Absolute Proof the Earth is Round NOT Flat!

a reply to: turbonium1

In the case of Champlain Towers, it was a classic CD, and it's mass fell through the air, to the ground

A blatantly false statement and lie based on zero evidence. With you shamelessly using a tragedy to play your ignorant game.

You

Objects fall in air, they are not 'pulled down' to Earth, from a magical force within Earth.

Then please explain how a less dense 20 pound styrofoam block can make a more dense steel spring lengthen in a spring scale in accordance with Hooke’s law.


And why building floors and bridges have weight limits.

a reply to: turbonium1

What are you babbling about. Answer the freaking questions.

And your list just grew…

Stop changing the subject and address what is posted…

Evidently the earths curvature can be measured and used to make a scale model called a “globe”

Answer the question turbo, why is the most accurate way to map the distances and relative positions of points / places on the earth is by a spherical globe.

Why would the jet not maintain its altitude on a curved earth if the air pressure is essential the same all around the globe at 36,000 feet. And the way to increased altitude is to increase power and change control surfaces for less dense air? And what instrument should be measuring curved surface?

If there is no gravity, why does a jet have to create the force of lift to fly?

But hang a piece of steel from a steel spring hanging scale, the force of gravity pulls on the piece of steel to cause the spring to stretch in accordance with Hooke’s law which needs a force like gravity to work on the spring. in your model when one mass meets another mass, it simply stops.

What more do you want from Sputnik being in earth’s orbit. Launch and success verified by countries that would have very much liked to discredit the USSR. It was taken as a military threat. The rocket was pictured in its travel for placing the satellite into orbit. Amateurs verified that Sputnik and a rocket stage was added to the visible night sky. The signal from Sputnik was actually tracked by scores of individuals that verified Sputnik was in orbit.

Man’s first step to travel the paths of comets.

And yet, you can’t explain how a hanging spring scale works in accordance with Hooke’s law without a force like gravity. And how a metal spring can be used to obtain the weight of less dense objects like a bag of feathers or a block of foam. In fact it contradicts and invalidates your world view. While other peoples arguments you falsely claim as lies works nicely in the overall explanation and documented effects of gravity. With examples like Hooke’s law and why airplanes need to create a force labeled lift.

Why do buildings and bridges have weight limits.

What causes high tides, low tides, and tidal bore.

One from OneBigMonkeyToo I think, how can less dense air push down on a mercury column for a barometer.

At sea level, air pressure will push on the mercury at the open end and support a column of mercury about 30 inches high. If you used water instead of mercury, you would need a glass tube over 30 feet in length.

www.ncpedia.org...

a reply to: turbonium1

This is how we will add this to your list.

In your own context

You've already got a magical force, which doesn't hold down insects or birds,

Why would a brick thrown straight up into increasingly less dense air stop, change direction to accelerate into increasing dense air instead of just continuing to accelerate away from earth into increasingly less dense air?

a reply to: turbonium1

And I keep forgetting to add this one to the list.

If the earth was in a closed system because of a dome above the earth, the air pressure throughout the atmosphere would be the same as seen by gas in a gas bottle.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

Ok…

Let’s start small…

Then please explain how a less dense 20 pound styrofoam block can make a more dense steel spring lengthen in a spring scale in accordance with Hooke’s law.

Then what causes tides, high tides, and tidal bores if you think there is no gravity.

Hooke's law is like Newton's laws, which takes what already exists, and already explained by our real Earth, which is flat, and covered by the firmanent, and needs no magical 'pulling' forces, and then twists them around, to fit their ball Earth lie, and use made up magical forces to support it all. Then, they make up a 'law' for something that already exists, with no need to call it a 'law', since those 'laws' are fakes, named after the frauds who twisted them around to fit their ball Earth lie.


One of the best examples of this, is when they said that 'gravity', was measured to have a constant rate of 'speed, or acceleration, when pulling any object down from the air, to the Earth'. That alone completely destroys their claims of 'gravity'. They first stated, because it made sense, that this 'force' called 'gravity', behaved the same way as all other forces do, which is, they are strongest near the SOURCE of that force, and weaker with more distance FROM the source.

This was consistent with all other forces, ACTUAL forces - they all have a source, where they originate from, and that is where they are strongest. Like a magnet, is stronger when objects are near to it, weaker when further away from it. Same as hurricanes and tornados are strongest when near things, weaker when further away from them.

So they said that was true for 'gravity', it was strongest when near the source, and weaker with more distance.

Only problem is, it didn't even exist. So when they said it was like all other forces, it was doomed to fail, and it has. In the real world, not a fairy tale world, the only place it 'exists', and it can do anything and everything you want it to do.

Why do we know 'gravity' doesn't exist? It is claimed to be like all other forces, stronger when near it's source, and weaker with more distance from it's source. And then, they proved themselves wrong, and liars, by hijacking the rate of fall through air, which is a constant, everywhere in the air, at any altitude, and claimed it was the 'rate of acceleration/speed of objects in air, when they are acted on, by the Earth's 'gravity'.


