Jimmy McGill

Jupiter
« on: January 11, 2019, 11:45:45 PM »
What does flat earth hypothesis have to say about Jupiter?

Jupiter clearly rotates on an axis, roughy once every 10 hours (the equatorial region rotates more quickly than at the poles), compared to the earth’s roughly 24 hour rotation.
This can be visibly observed and is thus a fact.

What is equally as interesting to me is your opinions on the orbit of the Galilean moons.
We not only observe the larger moons orbit around Jupiter, but we can also see the shadows they cast on the planet!

How are these observations explained on a flat earth? What drives the orbit of the moons of not gravity? What casts the shadow on the planet if not the moons coming between Jupiter and the sun?

Re: Jupiter
« Reply #1 on: January 12, 2019, 12:11:16 AM »
Actually, FE has a selective gravity called celestial gravitation which covers orbits and stuff like that.
https://wiki.tfes.org/Celestial_Gravitation

About the shadows of the moons, with the sun circling over the Flat earth, I think it would be something like a geocentric model and work about the same I think. The only weird part would be that the sun would be over on the other side of the earth when it's night at your side, so if you look at Jupiter through a telescope, and see moon shadows, then where's the light causing the shadow coming from? If it's the sun, then how is sunlight traveling across the flat earth to Jupiter? If the Sun was a sphere that shone in all directions, then shouldn't sunlight be able to illuminate your night? But with a spotlight sun, the light has to coming from elsewhere, but I've never heard FErs say there was a second star in our solar system. What do I have wrong here?
We are smarter than those scientists.
I see multiple contradicting explanations. You guys should have a pow-wow and figure out how your model works.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 1128
    • View Profile
Re: Jupiter
« Reply #2 on: January 12, 2019, 01:50:37 AM »
Actually, FE has a selective gravity called celestial gravitation which covers orbits and stuff like that.
https://wiki.tfes.org/Celestial_Gravitation

About the shadows of the moons, with the sun circling over the Flat earth, I think it would be something like a geocentric model and work about the same I think. The only weird part would be that the sun would be over on the other side of the earth when it's night at your side, so if you look at Jupiter through a telescope, and see moon shadows, then where's the light causing the shadow coming from? If it's the sun, then how is sunlight traveling across the flat earth to Jupiter? If the Sun was a sphere that shone in all directions, then shouldn't sunlight be able to illuminate your night? But with a spotlight sun, the light has to coming from elsewhere, but I've never heard FErs say there was a second star in our solar system. What do I have wrong here?

This is the conundrum:

How does a spotlight sun point up to cast moon shadows on Jupiter?

V

How is a sphere sun, illuminating in all directions, not seen, given enough elevation and perhaps a telescope from an observer in darkness?
Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6364
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Jupiter
« Reply #3 on: January 12, 2019, 02:02:57 AM »
The atmoplane doesn't exist between the celestial bodies, but builds up a haze we cannot see beyond on the surface.

Jimmy McGill

Re: Jupiter
« Reply #4 on: January 12, 2019, 02:06:23 AM »
Actually, FE has a selective gravity called celestial gravitation which covers orbits and stuff like that.
https://wiki.tfes.org/Celestial_Gravitation

About the shadows of the moons, with the sun circling over the Flat earth, I think it would be something like a geocentric model and work about the same I think. The only weird part would be that the sun would be over on the other side of the earth when it's night at your side, so if you look at Jupiter through a telescope, and see moon shadows, then where's the light causing the shadow coming from? If it's the sun, then how is sunlight traveling across the flat earth to Jupiter? If the Sun was a sphere that shone in all directions, then shouldn't sunlight be able to illuminate your night? But with a spotlight sun, the light has to coming from elsewhere, but I've never heard FErs say there was a second star in our solar system. What do I have wrong here?

That selective gravity has too many problems for me to address, but I’ll just leave it at this.
It says there’s an attractive force between objects with mass on the earth and the “heavenly bodies”. It says nothing about celestial objects attracting each other.
I won’t even go over how the “heavenly bodies” would come crashing down were such a force real on a flat earth.
No, I don’t think their side will get any help going down that avenue.

