Flat earth theory?

a reply to: InfiniteTrinity

right as I have explained , it is underpinned by the natural phenomenon called gravity ( a short explanation here we go)



mass is affected by the fundemental force of nature called gravity, objects which have mass are pulled to objects which have a larger mass , the gravitational field surrounding that mass will act upon other smaller objects with mass.

So any object you fire into space around the earth , whether it gets into orbit , or not will be acted upon by the earths gravitationl influence.

So for satellites, we fire them into space , we put them into a stable orbit , so that it doesnt decay and fall back down to earth under the influence of gravity . The ISS for example has a decaying orbit and it doesnt orbit in a geostationary orbit , as the ISS can be seen to travel accross the night sky.

Most satellites simply orbit the earth to gather data over an orbit (not stationary) like the ISS it is not in geostationary orbit , others are in geostationary orbit so they cover a specific part of the earth for data gathering and so remain fixed in position.

Now in order for that to happen , they need to get into a stable orbit , so they put them up to the right position so that when they do fall into the earths curvature, they fall infinitely around the curvature , not in a decaying orbit.
This all has to do with their trajectory , if they achieve the correct position at the right height and speed , it will continue to fall in a stable orbit .

Thats the bread and butter of satellites .

Now in order to have it fixed in position above the earth , they simply match the satellites orbital velocity to the earths rotational speed. So that as the satellite falls in its trajectory for infinity under the influence of gravity , it is also matching the earths rotational speed so that it follows the earth round in its exact position.

a reply to: sapien82

Here is the question again for you because you are obviously responding to someone else's question. At least not to mine.

Can you now explain how it maintains its curved trajectory through space without falling along Earth curvature,

The only thing that can keep it in a curved trajectory, is falling around Earth curvature. But a geostationary satellite doesnt do that, does it, sapien82?

It maintains its curved trajectory through space in orbit around the earth because the earth is a sphere
and has a curved surface, and because of the earths gravitational influence on satellites.

Without the earths curvature a satellite wouldnt orbit around the earth the two things are fundemental to orbits
if the earth was any other shape , say flat , satellites wouldnt orbit at all
the word Orbit , wouldnt even exist if the earth was flat !

a reply to: InfiniteTrinity

You just got schooled, again........

originally posted by: InfiniteTrinity
a reply to: sapien82

Btw, sapien82......can you use punctuation and capitalisation..........something quite familiar about your derilict style, I just can't put my finger on it. I can't do that.

How about you stick to the subject at hand instead of using intellectual superiority to attack my character instead of my position , since punctuation and capitalisation are not the subject of debate here, you can still obtain information from what I've written without either !

a reply to: InfiniteTrinity

If you arent happy with my layman explanation , then goto the thread

"Ask anything you want about Physics"

I'm sure Arbitgeur can explain it to you in a more detailed fashion than I can , I'm sure he has a Phd in Physics !

a reply to: sapien82

It maintains its curved trajectory through space in orbit around the earth because the earth is a sphere and has a curved surface, and because of the earths gravitational influence on satellites.

Wow. But a geostationary sat doesnt move along this curvature. So you just debunked it yourself.

Without the earths curvature a satellite wouldnt orbit around the earth

Just wow.

Exactly. Because it needs to fall around Earth curvature. But geostationary sats dont do that do they? Debunked again.

the two things are fundemental to orbits if the earth was any other shape , say flat , satellites wouldnt orbit at all the word ,

But geostationary sats dont orbit the Earth. Oops.

a reply to: InfiniteTrinity

Strange? You ramble on like NicSign ......

a reply to: InfiniteTrinity

Your not helping yourself out. You just come off as an individual that cannot comprehend basic physics.

a reply to: sapien82

I'm sure Arbitgeur can explain it to you in a more detailed fashion than I can , I'm sure he has a Phd in Physics !

I am 100% sure that he cant.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: InfiniteTrinity

Your not helping yourself out. You just come off as an individual that cannot comprehend basic physics.

