[Curious Squirrel]

Well, seeing as we haven't seen anything but Tom's nonsense reply, and nothing from him since it was pointed out his postulation has a giant hole in it, I'm gonna chalk that part up as closed in favor of Round Earth. Although I DO still really want to know where 3DGeek was going with this, as once again the first post seems to suggest more is coming. I have a guess, but does anyone know for sure where he was headed here?

[TomInAustin]

Well, seeing as we haven't seen anything but Tom's nonsense reply, and nothing from him since it was pointed out his postulation has a giant hole in it, I'm gonna that part up as closed in favor of Round Earth. Although I DO still really want to know where 3DGeek was going with this, as once again the first post seems to suggest more is coming. I have a guess, but does anyone know for sure where he was headed here?

Agree, 3d is awol and I'd love to know where he was going with this.  My assumption was that he wanted to compile point to point data to see if a flat map was possible.

Tom Bishop just cut and ran as usual.  These threads are helpful for newcomers to observe that logical arguments are either derailed or ignored.

[3DGeek]

Sorry - guys - I've been temporarily overwhelmed with work over the past few days - hence little time for FET disproofs.

You can't do this calculation with just triangles.  Any three lengths will make a triangle (So long as A+B<C, etc)!

Mr Bishop's "Proof" is silly.

STEP 3:

You have to use TWO triangles.   Take four cities that make a quadrilateral (basically, any four so long as they aren't "colinear").

Let's call them A, B, C, D.



Using the "cosine law" (which Mr.Bishop clearly accepts) you can say that IF the world is flat, then calculating the angle BAD from the lengths A-B, B-D and A-D will give you the same answer as if you calculate the angle CAD plus BAC.  After all BAD must equal CAD + BAC - right?

If the world is flat then all of the geometry will work out nicely - you can calculate all of the angles and the'll all add up more or less perfectly...right?

If the world is not flat then there will be wildly different results from calculating the angle BAD directly and from the sum of CAD and BAC.

(Clearly "BAD" is well named!)

When I have time, I'll find four suitable cities and do the math.    But if someone else wants to give it a shot first, there is a handy triangle calculator here:

    http://www.calculator.net/triangle-calculator.html

Just be sure to find four cities that are WIDELY spread.  The further apart they are, the more convincing the answers will be.

[inquisitive]

Let us wait for Tom to respond.

[Curious Squirrel]

Let us wait for Tom to respond.

Don't hold your breath. Once he leaves a thread I've not seen him come back.

3DGeek if you wanna throw me some cities I'd be more than happy to do the math legwork. Been having some difficulty locating a good fourth as one section of the FE map is basically deserted (darn you Pacific Ocean and your vastness!)

[inquisitive]

Let us wait for Tom to respond.

Don't hold your breath. Once he leaves a thread I've not seen him come back.

3DGeek if you wanna throw me some cities I'd be more than happy to do the math legwork. Been having some difficulty locating a good fourth as one section of the FE map is basically deserted (darn you Pacific Ocean and your vastness!)

New York, Paris, Cape Town & Buenos Aries
NY - PA 5834
NY - BA 3346
NY - CT 7803
CT - PA 12844
CT - BA 6865
BA - PA 11043

NY angles are 123.6° or 100.9 + 61.5 = 162.4°

QED

[Curious Squirrel]

Let us wait for Tom to respond.

Don't hold your breath. Once he leaves a thread I've not seen him come back.

3DGeek if you wanna throw me some cities I'd be more than happy to do the math legwork. Been having some difficulty locating a good fourth as one section of the FE map is basically deserted (darn you Pacific Ocean and your vastness!)

New York, Paris, Cape Town & Buenos Aries
NY - PA 8834
NY - BA 3346
NY - CT 7803
CT - PA 12844
CT - BA 6865
BA - PA 11043

NY angles are 123.6° or 100.9 + 61.5 = 162.4°

QED

Awesome, thank you and I'm stealing this to link to in my signature!

[3DGeek]

Let us wait for Tom to respond.

Don't hold your breath. Once he leaves a thread I've not seen him come back.

3DGeek if you wanna throw me some cities I'd be more than happy to do the math legwork. Been having some difficulty locating a good fourth as one section of the FE map is basically deserted (darn you Pacific Ocean and your vastness!)

