Bitcoin Forum
July 18, 2019, 08:18:12 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 [573] 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 ... 780 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Flat Earth  (Read 1074928 times)
notbatman
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002
Merit: 1017



View Profile
June 01, 2018, 12:33:37 AM
 #11441

@af_newbie



I think the first thing we need to do is establish that the Earth indeed has an electric field that measures 100 Volts per meter and extends out perpendicular to the ground.

The globalists don't deny this field exists but nor do they ever bring it up with rare exceptions like Feynman and his lectures that only a few physics enthusiasts attend. The globalist explanation for this field is induction from the Sun (in Feynman's case he claims thunderstorms) and that the charge spreads out to cover the entire surface. Unfortunately for the globalists these theories fail when one looks at the magnetic fields that would be produced by the current flows, the compass needle would be going nuts.

On a flat Earth with an electrically polarized dome with the dome surface being the positive (+) plate and the ground the negative (-) plate creating a giant capacitor the Earth's electric field is easily and neatly explained.







Now the thing you need to understand regarding density and why the denser an object is, the heavier it gets is the electric field line density at the surface of an object is greater with objects that are more dense; more particles require more lines to "feed" them thus the net force which acts via these lines is greater on the denser objects. Air pressure, the force it exerts on an object is via the electric field lines; electromagnetism is fluid dynamics with the primary fluid being an aether that itself is best described as being a gaseous crystal.

Now the reason the air an object has displaced is pushing that object in any particular direction is the electric field (between the dome and the ground) is creating an asymmetry in the lines on the objects surface; the pressure is not uniform.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1563437892
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563437892

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563437892
Reply with quote  #2

1563437892
Report to moderator
1563437892
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563437892

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563437892
Reply with quote  #2

1563437892
Report to moderator
zap2per
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 98
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 01, 2018, 12:52:35 AM
 #11442

Why more dense objects weigh more than the less dense objects of the same size? Both objects are on the ground, next to each other.
What forces are at work?

If you truly wanna know that secret, you'll have to come to the dark side..
Bheb112795
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 38
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 01, 2018, 02:28:56 AM
 #11443

By the perspective of us here standing on the big surface we'll seeing the flat earth but we cannot tell the shape of the surface.
YuTü.Co.in
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728
Merit: 345


Re-monetizing YouTubers via Crypto-commodities


View Profile WWW
June 01, 2018, 04:07:37 AM
 #11444

Why more dense objects weigh more than the less dense objects of the same size? Both objects are on the ground, next to each other.
What forces are at work?

If you truly wanna know that secret, you'll have to come to the dark side..

Okay, I visited The Dark Side - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWQ-6IAS1cc - Now what?

notbatman
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002
Merit: 1017



View Profile
June 01, 2018, 07:19:52 AM
Last edit: June 01, 2018, 07:32:52 AM by notbatman
 #11445

@af_newbie

I think the first thing we need to do is establish that the Earth indeed has an electric field that measures 100 Volts per meter and extends out perpendicular to the ground.

The globalists don't deny this field exists but nor do they ever bring it up with rare exceptions like Feynman and his lectures that only a few physics enthusiasts attend. The globalist explanation for this field is induction from the Sun (in Feynman's case he claims thunderstorms) and that the charge spreads out to cover the entire surface. Unfortunately for the globalists these theories fail when one looks at the magnetic fields that would be produced by the current flows, the compass needle would be going nuts.

On a flat Earth with an electrically polarized dome with the dome surface being the positive (+) plate and the ground the negative (-) plate creating a giant capacitor the Earth's electric field is easily and neatly explained.



Now the thing you need to understand regarding density and why the denser an object is, the heavier it gets is the electric field line density at the surface of an object is greater with objects that are more dense; more particles require more lines to "feed" them thus the net force which acts via these lines is greater on the denser objects. Air pressure, the force it exerts on an object is via the electric field lines; electromagnetism is fluid dynamics with the primary fluid being an aether that itself is best described as being a gaseous crystal.

Now the reason the air an object has displaced is pushing that object in any particular direction is the electric field (between the dome and the ground) is creating an asymmetry in the lines on the objects surface; the pressure is not uniform.

Few issues/questions with your description:

1. Electric Field intensity observed in nature varies based on the atmospheric conditions such as fog, lightning or after sunrise.  It can vary widely from 20 V/m to 1200+ V/m at the Earth surface. This would impact the "weight" of objects in your model.  In nature we observe that the weight of the objects does not vary due to the atmospheric conditions.