Can you now explain how it maintains its curved trajectory through space without falling along Earth curvature, Neutronflux.

Sofar you have failed to do so so why are you back with more fluff?

originally posted by: InfiniteTrinity
a reply to: sapien82

I'm sure Arbitgeur can explain it to you in a more detailed fashion than I can , I'm sure he has a Phd in Physics !

I am 100% sure that he cant.

I am glad you realize it’s your ability to learn which is the problem.

Numerous cited sources and explanations why you are wrong. Dead wrong. And all you can do is say your right because you say so?

originally posted by: InfiniteTrinity

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: InfiniteTrinity

Your not helping yourself out. You just come off as an individual that cannot comprehend basic physics.

Can you now explain how it maintains its curved trajectory through space without falling along Earth curvature, Neutronflux.

Sofar you have failed to do so so why are you back with more fluff?

It’s be explained, cited, quoted and ran into the ground for you. You just want to be argumentative.

a reply to: InfiniteTrinity

Your the one that stated, “I am 100% sure that he cant.” So what the hell am I going to teach you?

a reply to: neutronflux

I have proven that all those sources are wrong, because geostationary orbits are not possible according to the rules of your model, which none of you seem to understand.

Until someone aswers this question,

how does it maintain its curved trajectory through space without falling along Earth curvature?



geostationary orbits are debunked.

a reply to: InfiniteTrinity

In physics, an orbit is the gravitationally curved trajectory of an object,[1] such as the trajectory of a planet around a star or a natural satellite around a planet. Normally, orbit refers to a regularly repeating trajectory, although it may also refer to a non-repeating trajectory. To a close approximation, planets and satellites follow elliptic orbits, with the central mass being orbited at a focal point of the ellipse,[2] as described by Kepler's laws of planetary motion.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Then you “school” us on what keeps geostationary/ geosynchronous satellites in orbit.

originally posted by: InfiniteTrinity
a reply to: neutronflux

I have proven that all those sources are wrong, because geostationary orbits are not possible according to the rules of your model, which none of you seem to understand.

Until someone aswers this question,

how does it maintains its curved trajectory through space without falling along Earth curvature?



geostationary orbits are debunked.

No. You have created your own delusion. With no proof.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: InfiniteTrinity

Your the one that stated, “I am 100% sure that he cant.” So what the hell am I going to teach you?

You are going to teach me absolutely nothing you are just here to show how inept people are when it comes to defending the popular model against real scrutiny.

And I am 100% sure he cant because you cant explain the impossible.

He is reading this. He not comin out.

a reply to: InfiniteTrinity

No one is truly certain of anything !

and that is science in a nutshell.

but you are 100% certain of yourself and thats why we have come to this impasse
that and you simply refuse to acknowledge those facts .

Im going to try and understand why you arent accepting this , you think that geostationary means that it doesnt orbit , that isnt the case, geostationary satellites do orbit the earth but the earth is also spinning at the same rate that the satellite is falling along that curvature under the influence of gravity so it remains fixed in that position.

its the word "stationary" thats throwing you , its stationary in terms of its absolute position over the earth, but its not stationary in that it isnt moving at all . the satellite is moving continually , falling around the earths curvature, but because the earth is rotating at the same speed as the satellite is falling under gravity, the satellite will appear as though its not moving at all to an observer on earth .

Your just using semantics with the word orbit , yes an orbit can be considered as a complete revolution of the earths circumference , but it is also in orbit as it is falling around the earth , but in a geo stationary orbit.

If that is the case , then its the word "orbit" that is the semantic issue here and not the actual process of a complete revolution around the earth !

this is known as periodic elliptical revolution , which is actually what most satellites do , they complete a revolution
as they are not "fixed" in geostationary orbit !

a reply to: neutronflux

its the word "stationary" thats throwing you , its stationary in terms of its absolute position over the earth, but its not stationary in that it isnt moving at all .

No, I have said all time that its moving through space. Try to read.

Can you now answer the question.

How does a geostationary satellite maintain its curved trajectory through space without falling along Earth curvature?