Flat earth theory?

originally posted by: LolliKum
a reply to: UpIsNowDown

. . . show me where you want me to measure and state what will make it impossible . . .

The one that someone else was bringing up on this thread was Sydney, Australia to Santiago, Chile.
I think that would be the furthest stretch over open water between major land masses to the extreme south, or rather the extreme outer edges of the circle of the plane earth.
If you were seeing the world as a sphere, it would probably work out as the shortest line going over Antarctica, which would make it impossible to do unless you got permission from every signatory to the Antarctic Treaty, where you would have to separately apply to every country and then to the governing body over the treaty and pay so many millions of Dollars in fees and take years to create environmental impact studies and have all of those approved.
Anyway, that would be the purely legal problem. Then there are practical problems involved in how you would go about taking measurements. Anyway, there are serious problems involving long periods of darkness and hurricane force winds that last for long times and high winds when those leave, and ocean currents that go like crazy and huge waves that will sink a small boat. OK, this is just if you were thinking that this is a rather short distance considering how this is at the end of the hypothetical ball making this restrict together, and not even considering the reality that it is not shrunk together but rather spread far apart by really being the outer edge of a huge circle. Then you need to like triple all the distances you imagine while staring at a globe model.
My real point is no one has ever attempted such a thing and there are serious reasons why not to. This leaves these places and locations and distances as a great mystery and no one really wants that badly to know since no one wants to go there anyway and they do not, they travel far to the north to stay more towards the center of the circle of the plane and do not venture over these great expanses of ocean where there is no chance of rescue in case of an accident.

You seem so intelligent with the ability to use a lot of words, but if I am being honest which I asked you to be, the drivel you have responded is beyond fantasy and falls into TROLL catergory so from now one, I understand that you are merely trolling, I will take no further part until you wish to be honest.

originally posted by: LolliKum
a reply to: Badams

. . . alot of videos you can watch showing this.

Oh?
I see one. Well, I know it takes an incredible amount of horsepower to pump out a vacuum, that is one thing, and the other is that there are not a lot of chambers in existence and I am sure, none like this one in the video.
All I can say is, Isn't it peculiar that instead of a hammer, they dropped a plastic bowling ball?
Like I was saying before, and I am not backing down from it, things fall according to their material that they are made of.
My guess is that they cherry picked the bowling ball because it has the same electromagnetic attraction component as the feathers.
If you think about it for even one minute, you realize this video is completely insane.
They probably spent thousands of Dollars to do this, and why did they not have 10 or 15 different things dropped all at once with all the time and money spent to make this?
Well, the explanation is they cherry picked two objects they knew ahead of time had the came electromagnetic attraction coefficient, plastic and the feathers.

Ah, here is your error: First, you tell us that this chamber is fake. Then, you tell us all materials have to fall with the same speed (according to your theory about electromagnetic resistance or attraction).
Now.

Did they use that vaccum chamber?

If yes, your theory does not hold. Vaccum, items falling with the same speed = gravity.

If no (no such chamber exists), it has to be a trick. If there was a trick, why use a trick? Ball and feather are just slowed down by electromagnetic effects, right? So, why to use a chamber which does not even exist?

In other words: The ball is in your field, show us how you slow down a falling bowling ball enough to let it fall as fast/slow as a feather. Hint: the em-field should be strong enough to create an upwards directed Lorentz-force to counter the boyance or gravity or whatever you think lets a bowling ball drop faster than a feather under air-resistance. Hint 2: a Lorentz-force strong enough to do this in an non-conductive bowling ball would require a SERIOUS amount of amperes!

originally posted by: zatara
a reply to: Somethingsamiss

It is very difficult to understand how a balance can be kept between two different pressurre zones without a solid divider. Just imagine the presure of an absolute vacuum in direct contact with our Earths atmosphere. Would it not suck our atmosphere "dry" until a balance is reached. Hmmm...still can not get my head around it..