Would love to hear from Tom or Pete!

Jimmy McGill

Re: Jupiter
« Reply #5 on: January 12, 2019, 02:07:46 AM »
The atmoplane doesn't exist between the celestial bodies, but builds up a haze we cannot see beyond on the surface.

My original post mentioned nothing about the atmosphere.
EDIT: I don’t think anyone mentioned anything about the atmosphere, actually.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6364
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Jupiter
« Reply #6 on: January 12, 2019, 02:11:02 AM »
The atmoplane doesn't exist between the celestial bodies, but builds up a haze we cannot see beyond on the surface.

My original post mentioned nothing about the atmosphere.
EDIT: I don’t think anyone mentioned anything about the atmosphere, actually.


I was responding to the post above mine.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 1128
    • View Profile
Re: Jupiter
« Reply #7 on: January 12, 2019, 02:11:46 AM »
The atmoplane doesn't exist between the celestial bodies...

How is this known to FET?

...but builds up a haze we cannot see beyond on the surface.

And if this were true then we wouldn't be able to observe celestial bodies with a telescope.
Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6364
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Jupiter
« Reply #8 on: January 12, 2019, 02:17:43 AM »
The atmoplane doesn't exist between the celestial bodies...

How is this known to FET?

...but builds up a haze we cannot see beyond on the surface.

And if this were true then we wouldn't be able to observe celestial bodies with a telescope.

The light of the celestial bodies are projected onto the atmosphere in a circle beneath and around them like the sun is described to do in ENAG and the Wiki. When the edges of that circle intersect with the observer's limited circle of vision they will rise for that observer.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 1128
    • View Profile
Re: Jupiter
« Reply #9 on: January 12, 2019, 02:40:55 AM »
The atmoplane doesn't exist between the celestial bodies...

How is this known to FET?

...but builds up a haze we cannot see beyond on the surface.

And if this were true then we wouldn't be able to observe celestial bodies with a telescope.

The light of the celestial bodies are projected onto the atmosphere in a circle beneath and around them like the sun is described to do in ENAG and the Wiki. When the edges of that circle intersect with the observer's limited circle of vision they will rise for that observer.

That answers neither question. Read the questions again.
Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

Jimmy McGill

Re: Jupiter
« Reply #10 on: January 12, 2019, 06:39:30 AM »
The atmoplane doesn't exist between the celestial bodies...

How is this known to FET?

...but builds up a haze we cannot see beyond on the surface.

And if this were true then we wouldn't be able to observe celestial bodies with a telescope.

The light of the celestial bodies are projected onto the atmosphere in a circle beneath and around them like the sun is described to do in ENAG and the Wiki. When the edges of that circle intersect with the observer's limited circle of vision they will rise for that observer.

From the wiki:
“Zeteticism differs from the usual scientific method in that using zeteticism one bases his conclusions on experimentation and observation rather than on an initial theory that is to be proved or disproved.”

Have you observed anything you are claiming on this thread? Do you have proof?

shootingstar

Re: Jupiter
« Reply #11 on: January 12, 2019, 09:36:27 AM »
Just out of interest on the same related topic, as well as observing and imaging Jupiter and its associate satellite phenomenon for several years now through my own telescopes I have also seen the shadow of Saturn on its own ring system. It looks like a big chunk of the ring system is missing just to one side of the planet.  Saturn is twice as far away from the Sun as Jupiter (5AUs against 10AUs approx.).  The only time when you cannot see a shadow on the rings is when Saturn reaches opposition. I.e. there is an alignment between the Sun, Earth and Saturn with Earth in the middle. In that situation the shadow lies behind Saturn so you wouldn't expect to see it.

