Offline somerled

  • *
  • Posts: 112
    • View Profile
Re: What are the (flat Earth) stars?
« Reply #20 on: October 27, 2019, 12:47:45 PM »
Twinkling does not imply a chaotic atmosphere at all , or the planets would twinkle since their weak reflective light has to travel through the atmosphere according to the model.
     You , and science are unable to explain this phenomena - which is why the word "might" is used in the explanation. I show you a link where it is clearly stated that planets do not twinkle .
     I do not need to poke holes in the heliocentric theory . The holes are everywhere . You are unable to accept them for what they are , which is why you end up mincing words , or changing the direction of the thread .

*

Offline BillO

  • *
  • Posts: 513
  • Huh?
    • View Profile
Re: What are the (flat Earth) stars?
« Reply #21 on: October 27, 2019, 01:22:01 PM »
Twinkling does not imply a chaotic atmosphere at all , or the planets would twinkle since their weak reflective light has to travel through the atmosphere according to the model.
Your poor comprehension skills do not constitute a disproof of anything.  To imply the atmosphere is not subject to chaotic behavior is to deny weather.  Maybe it's possible you live in an area that has never had strong buffeting wind or a thunder storm, or even clouds in the sky but you must have heard of them.

You can find hundreds of on-line explanations as to why stars twinkle and planets do not.  Some better than others, but all essentially saying the same thing.  Most do not include the word 'might'. Like this one you provided: http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/about-us/58-our-solar-system/planets-and-dwarf-planets/planet-watching/251-why-do-planets-not-twinkle-intermediate

Your finding one that was badly worded and interpreting that as meaning it and all the others are wrong is astonishing.
Here a quack, there a quack, everywhere a quack quack.

Offline somerled

  • *
  • Posts: 112
    • View Profile
Re: What are the (flat Earth) stars?
« Reply #22 on: October 28, 2019, 11:00:55 AM »
Are you unable to think clearly ? I do not imply anything about the atmosphere . The stars always twinkle whether there are "chaotic" (as you put it ) conditions or not . The planets do not ever . The link I gave was written by a scientist . What is your problem with that ? Doesn't fit your agenda?
       The fact that you have found hundreds of on-line explanations says it all . There is no explanation . Heliocentrism in a nut shell .
       Explained with simplicity in FE theory .

Re: What are the (flat Earth) stars?
« Reply #23 on: October 28, 2019, 11:13:55 AM »
The fact you think that the atmosphere is only chaotic sometimes just shows your complete lack of understanding.
Can you please provide the FE explanation, including the explanation of observed phases of planets and their moons casting shadows on them.
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

*

Offline BillO

  • *
  • Posts: 513
  • Huh?
    • View Profile
Re: What are the (flat Earth) stars?
« Reply #24 on: October 28, 2019, 01:50:19 PM »
The link I gave was written by a scientist . What is your problem with that ? Doesn't fit your agenda?
Right, and the one that you provided that I re-posted was also written by a scientist and it does not use the word "might".

       The fact that you have found hundreds of on-line explanations says it all .
All the ones I found give the SAME explanation.

Heliocentrism in a nut shell .
You do know what the term "nut shell" means, don't you?

       Explained with simplicity in FE theory .
Please, go right ahead.

Also, what's with the 'space comma', 'space period' and 'space question mark'?  Is there a problem with your keyboard?
Here a quack, there a quack, everywhere a quack quack.

Offline somerled

  • *
  • Posts: 112
    • View Profile
Re: What are the (flat Earth) stars?
« Reply #25 on: October 29, 2019, 11:36:33 AM »
The fact you think that the atmosphere is only chaotic sometimes just shows your complete lack of understanding.
Can you please provide the FE explanation, including the explanation of observed phases of planets and their moons casting shadows on them.

Have a look at the Tycho Brahe geocentric model , a supposed  advancement of the Ptolemaic model . You will find that all observations of planetary phase and motion were explained within these models in which the earth is stationary .

The heliocentric model brought no new observation or experiment which required the sun to be at the system's centre and earth in motion . Science still has not verified the assumptions of motion or curvature .

Stars are small , not distant and they scintillate . Planets are nearer and are luminaries within the reaches of the atmosphere which is why they do not scintillate ever .

Science cannot explain how Saturn reflects sunlight which after travelling 9.5 AU is then scattered and a minute amount can travel a further 8.5 AU back to earth  , through the van Allen belts and our light scattering atmosphere  and produce stable image which we can see with the naked eye . Same for all planets.

Your nonsense about what you say I think or have stated about the atmosphere is irrelevant and a diversionary tactic .