There is a divider and its called distance. Your one hundred percent right a vacuum would immediately suck in anything that touches it. But thats not what happens gravity makes density decrease the further we get from the center of gravity. Would it surprise you to know the ISS is within earths atmosphere? But by the time we get that high the atmosphere is really thin. Earth's atmosphere is about 300 miles total. But most of what we consider atmosphere is within 10 miles.

At sea level, air pressure is about 14.7 pounds per square inch. At 10,000 feet , the air pressure is 10 pounds per square inch. At 60000 feet it drops down to 1.04 pounds per square inch. As you can see the atmosphere keeps decreasing until it comes into contact with the vacuum of space.

a reply to: ManFromEurope

Serious amperes you would have to strike the bowling ball with a lightning strike. And even that would just melt it as it travels down. What i think he is trying to claim is Diamagnetic Levitation. Yes it is possible to levitate magnetically every material in fact everything on earth.all matter in the universe has a slight magnetic charge, when i say slight we are talking hardly noticeable. Why thats because the electrons in atoms have a charge. By setting up a large enough magnetic field we can cause objects to repel.


But gravity is still there in the case of diamagnetic levitation, the gravitational force is compensated on the level of individual atoms and molecules. This is, in fact, as close as we can - probably ever - approach the science-fiction antigravity machine. But there is no way this was done on such a large scale and the other problem is different objects would not levitate the same. The field has to be adjusted for each object. There is some research in using magnetic fields to push objects to the floor. And there has been some success but we are talking on a cellular level. They found the more cells involved the less effect they can have moving an object. Being able to float an object and pushing an object are to very different things.

a reply to: wmd_2008

All due to a tilted globe can't happen on a flat Earth.

This is what I was saying before, and will repeat it for anyone who missed it before, demonstrating how an observed phenomenon happens using a sphere model does not somehow exclude the demonstration of that phenomenon on a flat earth.
The tilt of the axes of the earth was invented to add to the sphere Earth theory to explain how it is that the Earth could go in a 93 million mile radius circle around the sun and have the theoretical axes of the Earth still point to the North star.
Anyway, I think I might have found the right Globebusters video of the one about the Sun rising in New Zealand because they are showing in it the same map you are showing, the blue map of day and night on the earth. I need to actually go through the entire video to see if it does discuss this problem. The video is close to 4 hours long. This is why I started making videos by making captures from the Globebusters videos but in short sections of 5 minutes or so, and break it up according to the topic. On the actual original videos, they hardly give any description in the title and none in the video description section on the YT page. So, I will make a cut of the section on New Zealand when I find it and post it in the thread, the link to the one I make on my channel.

What is it saying about the state of civilization that this has gone on for 24 pages? Wonder if we'd get 30 pages out of the theory earthquakes are when Atlas shrugs? But I suppose better carrying on with this in a forum, than being out on the streets.

a reply to: JameSimon

Let's establish something really quick on this thread:

You don't have anything to substantiate that claim with.
OK, the "fact" is that there was a theory put forward around 1500 that the Earth was a sphere, and since then, it was sponsored by things like the Royal Society who set themselves as the ultimate arbiters of truth, and they commissioned various people to go ahead and produce proofs of the theory so they could declare it as a scientific fact.
Those people so sent forth were basically hucksters and devised so called experiments to prove the various supporting theories for the whole spherical Earth/heliocentric system of viewing the universe.
People still go back to those same long-ago non-repeatable experiments to this day whenever the "truth" of the sphere Earth is called into question.
As far as proving the flat earth, that is really easy, and has been done over and over and anyone can go out and prove it to themselves by just looking at the Earth and now that people have actually done the math as to how much curvature should be observed if the Earth was a sphere and the size claimed by the spherical Earth supports, and realize by looking at sources like Google Maps the distances they are looking and realizing they can see things clearly that should be hidden behind a great lump of the earth caused by the theorized rotundity of the Earth.

a reply to: dragonridr

Yes, I get that. Not that I am a flatearther but do you think there is a way to calculate this equilibrium with gravity part of this equation? Would very much like to see this.

Anybpdy?

a reply to: Scrutinizing

What is it saying about the state of civilization that this has gone on for 24 pages?

