I think you are missing one important factor. Gravity.
Not in regards to the specific statement you were responding to. Orbit always decays because constant speed in anything but a completely frictionless and unidirectional path requires acceleration. Acceleration costs energy. The same is true “attached” to a (uniformly) rotating world.
Can you prove the earth is still?
Arguably, yes (proof is very subjective outside of mathematics :()
In science we can only prove through observation (bearing natural law; the what) and experiment (bearing theory; the why/how)
I already mentioned the michelson morely observation, which establishes that the world is not whizzing anywhere like a space potato. The michelson gale pearson in conjunction with “airy’s failure” does away with the fantasy/conceit of axial rotation. The sky rotates above us! We are stationary.
So what would explain why we are only getting an obvious downward force?
Sadly, most things that we observe don’t have explanations, and worse than that - the explanations that we teach are historically always incorrect :( You learn to live with it.
The downward force is caused by the interplay between the weight of the object and the media it displaces. When it is greater, it has a “downward force” (gravity). When it is lesser, it has an “upward force” (levity). When it is equal it floats (neutrality).
This is all experimentally verifiable as well. The cause of gravity, levity, and neutrality is weight!
When things are entrained during freefall the rules “appear” to be suspended, but only because they are entrained. Archimedes principle involves volumetric density and the entire object (let’s say an airplane cabin, for instance) is still subject to it, although the entrained items within are temporarily not.
Gravity only exists with mass.
In a way you are right! However I think it is important to use the word gravitation.
Gravitation only exists with mass... However, they are both entirely fictional and do not in any way exist outside of equation. This is why they cannot be adequately defined, measured, or manipulated! It is not coincidence that when combined they return to the actual and measured weight they began as.
It doesn't explain a single direction of force.
There isn’t a single direction of force! It is all to do with the interplay of the weight of the object, and that of the media it displaces!
As for the reason why objects have weight - we may never have an adequate (or correct) answer :(
You can even demonstrate this while on earth.
That’s where all science is done! Buoyancy is never absent, it merely appears to be while the object and media are entrained during freefall. The “buoyancy” you are referring to is merely isostatic/isobaric pressure - it’s always there but is not distributed on the object the same way typically.
its not guessing - you are using observation and collecting data.
Not a guess its observation.
I agree that observation and data collecting are not guessing! That is how we establish natural law in science; which is to say “what is”. When you imagine an explanation for that natural law and don’t/can’t experimentally validate it - that’s called guessing!
When a new theory comes along ...
Sadly it takes more than merely “coming along” or better describing reality. The old generation (and their miseducation/bias) also needs to die off, traditionally :(
Flat earth has come and gone
No, it hasn’t! We were just mistaught that it has. Since ancient greece virtually every educated person on earth has been taught that the world is spherical.
Besides, scientific theories are bore of experiment. The shape of the world (or any physical object) is not a scientific theory, nor could it ever be! It’s simply not what scientific theories are for!
We have observation, we can go to space and see the earth is round.
Can we? Can you visit a place that doesn’t exist? Is merely “looking at something” how we conduct empirical science? Do you think that avoiding abject appeal to authority is important for a diligent student or is it fine to simply believe instead of know?
you can take a high altitude weather balloon with a camera and see the same thing.
Yes we can, and many have! The results are in, but they aren’t what you think/expect!
Sadly we were both mistaught that the horizon ought to curve at some altitude. Even if the earth were spherical, it wouldn’t do so. Some students, more fortunate than us, today are not taught this nonsense anymore.
Explain and prove that it breaks modern scientific laws.
Sure! It’s pretty simple. The natural behavior of gas (gas law) was established on earth’s surface where gravitation is presumed (but never measured, because it simply doesn’t exist to measure) strongest. Two gas laws are violated by the mere concept of space (and many more besides, but let’s start with them).
- Gas always expands to fill a container as homogeneously as possible.
- Gas pressure is derived from the container walls.
Simply the consistent existence of (relatively) static isobaric/isostatic air pressure necessarily contradicts the existence of an “infinite sky vacuum” above our heads. The very concept of a “gas giant” in such a vacuum is both laughable and entirely unscientific in light of the laws above. Again, these laws were established here on earths surface where gravitation is believed to be strongest. They are laws because, under natural circumstances, they have no available contradicting observation - unless you know of one?!
