Coriolis effect in FET
« on: January 15, 2015, 10:38:05 PM »
How is Coriolis effect explained in FET? Does the disc rotate on itself?

Thork

Re: Coriolis effect in FET
« Reply #1 on: January 15, 2015, 10:54:55 PM »
Ok, enough. Read the wiki.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10844
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Coriolis effect in FET
« Reply #2 on: January 16, 2015, 06:45:38 AM »
The answer we've given in the past to this question is that the stars have a slight gravitational field. This is how the variation of g at high altitudes is explained. The stars are also rotating above the earth at one rotation per 24 hours. That bullets and artillery shells are are deflected is because the stars are pulling the bullet.

Quote
Why do storms always rotate anti-clockwise in the northern hemisphere and clockwise in the southern....?

This is explained in the bi-polar model by counter-rotating celestial systems which grind against each other like a spinning pair of gears.



The gravitation of the spinning celestial gears overhead pulls wind systems clockwise or counter-clockwise. The gears are centered over the North and South Pole. The layout of the earth in the bi-polar model is depicted with two poles. Here is a general illustration:



At the equator we can see this gear system begin pulling away from itself, which should be impossible if the earth were a globe.





If the earth were a globe the stars should be an equal distance away from each other at all times as they pass across the sky, and not physically spreading apart and growing in distance from one another. This is evidence that the stars are operating in the manner described.
« Last Edit: January 16, 2015, 07:18:17 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10844
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Coriolis effect in FET
« Reply #3 on: January 16, 2015, 06:49:34 AM »
In the classic model, an explanation given in the past has been that the sun is stirring up wind systems as its warm spotlight passes over the equator. Heat causes a change in pressure, which puts wind systems into motion. After the sun's spotlight leaves an area the winds are sucked in from the North and South to meet in the middle. Over eons this has caused the wind systems in the North to generally move one way and wind systems in the South to generally move the other way. Bullets and artillery shells are affected by this wind, often mistaken for the rotation of the earth.
« Last Edit: January 16, 2015, 07:40:48 AM by Tom Bishop »

Offline Gulliver

  • *
  • Posts: 682
    • View Profile
Re: Coriolis effect in FET
« Reply #4 on: January 16, 2015, 07:41:07 AM »
If the earth were a globe the stars should be an equal distance away from each other at all times as they pass across the sky, and not physically spreading apart and growing in distance from one another.
OKay, I'll bite. When don't the stars appear to be the same (You mysteriously called it "equal".) distance as they pass across the sky? Did someone change reality and forget to post it in FET announcements?
Don't rely on FEers for history or physics.
[Hampton] never did [go to prison] and was never found guilty of libel.
The ISS doesn't accelerate.

Re: Coriolis effect in FET
« Reply #5 on: January 16, 2015, 08:06:18 AM »
Ok, enough. Read the wiki.
I'm sorry but I did a research for "Coriolis" on the wiki, and all I got was this: "The Wind Currents are put into gradual motion by the attraction of the Northern and Southern Celestial Systems, which are grinding against each other as gears at the equator line."

I'm actually used to read reality-based science, where an explanation is usually not contained in one sentence. There's not even a link to explain what are "Northern and Southern Celestial Systems"... But I see that others have responded in the rest of the thread, I'll read it later.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10844
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Coriolis effect in FET
« Reply #6 on: January 16, 2015, 08:08:19 AM »
If the earth were a globe the stars should be an equal distance away from each other at all times as they pass across the sky, and not physically spreading apart and growing in distance from one another.
OKay, I'll bite. When don't the stars appear to be the same (You mysteriously called it "equal".) distance as they pass across the sky? Did someone change reality and forget to post it in FET announcements?

I believe I provided two pictures taken from the equator. The stars get close and then spread apart from each other. They do not remain the same distance from each other at all times.

