Bitcoin Forum
July 24, 2019, 08:00:23 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 ... 781 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Flat Earth  (Read 1075602 times)
notbatman
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002
Merit: 1017



View Profile
June 03, 2018, 11:50:56 PM
 #11481

@af_newbie

Push a large piece of Styrofoam into the ocean, hold it down. You can feel the water pressure pushing it up!

Now get a water pressure meter and take a reading below the piece of submerged Styrofoam and measure the pressure. Do you see how obscene this logic and argument is trying to disprove my claim? I claim displaced air is pushing objects down and you tell me go take an air pressure reading above the object to prove it. Well it's the same deal as with trying to measure the pressure pushing the submerged Styrofoam up by putting a pressure meter below it; it doesn't work that way.

You literally have no argument.

You are conveniently forgetting that buoyancy is only observable when gravity is present.  The pressure difference between the top of the object and the bottom is due to gravity.  That pressure difference is the cause of the buoyancy upward force.

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

You think the cause of the pressure is the electric field not the gravity, I have shown you that it cannot possibly be the electric field.

You are twisting scientific principles, using them incorrectly because you do not understand the fundamentals.



You have shown nothing and twisted my assertions. I on the other hand have used experiments already on the books to prove empirically that a) special relativity is not consistent with experiment [Sagnac: Dufour & Prunier] b), that experiment is consistent with an aether [Sagnac] and c), that the Earth is motionless [Michelson & Morley].

My assertions are testable, repeatable and well documented [see above] while yours uses faulty logic [i.e. pressure readings with a meter next to an object], theory that isn't supported by experimental evidence [i.e. special relativity] and claims backed by special relativity [i.e. no aether and field lines that aren't "real"].

Gravity as an unproven theory after all these years exists solely to support heliocentrism and a spinning globe. I can show that the Earth is motionless with experiments already on the books, such as M&M and these results are confirmed by Airy's failure to detect any motion. All arguments that invoke special relativity i.e. no aether and stellar aberration are put to rest by Dufour & Prunier.

The electric field of the Earth is a testable and measurable thing and, it supports the idea of a flat and motionless Earth as well as an alternative and expanded mechanism for buoyancy that, accounts for motion in two directions. It's now also in compliance with Newton's (may he rot in hell) 3rd Law when applied to the displacement by denser than air objects.
1563955223
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563955223

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563955223
Reply with quote  #2

1563955223
Report to moderator
1563955223
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563955223

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563955223
Reply with quote  #2

1563955223
Report to moderator
1563955223
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563955223

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563955223
Reply with quote  #2

1563955223
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1563955223
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563955223

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563955223
Reply with quote  #2

1563955223
Report to moderator
1563955223
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563955223

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563955223
Reply with quote  #2

1563955223
Report to moderator
Vod
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2814
Merit: 2273


Licking my boob since 1970


View Profile WWW
June 04, 2018, 03:15:34 AM
 #11482

Show your math or be quiet forever.

 Cheesy

Since when have brainwashed people ever kept quiet?  Their cult will only survive if they go out and spread their lies.

I'm into creating universes, smiting people, writing holy books and listening to Prayer Messages (PMs).
BitcoinTalk Public Information Project (BPIP)  - BPIP Reports
"Masturbation makes you feel good but doesn't do anything for the person you're thinking of.  Just like prayer."
Jakevella28
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 29
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 04, 2018, 04:13:14 AM
 #11483

I don’t understand how people don’t question this more . The fact that there has been so many tests measuring the curvature of the earth and it always comes back flat or not even close to what it would be if we were on a ball.
Whtwabbit
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 486
Merit: 266



View Profile
June 04, 2018, 09:08:04 AM
 #11484

I don’t understand how people don’t question this more . The fact that there has been so many tests measuring the curvature of the earth and it always comes back flat or not even close to what it would be if we were on a ball.

Because of the school system, TV and magazines etc.