2. Not sure what you mean by "more particles require more lines to feed them", electric field flux would be constant for a given object surface provided the electric field intensity is uniform and does not fluctuate due to the atmospheric conditions, I'm not sure how you think it relates to the weight of the object.

3. What do you mean by the pressure is not uniform?  It is measurable, is it not?  Wouldn't the air pressure be the same around a wood block and a gold brick placed next to each other?




1. Perhaps small variations might be measured but for the most part the force on an object is based on the ratio of displaced atmosphere to the density of the material displacing it.

2. All particles have field lines irrespective of any externally generated fields. More field lines means more net force, each additional line gives a little more for the atmosphere to push on.

3. The atmosphere is pushing on objects, the force is at the interface between the object and the atmosphere, however since the force acts via the field lines it's transmitted to each individual particle via the line. Taking a pressure reading of the atmosphere surrounding an object can't say anything about the displacement the object causes. You're just wasting my time until you can understand this. An anology would be connecting a voltmeter to one pole of a battery and expecting to get a reading with an open circuit.

Look at how a helium balloon is pushed up, understand how air pressure is acting on it. For dense objects it's the same only the push is in the opposite direction.


There's a saying that in the land of the blind the man with one eye is king. Density and buoyancy explain why objects fall and I can't explain any more than I already have as my understanding is not complete. My ability to accurately articulate something i don't fully understand myself to a retarded child is limited.
af_newbie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344
Merit: 1252



View Profile
June 01, 2018, 12:35:46 PM
Merited by TooQik (10)
 #11446

@af_newbie

I think the first thing we need to do is establish that the Earth indeed has an electric field that measures 100 Volts per meter and extends out perpendicular to the ground.

The globalists don't deny this field exists but nor do they ever bring it up with rare exceptions like Feynman and his lectures that only a few physics enthusiasts attend. The globalist explanation for this field is induction from the Sun (in Feynman's case he claims thunderstorms) and that the charge spreads out to cover the entire surface. Unfortunately for the globalists these theories fail when one looks at the magnetic fields that would be produced by the current flows, the compass needle would be going nuts.

On a flat Earth with an electrically polarized dome with the dome surface being the positive (+) plate and the ground the negative (-) plate creating a giant capacitor the Earth's electric field is easily and neatly explained.



Now the thing you need to understand regarding density and why the denser an object is, the heavier it gets is the electric field line density at the surface of an object is greater with objects that are more dense; more particles require more lines to "feed" them thus the net force which acts via these lines is greater on the denser objects. Air pressure, the force it exerts on an object is via the electric field lines; electromagnetism is fluid dynamics with the primary fluid being an aether that itself is best described as being a gaseous crystal.

Now the reason the air an object has displaced is pushing that object in any particular direction is the electric field (between the dome and the ground) is creating an asymmetry in the lines on the objects surface; the pressure is not uniform.

Few issues/questions with your description:

1. Electric Field intensity observed in nature varies based on the atmospheric conditions such as fog, lightning or after sunrise.  It can vary widely from 20 V/m to 1200+ V/m at the Earth surface. This would impact the "weight" of objects in your model.  In nature we observe that the weight of the objects does not vary due to the atmospheric conditions.

2. Not sure what you mean by "more particles require more lines to feed them", electric field flux would be constant for a given object surface provided the electric field intensity is uniform and does not fluctuate due to the atmospheric conditions, I'm not sure how you think it relates to the weight of the object.

3. What do you mean by the pressure is not uniform?  It is measurable, is it not?  Wouldn't the air pressure be the same around a wood block and a gold brick placed next to each other?




1. Perhaps small variations might be measured but for the most part the force on an object is based on the ratio of displaced atmosphere to the density of the material displacing it.

2. All particles have field lines irrespective of any externally generated fields. More field lines means more net force, each additional line gives a little more for the atmosphere to push on.

3. The atmosphere is pushing on objects, the force is at the interface between the object and the atmosphere, however since the force acts via the field lines it's transmitted to each individual particle via the line. Taking a pressure reading of the atmosphere surrounding an object can't say anything about the displacement the object causes. You're just wasting my time until you can understand this. An anology would be connecting a voltmeter to one pole of a battery and expecting to get a reading with an open circuit.

Look at how a helium balloon is pushed up, understand how air pressure is acting on it. For dense objects it's the same only the push is in the opposite direction.


There's a saying that in the land of the blind the man with one eye is king. Density and buoyancy explain why objects fall and I can't explain any more than I already have as my understanding is not complete. My ability to accurately articulate something i don't fully understand myself to a retarded child is limited.