They claimed it was a force that was strongest when near it's source, which is the Earth, and weaker with more distance from it; source, which is the Earth. That means, it can NOT have a constant rate of force, at all distances from it's source. No actual forces do. And they also CLAIMED it does, then claimed it doesn't, by hijacking the actual rate of falling objects in air, which is always the same rate, whether objects are higher or lower, in the air.

They actually proved 'gravity' doesn't exist, because of this fact.

As they first claimed, it behaved like all other forces, but those are ACTUAL forces, not made up ones.

So how could your magical force have an actual SOURCE, which is always the same strength, near it, or far away from it?

Because it doesn't even exist, and HAS no 'source'!

The rate of acceleration of objects in air IS a constant. The actual rate of acceleration is based on the atmospheric conditions, and the force of winds, which is an actual force, that acts on objects falling in air. And it is NOT constant, because we know that all actual forces, are not constant.

The only constant is the speed of objects falling through air, when the air, and atmosphere, are excluded, or taken as a constant, and excluded from the rate of speed for objects falling in air.

It is a FALL, and is at a constant rate of speed/acceleration when objects fall in air. The constant rate proves there is NO 'force' acting on them from below.

a reply to: turbonium1

Now turbo. You ignored how it contradicts your delusion.

How is a less dense object causing the steel spring to lengthen. In your delusion the steel spring should prevent the hanging less dense object from moving down. You can replace foam with wood if you like. Wood is steel less dense than steel in the spring.

So you admit your model ignores what is actually occurring.

Second. The spring needs a fore acting on it. Is that false. Why does the steel spring only lengthen when a weight is hanged from it.

a reply to: turbonium1

You didn’t answer the question

Why would a brick thrown straight up into increasingly less dense air slow down faster than what can be attributed to air resistance stop, change direction to accelerate into increasing dense air instead of just continuing to accelerate away from earth into increasingly less dense air?


In you model of density, the brick should accelerate into the less dense air father away from the earth.

a reply to: turbonium1

And you still need to address high tides, tidal bores.

And you need to address why floors and bridges have weight limits. And shelves too.

Bridge Collapses After Overweight Semi-Truck Tries to Cross It

The truck had been carrying a load much heavier than the stated maximum amount the single-lane bridge could sustain.

amp.interestingengineering.com...

Was the above a case of CD? Or because of the force of gravity?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

This is how we will add this to your list.

In your own context

You've already got a magical force, which doesn't hold down insects or birds,

Why would a brick thrown straight up into increasingly less dense air stop, change direction to accelerate into increasing dense air instead of just continuing to accelerate away from earth into increasingly less dense air?

I've already explained this to you, over and over again, if you don't understand it, that's your problem, since it's been explained to you, very clearly, many times already.

All objects originate on Earth, and when above it, they fall through the air, back to the Earth again. They fall ANYWHERE in the air, at all altitudes in air. But all objects originate on the Earth, not in the air above Earth.

When a brick is thrown up, it must have a force that acts on it, because the brick cannot throw ITSELF up, right?

There must be a force, acting on the brick, to throw it p in the air, right?

And that is the ONLY force which makes the brick go upward into the air, yes? And there are NO other forces that are making it go upward into the air, right?


The density of air at 10 feet, is about the same as it is at 20 or 30 feet, and not much different at 50 or 100 feet either, would you agree? Look it up, if you think it's a lot different density at 100 feet, than it is at 10 feet, look it up, it is
virtually negligible in difference, at heights that your brick is thrown up to, anyway.

And the brick is going upward in air, because a force acted on it, and that's the only thing that made it go upward into air, and continued to go up, nothing else did.

Like I just told you, this force is the only thing that made the brick go up, and that force doesn't continue to act on the brick, it acted on it one time, that's it. The force is limited, and dissipates after awhile. By that point, the brick slows down its upward movement, because the force dissipated, which caused the brick's upward movement, to begin with.

The air's density isn't exactly 'thinner' from 10 to 20 feet, which would be about as high you could throw a brick upward into air, unless you are Superman or something, right?

Even if it WAS much thinner at 30 feet, it wouldn't make the brick keep going up and up into ever thinner air, hundreds of feet higher, then higher and higher in air! This would require FAR, FAR more force, than you applied to the brick, when you first threw it upward! That's what made it go upward. The force is NOT strong enough to make the brick go up to 50,000 feet altitude - and for some reason, you still don't understand why it wouldn't keep going up and up and up, and I've told you why - because it only went up, by the force applied to it, and it slows down, because the force applied to the brick dissipates, and it stops, when the force that acted on it, dies out. The air cannot throw it further and further up, simply because it is thinner than the air it's within, and this air throws it up into even thinner air, that's just stupid.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

You didn’t answer the question

Why would a brick thrown straight up into increasingly less dense air slow down faster than what can be attributed to air resistance stop, change direction to accelerate into increasing dense air instead of just continuing to accelerate away from earth into increasingly less dense air?