Re: What are the (flat Earth) stars?
« Reply #26 on: October 29, 2019, 02:49:45 PM »
Have a look at the Tycho Brahe geocentric model , a supposed  advancement of the Ptolemaic model . You will find that all observations of planetary phase and motion were explained within these models in which the earth is stationary.
And his explanation of phases was, surely, the same as the heliocentric model's - that the planets are not "luminaries", they are objects being lit by a light source, the sun. Luminaries do not have shadows or phases as we see on the moon or the inner planets.

Quote
The heliocentric model brought no new observation or experiment which required the sun to be at the system's centre and earth in motion. Science still has not verified the assumptions of motion or curvature.
Then why is that the prevailing scientific view? Obviously the hundreds of people who have been to space can attest to the shape of the earth, amateurs with balloons can demonstrate curvature. The evidence for motion is things like the the Coreolis effect and the good people at Globebusters managed to measure the 15 degree per hour drift caused by the earth's rotation.

Quote
Stars are small , not distant and they scintillate . Planets are nearer and are luminaries within the reaches of the atmosphere which is why they do not scintillate ever.
Evidence?

Quote
Science cannot explain how Saturn reflects sunlight which after travelling 9.5 AU is then scattered and a minute amount can travel a further 8.5 AU back to earth  , through the van Allen belts and our light scattering atmosphere  and produce stable image which we can see with the naked eye .
Is this really something science something cannot explain or just something you cannot understand?
Can we agree that the sun is quite bright? You literally can't look at it safely. And that's at 1 AU. So yeah, obviously it will be dimmer at 9.5 AU but still very much visible and Saturn has an albedo of about 0.5, it reflects about half of the light back. And Saturn is very big. So the fact Saturn is visible with the naked eye is not a mystery.

Quote
Same for all planets.

Well no, not all planets because the outer planets are further away and smaller and have a lower albedo (although still quite high) and can't be seen with the naked eye. But yes, with the right equipment they can be seen for the exact same reason Saturn can.

Quote
Your nonsense about what you say I think or have stated about the atmosphere is irrelevant and a diversionary tactic .
It's completely relevant. It shows your lack of understanding. Basing beliefs on ignorance leads you to the wrong conclusions.
If you think the atmosphere is only chaotic at times then you don't understand what the term means in this context.
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

Re: What are the (flat Earth) stars?
« Reply #27 on: October 29, 2019, 03:11:06 PM »
The fact you think that the atmosphere is only chaotic sometimes just shows your complete lack of understanding.
Can you please provide the FE explanation, including the explanation of observed phases of planets and their moons casting shadows on them.
Implying the atmoplane is in constant chaos?

Am I reading your statement correctly?

*

Offline BillO

  • *
  • Posts: 513
  • Huh?
    • View Profile
Re: What are the (flat Earth) stars?
« Reply #28 on: October 29, 2019, 03:43:00 PM »
Implying the atmoplane is in constant chaos?
The atmosphere is in constant chaos.  It is the poster child for chaos theory.  In physics a chaotic system is one where predictability at a fine scale is difficult or impossible such that the behavior of the system seems random and is easily perturbed.  For instance, you can never predict the instantaneous direction of velocity of the wind, no matter how energetic, nor the shape of a cloud, or the exact temperature or humidity of the air at a particular space-time coordinate.    Even bulk predictions are almost impossible.  Witness the inaccuracy of longer term weather forecasts despite that the worlds largest and most powerful computers are employed to the task.  Short term forecasts are based on the direction and speed of travel of existing weather (it's sunny in St. Louis today, so it will likely be sunny in Raleigh tomorrow), but even those predictions can be far off the mark.
Here a quack, there a quack, everywhere a quack quack.

Offline somerled

  • *
  • Posts: 112
    • View Profile
Re: What are the (flat Earth) stars?
« Reply #29 on: October 29, 2019, 04:26:25 PM »
Have a look at the Tycho Brahe geocentric model , a supposed  advancement of the Ptolemaic model . You will find that all observations of planetary phase and motion were explained within these models in which the earth is stationary.
And his explanation of phases was, surely, the same as the heliocentric model's - that the planets are not "luminaries", they are objects being lit by a light source, the sun. Luminaries do not have shadows or phases as we see on the moon or the inner planets.

Quote
The heliocentric model brought no new observation or experiment which required the sun to be at the system's centre and earth in motion. Science still has not verified the assumptions of motion or curvature.
Then why is that the prevailing scientific view? Obviously the hundreds of people who have been to space can attest to the shape of the earth, amateurs with balloons can demonstrate curvature. The evidence for motion is things like the the Coreolis effect and the good people at Globebusters managed to measure the 15 degree per hour drift caused by the earth's rotation.

