d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Science, Technology & Nature >
Poll > Flat Earth Vs Globe Earth
Prev11011121314119Next
Closed New Topic New Poll
  Guests cannot view or vote in polls. Please register or login.
Member
Posts: 9
Joined: May 20 2017
Gold: 0.00
May 21 2017 01:19am
Sometimes after a solar system show, a visitor will try and argue this (probably twice a month on average), and they are the easiest arguments to pick apart.
Member
Posts: 66,666
Joined: May 17 2005
Gold: 17,384.69
May 21 2017 02:19am
I think flat eaters are probably as much dangerous as religious fanatics anyway.
First step i was amused & curious, it was a nice way to discuss about our reality perception, but now im realizing it's pretty destructive.


Quote (card_sultan @ 21 May 2017 06:24)
... incoherent bullcrap ...


You are a disease.
Member
Posts: 63,838
Joined: Jun 26 2009
Gold: 174.69
May 21 2017 02:34am
Flat earth 31.25% (10 Votes)

10 people know the truth
Member
Posts: 8,376
Joined: Jan 5 2012
Gold: 450.51
May 21 2017 02:40am
I opened my eyes, I woke up
Flat earth, spread the word sheople

Can't believe people are this stupid in 2017 :)
Member
Posts: 12,259
Joined: Mar 4 2006
Gold: 10,844.00
May 21 2017 07:45am
Quote (card_sultan @ May 21 2017 12:24am)
as for my proof that gravity does not exist , your welcome to debunk this:

Disproof of Gravity
By Aaron Guerami
aguerami@gmail.com
http://aaronsreality./
The standard particle model has yet to find any evidence of Gravity. This is most concerning since gravity
is used by most modern equations. Great particle accelerators have hunted for any signs of gravity. None
found!
There are several ways to disprove gravity.
1) Experimentally
One simple experiment shows there is no gravity. The Helium Balloon. It rises. How is this
possible? Classical Mechanics shows that Force equals the Constant of Gravity multiplied by the
Mass of Object 1 multiplied by the Mass of Object 2 divided by the Distance between the two
masses raised to the second power.
F=GM1M2/r^2
With this logic, the mass of the Earth is so great that the helium balloon would have no choice but
to be attracted to the Earth. We have mass 1 pulling on mass 2 and mass 2 pulling on mass 1.
F1 = F2. This is just wrong. The force of the balloon that pulls the Earth is not equal to the force
that the Earth pulls on the balloon. It would not rise. What we see in the experiment that the
helium is rising to meet its level of density.
2) Commutitive
The mathematics of gravity is a concept called Zero Point Mass. This is a mass without a volume.
This is not found in the universe. The main problem here is the reduction of 3 dimensional
densities to 0 dimensional masses. Once a density is reduces to a mass, the mass cannot be
returned to the original shape of the density. So we cannot cube a zero and get anything but
another zero. This breaks the commutative properties of addition.
Let’s look at some of the equations and how gravity fails at a fundamental level.
F=ma : Force equals mass times acceleration.
We have a zero dimensional mass * a 2 dimensional vector and that does not equal a 3
dimensional field. So the main axiom of gravity fails the commutative test.
This alone should disprove gravity.
F = G(M1*M2)/r^2 : Force = The constant of Gravity * (The zero dimensional mass 1 * The zero
dimensional mass 2)/ The 3 dimensional length between them squared. So every object pulls
every other object. The dimensional problem occurs again.
A constant is what is used to fill in the gaps. When things do not work the way we want them to,
we just add a constant to fix the problem. When the equation no longer works, we change the
constant’s value.
Physicists know about this problem. They created gravity waves and shell modeling to
compensate for the dimensionless mass. But gravity is still dimensionless. The dimensionless
mass cannot create a 3 dimensional shape.
We all know that gravity collapses under the scrutiny of the tiny. Quantum level objects do not
show any signs of gravity. The particle accelerators prove this. They have yet to find any force
that works as gravity is described.
3) Gravity fails the multi-body test.
Gravity can only compute the force between 2 objects. Any equation that uses a sum of objects
fails in this way. First the two objects force is computed then the third body is computed with the
resultant of the first two bodies. Then that resultant is computed with the 4 body... That is how
summation works. The problem is that the distance between object 1 and 2 is not evaluated in the
next iteration.
4) Gravity and Complex Systems.
Let’s look at a hurricane that is traveling over the ocean. The spinning winds cause rotation in the
ocean. The low pressure of the storm causes a bulge upward in the ocean. Heat and pressure
are two of the main variables in this system. As the temp increases it decreases the pressure of
the storm, causing an increase in intensity in the storm. The heated air is forced up the eye wall.
This is an example of a temperature/pressure force on density. It is not possible for gravity to
describe this system, with or without spheres.
5) Questions posed by others:
- the rain fall because of gravity.
- the rain occurs because of water vapor cooling (temperature going closer to the dew point).
- the rain formation in itself is a very complex phenomena.
- the dynamics of rain formation depends on the presence of aerosols and fine particles.
- the dynamics of rain formation also depends on complex collision and coalescence
phenomena.
- the ascending motion of air is driven by gravity on all parts of the atmosphere.
- this ascending motion is also affected by the Coriolis force.
- this motion is affected also by the drag of rain.
- this motion is also affected by the detailed geometry of the hurricane.
- the fluid dynamics itself exhibits an incredible complexity, like turbulence and instabilities.
- the term "T" in the Navier-Stokes equation above hides a lot of complexities that often still need
to be understood.
- heat exchange plays an important role, yet it is not simpler than the fluid dynamics.
- the rain fall because of gravity
Rain falls because as cold water it is more dense or less buoyant then the surrounding air.
- the rain occurs because of water vapor cooling (temperature going closer to the dew point).
Yes, that is one way of looking at density and Buoyancy
- the rain formation in itself is a very complex phenomena.
Yes
- the dynamics of rain formation depends on the presence of aerosols and fine particles
Yes, the mixture of dirty water causes it to be a more dense mixture.
- the dynamics of rain formation also depends on complex collision and coalescence
phenomena.
Yes again, as the less dense gas collides with other gases, their temperature reduces and the
gas becomes liquid. This process occurs until the liquid water is heavier than the force of the
updraft.
- the ascending motion of air is driven by gravity on all parts of the atmosphere .
No. The ascending motion of air is due to the changes in temperature. The air heats at the
ground and rises. As it rises it cools and becomes liquid again. The liquid water is more dense
then the surrounding air.
- this ascending motion is also affected by the Coriolis force .
There are only 4 forces, Gluon - nuclear, W Boson - magnetism, Z Boson - electricity, and the
Photon - heat. Those are the only forces that have been experimentally shown.
- this motion is affected also by the drag of rain
Of course, As rain falls it drags against the updraft. This is the friction that removes the heat from
the air. Heat radiates to cold.
- this motion is also affected by the detailed geometry of the hurricane
The motion is the geometry of the cyclone. Geometry is a snapshot in time of an object.
- the fluid dynamics itself exhibits an incredible complexity, like turbulence and instabilities
The whole system is buoyancy. Buoyancy is only fluid dynamics. As a matter of opinion,
everything is fluid dynamics.
- the term "T" in the Navier-Stokes equation above hides a lot of complexities that often still need
to be understood
Like G, they change T frequently. These changes of G try to mimic the evidence. Just change the
constant and you will get what you want to see.
- heat exchange plays an important role, yet it is not simpler than the fluid dynamics
Heat exchange is intrinsic to fluid dynamics. You cannot remove heat from the fluid dynamics
problem.
- yet, suppress gravity and there are no hurricanes anymore
One cannot suppress gravity. Gravity is not real. It’s an old model of how objects move. Evidence
has forced major changes in gravity. There is no supporting evidence of a graviton. It is like the
Higg’s boson. Something that was built to try to explain interactions, but it does not.
6) Silly paradoxes created by gravity.
a. Black Holes are easily disproven by Crothers at sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com
b. Worm holes/Time travel
c. Parallel Universes
d. Relativity
e. Flat universe
f. Graviton decay
g. Higg’s Boson

Kepler's 3 laws are more in line with how planets orbit the sun. This is because of the Sun’s motion
around the galaxy. This causes the elliptical shape of the orbit. Not gravity. Gravity cannot explain 3 body
interactions. If the equation has a G in it then it is a Zero Point Mass system and that does not exist in
the universe.
The rules of the universe are simple. An atoms position in a system is based upon its density in relation to
the surrounding densities and the changes in magnetism, electricity and temperature. Density is the most
important function in determining the position of an object. Density is the vibration intensity within a
volume in relation to the density of the surrounding medium.