1. The electric field intensity can be 10+ times larger or 5 times smaller, if you think your "air pressure gradient" is due to the electric field flux going though the object's surface, objects should be weighing 10 times more during lightning and 5 times less during sunrise.  You are in denial of your own theory.

2. Neutrally charged particles do not generate electric field, the electric field in your model is generated by positively charged dome and negatively charged Earth.  The density would have no effect on the outside electric field coming to the object surface.  

3. Even if you assume that your "air pressure gradient" exist and is affected by the atmospheric electric field, by measuring the air pressure around the object you would be measuring the scalar value of that "air pressure vector".

You are in complete denial of observable reality and your own dome theory.

You deny that atmospheric conditions have significant, measurable effect on the atmospheric electric field.
You deny that air pressure is the same around objects of different densities.
You deny that the atmospheric electric field measured around objects with different densities stays the same.


On top of that, you claim that the arrangement of atoms in the object generates electric field outside of the object.

There is no need to discuss this further.  It is obvious to me that you are suffer from cognitive dissonance.

BTW, we have a name for your dome, it is called ionosphere.   You have twisted what is observed by adding the concept that object density is increasing electric field intensity by some unknown force and that air pressure is acting in the direction of the atmospheric electric field.

I have shown you where your model breaks.  Take it or stay in the dark.
Herbys
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 6


View Profile
June 01, 2018, 03:11:10 PM
 #11447

The most obvious proof that the Earth is round is a lunar eclipse. The shape of the shadow from the Earth, which falls on the moon during eclipses, is completely round.
That's why the moon becomes a crescent moon. Smiley
exemplaar
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 957
Merit: 504



View Profile
June 01, 2018, 08:13:27 PM
 #11448




Show me here how can ground(earth) cast a shadow on the light levitating above(aka the moon).



You have been successfully indoctrinating with a heliocopernican lie. About the time to do your research on Flat Earth.



YuTü.Co.in
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728
Merit: 345


Re-monetizing YouTubers via Crypto-commodities


View Profile WWW
June 01, 2018, 09:42:33 PM
 #11449

Cold hearted orb that rules the night
Removes the colors from our sight
Red is gray and yellow white
But we decide which is right
And which is an illusion

Pinprick holes in a colorless sky
Let insipid figures of light pass by
The mighty light of ten thousand specks on the dome
Challenges infinity and is soon gone

Nighttime to some, a brief interlude
To others the fear of solitude
Brave Helios, wake up your steeds
Bring the warmth the flat Earth needs

notbatman
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002
Merit: 1017



View Profile
June 02, 2018, 12:28:43 AM
 #11450

The most obvious proof that the Earth is round is a lunar eclipse. The shape of the shadow from the Earth, which falls on the moon during eclipses, is completely round.
That's why the moon becomes a crescent moon. Smiley


What proof do you have that a shadow in the sky is created by the Earth beneath your feet? One must assume the heliocentric model is correct to even make that claim!

On a flat and motionless Earth the Sun, Moon, stars and planets are holographically projected off of a mirrored dome. The mirror is a golden reflective oxide layer on a nickel-iron damascus type steel.

A lunar eclipse in this case would be a 3rd dark celestial object that masks the Moon's projection for a period of time.
notbatman
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002
Merit: 1017



View Profile
June 02, 2018, 12:35:35 AM
Last edit: June 02, 2018, 12:53:20 AM by notbatman
 #11451

@af_newbie every particle has a field line; the particle has to be entangled or it doesn't exist. A particle in a state of superposition is no particle at all.







"Emission theory or extramission theory (variants: extromission, extromittism) is the proposal that visual perception is accomplished by eye beams emitted by the eyes." -- Wiki
BADecker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2072
Merit: 1108


View Profile
June 02, 2018, 12:50:45 AM
 #11452




Show me here how can ground(earth) cast a shadow on the light levitating above(aka the moon).



You have been successfully indoctrinating with a heliocopernican lie. About the time to do your research on Flat Earth.


Great religion you have there.    Cool

Don't be afraid to donate Bitcoin >>> 1JDJotyxZLFF8akGCxHeqMkD4YrrTmEAwz !
YuTü.Co.in
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728
Merit: 345


Re-monetizing YouTubers via Crypto-commodities


View Profile WWW
June 02, 2018, 01:48:14 AM
 #11453




Show me here how can ground(earth) cast a shadow on the light levitating above(aka the moon).



You have been successfully indoctrinating with a heliocopernican lie. About the time to do your research on Flat Earth.


