Put a flat earthier into space

[Nobby]

No they don't. Zero proof has been offered. What if your clock is made of crisps? Time doesn't exist

Didn't he claim time was man made last week?

 

[fyl2u]

No they don't. Zero proof has been offered. What if your clock is made of crisps? Time doesn't exist

Not all hour hands move at the same rate.

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

Didn't he claim time was man made last week?

Define last week.
I'll just take it that you cant.
Think about that.

 

[chelt_mackem]

Not all hour hands move at the same rate.

Are they even hands? I was looking at mine while I was in the bath and realised my hands look nothing like those on a clock. Hour hands don't exist, only our hands exist.

 

[SYB_DC]

Are they even hands? I was looking at mine while I was in the bath and realised my hands look nothing like those on a clock. Hour hands don't exist, only our hands exist.

Whose hands are we really talking about? What do you mean, "your" hands? It's just a narrative you tell yourself that they're yours because they're attached to "your" arms.

Define last week.
I'll just take it that you cant.
Think about that.

All weeks were preceded by a different week. All. But you can't say which one was the "last" one because it wasn't you who was there, right? You just think it was because you told yourself that.

Your "time just moves" model has no meaning. Time can't move, because what is the MEDIUM? Everything needs a medium. Everything.

 

[fyl2u]

Your "time just moves" model has no meaning. Time can't move, because what is the MEDIUM? Everything needs a medium. Everything.

The only true law of motion is that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. That's why our watches spin around anticlockwise on our wrists in opposition to the hands moving clockwise.

 

[SYB_DC]

The only true law of motion is that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. That's why our watches spin around anticlockwise on our wrists in opposition to the hands moving clockwise.

Nope. You see this utter contradictory stuff is laughable to be honest. There's FRICTION. Everywhere. That's your issue, not mine.
Does your watch catch on things or fly off your wrist as you supposedly spin 1000 mph on this spinning globe? You can't explain why not. Want to know why? Because there is no spinning globe. It's FRICTION.

 

[monkeytassle]

The only true law of motion is that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. That's why our watches spin around anticlockwise on our wrists in opposition to the hands moving clockwise.

You should publish a paper with tangible evidence that opposes Newtonian law. All 3.

Until that appears you're just a loon on a message board.

 

[fyl2u]

You should publish a paper with tangible evidence that opposes Newtonian law. All 3.

Until that appears you're just a loon on a message board.

I think you may have mistaken my parody of the loon for actual lunacy.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

But you can keep going towards the centre until you reach a landmass opposite the one you left and your compass points back to the centre, how does that work?

If you go opposite the one you left, where are you going?
If you go north and hit another landmass that is north then carry on north to another landmass then you still haven't reached any centre
Do planes fly over these so called poles to make destinations easier to get to?

 

[fyl2u]

Do planes fly over these so called poles to make destinations easier to get to?

Yes. Yes they do.

Logon or register to see this image

 

[taipeisafc]

Didn't he claim time was man made last week?

Yes he was quoting Philosophical concepts (copied and pasted) and missed the point entirely as usual. Anyway I am off to site which is south of where I am so I am going to turn my compass to South and head off in that direction if I don't post for a couple of days then I have maybe gone the wrong way.

 

[monkeytassle]

Yes he was quoting Philosophical concepts (copied and pasted) and missed the point entirely as usual. Anyway I am off to site which is south of where I am so I am going to turn my compass to South and head off in that direction if I don't post for a couple of days then I have maybe gone the wrong way.

If you go north and keep going you'll eventually arrive at the same place

 

[Nukehasslefan]

The earth's rock surface used to be molten, i.e. a thick liquid like lava, and back then the world was spinning faster than it is now. The Earth's spin is gradually slowing down due to various forces. In about 150,000 years for example, a day will be about 27 hours long.

How do you know this?

As the earth cooled, the molten rock began to set in place, hence the bulge that still exists today, and then the Earth's spin continued to slow down.

Ahhhh, I see.
A reliance on stories....but by who?

Imagine it like the spinning swinging chairs fairground ride. As the ride speeds up, the chairs swing outwards from the force of the spin until they're almost horizontal, but then as it it slows down, the chairs eventually return to their vertical resting positions.

Aye on a fairground ride or the roundabout, I agree.
But they also stay winging outwards at any given rate, whether its slight at a few mph or near horizontal at a higher mph or revolution.
The point is they still swing out and you feel it.
Of course you can argue about it making one revolution over 24 hours but it's simply not a match up.
the way to match it up is to say the fairground ride is 24,000 miles in circumference and everyone who gets on each swing will be going at 1000 mph and will take 24 hours to get back to their starting position.

The point being, it would still be 1000 mph and you would certainly feel it.
So this supposed slow as a clock speed is just a simple sidestep con job to argue for why we don;t feel the rotation when the reality is, the Earth does not rotate.

Yes, to an extent you're right, but a vacuum is also a medium if we're using that version of the terminology.