Offline Gulliver

  • *
  • Posts: 682
    • View Profile
Re: Coriolis effect in FET
« Reply #7 on: January 16, 2015, 10:22:07 AM »
If the earth were a globe the stars should be an equal distance away from each other at all times as they pass across the sky, and not physically spreading apart and growing in distance from one another.
OKay, I'll bite. When don't the stars appear to be the same (You mysteriously called it "equal".) distance as they pass across the sky? Did someone change reality and forget to post it in FET announcements?

I believe I provided two pictures taken from the equator. The stars get close and then spread apart from each other. They do not remain the same distance from each other at all times.
Tom, no stars do not change their distance from each other. Your photo shows the  projection of a celestrial ball. Yes 3-D to 2-D causes distortion.

Tom, do these tracks get wider as they come closer to the camera? Do I really have to lecture you on perspective?
« Last Edit: January 16, 2015, 05:59:32 PM by Gulliver »
Don't rely on FEers for history or physics.
[Hampton] never did [go to prison] and was never found guilty of libel.
The ISS doesn't accelerate.

LuggerSailor

Re: Coriolis effect in FET
« Reply #8 on: January 16, 2015, 01:05:01 PM »
The stars get close and then spread apart from each other. They do not remain the same distance from each other at all times.

I'd be stuffed if I were to consider using the aparent position of stars for navigation then!

Oh, wait...

That's what Celestial Navigation is!

Rama Set

Re: Coriolis effect in FET
« Reply #9 on: January 16, 2015, 05:34:50 PM »
If the earth were a globe the stars should be an equal distance away from each other at all times as they pass across the sky, and not physically spreading apart and growing in distance from one another.
OKay, I'll bite. When don't the stars appear to be the same (You mysteriously called it "equal".) distance as they pass across the sky? Did someone change reality and forget to post it in FET announcements?

I believe I provided two pictures taken from the equator. The stars get close and then spread apart from each other. They do not remain the same distance from each other at all times.

How do you know they are spreading apart?  Can I please see the relevant measurements and methodology?

*

Offline Tintagel

  • *
  • Posts: 531
  • Full of Tinier Tintagels
    • View Profile
Re: Coriolis effect in FET
« Reply #10 on: January 16, 2015, 06:27:55 PM »
Ok, enough. Read the wiki.
I'm sorry but I did a research for "Coriolis" on the wiki, and all I got was this: "The Wind Currents are put into gradual motion by the attraction of the Northern and Southern Celestial Systems, which are grinding against each other as gears at the equator line."

I'm actually used to read reality-based science, where an explanation is usually not contained in one sentence. There's not even a link to explain what are "Northern and Southern Celestial Systems"... But I see that others have responded in the rest of the thread, I'll read it later.

Those who claim to be into reality-based science are generally instead into internet-based science.  The google and wiki scholars who know everything there is to know about relativity because they follow Stephen Hawking on Instagram.  Your reliance on links to explain things betrays your true feelings as to where knowledge is kept.

My point is this: you do not know that the earth is a sphere.  You assume it is, because it is what you have been told.  What do your eyes tell you?  What do you know?

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10844
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Coriolis effect in FET
« Reply #11 on: January 16, 2015, 07:48:40 PM »
If the earth were a globe the stars should be an equal distance away from each other at all times as they pass across the sky, and not physically spreading apart and growing in distance from one another.
OKay, I'll bite. When don't the stars appear to be the same (You mysteriously called it "equal".) distance as they pass across the sky? Did someone change reality and forget to post it in FET announcements?

I believe I provided two pictures taken from the equator. The stars get close and then spread apart from each other. They do not remain the same distance from each other at all times.
Tom, no stars do not change their distance from each other. Your photo shows the  projection of a celestrial ball. Yes 3-D to 2-D causes distortion.

Tom, do these tracks get wider as they come closer to the camera? Do I really have to lecture you on perspective?


Your mechanism doesn't really make sense. Under RET the stars are many light years away from the earth, and from each other. You seem to be claiming that when rotating across the sphere of the earth, an admittedly tiny amount of space in relation, they get far enough away that they build up and squeeze together via perspective. Is that correct?