In you model of density, the brick should accelerate into the less dense air father away from the earth.

Let's see if this works any better....

Do you know that something must first MAKE a brick be thrown up into air?

You keep saying 'why would a brick that is thrown up', and completely ignore what caused it to go upward, and ask why it would EVER slow down so much, and stop, when the air cannot account for it!!

Do you know that it only DID go upward, because a force acted on it?

It's true.

Please tell me you know the brick went up because a force acted on it. I'd like to hear you say that, for the first time.

Baby steps, it's the last resort....

a reply to: turbonium1

You can only aspire to baby steps.

When teh brick stops going up it will fall down. It will fall down at a precisely predictable weight. Why is it that it needs a force to go up, but in your imaginary world it needs no force to make it go down again?

a reply to: neutronflux
Curved lense

a reply to: turbonium1

I've already explained this to you, over and over again, if you don't understand it, that's your problem, since it's been explained to you, very clearly, many times already.

You drop a object in a cave with uniform air pressure, and the cave walls have uniform density. Why can’t a person trick a dropped object to fall up? You claim there is no force to make it fall down.

And…. You ignore how you contradict yourself…

Now turbo. You ignored how it contradicts your delusion.

How is a less dense object causing the steel spring to lengthen. In your delusion the steel spring should prevent the hanging less dense object from moving down. You can replace foam with wood if you like. Wood is steel less dense than steel in the spring.

So you admit your model ignores what is actually occurring.

Second. The spring needs a fore acting on it. Is that false. Why does the steel spring only lengthen when a weight is hanged from it.

a reply to: turbonium1

If there is no downward force, why do cranes need counter weights..

Mobile Crane Counterweights – an Important Safety Factor

cranesblog.com...

Using the following mathematical formula, while designing the component, will minimize possible risks and secure reliable counterbalance:
P = V x μ x g
Where P is the weight of the required counterweight; V – its volume; μ – is the density of the material of which the counterweight was made of and g – the gravitational constant (9.81).

What is g in the calculation?

a reply to: turbonium1

And by the way, if there is no downward force called gravity. Then why do cranes have to expert power to lift a load. Why dose lifting a load require power. And why does lowering a load require less power and motor braking? In your delusion, the amount of power required to lower a load should be the same power as raising the load. That is not the case.

a reply to: turbonium1

Or,

Regenerative brake

Crystal Palace-Croydon (1906), and many others. Slowing the speed of the cars or keeping it in control on descending gradients, the motors worked as generators and braked the vehicles.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

If there is no downward force called gravity, how does Regenerative braking work while going down hills?


Wow. Look at that. Posts listing the practical use of gravity, or practical ways to safely protect against the force of gravity.

a reply to: turbonium1

Oh, another application of gravity came to mind…

Tidal Energy or Tidal Power as it is also known, is another form of hydro power that exploits the vast energy source of the oceans tides to generate electricity. Tidal Energy is a “sustainable energy source”, as the Earth uses the gravitational forces of both the moon and the sun everyday to move vast quantities of water around the oceans and seas producing tides.

As the Earth, its Moon and the Sun rotate around each other in space, the gravitational movement of the moon and the sun with respect to the earth, causes millions of gallons of water to flow around the Earth’s oceans creating periodic shifts in these moving bodies of water. These vertical shifts of water are what we call “tides”.

www.alternative-energy-tutorials.com...

Sihwa Lake Tidal Power Station, South Korea – 254MW

With an output capacity of 254MW, the Sihwa Lake tidal power station located on Lake Sihwa, approximately 4km from the city of Siheung in Gyeonggi Province of South Korea, is the world’s biggest tidal power plant.

The project, owned by Korea Water Resources Corporation, was opened in August 2011 and utilises a 12.5km long seawall constructed in 1994 for flood mitigation and agricultural purposes. Power is generated on tidal inflows into the 30km2 basin with the help of ten 25.4MW submerged bulb turbines. Eight culvert type sluice gates are used for the water outflow from the barrage.

www.power-technology.com...

For gravity not existing in your delusion, it is used and designed for on many practical ways in the real world.

Anyone in the world with a weather station saw irrefutable proof the world is round this weekend. The shockwave from the Tongan volcanic eruption was clearly seen on pressure charts - first in one direction and then the other. This would have been impossible on a flat Earth.

Se, for example: www.thecourier.co.uk...

(or any Facebook page/twitter feed related to meteorology, where it's been the cause celebre over the past 2 days

QED

a reply to: muzzleflash

Think about it like this the Earth is like a ball of jelly that is spinning and it’s equator is being pulled on by the moon and the sun causing it to not completely flatten but to bulge out in the center. This would give a sort of flying saucer appearance.