A vacuum would be nothing. Nothing could exist in a vacuum.
But...as you say....if we are going down the extreme low pressure route and classing that as the vacuum then space has to be extreme low pressure meaning it has to be a medium throughout, meaning all matter within it, is attached.
Which means there's no floating about like we're told.
Which means there's no constant velocity. It basically cannot exist.
It means nothing can exist within it like we're told.

If the argument goes back to space being a true vacuum or something like it with bits of scattered particles just milling about up there, then it becomes even more clownish............but..........this is the stuff we were all brought up on. Like Santa and the toothfairy....etc....etc.

The THREE laws of motion apply everywhere, regardless of what the medium is.

The THREE laws are not extensions of each other at all. They are distinct, different, and describe different aspects of motion.

There's one simple law and it's the third.
The second simply adds on to the third and basically says the same thing.
The first is impossible.

That is correct. It pushes in every direction but is held back by the skin of the balloon in all directions except the direction of the hole, therefore all the internal forces cancel each other out with the exception of the one in the opposite direction of the hole, thereby creating motion in that direction.Out of the nozzle, yes. The atmospheric pressure outside the balloon has nothing to do with the direction of motion though, it only affects the speed at which the air inside the balloon escapes.

No.
The atmosphere aids in crushing the balloon back into its original shape once the nozzle is opened.
And this exiting air from the nozzle creates a higher push against the atmosphere and hits that atmospheric barrier creating the push required for the balloon to move in the opposite direction.
If there was no external atmospheric barrier there would be no propulsion.

In a vacuum, it escape faster because there's less pressure outside preventing the escape, and so the speed of travel of the balloon would be much faster than it would be if released in air.

The supposed vacuum offers next to zero resistance to action going by what we're told.
Any expelled gases would simply be expanded into it and hit no barrier to propel the craft in the opposite direction.

The medium is irrelevant to the direction of travel of the balloon.

It's absolutely massively relevant. No medium and no travel. No force and resistance.

The lower the pressure outside the balloon, the faster the balloon will travel in the opposite direction.

Nope.
The lower the external pressure the more expanded the balloon would become if the nozzle was shut.
If the nozzle was opened in extreme low pressure the air inside would be lost....in short order.... to that low pressure and would create very little advancement in the opposite direction.

A balloon released in a vacuum would travel much faster than the same balloon released in your living room.

Absolutely not. 100% not.
That's a fiction told to people who will simply believe it for no other reason than they believe space is a reality of a vacuum...etc.

 

[Nobby]

this exiting air from the nozzle creates a higher push against the atmosphere and hits that atmospheric barrier creating the push required for the balloon to move in the opposite direction.

How far behind the exhaust is atmospheric barrier and does any of the exhaust gas get through it?

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

The point being, it would still be 1000 mph and you would certainly feel it.
So this supposed slow as a clock speed is just a simple sidestep con job to argue for why we don;t feel the rotation when the reality is, the Earth does not rotate.

And the point you are missing is the immense difference between revolving around a little fairground ride and a planet.
Walk around a lamp post and your direction changes with every step, but go around a circle 40,000km in circumference and you will barely notice the turn.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

You're wrong. The lack of friction from the air makes movement easier, not harder.

Only if you're using it against stored energy and not propulsive energy.

Just watch that video I posted earlier today of the world's largest vacuum chamber - when released in a vacuum, the feathers fall to the ground at the exact same speed as the bowling ball due to the lack of friction from air.

That video is nonsense.

A vacuum is the lowest possible pressure medium.

The lowest possible pressure medium would be the inability for atmospheric gases to expand into each other with enough friction to force out any more into the external atmosphere via a strong pump pushing against that external atmosphere.
A super strong container would be required for starters and a super strong pump.

But regardless of that, what is left offers very very little medium in order for anything to be propelled under it's own energy.
It would offer a low resistance to the drop of an object compared to external atmospheric resistance to the same object.

Just because you don't understand how rockets work, doesn't mean it's an impossibility.

Rockets are simple. High pressure push from the back end and a reactionary resistance of atmosphere in order for the rocket to be pushed into the sky until it arcs back to Earth or gives up its fuel before it makes a complete arc and then tumbles back to Earth.

The phenomenon you're describing is completely true, and that's exactly why the balloon would travel faster on release in a vacuum than in your living room.
The much lower pressure in a vacuum means that the relative pressure between the air inside the balloon and the medium outside the balloon is greater, which in turn produces a greater effect when the balloon is released.

Thanks for providing the perfect example of why you're wrong about this.

The air inside the balloon against a lower pressure would disintegrate the balloon skin if that balloon was placed in a big enough container for it to keep expanding.

No, the propellant is pushing against the spacecraft, not against the atmosphere. We've all explained this to you many times.

Tell me how the propellant pushed against the aircraft.

Burning propellant expands massively against the spacecraft.

Massively against where on that aircraft?