Offline Gulliver

  • *
  • Posts: 682
    • View Profile
Re: Coriolis effect in FET
« Reply #12 on: January 16, 2015, 08:05:28 PM »
If the earth were a globe the stars should be an equal distance away from each other at all times as they pass across the sky, and not physically spreading apart and growing in distance from one another.
OKay, I'll bite. When don't the stars appear to be the same (You mysteriously called it "equal".) distance as they pass across the sky? Did someone change reality and forget to post it in FET announcements?

I believe I provided two pictures taken from the equator. The stars get close and then spread apart from each other. They do not remain the same distance from each other at all times.
Tom, no stars do not change their distance from each other. Your photo shows the  projection of a celestrial ball. Yes 3-D to 2-D causes distortion.

Tom, do these tracks get wider as they come closer to the camera? Do I really have to lecture you on perspective?


Your mechanism doesn't really make sense. Under RET the stars are many light years away from the earth, and from each other. You seem to be claiming that when rotating across the sphere of the earth, an admittedly tiny amount of space in relation, they get far enough away that they build up and squeeze together via perspective. Is that correct?
No. Just like the rails could go on for hundreds of miles and appear by perspective to be very close to one another in the distance they are in reality the same distance apart.

Again, I remind you that you're mapping a 3-D celestial sphere onto a 2-D photograph.

I renew Rama Set's challenge to you. How did you determine that the stars grew apart overnight?

Those who claim to be into reality-based science are generally instead into internet-based science.  The google and wiki scholars who know everything there is to know about relativity because they follow Stephen Hawking on Instagram.  Your reliance on links to explain things betrays your true feelings as to where knowledge is kept.

My point is this: you do not know that the earth is a sphere.  You assume it is, because it is what you have been told.  What do your eyes tell you?  What do you know?
Please don't detail the thread. If you want to discuss what I value as knowledge or for what reasons I'm supportive of RET, please open an appropriate thread. I doubt that anyone else is interested in my opinion, as it's just the same as 99.99% of the people.
Don't rely on FEers for history or physics.
[Hampton] never did [go to prison] and was never found guilty of libel.
The ISS doesn't accelerate.

Re: Coriolis effect in FET
« Reply #13 on: January 16, 2015, 08:17:22 PM »
The answer we've given in the past to this question is that the stars have a slight gravitational field. This is how the variation of g at high altitudes is explained. The stars are also rotating above the earth at one rotation per 24 hours. That bullets and artillery shells are are deflected is because the stars are pulling the bullet.
Interesting. This has a predictable consequence: if you stand at the equator and fire a canon either towards north (towards north pole) or towards south (towards the opposite direction), the coriolis effect would be stronger in the south direction than in the north direction.

Which is not what we observe so your theory is wrong.

*

Offline markjo

  • *
  • Posts: 8070
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: Coriolis effect in FET
« Reply #14 on: January 17, 2015, 12:24:44 AM »
If the earth were a globe the stars should be an equal distance away from each other at all times as they pass across the sky, and not physically spreading apart and growing in distance from one another.
OKay, I'll bite. When don't the stars appear to be the same (You mysteriously called it "equal".) distance as they pass across the sky? Did someone change reality and forget to post it in FET announcements?

I believe I provided two pictures taken from the equator. The stars get close and then spread apart from each other. They do not remain the same distance from each other at all times.
Are you talking about the pictures that look like they were taken with fisheye lenses?
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. -- Charles Darwin

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

*

Offline Tintagel

  • *
  • Posts: 531
  • Full of Tinier Tintagels
    • View Profile
Re: Coriolis effect in FET
« Reply #15 on: January 17, 2015, 12:40:16 AM »
The answer we've given in the past to this question is that the stars have a slight gravitational field. This is how the variation of g at high altitudes is explained. The stars are also rotating above the earth at one rotation per 24 hours. That bullets and artillery shells are are deflected is because the stars are pulling the bullet.
Interesting. This has a predictable consequence: if you stand at the equator and fire a canon either towards north (towards north pole) or towards south (towards the opposite direction), the coriolis effect would be stronger in the south direction than in the north direction.