Quote
Stars are small , not distant and they scintillate . Planets are nearer and are luminaries within the reaches of the atmosphere which is why they do not scintillate ever.
Evidence?

Quote
Science cannot explain how Saturn reflects sunlight which after travelling 9.5 AU is then scattered and a minute amount can travel a further 8.5 AU back to earth  , through the van Allen belts and our light scattering atmosphere  and produce stable image which we can see with the naked eye .
Is this really something science something cannot explain or just something you cannot understand?
Can we agree that the sun is quite bright? You literally can't look at it safely. And that's at 1 AU. So yeah, obviously it will be dimmer at 9.5 AU but still very much visible and Saturn has an albedo of about 0.5, it reflects about half of the light back. And Saturn is very big. So the fact Saturn is visible with the naked eye is not a mystery.

Quote
Same for all planets.

Well no, not all planets because the outer planets are further away and smaller and have a lower albedo (although still quite high) and can't be seen with the naked eye. But yes, with the right equipment they can be seen for the exact same reason Saturn can.

Quote
Your nonsense about what you say I think or have stated about the atmosphere is irrelevant and a diversionary tactic .
It's completely relevant. It shows your lack of understanding. Basing beliefs on ignorance leads you to the wrong conclusions.
If you think the atmosphere is only chaotic at times then you don't understand what the term means in this context.

Mercury and Venus orbit the Sun which gives them their phases - they are moons of the Sun which orbits the earth , geocentric model , or circles the earth plane in FE . Have you not looked at the geocentric model . They are the only two planets which don't have moons  , another problem for the heliocentric model .

Present the scientific peer reviewed papers of globebusters proving rotation or curvature and stop waffling about chaos and the atmosphere .We all know about the weather and chaos . Still don't make the planets twinkle .

If you want real chaos then investigate the effect of chaos theory and the n-body problem associated with the orbits in the solar system model .

Offline ChrisTP

  • *
  • Posts: 441
    • View Profile
Re: What are the (flat Earth) stars?
« Reply #30 on: October 29, 2019, 04:52:07 PM »
Sorry, how is Venus and Mercury not having moons a problem for any model?
Tom is wrong most of the time. Hardly big news, don't you think?

*

Offline BillO

  • *
  • Posts: 513
  • Huh?
    • View Profile
Re: What are the (flat Earth) stars?
« Reply #31 on: October 29, 2019, 07:23:35 PM »
       Explained with simplicity in FE theory .
This explanation is still pending.  Use FE theory to explain by derivation from theory why stars scintillate and planets do not.  Just saying stars do and planets do not is not explaining anything, it is merely making an empty statement.

For RE theory, including the chaotic nature of the atmosphere is an essential part of the derivation.  It is the mechanism in RE theory that makes the stars scintillate and their tiny (point source) size is what allows small chaotic motions in the atmosphere produce this effect.  As I said before, planets still do experience the effects of the chaotic nature of the atmosphere, but they are large enough that these effects appear to cancel out when viewed by the human eye, or even a toy telescope.  Viewed through the Mount Palomar scope with a high resolution, high speed sensor and you will record the planets shimmering.
Here a quack, there a quack, everywhere a quack quack.

Re: What are the (flat Earth) stars?
« Reply #32 on: October 30, 2019, 03:48:44 AM »
luminious elements? perhaps neon. Some flat earth models allow for gravity, so perhaps neon grouped due to gravity. for models without gravity, perhaps supernatural forces cause them to cluster?

Re: What are the (flat Earth) stars?
« Reply #33 on: October 30, 2019, 01:56:30 PM »
Mercury and Venus orbit the Sun which gives them their phases - they are moons of the Sun which orbits the earth , geocentric model , or circles the earth plane in FE.
Can you provide some evidence for that claim? I've asked you a few times for evidence of your wild assertions, you have yet to provide any.

Quote
Present the scientific peer reviewed papers of globebusters proving rotation or curvature

Well, Globebusters are FE and therefore don't publish papers or get them peer reviewed. I have provided evidence for rotation and curvature, you have provided no evidence for any of your claims.

Quote
We all know about the weather and chaos . Still don't make the planets twinkle.
The reason for this has been explained to you. You then basically posted "nuh-uh" and then provided a link which explained it in exactly the way you just said was wrong.
And yes, the chaotic atmosphere is part of the explanation. A chaotic system means something in mathematics.