I love the part of this video where he says according to einstein there is no gravitational force, wake up sleepy heads!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NblR01hHK6U




Its your idea right, you didn't copy that from a youtube comment right, figures your trying to back away from it now.



The mathematics alone in this "proof" are cringe worthy. You clearly don't understand vector fields nor simple algebraic set theory. It's like a bunch of misinformed people spreading things that "sound right" to them but are too advanced for their tiny minds to understand.

Commutative is how it's spelled by the way.

This post was edited by Xx Shin3d0wn xX on May 21 2017 07:53am
Member
Posts: 12,066
Joined: Jun 3 2006
Gold: 6,723.69
May 21 2017 08:21am
Quote (ChivasRegal @ May 21 2017 09:34am)
Flat earth 31.25% (10 Votes)

10 people know the truth


You can't be serious xD You? A flat-earther? XD
/e @Card_sultan Actually, black holes and gravitational lines are well-established by now, (through quantum mechanics, not astrophysics). The fact that it doesn't fully fit all of the observations we make is because there are unknown factors playing a role. That doesn't mean that the original model is wrong. It just makes it incomplete. Replacing an incomplete model that befits a very big cut of our observation by one that befits almost none of our observations on top of the fact that it creates several paradoxes is irrational. So I can only ask of you this.
Are you Canadian or something? :rofl:

This post was edited by Forg0tten on May 21 2017 08:27am
Member
Posts: 104,397
Joined: Jun 22 2007
Gold: 0.00
May 21 2017 08:29am
I'm confident now that this thread is full of master trolls...
Member
Posts: 40,316
Joined: Dec 16 2008
Gold: 92.71
Warn: 50%
May 21 2017 09:10am
Quote (card_sultan @ May 20 2017 06:30pm)

You can see that the Earth does not spin by using an accelerometer in your iphone and setting it to level in one location - then flying a few thousand miles and its still at the same level - if the Earth was a ball you would not be level, also accelerometers dont use gravity because it doesn't exist.



wat
Member
Posts: 12,259
Joined: Mar 4 2006
Gold: 10,844.00
May 21 2017 12:15pm
Also as for your proofs 1. Stats gravity doesn't exist because experimentally a helium balloon shouldn't float. False, it's called buoyancy. Any fluid in a gravitational field possesses a pressure gradient, (which if the gas/liquid is in equilibrium) counterbalances the effect of gravity. Gravity acting on such a fluid creates this pressure, which is referred to a hydrostatic pressure. To make a long story short, the external pressure (of the air) is greater at the bottom of your ballon than at the top. So the net external pressure on the ballon is imbalanced, providing a net upward force equal to the weight of the displaced air.
Member
Posts: 63,097
Joined: Jan 11 2005
Gold: 9,765.00
Warn: 60%
May 21 2017 12:34pm
Quote (WhoBut_WBMason @ May 21 2017 05:10am)
wat


yes you can use your smartphone to prove the earth isn't a spinning ball





Quote (Forg0tten @ May 21 2017 04:21am)
You can't be serious xD You? A flat-earther? XD
/e @Card_sultan Actually, black holes and gravitational lines are well-established by now, (through quantum mechanics, not astrophysics). The fact that it doesn't fully fit all of the observations we make is because there are unknown factors playing a role. That doesn't mean that the original model is wrong. It just makes it incomplete. Replacing an incomplete model that befits a very big cut of our observation by one that befits almost none of our observations on top of the fact that it creates several paradoxes is irrational. So I can only ask of you this.
Are you Canadian or something? :rofl:


Quantum mechanics has found no proof of gravity existing at the quantum level.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_gravity

Quantum gravity (QG) is a field of theoretical physics that seeks to describe gravity according to .... While there is no concrete proof of the existence of gravitons

Quote (Xx Shin3d0wn xX @ May 21 2017 03:45am)
The mathematics alone in this "proof" are cringe worthy. You clearly don't understand vector fields nor simple algebraic set theory. It's like a bunch of misinformed people spreading things that "sound right" to them but are too advanced for their tiny minds to understand.

Commutative is how it's spelled by the way.


Cringeworthy is how i would describe your post, you gave no examples of proof beside your opinion, and opinions are great but everyone's got one. You should stay in your safe box and have more faith in Nasa, because they never lie...
Go Back To Science, Technology & Nature Topic List
Prev11011121314119Next
Closed New Topic New Poll