Tom is always going on about proof and to me seeing something with my own eyes by pointing a telescope towards a planet in the sky is proof. If not then please let me know what you need Tom and I will provide it.
« Last Edit: January 12, 2019, 09:50:31 AM by shootingstar »

Re: Jupiter
« Reply #12 on: January 13, 2019, 10:54:45 PM »
Jupiter has the same diameter as that of the Moon, Sun, Black Sun, Shadow Moon.

Its shape is discoidal, it is the layers of clouds which rotate above its surface.

The most puzzling fact about Jupiter is its angular momentum and its infrared radiation:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=55860.msg1393321#msg1393321

As for the orbits of its moons, you need to understand the flux of gravitons paradox.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1723400#msg1723400 (second part of the message, Sun - Jupiter - Io system)

shootingstar

Re: Jupiter
« Reply #13 on: January 13, 2019, 11:02:29 PM »
Quote
Jupiter has the same diameter as that of the Moon, Sun, Black Sun, Shadow Moon. - No it doesn't. Jupiter is 11x Earth diameter

Its shape is discoidal, it is the layers of clouds which rotate above its surface. - Jupiter exhibits polar flattening more than any other planet on account of its rapid rotation.  Made of H/He about the same as the Sun

The most puzzling fact about Jupiter is its angular momentum and its infrared radiation: - Not really. Jupiter shows internal heating in IR which is down to its mass.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=55860.msg1393321#msg1393321

As for the orbits of its moons, you need to understand the flux of gravitons paradox.  - The graviton is as yet unconfirmed by the Standard Model.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1723400#msg1723400 (second part of the message, Sun - Jupiter - Io system)

Offline JCM

  • *
  • Posts: 156
    • View Profile
Re: Jupiter
« Reply #14 on: January 13, 2019, 11:17:42 PM »
Jupiter has the same diameter as that of the Moon, Sun, Black Sun, Shadow Moon.

Its shape is discoidal, it is the layers of clouds which rotate above its surface.

The most puzzling fact about Jupiter is its angular momentum and its infrared radiation:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=55860.msg1393321#msg1393321

As for the orbits of its moons, you need to understand the flux of gravitons paradox.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1723400#msg1723400 (second part of the message, Sun - Jupiter - Io system)

Evidence?  We can measure the Ganymede, Callisto, Io, Europa orbit periods around Jupiter from Earth....  Ganymede 7.1 days, Callisto 16.7 days, Europa 3.6 days, Io 1.8 days.  They are clearly orbiting a spherical Jupiter.  If you have evidence showing a discoidal shape you should offer it.

shootingstar

Re: Jupiter
« Reply #15 on: January 13, 2019, 11:29:42 PM »
If you look at Jupiter through a simple pair of binoculars you can see it as a distinct disk.  Not three dimensional as you don't have the image scale. But through a telescope you can see the flattening effect of features like the red spot which shows the spherical nature of the planet.

Re: Jupiter
« Reply #16 on: January 14, 2019, 07:23:09 AM »
If you have evidence showing a discoidal shape you should offer it.

Here is the ultimate proof: the shape of the Sun is not spherical.

Precise calculations, using the Clayton equation:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1939765#msg1939765

If the Sun has a discoidal shape, then so must all of the other planets (including Jupiter).

Evidence?  We can measure the Ganymede, Callisto, Io, Europa orbit periods around Jupiter from Earth....  Ganymede 7.1 days, Callisto 16.7 days, Europa 3.6 days, Io 1.8 days.

Right.

According to which law of gravitation do these satellites orbit around Jupiter?

It cannot be an attractive law of gravitation.

Here is the flux of gravitons paradox, (how a three body system cannot function given the attractive gravity scenario) - for a better visualization, use Sun - Jupiter - Io

"OBJECTIVE: Demonstrate that this interchange of gravitational particles again will seem to result in violations of conservation of energy. We will do this by demonstrating that, if matter is indeed influenced by gravitational particles, then, even under normal orbital conditions, gravity should decrease, due to a gravitational shadowing effect. This shadowing effect would violate conservation of energy.