"Brainwashed"
George Harrison


Brainwashed in our childhood
Brainwashed by the school
Brainwashed by our teachers
And Brainwashed by all their rules
Brainwashed by our leaders
By our Kings and Queens
Brainwashed in the open and brainwashed behind the scenes
God God God
A voice cries in the wilderness
God God God
It was on the longest night
God God God
An eternity of darkness
God God God
Someone turned out the spiritual light
Brainwashed by the Nikkei
Brainwashed by Dow Jones
Brainwashed by the FTSE
Nasdaq and secure loans
Brainwashed us from Brussels
Brainwashing us in Bonn
Brainwashing us in Washington
Westminster in London
God God God
You are the wisdom that we seek
God God God
The lover that we miss
God God God
Your nature is eternity
God God God
You are Existence, Knowledge, Bliss
The soul does not love. It is love itself
It does not exist. It is existence itself
It does not know. It is knowledge itself
How to know God, page 130
They brainwashed my great uncle
Brainwashed my cousin Bob
They even got my grandma when she was working for the mob
Brainwash you while you're sleeping
While in your traffic jam
Brainwash you while you're weeping
While still a baby in your pram
Brainwashed by the military
Brainwashed under duress
Brainwashed by the media
You're brainwashed by the press
Brainwashed by computers
Brainwashed by mobile phones
Brainwashed by the satellites
Brainwashed to the bone
God God God
Won't you lead us through this mess
God God God
From the places of concrete
God God God
Nothing's worse than ignorance
God God God
I just won't accept defeat
God God God
Must be something I forgot
God God God
Down on Bullshit Avenue
God God God
If we can only stop the rot
God God God
Wish that you'd brainwash us too


██████████
█████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
████
████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
███████████████████████████
██████
██████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████████████
██████████████
████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████
██████████

Monero
"The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine
whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy." 
David Chaum 1996
"Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect."  Adam Back 2014
Buy and sell XMR near you
P2P Exchange Network
Buy XMR with fiat
Is Dash a scam?
quynhdang
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 33
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 04, 2018, 09:46:11 AM
 #11485

I learn from Physics at school that the earth is not flat. Although I didn't understand any of the holy complicated physical formula. Most of the time I did not understand the formula which are said to be true. So OK I have to believe it's true.
MiSKLaCH
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 417
Merit: 253


I hate everyone, equally.


View Profile
June 04, 2018, 10:20:20 AM
 #11486

Planet Earth is a geoid, period!
Useless thread, lock it.

I hate everyone, equally.
notbatman
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002
Merit: 1017



View Profile
June 04, 2018, 01:17:48 PM
Last edit: June 04, 2018, 01:43:01 PM by notbatman
 #11487

@af_newbie

Push a large piece of Styrofoam into the ocean, hold it down. You can feel the water pressure pushing it up!

Now get a water pressure meter and take a reading below the piece of submerged Styrofoam and measure the pressure. Do you see how obscene this logic and argument is trying to disprove my claim? I claim displaced air is pushing objects down and you tell me go take an air pressure reading above the object to prove it. Well it's the same deal as with trying to measure the pressure pushing the submerged Styrofoam up by putting a pressure meter below it; it doesn't work that way.

You literally have no argument.

You are conveniently forgetting that buoyancy is only observable when gravity is present.  The pressure difference between the top of the object and the bottom is due to gravity.  That pressure difference is the cause of the buoyancy upward force.

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

You think the cause of the pressure is the electric field not the gravity, I have shown you that it cannot possibly be the electric field.

You are twisting scientific principles, using them incorrectly because you do not understand the fundamentals.



You have shown nothing and twisted my assertions. I on the other hand have used experiments already on the books to prove empirically that a) special relativity is not consistent with experiment [Sagnac: Dufour & Prunier] b), that experiment is consistent with an aether [Sagnac] and c), that the Earth is motionless [Michelson & Morley].

My assertions are testable, repeatable and well documented [see above] while yours uses faulty logic [i.e. pressure readings with a meter next to an object], theory that isn't supported by experimental evidence [i.e. special relativity] and claims backed by special relativity [i.e. no aether and field lines that aren't "real"].

Gravity as an unproven theory after all these years exists solely to support heliocentrism and a spinning globe. I can show that the Earth is motionless with experiments already on the books, such as M&M and these results are confirmed by Airy's failure to detect any motion. All arguments that invoke special relativity i.e. no aether and stellar aberration are put to rest by Dufour & Prunier.

The electric field of the Earth is a testable and measurable thing and, it supports the idea of a flat and motionless Earth as well as an alternative and expanded mechanism for buoyancy that, accounts for motion in two directions; it's now also in compliance with Newton's (may he rot in hell) 3rd Law when applied to the displacement by denser than air objects.