Your definition of science is extremely narrow and strange.
That’s true! However, it is correct and a working definition! (As opposed to one which does not work, and is not correct)
It appears that you only accept observation if it is with a human eye and not a mechanical or digital one.
Actually, just the opposite! Empiricism requires measurement, not merely looking!
You don't accept observational science using a laser and distance to prove curvature
Of course not! But that is because I understand what light is, and because I understand how refraction works! You could never “prove” nor measure curvature in such a manner! This is a longer conversation, as many of our previous question/answers are as well.
You don't accept a laser gyroscope to prove rotation.
Quite the contrary! It does measure rotation! Just not of the earth!
You expect me to prove the curvature
Absolutely not! We’re just having a conversation! Also, proof isn’t really something anyone can give anyone else (outside of mathematics) - it is far too subjective. We must obtain proof for ourselves, as well as define the criteria for what could/would/should serve as such proof in our view!
yet you are claiming the earth is flat
Nope!
is to say its no know the shape of the earth, not that its flat.
I assume there are some typos here, but if I am interpreting you correctly - you’re right, and I do exactly that! I can say with certainty that the earth is not spherical the way we are taught, however I do not know its true entire shape!
we have vehicles that can fly.
True.
We also have vehicles that can go into low orbit.
Not if I am correct, and orbit is entirely fictional - no!
I'm sure you are going to excludes any of these things that can go into space right?
Personally, as an independent researcher and student, I “exclude” (discard/put aside, more like) things I cannot validate/verify for myself. When it comes to studying/ascertaining the shape of the world, I generally prefer to stay more “down to earth”. The shape of the earth is down here! We don’t need to go into the sky or “space” to measure it... In fact, that just makes it harder to directly measure!
What exactly do you think happens when we get high enough to see the entire earth?
I’m not convinced that we can reach such a height, ever have in the past, or even have the “optical capacity” to see the entire thing even if we could reach such a vantage point. However, assuming we can - I am not really sure... Extrapolating from the highest vantage available to us, I would speculate that the world appears as a generally flat plane beneath us, and the horizon surrounding us remains linear and appears slightly lower as we rise. Basically, I expect it to look very similarly to the vantage available from, say, a weather balloon - because nature is fractal.
However, there are some who posit that the earth (as many currently posit/believe about the universe) is not finite. Of course in such a case, you could never get high enough to see the whole thing even if it were optically feasible.
I don't think it would cause acceleration since we are not going faster are we?
It seems that way, but actually it requires it! Velocity is a vector (i.e. includes direction). Whenever you change direction (or speed, of course!) you require (and experience) acceleration!
Mass is pretty simple, how heavy is something relative to its size
I am well aware. I just said it wasn’t real, and did not exist outside of equation.
In science its synonymous with density.
It is synonymous with inertia (which does exist, because weight exists), but I think I get/agree with your meaning.
I can have an object that weighs one weight and move it to another area of the earth and it will weigh another weight.
Minusculely, yes that is true. It just isn’t for the reasons we were taught. The primary cause for the difference in weight (and fall/rise time, as in many “gravimeters”) is buoyancy/the media it displaces. Of course, temperature, electrical charge, and many other things play a small role in such things as well.
Weight is not imbued by magical fields that defy description, measurement, manipulation, and discovery (from invocation, not creation/invention, of the stupid idea by newton to now). Weight is merely an intrinsic and inexorable property of all matter. Mass and gravitation do not, in any way, exist outside of equation. Weight is all there is, and all there has ever been!
This is (apparent) yearly change in positions of all stars in the sky due to Earth's own motion.
I like assumption and speculation too, but I don’t call it science! I call it guessing!
But thier positions are relative to each other!
Again, I like guessing!
Doppler effect.
That’s real!
These are all motions relative to other objects in space.