Your fundamental understanding of what makes the motion happen is wrong, so all your arguments about this are based on that wrong assumption.

By all means keep that opinion.

The force of the propellant is acting against the spacecraft. That's what causes the motion of the spacecraft.

Acting against the space craft as in, how?

In our atmosphere, the expulsion of the exhaust reaction ALSO pushes against the air outside it, causing that air to be pushed away (don't stand in the way of the exhaust reaction if you ever try this experiment at home or you'll be fried), but always remember the EQUAL AND OPPOSITE REACTION - it happens in all directions at once but if there's only one direction the exhaust reaction can escape because the craft itself is blocking all the other directions, then the NET FORCE propels the craft away from the reaction.

NEWTON, BABY!

The medium in action.
Now try this same thing in the space they tell us about and let's see how you answer it by using what you've just said.

The dynamite creates an exothermic reaction that does indeed require oxygen to make it happen, but do honestly believe that if you supplied a bunch of dynamite with an oxygen supply (say, by supplying it with liquid oxygen) in a vacuum, it wouldn't push away a cardboard box sitting next to it?

I can assure you it would.

If this was in space as we're told space is and you had your box and dynamite then your first issue would be in detonating it. Your second issue would be containing the make up of that dynamite. And thirdly there is no medium for it to create any blast wave.
So no, it wouldn't be working....at all.

The surrounding air is indeed pushed away, just like the box would be. It's unnecessary to the motion of the box though.

In atmosphere I agree.
The medium is there for the blast to create waves and push the box away and anything else within that blast radius, as well as affecting many things over a wider radius depending on the strength of blast.

Tell me, what do you think would happen if the dynamite were actually glued to the side of the box nin such a way that there was no air in between the dynamite and the box? Do you think the box would just sit still when the dynamite exploded because there was no air in between them to push it away?

It would not move because there would be no detonation.
But...back to the if mode. IF it could detonate and the medium was of extreme low pressure then the box would act as a medium in itself. It would be part of the dynamite set up. An extra skin that would create a barrier to the detonation and so, would move a little within the extreme low pressure but so little as to be called a dud.

The more you look at it through your bizarre flat-earther eyes, the more deluded you become, and the stronger the smell of your own bullshittery becomes.

And you're very welcome to whatever opinion you choose about me.

You're clutching at straws now, like. Your obvious stress at being tucked so many times in short succession is having a noticeable effect on your posting style.

You keep believing that. It may give you a sense of gain.

 

[taipeisafc]

He keeps rambling on about vacuum and his latest utter drivel is about "super strong containers to contain absolute vacuum" so a differential pressure of 1 bar - the vast majority of our pressure vessels are designed for full vac rating as it means we don't need vacuum relief on there. He has utterly no clue about vacuum, gases, pressure, rotation, navigation, newtons laws, inertia, expansion, reactive forces...I could go on but it would be a long list but the longer this thread goes on the stupidier he shows himself to be.

fyl2u said :

"A balloon released in a vacuum would travel much faster than the same balloon released in your living room."

Nukehasslefan said :

"Absolutely not. 100% not.
That's a fiction told to people who will simply believe it for no other reason than they believe space is a reality of a vacuum...etc."

So prove it then. If you are saying 100% not then you must have proof to back it up so lets see it. If you have no proof then yet again you are lying.

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

The supposed vacuum offers next to zero resistance to action going by what we're told.
Any expelled gases would simply be expanded into it and hit no barrier to propel the craft in the opposite direction.

and the equal and opposite reaction would be....?

 

[Nukehasslefan]

If the explorers just stop, why do they claim they have been to the poles or crossed the Arctic or Antartic? None have come back and said “sorry, didn’t make it, impossible”.

Why do people claim they've landed on the moon?
Why do Anglers say it was this>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>big?
Why do people cheat?
Why do people tell lies?
Why do people fantasize?
Why do people believe lies?
Why do people trust?
Why do people claim to have descended 7 miles down into ocean?

And so on

But the spin of the earth, think it through will you. We can guide you. First of all, do you know how to calculate speed?

Let's deal with 1000 mph spinning on a globe as we're told.

I’m finding it amazing how someone can put forward so many scientific concepts and discuss the laws of motion while saying the size of the earth doesn’t matter even it was a million miles wide. 1000mph. That is the figure in the flat earth bible, that is all that matters. The bible is never wrong, it tells people to think for themselves.

1000 mph is 1000 mph regardless of size.

I know what you mean, it's a bit of a guilty pleasure to keep destroying his ludicrous suggestions.

I don't see anything destroyed other than the spinning global Earth and all of the utter nonsense that goes with it.

Didn't he claim time was man made last week?

It is man made.
Time has no relevance other than to man made time pieces and the order in which we follow them.
Take away time and dates and we simply live in the moment, not the past and not the present. The now.
No yesterday, no tomorrow, just the NOW.

Yes. Yes they do.

Logon or register to see this image

I don't see anything flying over so called poles.