Thought Experiment: IMAGINE THAT GRAVITONS BEHAVE LIKE PHOTONS

(for descriptive purposes only)

To better visualize how this partial gravitational influence might be encountered, let us describe gravity and gravitational interaction in terms of light, so that:

If gravitons exist, violations of the Law of Conservation of Energy will almost certainly occur.

Brilliance of light = gravitational attraction = (emission of gravitons)

Decreasing Transparency = Increasing Density and Mass

In this thought experiment, we will specify one sun, one earth and one moon. Each will be partially luminous, to simulate their 'output' of gravitons, and each will also be partially opaque, to indicate their 'capturing-of' or their 'reception-of' gravitons. We would then have the following description of the system.

In this imaginary system, the moon orbits the earth, and the earth-moon pair orbits the sun. Since glow will simulate gravity emitted, we could describe this sun as glowing brighter that this earth, and this earth as glowing brighter than the moon.

In addition, the moon would be more transparent than the earth, and the earth would be less transparent than the sun. This would simulate the increasing 'interception' of gravity, with an increase of both the density and mass from the moon, to the earth then to the sun in our imaginary example.

In this example, the light from the sun would 'attract' the earth and the moon (simulating the pull of gravity). The earth would glow less brilliantly than the sun, but still brighter than the moon. The moon would be attracted to both the earth and the sun, but would orbit the earth. The earth moon pair would then orbit the sun together.

In this example, the moon would spend more time in the earth's shadow, and the earth's shadow would be comparatively darker than the moon's shadow. Since the moon would be attracted to the sun only by the light from the sun, and the light emitted by the earth with the sun shining through the less transparent earth would be less than the light emitted by the sun directly, the moon would gain some amount of orbital distance from the sun every time the moon 'hid' in the earth's shadow.

This gain of gravitational energy, simulated in this example with light and transparency, {for visual purposes only}, would violate conservation of energy. If gravitons exist, they must self-condradictingly pass through nearer masses unaffected, so as not to decrease gravity for masses at a further distance, while still interacting with those closer masses at the same time.

Otherwise, we are left with the choice that masses at a distance will randomly gain some gravitational potential energy depending on whether randomly distributed nearer masses create a gravitational 'shadow' effect. We are once again led to the conclusion that gravitons, if they exist, must create violations of conservation of energy. This is hardly a reliable theoretical endorsement of gravitons, when conservation of energy must fall by the wayside in order to allow gravitons to exist. A much more logical conclusion is again, gravitons do not exist, and cannot exist. Some other method of explaining gravitational interactions must be needed."

« Last Edit: January 14, 2019, 07:25:23 AM by sandokhan »

shootingstar

Re: Jupiter
« Reply #17 on: January 14, 2019, 07:50:49 AM »
Curios about your mentioning of the 'black Sun'. Could you elaborate a bit more on that one please and if you don't think the Sun is spherical then good luck with that idea! 

*

Offline Bad Puppy

  • *
  • Posts: 194
  • Belief does not make something a theory.
    • View Profile
Re: Jupiter
« Reply #18 on: January 14, 2019, 09:02:18 PM »
So, if the sun is discoidal, everyone who can see the sun is staring perpendicular to its surface and seeing what we think is a sphere?
And videos of Jupiter's rotation viewed through telescopes by amateurs are faked?
If the sun is proven to be spherical, then so must all of the other planets (including Jupiter).  And Earth?  If a single planet or star is proven to be spherical, does that mean that the Earth must also be spherical?
Quote from: Tom Bishop
...circles do not exist and pi is not 3.14159...

Quote from: totallackey
Do you have any evidence of reality?

shootingstar

Re: Jupiter
« Reply #19 on: January 14, 2019, 09:25:02 PM »
I know the videos that I have taken of Jupiters rotation are not faked because I was the one who recorded and processed them using my own equipment.  I am actually recording some video of the Moon right now in the same way.  And the surface looks very spherical I have to say.  I can give you a step by step guide on how I do them if anyone is interested to know.