Quote
If you want real chaos then investigate the effect of chaos theory and the n-body problem associated with the orbits in the solar system model.
Yes. This is another example of a chaotic system. As is a double pendulum. Just because the future of a system cannot be perfectly predicted with our current models, doesn't mean the models are not useful. It's a bit of a leap from "you can't model the 'n' body problem perfectly" to "the earth is flat.
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

Re: What are the (flat Earth) stars?
« Reply #34 on: October 31, 2019, 03:15:45 PM »
Implying the atmoplane is in constant chaos?
The atmosphere is in constant chaos.  It is the poster child for chaos theory.  In physics a chaotic system is one where predictability at a fine scale is difficult or impossible such that the behavior of the system seems random and is easily perturbed.  For instance, you can never predict the instantaneous direction of velocity of the wind, no matter how energetic, nor the shape of a cloud, or the exact temperature or humidity of the air at a particular space-time coordinate.    Even bulk predictions are almost impossible.  Witness the inaccuracy of longer term weather forecasts despite that the worlds largest and most powerful computers are employed to the task.  Short term forecasts are based on the direction and speed of travel of existing weather (it's sunny in St. Louis today, so it will likely be sunny in Raleigh tomorrow), but even those predictions can be far off the mark.
I agree that portions of the atmoplane are in chaos at any given point.

This explains, in part, how the light of the sun is hidden from the surface of the flat earth.

*

Offline BillO

  • *
  • Posts: 513
  • Huh?
    • View Profile
Re: What are the (flat Earth) stars?
« Reply #35 on: October 31, 2019, 06:11:59 PM »
This explains, in part, how the light of the sun is hidden from the surface of the flat earth.
Can you offer that explanation?  State the theoretical mechanism and discuss how you derive from that how it hides the sun?
Here a quack, there a quack, everywhere a quack quack.

*

Offline Tim Alphabeaver

  • *
  • Posts: 170
  • That's no beaver
    • View Profile
Re: What are the (flat Earth) stars?
« Reply #36 on: November 04, 2019, 01:32:12 AM »
If you want real chaos then investigate the effect of chaos theory and the n-body problem associated with the orbits in the solar system model .
Are you really arguing that a 10-body problem of the solar system is more chaotic than the 10^44 - body system that is the atmosphere? Really?
Case in point - I can easily predict the orbits of all of the planets by numerically solving the n-body equation with a computer, and very accurately predict their positions for at least the next 100 years. Meanwhile the weather report can't even predict with 99% accuracy whether it's going to rain tomorrow.

You are not just a clown - you are the entire circus.
**I move away from the infinite flat plane to breathe in

*

Offline junker

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8786
    • View Profile
Re: What are the (flat Earth) stars?
« Reply #37 on: November 04, 2019, 04:25:05 AM »
If you want real chaos then investigate the effect of chaos theory and the n-body problem associated with the orbits in the solar system model .
Are you really arguing that a 10-body problem of the solar system is more chaotic than the 10^44 - body system that is the atmosphere? Really?
Case in point - I can easily predict the orbits of all of the planets by numerically solving the n-body equation with a computer, and very accurately predict their positions for at least the next 100 years. Meanwhile the weather report can't even predict with 99% accuracy whether it's going to rain tomorrow.

You are not just a clown - you are the entire circus.

Refrain from personal attacks in the upper fora. Warned.

Re: What are the (flat Earth) stars?
« Reply #38 on: November 04, 2019, 12:03:00 PM »
This explains, in part, how the light of the sun is hidden from the surface of the flat earth.
Can you offer that explanation?  State the theoretical mechanism and discuss how you derive from that how it hides the sun?
I am unsure what further explanation you seek.

The atmoplane is certainly never in a state of 100 percent chaos, although there is 100 percent chaos in portions of the atmoplane at any given time.

Certain places experience direct blackouts at high noon, certainly occluding sunlight thousands of miles away.

*

Offline BillO

  • *
  • Posts: 513
  • Huh?
    • View Profile
Re: What are the (flat Earth) stars?
« Reply #39 on: November 04, 2019, 12:47:15 PM »
I am unsure what further explanation you seek.

The atmoplane is certainly never in a state of 100 percent chaos, although there is 100 percent chaos in portions of the atmoplane at any given time.

Certain places experience direct blackouts at high noon, certainly occluding sunlight thousands of miles away.
For instance, what in FE theory accounts for these direct blackouts?  What is doing the occluding and how is it doing it?
Here a quack, there a quack, everywhere a quack quack.