New York, Paris, Cape Town & Buenos Aries
NY - PA 8834
NY - BA 3346
NY - CT 7803
CT - PA 12844
CT - BA 6865
BA - PA 11043

NY angles are 123.6° or 100.9 + 61.5 = 162.4°

QED

Many thanks!  You saved me some legwork there.

So - that brings us to STEP 4:

STEP 4:


There is no possible planar ("flat") quadrilateral that can have the four sides and two diagonals be what they are calculated to be here.

Hence there is no possible Flat Earth map that can reconcile flight times and distances that we KNOW are true.

This result cannot prove whether the Earth is concave or convex - but it certainly proves that it cannot under any circumstances be flat.

Soo....can we shut down this stupid website now?

[Tom Bishop]

If the lines are too long for the triangle, then it is entirely possible for a triangle to have more than 180 degrees.


I can't find any New York to Paris flights, or New York to Buenos Airies flights, or New York to Cape Town flights on https://www.qantas.com/travel/airlines/route-maps/global/en. Please provide your sources.

[geckothegeek]

I can't find any New York to Paris flights, or New York to Buenos Airies flights, or New York to Cape Town flights on https://www.qantas.com/travel/airlines/route-maps/global/en. Please provide your sources.

Try calling American Airlines or a local travel agency.

[Tom Bishop]

How are we supposed to know if those distances are based on actual flight logs or on calculations which assume a globe if the author neglects to provide his sources?

[inquisitive]

How are we supposed to know if those distances are based on actual flight logs or on calculations which assume a globe if the author neglects to provide his sources?

As usual a well crafted reply.  Do you have the slightest bit of evidence to dispute the numbers?  I am surprised, maybe, that you spend so much time claiming round earth numbers are wrong, it's just a game for you, isn't it?  Entertainment for others.

Please note NY-PA is 5834, finger problem.

Actual flight at https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/af6#e632a81

[Tom Bishop]

You originally said 8834 km. You "misfingered" three characters. And we are supposed to trust your math now?

Regardless, that website just says "GREAT CIRCLE DISTANCE 5,850 km." How do we know whether that figure on the website is based on a flight log or on a Round Earth theory about how far New York should be from Paris?

[inquisitive]

You originally said 8834 km. You "misfingered" three characters. And we are supposed to trust your math now?

Regardless, that website just says "GREAT CIRCLE DISTANCE 5,850 km." How do we know whether that figure on the website is based on a flight log or on a Round Earth theory about how far New York should be from Paris?

I read 8834 wrongly from what I had written on a piece of paper.

What do you believe the distance from New York to Paris to be?

Or 'Tom, how far is it from New York to Paris?'

[Tom Bishop]

The distance from New York to Paris is unknown.

[inquisitive]

The distance from New York to Paris is unknown.

Really, you must have a rough idea.  How do ships and planes work out journey times?  My GPS tells me speed and distance accurately.

[TomInAustin]

The distance from New York to Paris is unknown.

OMG, now that was funny.   

https://www.google.com/search?q=flight+distance+new+york+to+paris&oq=flight+distance+new&aqs=chrome.4.69i57j0l5.7295j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

[Curious Squirrel]

The distance from New York to Paris is unknown.

OMG, now that was funny.   

https://www.google.com/search?q=flight+distance+new+york+to+paris&oq=flight+distance+new&aqs=chrome.4.69i57j0l5.7295j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Shhh, those calculations presuppose a round Earth, and unless you've personally measured the distance and have proof, they don't count. <- Literally what is being said. My mind is boggled.

[Tom Bishop]

Really, you must have a rough idea.  How do ships and planes work out journey times?

There is a theoretical model based on latitudes and longitudes on a Round Earth which supposedly tells us how far away point A should be from point B, and planes use this value in its calculations when guessing its own cruising speed .

However, Latitude and Longitude is a spherical coordinate system. The points and the theoretical distance between them depends on the concept that the earth is a sphere.

My GPS tells me speed and distance accurately.

And how do you know that the speed and distance is accurate? Even at the scale of a car, the GPS speed is inaccurate when compared to the car's speedometer.

[Curious Squirrel]

My GPS tells me speed and distance accurately.

And how do you know that the speed and distance is accurate? Even at the scale of a car, the GPS speed is inaccurate when compared to the car's speedometer.

Really? Because mine is pretty spot on within 1 MPH usually. As long as I'm not changing speeds faster than it's refresh rate. It also does a pretty damn good job at giving arrival times, which means it needs to be fairly accurate for speed, distance, and current location.