Flat earth theory?

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: InfiniteTrinity

so now we are moving onto the word relative, from the word orbit !

take your circular , goal post switching, decaying orbit of an argument and your opinion and go back to youtube hahahahah

So this is you finally realising that you all were making false claims for 30 pages and now this is my fault because you all cannot grasp the meaning of the words that were used?

originally posted by: InfiniteTrinity
a reply to: neutronflux

I am sorry that you don’t understand a geostationary satellite doesn’t move relative to a specific point above earth, but a geostationary satellite does complete an orbit in space with the earth at the center of that orbit. And what the geostationary satellite is actually orbiting is earth’s center of mass.

So its not orbiting around the Earth like you all claimed? Its the only thing I can conclude from your words

So why wont you admit it? Do you need it to be moving around Earth like oldcarpy says?

A geostationary satellite is orbiting what orbiting things orbit. Orbiting the center of mass of an object. This case, it’s the earth. What’s an object supposed to orbit using the parameters that define orbit listed in the reference material below?

Orbital elements
Orbital elements are the parameters required to uniquely identify a specific orbit.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: InfiniteTrinity

Orbit

a reply to: InfiniteTrinity

Orbit orbit

a reply to: Out6of9Balance

yeh got to love those natural phenomenon that we have collectively observed and catalogued with evidence !

a reply to: neutronflux

A geostationary satellite is orbiting what orbiting things orbit. Orbiting the center of mass of an object. This case, it’s the earth.

Your claim was that they orbit around the planet. This claim is what I have been refuting for 30 pages.

So again, you finally admit that they dont go around the planet Earth?

Okay, now a thought experiment:

- what about a satellite which goes counter-clockwise around Earth in an geostationary orbit - what do you think?

My answer: it would still need 24 hrs (give or take some minutes, we do not dabble in ticks) for an orbit, but now it is just the other way around. It would still orbit Earth, because what else would it orbit?

Of course, this satellite would make not much sense.

Right for the sake of the discussion can we at least just abandon this now , and go back to flat earth before we get the thread closed finally for some seriously crazy thread drifting.

This last run of posts makes japanese performance drift car enthusiasts look like little kids playing with hotwheels

a reply to: sapien82

So you admit that they do not orbit around the planet?

a reply to: InfiniteTrinity

Orbit orbit orbit

a reply to: ManFromEurope

Sorry nothing you say is going to change the fact that geostationary satellites do not move around the Earth and that you all have been pushing utter nonsense for three days because you cannot understand words even after I basically rubbed your faces in it hundreds of times.

Wow.

originally posted by: InfiniteTrinity
a reply to: neutronflux

A geostationary satellite is orbiting what orbiting things orbit. Orbiting the center of mass of an object. This case, it’s the earth.

Your claim was that they orbit around the planet. This claim is what I have been refuting for 30 pages.

So again, you finally admit that they dont go around the planet Earth?

that post is not an admission they dont go around the earth , its an admission that they orbit around the mass of the earth which has a gravitational field , and in doing so move around the earth .

time after time !

the thing about this is , although we can never be 100% certain, the chance of that ever being different is very very small , so why do you keep asking as if that has somehow against all observable facts has changed to match what you believe is true?

Why do you persist ? , and you still persist despite being asked to provide any evidence which supports your claim that its debunked !

You have given us nothing at all, not even one link to an article or physics paper or anything at all accept your opinion. Even the flat earth gang post youtube videos, you just give your opinion

It's so lazy mate.

If you want to play this game at least play by the rules.

originally posted by: InfiniteTrinity
a reply to: ManFromEurope

Sorry nothing you say is going to change the fact that geostationary satellites do not move around the Earth and that you all have been pushing utter nonsense for three days because you cannot understand words even after I basically rubbed your faces in it hundreds of times.

Wow.

If that is a fact , prove it. Show us the evidence which supports your claim that it's a fact

a reply to: neutronflux

Be very proud Neutronflux. First you led your friends down the wrong path, then when you finally realised your mistake you tried to act like it wasnt you but your friends and then witnessed them making the false claim time and time again without saying a thing while trying to weasel your way out of it.

a reply to: InfiniteTrinity

What you don’t get is you model orbit from the center of mass of the primary object. You treat the center of mass of the primary object as the origin point for modeling motion.

Again
originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: InfiniteTrinity

I am sorry that you don’t understand a geostationary satellite doesn’t move relative to a specific point above earth, but a geostationary satellite does complete an orbit in space with the earth at the center of that orbit. And what the geostationary satellite is actually orbiting is earth’s center of mass.

Now. please list where the earth’s rotation is a parameter for determining orbit.

Orbital elements
Orbital elements are the parameters required to uniquely identify a specific orbit.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: InfiniteTrinity
a reply to: neutronflux

A geostationary satellite is orbiting what orbiting things orbit. Orbiting the center of mass of an object. This case, it’s the earth.

Your claim was that they orbit around the planet. This claim is what I have been refuting for 30 pages.

So again, you finally admit that they dont go around the planet Earth?

Refuting is a bit of a stretch , you chide us for not apparently comprehending the meaning or definition of words , yet you obviously dont undsertand the meaning of refute!

Since in order to refute something you have to show or prove that it is wrong or false , and your opinion is not a vehicle of such action.

Please just either show us some evidence or stop flogging the dead horse as it stinks to high hell.

a reply to: sapien82

they orbit around the mass of the earth which has a gravitational field , and in doing so move around the earth .

Stop lying. They do not move around the Earth. If they did they would not be geostationary. Again why do you keep lying? Do you need them to move around the Earth?

a reply to: neutronflux

What you don’t get is you model orbit from the center of mass of the primary object. You treat the center of mass of the primary object as the origin point for modeling motion.

All I am doing here is asking if they move around the Earth.

According to your answer they dont.

According to you they move around the center of mass of the Earth. Unless the center of mass is the planet Earth itself, you are saying they do not orbit around the Earth.

What is the problem? Why cant you admit to the facts? Do you need them to move around the Earth?

originally posted by: InfiniteTrinity
a reply to: neutronflux

What you don’t get is you model orbit from the center of mass of the primary object. You treat the center of mass of the primary object as the origin point for modeling motion.

All I am doing here is asking if they move around the Earth.

According to your answer they dont.

According to you they move around the center of mass of the Earth. Unless the center of mass is the planet Earth itself, you are saying they do not orbit around the Earth.

What is the problem? Why cant you admit to the facts? Do you need them to move around the Earth?

Again. A geostationary satellite stays above the same point on earth. Hence “geo” sstationary. However. A geostationary satellite orbits the same axis the earth rotates on. The reason This can be used as a point of origin is the center of mass and axis are essential the same reference point when considering orbits of objects with little mass. If this was not true, how would a geostationary satellite say above the same point above earth?

Back to the center of mass. The moon does not orbit the earth. The earth and moon orbit about a point called a barycenter. There is no barycenter for a man made satellite and the earth because the earth is so relatively massive the barycenter is essential the earth’s center of mass. When defining orbits, objects center of mass and resultant barycenters are used. A planet’s rotation is not a parameter when defining an objects orbit.

Please quote where any of the above is false with a credible argument and proof. Sorry. Geostationary orbit is a thing. And you have done nothing to debunk geostationary orbit.

a reply to: sapien82

Please just either show us some evidence or stop flogging the dead horse as it stinks to high hell.

The individual would have to understand you model satellite motion from centers of gravity as a frame of reference. Not the edge of the revolving earth.