d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Science, Technology & Nature > Flat Earth Vs Globe Earth > Why Or Why Not?
Prev1141516171854Next
Closed New Topic New Poll
Views: 7935Replies: 538Track Topic
Member
Posts: 64,732
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 260.11
#151
Jun 10 2016 01:16pm
Quote (MaliceMizer @ Jun 10 2016 01:10pm)
Ya tho


I know, it would require a flat earther to do work to understand instead of just parrot a YouTube video.
Member
Posts: 63,097
Joined: Jan 11 2005
Gold: 9,765.00
Warn: 60%
#152
Jun 11 2016 11:17pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ Jun 10 2016 02:16pm)
I know, it would require a flat earther to do work to understand instead of just parrot a YouTube video.


From which parrot did you learn that an object in motion is always accelerating?
Member
Posts: 64,732
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 260.11
#153
Jun 12 2016 12:28am
Quote (card_sultan @ Jun 11 2016 11:17pm)
From which parrot did you learn that an object in motion is always accelerating?


Good to see you've totally given up on addressing anything and instead insist on lying.
Member
Posts: 13,231
Joined: Feb 1 2010
Gold: 4.77
#154
Jun 12 2016 01:18am
Quote (card_sultan @ 12 Jun 2016 00:17)
From which parrot did you learn that an object in motion is always accelerating?


My understanding of orbit is more based on an object constantly "falling" against the mass of another.
This must be a massive over simplification but it follows at some point that there would have to be some mechanism for velocity,
Because what we can observe on earth "matter" falling foes not perpetually gain speed but instead reaches a maximum terminal.

If objects in space, a near vacuum, are constantly falling against each other with no wind resistance to create a maximum terminal, would they continue to gain speed? Remember the "experiment" conducted on the moon with the feather and stone.

I think this is where your breakdown of understanding is happening, as is mine.
Probably from lack of understanding in the complexities of their heliocentric system, but the doublethink is strong in the last few pages from both sides.
Member
Posts: 64,732
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 260.11
#155
Jun 12 2016 10:38am
Quote (MaliceMizer @ Jun 12 2016 01:18am)
My understanding of orbit is more based on an object constantly "falling" against the mass of another.
This must be a massive over simplification but it follows at some point that there would have to be some mechanism for velocity,
Because what we can observe on earth "matter" falling foes not perpetually gain speed but instead reaches a maximum terminal.

If objects in space, a near vacuum, are constantly falling against each other with no wind resistance to create a maximum terminal, would they continue to gain speed? Remember the "experiment" conducted on the moon with the feather and stone.

I think this is where your breakdown of understanding is happening, as is mine.
Probably from lack of understanding in the complexities of their heliocentric system, but the doublethink is strong in the last few pages from both sides.


It's actually lack of understanding of basic physics, because it's not thar complicated.
Member
Posts: 63,097
Joined: Jan 11 2005
Gold: 9,765.00
Warn: 60%
#156
Jun 12 2016 11:13am
Quote (MaliceMizer @ Jun 12 2016 02:18am)
My understanding of orbit is more based on an object constantly "falling" against the mass of another.
This must be a massive over simplification but it follows at some point that there would have to be some mechanism for velocity,
Because what we can observe on earth "matter" falling foes not perpetually gain speed but instead reaches a maximum terminal.

If objects in space, a near vacuum, are constantly falling against each other with no wind resistance to create a maximum terminal, would they continue to gain speed? Remember the "experiment" conducted on the moon with the feather and stone.

I think this is where your breakdown of understanding is happening, as is mine.
Probably from lack of understanding in the complexities of their heliocentric system, but the doublethink is strong in the last few pages from both sides.


This is my understanding of orbiting and gravity in the Heliocentric system - what I am pointing out that if the earth is maintaining a constant speed in both in both the Heliocentric Model and some FE's cube model and Thor is saying that this constant speed must actually infer acceleration to where the earth would be traveling at a trillion mph, if this idea is even remotely correct, it would apply to both theories and pointing out the ridiculous of this in the Heliocentric model only confirms that his understanding of the geocentric model is simple wrong and full of gaping holes. Look at how he never explains his faith, only criticizes those that dare question it. Constant speed does not equal constant acceleration and anyone who thinks it does is just plain trolling with blatent lies and not even with a basic understanding of actual physics.
Member
Posts: 64,732
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 260.11
#157
Jun 12 2016 11:38am
Quote (card_sultan @ Jun 12 2016 11:13am)
This is my understanding of orbiting and gravity in the Heliocentric system - what I am pointing out that if the earth is maintaining a constant speed in both in both the Heliocentric Model and some FE's cube model and Thor is saying that this constant speed must actually infer acceleration to where the earth would be traveling at a trillion mph, if this idea is even remotely correct, it would apply to both theories and pointing out the ridiculous of this in the Heliocentric model only confirms that his understanding of the geocentric model is simple wrong and full of gaping holes. Look at how he never explains his faith, only criticizes those that dare question it. Constant speed does not equal constant acceleration and anyone who thinks it does is just plain trolling with blatent lies and not even with a basic understanding of actual physics.


