be weightless there as well.  Time to build an elevator, it would make a great place for a vacation, but bring an oxygen mask.   
For FE no explanation is possible, for RE no explanation is necessary.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 1249
    • View Profile
Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:
« Reply #43 on: October 25, 2018, 11:39:43 PM »
What specifically is UA affecting?

1. Just the Earth?
2. Earth, Sun, and Moon?
3. Earth, Sun, Moon, Stars?
4. Everything?
None of these answers are correct. It affects everything that finds itself in the current of Dark Energy. That happens to cover most things external to Earth, but that's merely a consequence rather than the definition.

Isn't this kind of semantics at a certain point? Would a better phrasing be: What specifically is the consequence of UAT? Does it consequentially impact:

1. Just the Earth?
2. Earth, Sun, and Moon?
3. Earth, Sun, Moon, Stars?
4. Everything?

If the consequence of UAT is that the earth is pushed upward, then why don't we crash into the moon and sun?
If the consequence of UAT is that the earth, sun and moon are being pushed upward, then why don't we crash into the stars and planets?
If the consequence of UAT is that the earth, sun, moon, stars and planets are being pushed upward, then that's sort of everything?

We're trying to get at what the consequence of UAT is which requires a smidge of specificity. Seems that a theory is obliged to be defined and scrutinized in order to be examined.


Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

*

Offline RonJ

  • *
  • Posts: 786
  • ACTA NON VERBA
    • View Profile
Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:
« Reply #44 on: October 26, 2018, 01:11:36 AM »
Things with UA are even worse.  You have to consider that the earth is being pushed on by a dark force field, along with at least the Sun and Moon.  I suppose that some of the stars are also being pushed, but there are other observed bodies that are moving at a different velocity relative to the earth.  You can see this with the red shift.  It can't really be a 'universal force' if other objects are effected differently.  All this because the concept of gravity is being abandoned for the earth.  The Earth's mass somehow shields the things on the top surface from the force of UA.    Gravity is an attractive force.  A very large object, like a star, keeps a much smaller object, like a planet in orbit because of the constant force of gravity is accelerating the planet.  Remember that acceleration is a vector and can either be a change in velocity, or a change in direction, or both.  The much larger object, like a star, is also being accelerated by the much smaller force of the orbiting planet. In fact astronomers have found the evidence of planets around distant stars because of the small perturbations of the star.  Also the planet Pluto was found because of the noticed perturbations of the orbits of Neptune and Uranus.  Yes, I know that if gravity is actually brought back in FET then there would be another problem.  Namely on a flat earth everything is attracted to the center of mass.  That would mean that at the edge of the planet, like near the South Pole the pull of gravity would not be anywhere near vertical.  The FET folks say they don't have to explain anything because that theory was the first.  It would be nice if a few workable equations were derived to explain all the anomalies that currently exist and can be seen and measured in observatories all over the world. Since the flat earth theory has been around longer, you would think that the equations and theories would be a lot more advanced.
For FE no explanation is possible, for RE no explanation is necessary.

Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:
« Reply #45 on: October 26, 2018, 07:04:16 AM »
If you're high enough above the flat earth that you are being affected by UA then you would remain at a constant distance from the earth without any propulsion, for the same reason the stars do, but you would feel that acceleration so you'd be as heavy as you are on earth.
Are you sure? You only feel acceleration in a car or plane because just one part of your body is being accelerated by surface contact. But if every part is affected, you would feel nothing. Just as we feel nothing in free fall, because the effect (whether of UA or gravity) is on every part of us.
Hmm. I'm not certain but I'm pretty sure you would feel it. You feel nothing in free-fall because the forces balance.
It's a common misconception that there is no gravity in space. In fact the force of gravity in low earth orbit isn't much different to that on the ground.
When astronauts are in orbit though the forces balance. They are going fast enough in a circle that: centripetal force = gravity
The forces balance so they are effectively weightless.

But if you were being accelerated upwards by UA then there is no other balancing force so I'm pretty sure you'd feel that.
« Last Edit: October 26, 2018, 08:09:32 AM by AllAroundTheWorld »
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

*

Online Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 9748
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:
« Reply #46 on: October 26, 2018, 12:04:19 PM »
Isn't this kind of semantics at a certain point?
No.

