Offline hexagon

  • *
  • Posts: 192
    • View Profile
Re: Wiki entry for Universal Acceleration
« Reply #60 on: June 05, 2018, 12:56:24 PM »
[lots of rambling]

But gravitational fields are not homogeneous, they are gradient fields, therefor the acceleration is not constant and the equivalence principle is not valid within an entire gravitational field.               
Isn't it just fantastic that we're not considering just an acceleration, then? It would be preferable if, in the future, you could try to stay on topic.

The starting point of my post was your false reference to special relativity. You're borrowing a concept of general relativity and as an advice to understand your concept you refer to special relativity...

*

Online Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8365
  • (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Wiki entry for Universal Acceleration
« Reply #61 on: June 05, 2018, 03:43:09 PM »
The starting point of my post was your false reference to special relativity. You're borrowing a concept of general relativity and as an advice to understand your concept you refer to special relativity...
No, I'm not. Whether or not UA can be locally distinguished from RET-style gravity and whether or not the Earth should exceed the speed of light under UA are two separate arguments, with two separate answers, directed at two distinct individuals. Trying to treat them as one is extremely unproductive of you.
« Last Edit: June 05, 2018, 03:47:04 PM by Pete Svarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Facebook and Twitter!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

Re: Wiki entry for Universal Acceleration
« Reply #62 on: June 05, 2018, 03:48:13 PM »
Pop quiz, hotshot.
I think I've seen you say that the earth sits on an infinite plane?
Ergo it has infinite mass?
So no amount of "dark energy" will accelerate it at all, let alone at 9.8m/s/s
F=ma, and if m is infinite then a = F/infinity...and it doesn't really matter how big the F is then.
"This is literally just a few people talking about it for a brief time every day on their spare time. That’s the flat earth movement" - Tom Bishop

*

Online junker

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8424
  • Boom
    • View Profile
Re: Wiki entry for Universal Acceleration
« Reply #63 on: June 05, 2018, 03:53:38 PM »
Pop quiz, hotshot.
Don't do that.

I think I've seen you say that the earth sits on an infinite plane?
Ergo it has infinite mass?
So no amount of "dark energy" will accelerate it at all, let alone at 9.8m/s/s
F=ma, and if m is infinite then a = F/infinity...and it doesn't really matter how big the F is then.
I may be mistaken about the model Pete prefers, but typically those who support the infinite plane model do not support UA.
Please make sure to check out these resources to ensure that your time at tfes.org is enjoyable and productive.

1. The Rules

2. The FAQ

3. The Wiki

You're doing God's work, junker.

*

Online Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8365
  • (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Wiki entry for Universal Acceleration
« Reply #64 on: June 05, 2018, 05:47:33 PM »
Pop quiz, hotshot.
Sorry, I'm not gonna entertain that.

I think I've seen you say that the earth sits on an infinite plane?
I hope not. It's not my position, and as junker pointed out, infinite plane models usually propose GR-style gravitation.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Facebook and Twitter!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

*

Offline QED

  • *
  • Posts: 208
  • As mad as a hatter.
    • View Profile
Re: Wiki entry for Universal Acceleration
« Reply #65 on: August 19, 2018, 03:38:27 AM »
The starting point of my post was your false reference to special relativity. You're borrowing a concept of general relativity and as an advice to understand your concept you refer to special relativity...
No, I'm not. Whether or not UA can be locally distinguished from RET-style gravity and whether or not the Earth should exceed the speed of light under UA are two separate arguments, with two separate answers, directed at two distinct individuals. Trying to treat them as one is extremely unproductive of you.

I think this is very important to point out: they are indeed separate claims in the FE model, by necessity.

In fairness, however, I do see how hexagon coupled them. General Relativity is commensurate with Special Relativity (in the RET). What I mean is that Einstein developed special relativity and then extended it (generalized it) years later into general relativity. Separated, they do not make sense in RET, and it is precise to treat them identically in RET arguments. The answers will always be the same, if the correct limits are taken.

Is this useful? Please let me know, and I will adjust.