No I'm correct - in the example, if the car is going 60 mph but the air inside the car is going 0 relative to the car - its relativistic velocity of that air is 60 mph

If you walk on top of a train at 5 mph and the train is going 30 mph - your relativistic velocity is 35 mph - but that man is resisting the air being forced on him at 30 mph which is quite possible

If you walk on the outside of an airplane at 5 mph and the plane is going 500 mph you need need to resist the force of the air going at 500 mph - you wouldn't last a step.

If the earth is going 1000 mph and you were resisting the force of 1000 mph wind you could walk around in any direction and only then your speed would be relativistic.

You cant just say the Earth is spinning at 1000 mph cause i think so and if a man is walking around at 5 mph, his speed is releavatic because he's not resisting any force and according to Nasa the earth is not a closed environment.

earth is flat

/ end thread

You fail to account for about a million variables.

You might have a minor grasp of relativity on a specific scale, but on the macro / Micro scale, you have no clue what's going on.

But sure, your correct.



If only.

This post was edited by Ep0ch on Mar 7 2017 06:32pm

What you still don't understand is that our atmosphere is moving with the planet, at the same speed and in the same direction. Functionally it will behave exactly the same as the air inside of an airplane. The only difference is the reason WHY the air is moving, not HOW it's moving. For a passenger on a plane the air around him is moving in a certain direction at a certain speed much faster than his own walking speed (no issues). For a person on a spherical earth the air around him is also moving in a certain direction at a certain speed much faster than his own walking speed (also no issues).
But it's clear you don't actually understand relative velocities at all, because you keep arguing things like airplanes getting swept by 1000 mph winds and such. This would never happen on either a flat earth or a spherical one, it's just nonsense. The model proposed by modern science (air, just like everything else, is moving with the planet due to gravity) poses no issues for airplanes, because the air is moving with the planet. Just like air moving with the airplane, train, etc. Therefore, bringing up wind-swept airplanes as an argument clearly indicates that you either don't understand the model (hence my first sentence) and/or you don't understand the concept of relative velocities (hence my previous post).

No , if the earth were a sphere and the air was moving at 1000 mph it would not be like air in a plane because that air is not moving at all relative to the plane because it is in a completely closed environment.
The earth is not a closed environment. The only other way the air could be relative would be that it if airplanes traveled 1000mph faster to the east and were able to overcome 1000mph winds when they traveled to the west and that doesn't happen because the earth does not move, and therefore the air does not move.

Do you know the difference between a closed and open environment?

This post was edited by card_sultan on Mar 7 2017 10:01pm

Do you?

I see you're back to the trolling, gg u faker.

You are basing your entire position on the assumption that the earth is an open environment.

When in fact it is a self contained environment that can be influenced by external variables.

You, as usual, don't know what the heck your talking about.

closed environments aren't affected by external variables, do you get wet inside a plane when it rains?

If relative velocity just means "moving" - why can't you just throw up a ball in the air when you traveling at 60 mph on a motorcycle?

I dont think you understand all the criteria needed for velocity to be relative, just that you know how to spell it.

Also it's not my assumption is an open environment - its Nasa's assumption that when they sent men to the moon and satellites to mars, venus +++ . Did the satelite need to smash through a ceiling first?

Did Buzz Aldrin ever talk about smashing through anything?

Are you confused with the earth being a closed system in terms of thermodynamics but an open environment in terms of physical motion?

This post was edited by card_sultan on Mar 7 2017 10:59pm

Then a car is not a close environment.

-edit

Yes, they did smash through a ceiling, it is called escape velocity.

-edit #2

Like I keep saying, you take what people say to you, and you repeat it back at them.

You think this makes you sound smart, or win or gain some kind of edge, but it doesnt, it shows your lack of creativity and original thought.

which explains everything.

-edit #3

Why do you hide? People who hide usually have something to hide, or be ashamed of.


This post was edited by Ep0ch on Mar 7 2017 11:03pm