Would a better phrasing be: What specifically is the consequence of UAT? Does it consequentially impact:

1. Just the Earth?
2. Earth, Sun, and Moon?
3. Earth, Sun, Moon, Stars?
4. Everything?
None of the answers you provided are correct.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:
« Reply #47 on: October 26, 2018, 12:16:40 PM »
None of the answers you provided are correct.
Dude, come on. I know we're bff's now and everything but if one of the usual suspects had posted that you'd have moved it for "shit posting" and warned them.
What does that reply add to the discussion?
If none of those answers is correct then what is the correct answer in your view? If you state that then the debate can advance. Just saying "Nuh-uh" adds nothing.
« Last Edit: October 26, 2018, 12:52:45 PM by AllAroundTheWorld »
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

*

Online Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 9748
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:
« Reply #48 on: October 27, 2018, 08:48:27 AM »
Dude, come on. I know we're bff's now and everything but if one of the usual suspects had posted that you'd have moved it for "shit posting" and warned them.
What does that reply add to the discussion?
If none of those answers is correct then what is the correct answer in your view? If you state that then the debate can advance. Just saying "Nuh-uh" adds nothing.
I already answered that question, and stack tried running away with it. If you failed to read my answer the first time around, is me repeating myself at all likely to help?

Ah well, have a quote.

None of these answers are correct. It affects everything that finds itself in the current of Dark Energy. That happens to cover most things external to Earth, but that's merely a consequence rather than the definition.

If you take my clarification of why 1-4 are all incorrect and ask "So is it 1, 2, 3 or 4?", there really is little I can do to help.
« Last Edit: October 27, 2018, 08:50:06 AM by Pete Svarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:
« Reply #49 on: October 27, 2018, 09:20:36 AM »
I already answered that question, and stack tried running away with it. If you failed to read my answer the first time around, is me repeating myself at all likely to help?
Well, it did help because it reminded me of your answer.

And fair enough, I’ll give you this one. You had already answered the question, I either missed it or forgot about it.
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

Offline edby

  • *
  • Posts: 1079
    • View Profile
Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:
« Reply #50 on: October 27, 2018, 09:26:19 AM »
Would a better phrasing be: What specifically is the consequence of UAT? Does it consequentially impact:

1. Just the Earth?
2. Earth, Sun, and Moon?
3. Earth, Sun, Moon, Stars?
4. Everything?
None of the answers you provided are correct.
Since none is correct, i.e. all are false, logically this implies

1. UA does not affect just the Earth
2. UA does not affect Earth, Sun, and Moon
3. UA does not affect Earth, Sun, and Moon and stars
4. UA does not affect everything.


Offline edby

  • *
  • Posts: 1079
    • View Profile
Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:
« Reply #51 on: October 27, 2018, 09:33:20 AM »
But if you were being accelerated upwards by UA then there is no other balancing force so I'm pretty sure you'd feel that.
No. With what sense organ would you feel it? Suppose we had an accelerometer consisting of a spring and a weight. When you are accelerated by point contact (and not action at a distance), the spring stretches because it is acting on the weight, and the weight resists.

But UA is an action-at-a-distance type force, so it affects the weight and the spring equally. So the spring would not stretch.

I can’t think of any sensor that could distinguish the weightlessness caused by orbit, from the weightlessness caused by UA.

Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:
« Reply #52 on: October 27, 2018, 10:15:03 AM »
But if you were being accelerated upwards by UA then there is no other balancing force so I'm pretty sure you'd feel that.
No. With what sense organ would you feel it? Suppose we had an accelerometer consisting of a spring and a weight. When you are accelerated by point contact (and not action at a distance), the spring stretches because it is acting on the weight, and the weight resists.

But UA is an action-at-a-distance type force, so it affects the weight and the spring equally. So the spring would not stretch.