Which is not what we observe so your theory is wrong.
How do you know?  I don't believe you have stood on the equator and fired a cannon north or south, so you cannot definitively say that this doesn't happen.

Offline Gulliver

  • *
  • Posts: 682
    • View Profile
Re: Coriolis effect in FET
« Reply #16 on: January 17, 2015, 01:47:57 AM »
The answer we've given in the past to this question is that the stars have a slight gravitational field. This is how the variation of g at high altitudes is explained. The stars are also rotating above the earth at one rotation per 24 hours. That bullets and artillery shells are are deflected is because the stars are pulling the bullet.
Interesting. This has a predictable consequence: if you stand at the equator and fire a canon either towards north (towards north pole) or towards south (towards the opposite direction), the coriolis effect would be stronger in the south direction than in the north direction.

Which is not what we observe so your theory is wrong.
How do you know?  I don't believe you have stood on the equator and fired a cannon north or south, so you cannot definitively say that this doesn't happen.
Here's a list of where you can go to observe the effect: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Foucault_pendulums

Yep, he's right. FET disproved.
Don't rely on FEers for history or physics.
[Hampton] never did [go to prison] and was never found guilty of libel.
The ISS doesn't accelerate.

*

Offline Tintagel

  • *
  • Posts: 531
  • Full of Tinier Tintagels
    • View Profile
Re: Coriolis effect in FET
« Reply #17 on: January 17, 2015, 02:28:32 AM »
The answer we've given in the past to this question is that the stars have a slight gravitational field. This is how the variation of g at high altitudes is explained. The stars are also rotating above the earth at one rotation per 24 hours. That bullets and artillery shells are are deflected is because the stars are pulling the bullet.
Interesting. This has a predictable consequence: if you stand at the equator and fire a canon either towards north (towards north pole) or towards south (towards the opposite direction), the coriolis effect would be stronger in the south direction than in the north direction.

Which is not what we observe so your theory is wrong.
How do you know?  I don't believe you have stood on the equator and fired a cannon north or south, so you cannot definitively say that this doesn't happen.
Here's a list of where you can go to observe the effect: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Foucault_pendulums

Yep, he's right. FET disproved.

What on earth does a Foucault pendulum have to do with a cannon?

*

Offline markjo

  • *
  • Posts: 8070
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: Coriolis effect in FET
« Reply #18 on: January 17, 2015, 02:45:40 AM »
The answer we've given in the past to this question is that the stars have a slight gravitational field. This is how the variation of g at high altitudes is explained. The stars are also rotating above the earth at one rotation per 24 hours. That bullets and artillery shells are are deflected is because the stars are pulling the bullet.
Interesting. This has a predictable consequence: if you stand at the equator and fire a canon either towards north (towards north pole) or towards south (towards the opposite direction), the coriolis effect would be stronger in the south direction than in the north direction.

Which is not what we observe so your theory is wrong.
How do you know?  I don't believe you have stood on the equator and fired a cannon north or south, so you cannot definitively say that this doesn't happen.
Here's a list of where you can go to observe the effect: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Foucault_pendulums

Yep, he's right. FET disproved.

What on earth does a Foucault pendulum have to do with a cannon?
They are both ways of demonstrating the Coriolis effect.
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. -- Charles Darwin

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

Re: Coriolis effect in FET
« Reply #19 on: January 17, 2015, 11:32:36 AM »
How do you know?  I don't believe you have stood on the equator and fired a cannon north or south, so you cannot definitively say that this doesn't happen.
Here's a list of where you can go to observe the effect: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Foucault_pendulums

Yep, he's right. FET disproved.

What on earth does a Foucault pendulum have to do with a cannon?
They are both ways of demonstrating the Coriolis effect.
Indeed.