Atmospheric electric field intensity can be 5 times lower during sunrise, objects would be flying off to space every morning.  During thunderstorms objects would weigh 10 to 20 times more, you would see major damage, all animals and people would die wherever there is a thunderstorm.

You really need to start measuring the E field before you open your mouth on this subject.

E field is not the only problem in your fantasy.

The charges on the dome and the ground would have to gradually decrease as you move away from the center of your disk.  Otherwise the same object would weigh less in Canada than in New Zealand.  What magic would keep the nonuniform, slowly descreasing charge distribution?

Again any lightning would increase the charges locally, and some other magic would have to fix the charge distribution for the dome model to predict the correct weights.

Now to the fun part, can you show me  your math how did you derive how much you weigh using your model based on 100 V/m E field and your directional air pressure?

Show your math or be quiet forever.





You arguments twist my assertions; I don't claim that the electric field is pushing objects down directly. I claim that the electric field is polarizing the atmosphere and that the atmosphere is pushing things down. It becomes clear that you're fielding a dishonest argument when you describe my model in an attempt to goad me into doing a lot of useless work that would just be ignored for the most part.

All the experiments already on the books that I've listed i.e. M&M, Sagnac, D&P, Airy etc.. are all described mathematically, see for yourself.

You don't have any rational arguments here, you're just trying to win an argument truth be damned; this isn't science.
Astargath
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Activity: 1162
Merit: 621


WOLF.BET - Provably Fair Dice Game


View Profile
June 04, 2018, 01:58:08 PM
 #11488

@af_newbie

Push a large piece of Styrofoam into the ocean, hold it down. You can feel the water pressure pushing it up!

Now get a water pressure meter and take a reading below the piece of submerged Styrofoam and measure the pressure. Do you see how obscene this logic and argument is trying to disprove my claim? I claim displaced air is pushing objects down and you tell me go take an air pressure reading above the object to prove it. Well it's the same deal as with trying to measure the pressure pushing the submerged Styrofoam up by putting a pressure meter below it; it doesn't work that way.

You literally have no argument.

You are conveniently forgetting that buoyancy is only observable when gravity is present.  The pressure difference between the top of the object and the bottom is due to gravity.  That pressure difference is the cause of the buoyancy upward force.

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

You think the cause of the pressure is the electric field not the gravity, I have shown you that it cannot possibly be the electric field.

You are twisting scientific principles, using them incorrectly because you do not understand the fundamentals.



You have shown nothing and twisted my assertions. I on the other hand have used experiments already on the books to prove empirically that a) special relativity is not consistent with experiment [Sagnac: Dufour & Prunier] b), that experiment is consistent with an aether [Sagnac] and c), that the Earth is motionless [Michelson & Morley].

My assertions are testable, repeatable and well documented [see above] while yours uses faulty logic [i.e. pressure readings with a meter next to an object], theory that isn't supported by experimental evidence [i.e. special relativity] and claims backed by special relativity [i.e. no aether and field lines that aren't "real"].

Gravity as an unproven theory after all these years exists solely to support heliocentrism and a spinning globe. I can show that the Earth is motionless with experiments already on the books, such as M&M and these results are confirmed by Airy's failure to detect any motion. All arguments that invoke special relativity i.e. no aether and stellar aberration are put to rest by Dufour & Prunier.

The electric field of the Earth is a testable and measurable thing and, it supports the idea of a flat and motionless Earth as well as an alternative and expanded mechanism for buoyancy that, accounts for motion in two directions; it's now also in compliance with Newton's (may he rot in hell) 3rd Law when applied to the displacement by denser than air objects.

Atmospheric electric field intensity can be 5 times lower during sunrise, objects would be flying off to space every morning.  During thunderstorms objects would weigh 10 to 20 times more, you would see major damage, all animals and people would die wherever there is a thunderstorm.

You really need to start measuring the E field before you open your mouth on this subject.

E field is not the only problem in your fantasy.

The charges on the dome and the ground would have to gradually decrease as you move away from the center of your disk.  Otherwise the same object would weigh less in Canada than in New Zealand.  What magic would keep the nonuniform, slowly descreasing charge distribution?