Great religion you have there.    Cool

In Jehovah's Witnesses' afterlife, man lays down with lions ...


seals don't fuck penguins ...


and chimps don't fuck frogs ...


aip78
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 40
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 02, 2018, 02:55:19 AM
 #11454

but I still believe that the earth is round
Nanoverso
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 81
Merit: 1


View Profile WWW
June 02, 2018, 03:12:51 AM
 #11455

but I still believe that the earth is round
The earth doesn't exist... (quoting Matrix movie).  Grin

Checkout my blog: VST Plugins Download Free (https://vst-plugins-free-download.blogspot.com).
notbatman
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002
Merit: 1017



View Profile
June 02, 2018, 08:55:54 AM
Last edit: June 02, 2018, 10:13:06 AM by notbatman
 #11456

@af_newbie

I'll mix and mach my theoretical framework as I please so long as it's descriptive of what going on. QM is already a Frankenstein's monster.
 
Field lines are in fact real; they're flows of aether that form solenoidal tubes; electromagnetics is fluid dynamics. The aetherless physics the TPTB push is provably wrong; special relativity has been proven to be not consistent with experimental evidence. All particles have a field or potential field that's very much real.

Also just look at what you're saying there's a field but it's nothing; get your head screwed on straight you can't have something (a field) then claim it's nothing. Your comments are indicative of a brainwashed child with it's head screwed on backwards, you must be a woman!



Edit:

Neutral particles have a toroidal dipole and an associated field.
notbatman
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002
Merit: 1017



View Profile
June 02, 2018, 10:55:58 AM
Last edit: June 02, 2018, 12:05:57 PM by notbatman
 #11457




Show me here how can ground(earth) cast a shadow on the light levitating above(aka the moon).



You have been successfully indoctrinating with a heliocopernican lie. About the time to do your research on Flat Earth.


Great religion you have there.    Cool

In Jehovah's Witnesses' afterlife, man lays down with lions ...


seals don't fuck penguins ...


and chimps don't fuck frogs ...


Ugh this is bad, really really bad. I'm 100% with God on this, no just no! This is so bad I'm not even going to go into any details. BTW they changed the lion into a wolf a few years ago, just FYI.



In related news Trudeau recently legalized frog blowjobs in Canada. How's that for a progressive society?

flekkelek
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602
Merit: 274



View Profile
June 02, 2018, 11:47:29 AM
 #11458

@af_newbie

I'll mix and mach my theoretical framework as I please so long as it's descriptive of what going on. QM is already a Frankenstein's monster.
 
Field lines are in fact real; they're flows of aether that form solenoidal tubes; electromagnetics is fluid dynamics. The aetherless physics the TPTB push is provably wrong; special relativity has been proven to be not consistent with experimental evidence. All particles have a field or potential field that's very much real.

Also just look at what you're saying there's a field but it's nothing; get your head screwed on straight you can't have something (a field) then claim it's nothing. Your comments are indicative of a brainwashed child with it's head screwed on backwards, you must be a woman!



Edit:

Neutral particles have a toroidal dipole and an associated field.

You have lost your mind.
I don't really think he can lose something he never had.

Tesó, van egy kis merited? Buszjegyre kell.
tableofcontents
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 126
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 02, 2018, 02:59:38 PM
 #11459

but I still believe that the earth is round
The earth doesn't exist... (quoting Matrix movie).  Grin

I'd never sing of Earth...if it does not exist... (quoting stupidly. I love Paramore <3)
notbatman
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002
Merit: 1017



View Profile
June 02, 2018, 03:22:09 PM
 #11460

@af_newbie

I'll mix and mach my theoretical framework as I please so long as it's descriptive of what going on. QM is already a Frankenstein's monster.
 
Field lines are in fact real; they're flows of aether that form solenoidal tubes; electromagnetics is fluid dynamics. The aetherless physics the TPTB push is provably wrong; special relativity has been proven to be not consistent with experimental evidence. All particles have a field or potential field that's very much real.

Also just look at what you're saying there's a field but it's nothing; get your head screwed on straight you can't have something (a field) then claim it's nothing. Your comments are indicative of a brainwashed child with it's head screwed on backwards, you must be a woman!



Edit:

Neutral particles have a toroidal dipole and an associated field.

You have lost your mind.

Dufour & Prunier showed that special relativity is not consistent with experimental results (Sagnac effect). I offer this as empirical proof that it's you that's lost their mind to a dishonest group consensus promoted by a well organized tribe of psychopathic criminals. My ad-hoc grasp on aetheric dynamics (electromagnetism) may not be 100% however, special relativity is at 0%.

You've been scammed!
Pages: « 1 ... 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 [573] 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 ... 780 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!