I can’t think of any sensor that could distinguish the weightlessness caused by orbit, from the weightlessness caused by UA.
Interesting. That’s a bit counter intuitive but from this

https://www.quora.com/Why-can-humans-feel-acceleration-but-not-constant-speed

It sounds like you’re right.
So if you were on this side of the moon you’d be weightless because you’re accelerating at the same rate as the moon.
On the dark side of the moon, if the moon shields you from UA like the earth does, then you’d weigh the same as you do on earth. Right?
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

*

Online Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 9748
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:
« Reply #53 on: October 27, 2018, 10:53:15 AM »
Since none is correct, i.e. all are false, logically this implies

1. UA does not affect just the Earth
2. UA does not affect Earth, Sun, and Moon
3. UA does not affect Earth, Sun, and Moon and stars
4. UA does not affect everything.
If the world around you is Boolean, sure. Unfortunately, that's not how human communication works at all.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

Offline edby

  • *
  • Posts: 1079
    • View Profile
Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:
« Reply #54 on: October 27, 2018, 11:09:54 AM »
So if you were on this side of the moon you’d be weightless because you’re accelerating at the same rate as the moon.
On the dark side of the moon, if the moon shields you from UA like the earth does, then you’d weigh the same as you do on earth. Right?
I think so. If there were such a thing.

Offline edby

  • *
  • Posts: 1079
    • View Profile
Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:
« Reply #55 on: October 27, 2018, 11:10:57 AM »
Since none is correct, i.e. all are false, logically this implies

1. UA does not affect just the Earth
2. UA does not affect Earth, Sun, and Moon
3. UA does not affect Earth, Sun, and Moon and stars
4. UA does not affect everything.
If the world around you is Boolean, sure. Unfortunately, that's not how human communication works at all.
You are trying to say that you meant something else. So what did you mean?

*

Online Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 9748
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:
« Reply #56 on: October 27, 2018, 12:33:20 PM »
You are trying to say that you meant something else. So what did you mean?
Precisely what I already said, and what I restated to AATW. For God's sake, read people's points prior to responding to them!
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

Offline edby

  • *
  • Posts: 1079
    • View Profile
Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:
« Reply #57 on: October 27, 2018, 12:59:26 PM »
You are trying to say that you meant something else. So what did you mean?
Precisely what I already said, and what I restated to AATW. For God's sake, read people's points prior to responding to them!
But what you said was that all those statements were false. Then you implied you didn't mean they were false, because you said 'world not Boolean'. So I'm not sure what you are talking about.

*

Online Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 9748
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:
« Reply #58 on: October 27, 2018, 01:25:40 PM »
But what you said was that all those statements were false.
Indeed.

Then you implied you didn't mean they were false, because you said 'world not Boolean'.
No. A statement can be false without its exact opposite being true. This is because the real world is not always well-represented by oversimplified Boolean logic. For your model to work, you'd have to deconstruct a claim into a series of binary decisions, and then analyse those one by one.

So I'm not sure what you are talking about.
Well, I guess I'll quote my quote for you. Apparently that helps.

Ah well, have a quote.

None of these answers are correct. It affects everything that finds itself in the current of Dark Energy. That happens to cover most things external to Earth, but that's merely a consequence rather than the definition.
« Last Edit: October 27, 2018, 01:27:52 PM by Pete Svarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

Offline edby

  • *
  • Posts: 1079
    • View Profile
Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:
« Reply #59 on: October 27, 2018, 01:44:52 PM »
Then you implied you didn't mean they were false, because you said 'world not Boolean'.
No. A statement can be false without its exact opposite being true. This is because the real world is not always well-represented by oversimplified Boolean logic. For your model to work, you'd have to deconstruct a claim into a series of binary decisions, and then analyse those one by one.
Oh right, you are denying Excluded Middle then. No point in arguing with someone who doesn’t believe in standard logic.

Note you are confusing a contrary (‘opposite’) with a contradictory, i.e. a negation. ‘Not the case that p’ includes absolutely every case where p is false, without remainder, so one or the other has to be true. Thus ‘No A is B’ contradicts ‘some A is B’. Contraries (‘No A is B’ / ‘every A is B’) can both be false of course.

So Flat earth even has a different logic? Interesting. But as I say, without logic, no meaningful discussion is to be had.