Again any lightning would increase the charges locally, and some other magic would have to fix the charge distribution for the dome model to predict the correct weights.

Now to the fun part, can you show me  your math how did you derive how much you weigh using your model based on 100 V/m E field and your directional air pressure?

Show your math or be quiet forever.





You arguments twist my assertions; I don't claim that the electric field is pushing objects down directly. I claim that the electric field is polarizing the atmosphere and that the atmosphere is pushing things down. It becomes clear that you're fielding a dishonest argument when you describe my model in an attempt to goad me into doing a lot of useless work that would just be ignored for the most part.

All the experiments already on the books that I've listed i.e. M&M, Sagnac, D&P, Airy etc.. are all described mathematically, see for yourself.

You don't have any rational arguments here, you're just trying to win an argument truth be damned; this isn't science.

Sagnac doesn't prove relativity is wrong. All the others also don't prove anything that you are claiming.


     ▄██▄
     ▀██▀



▄██▄
▀██▀



       ▄██▄
       ▀██▀

       ▄██████████████████▄
       ▀██████████████████▀



▄█████████████████████▄
▀█████████████████████▀



            ▄████████████████▄
            ▀████████████████▀
     ▐█▄           ▄█▌
     █████▄     ▄█████
    ▐█▌ ▀████▄████▀ ▐█▌
    ██    ▀█████▀    ██
   ██  ▄▄█▀▀███▀▀█▄▄  ██
  ██▄██▀▀    ▀     ▀█▄▄██
 ███▀▀                ▀▀██
▐██     ▀█▄     ▄█▀     ██▌
 ▀██▄  ▌           ▐  ▄██▀
   ▀███             ███▀
     ▀██▄  ▀███▀  ▄██▀
       ▀██▄ ▐█▌ ▄██▀
         ▀███████▀
.WOLF.BET.
   ▄██████████████████▄
   ▀██████████████████▀



       ▄█████████████████████▄
       ▀█████████████████████▀



▄████████████████▄
▀████████████████▀
   ...RNG CERTIFIED.....
     ...FREE FAUCET.........
..MOBILE FRIENDLY..
████
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
████

   ▄██▄
   ▀██▀



       ▄██▄
       ▀██▀



▄██▄
▀██▀



BADecker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2072
Merit: 1110


View Profile
June 04, 2018, 02:26:07 PM
 #11489


You arguments twist my assertions; I don't claim that the electric field is pushing objects down directly. I claim that the electric field is polarizing the atmosphere and that the atmosphere is pushing things down. It becomes clear that you're fielding a dishonest argument when you describe my model in an attempt to goad me into doing a lot of useless work that would just be ignored for the most part.

All the experiments already on the books that I've listed i.e. M&M, Sagnac, D&P, Airy etc.. are all described mathematically, see for yourself.

You don't have any rational arguments here, you're just trying to win an argument truth be damned; this isn't science.

Sagnac doesn't prove relativity is wrong. All the others also don't prove anything that you are claiming.

But when you feed him with statements like this,
without anything to back up what you say,
you only increase the validity of the things that he says.

But that is you, of course. Simply a different religion from the one that he has.

Cool

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

Activity: 417
Merit: 253


I hate everyone, equally.


View Profile
June 04, 2018, 02:51:34 PM
 #11490

Sagnac doesn't prove relativity is wrong. All the others also don't prove anything that you are claiming.

And, voilà: GPS proves relativity is real! http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html

I hate everyone, equally.
Astargath
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Activity: 1162
Merit: 621


WOLF.BET - Provably Fair Dice Game


View Profile
June 04, 2018, 02:56:22 PM
 #11491

@af_newbie

Push a large piece of Styrofoam into the ocean, hold it down. You can feel the water pressure pushing it up!

Now get a water pressure meter and take a reading below the piece of submerged Styrofoam and measure the pressure. Do you see how obscene this logic and argument is trying to disprove my claim? I claim displaced air is pushing objects down and you tell me go take an air pressure reading above the object to prove it. Well it's the same deal as with trying to measure the pressure pushing the submerged Styrofoam up by putting a pressure meter below it; it doesn't work that way.

You literally have no argument.

You are conveniently forgetting that buoyancy is only observable when gravity is present.  The pressure difference between the top of the object and the bottom is due to gravity.  That pressure difference is the cause of the buoyancy upward force.