Flat earth thread have a minimum of 60 pages.

Its just a rule.


Trolls, debunkers, skeptics and believers alike all fall for the scent of good flat earth thread.

Just look at the posts,

humour, frustration, absolute ignorance.

These threads are entertaining and should be taken as such.

a reply to: LolliKum

As far as proving the flat earth, that is really easy, and has been done over and over and anyone can go out and prove it to themselves by just looking at the Earth

So you are saying you can go outside?


when you go outside can you see all of the earth or just your surrounding environment?

Forget about whether its flat or a globe, can you see all of the earth when you go outside to say its flat by sight alone?

OK, the "fact" is that there was a theory put forward around 1500 that the Earth was a sphere, and since then, it was sponsored by things like the Royal Society who set themselves as the ultimate arbiters of truth, and they commissioned various people to go ahead and produce proofs of the theory so they could declare it as a scientific fact.

No sorry but your fact is just nonsense you have in your head.

The Greeks estimated earths circumference before Christ was around.

That is over 2000 years ago.

a reply to: LolliKum

This is what I was saying before, and will repeat it for anyone who missed it before, demonstrating how an observed phenomenon happens using a sphere model does not somehow exclude the demonstration of that phenomenon on a flat earth.

Ok.

Demonstrate how, on a flat world, the elevation of Polaris can correspond to the latitude of the observer. No videos please. A simple diagram will suffice. Please include dimensional values (latitude, elevation, that sort of thing).

originally posted by: zatara
a reply to: dragonridr

Yes, I get that. Not that I am a flatearther but do you think there is a way to calculate this equilibrium with gravity part of this equation? Would very much like to see this.

Anybpdy?

Yes there is in a paper i read they had the math involved in levitation.

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: Scrutinizing

What is it saying about the state of civilization that this has gone on for 24 pages?

Flat earth thread have a minimum of 60 pages.

Its just a rule.


Trolls, debunkers, skeptics and believers alike all fall for the scent of good flat earth thread.

Just look at the posts,

humour, frustration, absolute ignorance.

These threads are entertaining and should be taken as such.

I think people are truly believing flat earth theory because they dont have someone who can point out the flaws to them. We have NBA basketball players come out and say they believe the earth is flat.

www.cbssports.com...

Sad to say but i think our education system has failed. We became to worried about feelings and showed no concern for facts. We argue facts and claim we are somehow enlightened. Facts are facts they are not up for debate.

a reply to: zatara

Only vaccum cleaners suck oh and flatties.

The reason flatties think that is because they see experiments with 2 chambers where pressure will equalise or when a chamber with all the air removed will fill if a valve opens. Gravity creates the pressure at sea level which reduces with height basic science is like magic to them

a reply to: LolliKum

Show us how the view of the Moon would work on a flat Earth.

The Globe model can predict the postion of the stars planets etc flatties can't even agree with each other. So instead of claims show how you think it works I bet you dont.

a reply to: LolliKum

Pythagoras is attributed with the discovery that the earth was round 2500 years ago (not 500). Eratosthenes calculated the earth's circumference using 2 sticks more than 2000 years ago.

a reply to: dragonridr

Yes, well, some of those NBA players, Kyrie Irving in particular, don't seem all that bright most of the time...which I suppose is why some profess to believe in the FE idiocy.

a reply to: seagull

Its all about an over abundance of conspiracy in your life...

Obviously there are other factors but mistrust in the world leads to such idiocy...

And when you mix that with religion which is supposed to be based on "trust"

Its all down hill from there

a reply to: Akragon

Could be.

I can't pretend to understand how some people think, when I don't understand my thought processes half the time....

I'm not over the top religious, though I am a believer in a Supreme Deity. When it comes to this sort of idiocy, the Supreme Deity understands physics. How could she not??

😉

a reply to: seagull

I tend to focus on how people think, and the rationale behind it

Flat earthers deny what the do not understand... and don't actually attempt to understand

they would rather watch a video so someone else can explain why simple logic is wrong...

They are morons... im sorry