It really says something about your flat earth position that you have to actively lie about those who disagree with you.
Member
Posts: 14,319
Joined: Jun 19 2010
Gold: 7,271.48
#158
Jun 12 2016 11:47am
Quote (card_sultan @ Jun 12 2016 11:13am)
This is my understanding of orbiting and gravity in the Heliocentric system - what I am pointing out that if the earth is maintaining a constant speed in both in both the Heliocentric Model and some FE's cube model and Thor is saying that this constant speed must actually infer acceleration to where the earth would be traveling at a trillion mph, if this idea is even remotely correct, it would apply to both theories and pointing out the ridiculous of this in the Heliocentric model only confirms that his understanding of the geocentric model is simple wrong and full of gaping holes. Look at how he never explains his faith, only criticizes those that dare question it. Constant speed does not equal constant acceleration and anyone who thinks it does is just plain trolling with blatent lies and not even with a basic understanding of actual physics.



What was actually said:

Quote (card_sultan @ Jun 6 2016 10:28pm)
Well there is the Geocentric theory that the flat earth is moving up in space at the same rate that things fall or there is the Heliocentric theory that there is an invisible force that no one can explain or show, so take your pick.


Quote (Thor123422 @ Jun 7 2016 12:43am)
If the Earth was moving up at the same rate that wouldn't cause gravity. The only way motion of the Earth would cause a downward force is if it was ACCELERATING up. This is an entry level laws of motion problem.

I can guarantee Vsauce didn't seriously try to defend a flat Earth. I watch his channel.

Member
Posts: 13,231
Joined: Feb 1 2010
Gold: 4.77
#159
Jun 12 2016 01:13pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ 12 Jun 2016 11:38)
It's actually lack of understanding of basic physics, because it's not thar complicated.


Calling something basic physics doesn't make it so.

You have so many factors at this point the whole thing is convoluted by at least conflicting occurrence.


Care to explain terminal velocity in a vacuum? I tried going to imrightyourwron.com like you do and they said that there is constant acceleration

But the rectification of infinite orbit comes from
conflicting vectors of direction
Then suddenly space isn't a perfect vacuum and should be considered fluid
Then the planets make ellipticals instead of circles and gravity's magical properties are different to an ellipse than a circle.
Then gravity is suddenly inconsistent and the "rubber bands" act much like magnetism.
But the body actually accelerates to finish the apex of the ellipse and decelerates across the long portion for a consistent view to maintain consistent viewing.

C'mon tho

This shit is a mess. We don't even know what a perfect circle looks like. How are you so pompous to call it "basic physics" when a cursory search yields different results across the board? I have thousands of hours logged into Kerbal Space program, I do this for fun & it's still not easy.

This post was edited by MaliceMizer on Jun 12 2016 01:21pm
Member
Posts: 63,097
Joined: Jan 11 2005
Gold: 9,765.00
Warn: 60%
#160
Jun 12 2016 01:32pm
constant - not changing or varying; uniform; regular; invariable:

As in : Gravity is a constant invisible magic force in the Heliocentric Myth

accelerating - to cause faster or greater activity, development, progress, advancement, to move or go faster; increase in speed.

as in Thor first said

Quote (Thor123422 @ Jun 7 2016 12:34am)
Crushed by what? I'm on the outside. The air is moving at the same rate as the earth (with the exception of the wind).

I do demand evidence. I've actually taken quite a bit of physics and done the math myself.

If we were accelerating at 9.8m/s^2 after ten years we would be going over three million meters per second, or 6.7 million miles per hour. That is the requirement of the flat earth constantly accelerating upward. That is a LOT of energy that has to come from somewhere.



In all Fe theories I ve read, gravity is a complete myth, I heard vsauce talk about the one theory that states the FE is constantly moving up, but that's not true FE theory - it is the theory that says FE is attached to a cube.

For someone to claim constantly moving is = constant acceleration, shows me they have no understanding of physics and are incapable of having an actual conversation.

Go Back To Science, Technology & Nature Topic List
Prev1141516171854Next
Closed New Topic New Poll

© 2003-2024 d2jsp  Contact