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

You think the cause of the pressure is the electric field not the gravity, I have shown you that it cannot possibly be the electric field.

You are twisting scientific principles, using them incorrectly because you do not understand the fundamentals.



You have shown nothing and twisted my assertions. I on the other hand have used experiments already on the books to prove empirically that a) special relativity is not consistent with experiment [Sagnac: Dufour & Prunier] b), that experiment is consistent with an aether [Sagnac] and c), that the Earth is motionless [Michelson & Morley].

My assertions are testable, repeatable and well documented [see above] while yours uses faulty logic [i.e. pressure readings with a meter next to an object], theory that isn't supported by experimental evidence [i.e. special relativity] and claims backed by special relativity [i.e. no aether and field lines that aren't "real"].

Gravity as an unproven theory after all these years exists solely to support heliocentrism and a spinning globe. I can show that the Earth is motionless with experiments already on the books, such as M&M and these results are confirmed by Airy's failure to detect any motion. All arguments that invoke special relativity i.e. no aether and stellar aberration are put to rest by Dufour & Prunier.

The electric field of the Earth is a testable and measurable thing and, it supports the idea of a flat and motionless Earth as well as an alternative and expanded mechanism for buoyancy that, accounts for motion in two directions; it's now also in compliance with Newton's (may he rot in hell) 3rd Law when applied to the displacement by denser than air objects.

Atmospheric electric field intensity can be 5 times lower during sunrise, objects would be flying off to space every morning.  During thunderstorms objects would weigh 10 to 20 times more, you would see major damage, all animals and people would die wherever there is a thunderstorm.

You really need to start measuring the E field before you open your mouth on this subject.

E field is not the only problem in your fantasy.

The charges on the dome and the ground would have to gradually decrease as you move away from the center of your disk.  Otherwise the same object would weigh less in Canada than in New Zealand.  What magic would keep the nonuniform, slowly descreasing charge distribution?

Again any lightning would increase the charges locally, and some other magic would have to fix the charge distribution for the dome model to predict the correct weights.

Now to the fun part, can you show me  your math how did you derive how much you weigh using your model based on 100 V/m E field and your directional air pressure?

Show your math or be quiet forever.





You arguments twist my assertions; I don't claim that the electric field is pushing objects down directly. I claim that the electric field is polarizing the atmosphere and that the atmosphere is pushing things down. It becomes clear that you're fielding a dishonest argument when you describe my model in an attempt to goad me into doing a lot of useless work that would just be ignored for the most part.

All the experiments already on the books that I've listed i.e. M&M, Sagnac, D&P, Airy etc.. are all described mathematically, see for yourself.

You don't have any rational arguments here, you're just trying to win an argument truth be damned; this isn't science.

Ok, so you are flipping again.  You've been going back and forth between the air pressure and the E field.
Now that we've got you committed (pun intended) to the atmospheric air pressure as the cause of the force objects exert on the ground, we can drill further into your fantasy.

Put two objects on the ground, let's say two blocks of different wood but identical in size, say oak and pine.  Why one is heavier than the other?
The air pressure is all the same around them.

Show your math to show that the oak block is heavier than the pine block, or be quiet when adults are talking.


Hey calm down, you are going to scare him away. Watch him change the subject entirely and completely ignoring this point just like many others. The guy doesn't even understand that buoyancy cannot exist without gravity.


     ▄██▄
     ▀██▀



▄██▄
▀██▀



       ▄██▄
       ▀██▀

       ▄██████████████████▄
       ▀██████████████████▀



▄█████████████████████▄
▀█████████████████████▀



            ▄████████████████▄
            ▀████████████████▀
     ▐█▄           ▄█▌
     █████▄     ▄█████
    ▐█▌ ▀████▄████▀ ▐█▌
    ██    ▀█████▀    ██
   ██  ▄▄█▀▀███▀▀█▄▄  ██
  ██▄██▀▀    ▀     ▀█▄▄██
 ███▀▀                ▀▀██
▐██     ▀█▄     ▄█▀     ██▌
 ▀██▄  ▌           ▐  ▄██▀
   ▀███             ███▀
     ▀██▄  ▀███▀  ▄██▀
       ▀██▄ ▐█▌ ▄██▀
         ▀███████▀
.WOLF.BET.
   ▄██████████████████▄
   ▀██████████████████▀