So we are taught, and required to repeat in order to matriculate. However, it ain't necessarily so! What if I told you that “space” does not exist in any way, and if it did it would violate many of the scientific laws that we have established (unchallenged, mind you) for centuries? What if I told you the entire stupid idea was made up by the coimbra jesuits and then run with by newton due to his understanding of the permanence of the celestial cycles?
So it is technically possible to define a reference frame in which the Earth does not move, while the Sun, planets, and stars orbit around the Earth, but making this reference frame consistent with our observations of Doppler shift and parallaxes would be very complicated
I think it is reasonable to do so, despite complicated mathematics - however it is unnecessary. The lights in the sky do as they do, the rest is mythology/religion/pseudoscience masquerading as science :( There are good reasons I make such apparently “flippant” statements, and good criteria available to discern between science and pseudoscience masquerading as it.
and Occam's razor directs us, to use the simplest explanation whenever possible.
Ugh, more monks :(
Lol, all kidding aside - I like occam’s razor but the posits you are playing apologist for are fantastically complicated (which you are well aware of). You currently believe that the mythology you were taught is the simplest explanation available, but it is my view that you are in error. Besides, occam’s razor has to do with scientific theories. We are merely discussing speculations/guesses - not science nor scientific theories!
Go Fuck yourself handshake.
Actually, I’m not a handshake... I just got locked out of my main account because I stupidly forgot the password :(
At 55k ft you absolutely can
Nope! Even at 150k it isn’t visible to the human eye unaided. Though you are not the first, nor the last - to believe you could. In fact, you may actually have (however what you saw was an illusion due to distortion)!
Back away from the porn and take a class.
Good advice for us all! I’m way ahead of you brother, or sister!
Maybe learn something
Indeed! We must never cease! So much of what we learn (in classes, and outside of them) is simply wrong. In life, we are students and then we die. You seem to feel you are done learning in regards to the horizon (what it is, wether it appears to curve or not and why/what that signifies) - but you have just begun!
Perhaps a brief, civil, conversation with someone of a differing viewpoint could help you to practice what you preach? Or at least share your learning with another wayward soul?
Which is very slow for its size
Not really. 66k is pretty darn fast, though I can appreciate that on a large enough circle (the presumed orbit around the sun over the course of a year) that may not cause an extreme acceleration (though still a measurable one, which strangely cannot be and is not measured...)
the centripetal force of the earth spinning is almost nothing compared to its mass.
There isn’t any “mass” outside of equation. That’s why scales measure weight instead! There is no “mass” to measure (nor gravitation which also cannot be measured). It is NOT coincidence that when you combine the mathematical contrivances of mass and gravitation, they return to the real (and measured) weight they began (and were measured) as!
Don't forget we move around the galaxies center as well.
I don’t! I’m saying that we don’t do those things, and that is literally “astronomical fiction”. If we did, we could measure such motion (through interferometry for one)! Because we can’t (and haven’t), it is most reasonable and scientific (emperical) to conclude that there is no such motion. That is what michelson-morely actually established :(. Astronomy is barely science at all - it’s merely a pastime for rich dilettantes. That’s why it has produced virtually nothing of scientific value in millennia!
Dubay only just recently got back on for some reason I haven’t figured out yet
He’s controlled opposition! (His grandfather is reported to be a mason as well...)
We are largely in agreement, however the flat earth society (there are at least two that I know of) is a great place to begin research into the subject. One just needs to be careful to thoroughly verify/validate all claims encountered (facts are merely one type of claim) before they are accepted, or you end up a pinball bouncing from one unfounded belief to another.
So, nice non-sequitur strawman meme-vomit. It's really funny 😁.
That’s the heavily advertised (i.e. funded) psyop. It propagates offensively stupid things like this to falsely associate them with earnest flat earth research to prevent people from ever actually studying it. Sadly it has been pretty effective :(
yes its spinning that fast
I think they were talking about the “spinning” around the sun, not axially.
Axially, at the maximum (equator), the rotation speed is believed closer to 1000mph.
The centripetal force is nothing compared to the force pulling us to the earth
Well, not nothing but small!
Also there is no force “pulling” us to the earth at all. The force pushes us to the earth, and it is called weight!