       ▄█████████████████████▄
       ▀█████████████████████▀



▄████████████████▄
▀████████████████▀
   ...RNG CERTIFIED.....
     ...FREE FAUCET.........
..MOBILE FRIENDLY..
████
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
████

   ▄██▄
   ▀██▀



       ▄██▄
       ▀██▀



▄██▄
▀██▀



notbatman
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002
Merit: 1017



View Profile
June 04, 2018, 02:56:31 PM
 #11492

@af_newbie

  You're just being a fucking idiot now, the air pressure caused by an object displacing it is not measurable as an increase in the air pressure surrounding that object; the force is on the object.

Do you see how retarded your argument is, you're trying to measure a drop in the ocean by analyzing the sea level rise it causes.
Astargath
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Activity: 1162
Merit: 621


WOLF.BET - Provably Fair Dice Game


View Profile
June 04, 2018, 02:59:02 PM
 #11493

@af_newbie

  You're just being a fucking idiot now, the air pressure caused by an object displacing it is not measurable as an increase in the air pressure surrounding that object; the force is on the object.

Do you see how retarded your argument is, you're trying to measure a drop in the ocean by analyzing the sea level rise it causes.

I'm by no means an expert in this but I'm fairly sure he said ''Why one is heavier than the other?'' Not to measure the air pressure surrounding the objects.


     ▄██▄
     ▀██▀



▄██▄
▀██▀



       ▄██▄
       ▀██▀

       ▄██████████████████▄
       ▀██████████████████▀



▄█████████████████████▄
▀█████████████████████▀



            ▄████████████████▄
            ▀████████████████▀
     ▐█▄           ▄█▌
     █████▄     ▄█████
    ▐█▌ ▀████▄████▀ ▐█▌
    ██    ▀█████▀    ██
   ██  ▄▄█▀▀███▀▀█▄▄  ██
  ██▄██▀▀    ▀     ▀█▄▄██
 ███▀▀                ▀▀██
▐██     ▀█▄     ▄█▀     ██▌
 ▀██▄  ▌           ▐  ▄██▀
   ▀███             ███▀
     ▀██▄  ▀███▀  ▄██▀
       ▀██▄ ▐█▌ ▄██▀
         ▀███████▀
.WOLF.BET.
   ▄██████████████████▄
   ▀██████████████████▀



       ▄█████████████████████▄
       ▀█████████████████████▀



▄████████████████▄
▀████████████████▀
   ...RNG CERTIFIED.....
     ...FREE FAUCET.........
..MOBILE FRIENDLY..
████
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
████

   ▄██▄
   ▀██▀



       ▄██▄
       ▀██▀



▄██▄
▀██▀



BADecker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2072
Merit: 1110


View Profile
June 04, 2018, 03:02:38 PM
 #11494

@af_newbie

  You're just being a fucking idiot now, the air pressure caused by an object displacing it is not measurable as an increase in the air pressure surrounding that object; the force is on the object.

Do you see how retarded your argument is, you're trying to measure a drop in the ocean by analyzing the sea level rise it causes.

I'm by no means an expert in this but I'm fairly sure he said ''Why one is heavier than the other?'' Not to measure the air pressure surrounding the objects.

Right! If there weren't any gravity, their wouldn't be heavier, and their wouldn't be any easy ways to measure density.

Cool

Don't be afraid to donate Bitcoin >>> 1JDJotyxZLFF8akGCxHeqMkD4YrrTmEAwz !
notbatman
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002
Merit: 1017



View Profile
June 04, 2018, 03:12:59 PM
 #11495

Sagnac doesn't prove relativity is wrong. All the others also don't prove anything that you are claiming.

And, voilà: GPS proves relativity is real! http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html

You guys are twisting my assertions, my claims are that Dufour & Prunier's replication on the Sagnac effect took the non-rotating framework of special relativity into account and proved empirically that the results were not consistent with it.

But hey thanks for strawmaning my argument by omitting D&P then knocking over Sagnac with the special relativity argument. Your random link to some bullshit about GPS doesn't change the results D&P obtained.
Astargath
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Activity: 1162
Merit: 621


WOLF.BET - Provably Fair Dice Game


View Profile
June 04, 2018, 03:16:18 PM
 #11496

Sagnac doesn't prove relativity is wrong. All the others also don't prove anything that you are claiming.

And, voilà: GPS proves relativity is real! http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html

You guys are twisting my assertions, my claims are that Dufour & Prunier's replication on the Sagnac effect took the non-rotating framework of special relativity into account and proved empirically that the results were not consistent with it.

But hey thanks for strawmaning my argument by omitting D&P then knocking over Sagnac with the special relativity argument. Your random link to some bullshit about GPS doesn't change the results D&P obtained.

You keep saying the same shit over and over again, your random links also don't change anything, keep believing fairy tales


     ▄██▄
     ▀██▀



▄██▄
▀██▀



       ▄██▄
       ▀██▀

       ▄██████████████████▄
       ▀██████████████████▀



▄█████████████████████▄
▀█████████████████████▀



            ▄████████████████▄
            ▀████████████████▀
     ▐█▄           ▄█▌
     █████▄     ▄█████
    ▐█▌ ▀████▄████▀ ▐█▌
    ██    ▀█████▀    ██
   ██  ▄▄█▀▀███▀▀█▄▄  ██
  ██▄██▀▀    ▀     ▀█▄▄██
 ███▀▀                ▀▀██
▐██     ▀█▄     ▄█▀     ██▌
 ▀██▄  ▌           ▐  ▄██▀
   ▀███             ███▀
     ▀██▄  ▀███▀  ▄██▀
       ▀██▄ ▐█▌ ▄██▀
         ▀███████▀
.WOLF.BET.
   ▄██████████████████▄
   ▀██████████████████▀



       ▄█████████████████████▄
       ▀█████████████████████▀



▄████████████████▄
▀████████████████▀
   ...RNG CERTIFIED.....
     ...FREE FAUCET.........
..MOBILE FRIENDLY..
████
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
  ██
████

   ▄██▄
   ▀██▀



       ▄██▄
       ▀██▀



▄██▄
▀██▀



trolltalk
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 84
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 04, 2018, 04:02:43 PM
 #11497

The earth is absolutely round, there will be many conflict in the law of physics if the earth is flat.
notbatman
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002
Merit: 1017



View Profile
June 04, 2018, 04:06:06 PM
 #11498

@af_newbie

  You're just being a fucking idiot now, the air pressure caused by an object displacing it is not measurable as an increase in the air pressure surrounding that object; the force is on the object.

Do you see how retarded your argument is, you're trying to measure a drop in the ocean by analyzing the sea level rise it causes.

What is the cause of that force?

Hint: If you think it is the air pressure, the weight of the objects would be determined by their geometry not their mass.  If you think it is because of the air displacement, well, you just proved gravity.

How do you get pressure difference due to displacement in absence of gravity? Do you even read my posts?



If you were suddenly placed in a hard vacuum, you would explode, water boils in a vacuum and you would go puff puff splat.

My point is the pressure on objects from the atmosphere is immense, the electric field in polarizing the air causes a small imbalance in that force with less dense objects migrating towards the dome (the anode) as displacement current flows to the ground (the cathode). The more dense an object is less the force from the anode has on it and force from less dense gases push on the object as they jockey for position closer to the anode.
notbatman
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002
Merit: 1017



View Profile
June 04, 2018, 04:12:09 PM
 #11499

Sagnac doesn't prove relativity is wrong. All the others also don't prove anything that you are claiming.

And, voilà: GPS proves relativity is real! http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html

You guys are twisting my assertions, my claims are that Dufour & Prunier's replication on the Sagnac effect took the non-rotating framework of special relativity into account and proved empirically that the results were not consistent with it.

But hey thanks for strawmaning my argument by omitting D&P then knocking over Sagnac with the special relativity argument. Your random link to some bullshit about GPS doesn't change the results D&P obtained.

You keep saying the same shit over and over again, your random links also don't change anything, keep believing fairy tales


Perhaps the fact my argument doesn't change is evidence of its "weight". But hey, you just keep knocking over modified variations of all my assertions over and over while expecting a different result each time.



notbatman
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002
Merit: 1017



View Profile
June 04, 2018, 04:27:22 PM
 #11500

The earth is absolutely round, there will be many conflict in the law of physics if the earth is flat.

It's a house of cards it needs to fall.
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 ... 781 »
  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!