I have seen the curvature with my own eyes
I can assure you, that unless you went into “orbit” and/or the ISS you definitely did not.
Many people believe they see the “curvature” standing on the beach, or riding on a commercial airline (both of which are completely impossible). The most common reason for seeing this illusion is peer pressure/bias/conditioning. The second most common reason is distortion (from the eye/lens itself, and/or from what you were looking through/with).
literally teared up at how shockingly beautiful our planet is, and how many stars we CANT see from down here
It’s almost like light pollution is created specifically to stop such awe inducing natural spectacle :( The heavens are incredible!
The Book of Job describes the Earth in passing as hanging in space from the arctic regions
Interesting! What passage?
Biblically it is a divider, described as a massive tent built of crystal with a pale hue, that separates the waters of the heavens (above us) from the waters of the deep (below us). The vaults of the heavens and deep were opened once in the bible and it flooded the entire world (noah’s flood).
It’s all in the bible if you care to read it (and supposedly werner von braun has a specific passage about it on his gravestone). Alternatively, you can deduce/derive the firmaments actual existence (or something that serves its purpose in any case) by scientific law.
That’s why I’d rather be called a firmament earther.
Interesting! I prefer the term “flat earth researcher” myself, and/or globe skeptic/denier. The term “flat earther” is a derogatory created by the heavily advertised (i.e. funded) psyop to prevent people from earnestly studying this important subject.
It’s so misleading when people say flat.
Agreed. That is by design. There really aren’t any flat earthers - that’s a psyop!
Spinning at 66,600 miles an hour is a fantasy.
Agreed!
How in the hell can they even measure that, common sense should tell you that’s impossible.
Actually, there is a way! It’s called interferometry and we tried to use it to determine such believed/presumed motion through the “solar system” and universe. We found that the world was stationary, but the ramifications of that discovery were so philosophically abhorrent that “scientists” decided that the world was actually moving but that no optical experiment (measurement, in point of fact - not experiment) could ever be conceived to measure such motion. “We can’t measure it, but trust us - it’s totally there” - Professional sciencemongers.
NASA is the deception.
Not when it comes to the nature, shape, or motion of the world. They just repeat what they are taught in that regard.
NASA’s “deception” is merely to steal/embezzle taxpayer money and provide virtually nothing of any value in exchange (and always have, since their creation). They also provide distraction from serially unaddressed inequity/injustice here on earth - “space circus”.
Lazar is a fraud (and is heavily spook affiliated, if not an “asset” himself)
The only true stories regarding him are the suspicious death of his wife, and the brothels he ran and setup cameras in for blackmail purposes.
It’s true that this is offensively stupid, and heavily advertised (i.e. funded)!
If you would like to understand/discuss/explore why this is the case, please join us on the community I created to discuss such topics!
Click my username and find the link, or let me know and I will PM it to you!
The flat earth psyop is real, but most likely is not for the purpose you currently assume!
I’m flat, but I do not preclude other “operational modes” or “extrasensory” possibilities.
One way I avoid falling prey to “the woo” is by avoiding clif high like the mind plague he is. however, I was struck by his last line
Get your mind strong, there are lots of traps awaiting it, and the Woo is unforgiving.
Agreed. The woo is there to distract, discredit, and waste your time.
To all with an interest in discussing/exploring such things further - please join us on the community I created specifically for it!
Click my username and find the link, or let me know and I will PM it to you!
Fascinating! Thanks for sharing.
If you are a bible fan (and/or like theosophy, I highly recommend blueletterbible.org and the pocket e-sword)
I did some research on this line and have concluded that it does not support your interpretation (or provided translation).
The preceding line speaks of hell (in this instance, sheol) which is the cavernous underworld (read dante’s inferno? Or have any familiarity with hades?) beneath us.
Job is talking about that in the next line! The empty space is not “outer space” (they absolutely had no concept anything like that when the bible was written - it was first made up by the coimbra jesuits in the 15-16’s), but the empty space of sheol!
Agreed! Thousands of years and repeated translations will tend to do that! My research suggests that kjv did the best job in english, but even with creating new words when necessary - something is always lost when translating.
Thanks again for sharing!