Put a flat earthier into space

[taipeisafc]

What we see and what we're told are two entirely different things in my opinion so forgive me if I don't walk into anything.

It's not tough for me.
The spinning globe and 93 million-mile sun in a vacuum and light year stars and so on and so on are not tough to understand as being a total fantasy and basically, a clever pee take.
Mine offers much more potential but that doesn't mean to say it's correct in all of it.

It's all about paying attention and you won't get confused.

Prove it right then.

I am not making the statements which require proof, you are stating that the night sky and the motion of celestial objects wouldn't work on a Global earth and only on a flat earth - so it is up to you to prove this. "Aye and it works just fine around a circle but not on a spinning globe."

Fair enough so we agree that whatever we see exactly replicates circular motion of objects in orbit and that computer simulations can also model this. The question just remains is the simplest and most likely explanation planets in space or a carbon arc crystal hologram perfect focus hidden in the earth secret where nobody can go projector, which exactly replicates circular motion of planets. It is a toughy

The projector also knows when it is cloudy in a place (or is clownshoe saying clouds are projections too) so turns off the lights for that area but leaves them on the the rest, apart from that tiny bit of open sky which is tracks perfectly projecting the exact light show required. It can also make the sun appear in the sky in different places at different heights or indeed disappear completely in once place. It also can somehow keep the sun above the horizon for long periods in the North and the South of the planet and do the opposite. And it has never broken down in all of recorded existence. Hmmmm....I am struggling to see the flaws in that fantasy.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

There is your amended one, mark on where say London and Tokyo are, also what makes you think your dome foundation is about 10000 miles thick looking at that to scale (do you need me to explain scale), what brought you to that conclusion saying as nobody can have measured or observed it?

https://i.postimg.cc/R0KhbmF8/Smart-Select-20220927-174522-Chrome.jpg

Logon or register to see this image

I am not making the statements which require proof, you are stating that the night sky and the motion of celestial objects wouldn't work on a Global earth and only on a flat earth - so it is up to you to prove this.

It's not up to me to prove anything.

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

It's not up to me to prove anything.

Just as well really.

 

[legend7]

Logon or register to see this image

So we would have to make quite a detour to fly to Australia as we can't cross the central projector.
Plus when we do fly there we go away from the so called North Pole not closer to it, I'm assuming they would fly as close as possible to it to save time and fuel? Up over northern Norway, Sweden and Russia looking at how your layout is building up?
Also to scale based on the overall circle being 50k miles that looks about 17000 from here to Australia?
You never answered why you think the dome foundation is about 10000 miles wide, why not 5000, 20000, 1000, what workings out brought you to this figure represented by your markings?
And we would fly over Japan to get to Australia direct from UK?
Last one nukey mark Johannesburg South Africa on there

 

[Nukehasslefan]

So we would have to make quite a detour to fly to Australia as we can't cross the central projector.

It would always be avoidance from the centre no matter where you're going.

Plus when we do fly there we go away from the so called North Pole not closer to it, I'm assuming they would fly as close as possible to it to save time and fuel?

Probably as close as possible which would still be far from it.

Up over northern Norway, Sweden and Russia looking at how your layout is building up?

It depends on the flight and the destination and the stop off. Generally, you'll see zig-zagging to airports before destinations are reached.

Also to scale based on the overall circle being 50k miles that looks about 17000 from here to Australia?

I didn't offer it to any scale, I just offered you an approximate based on what you asked me for.
If you want to scale it down then that's up to you.

You never answered why you think the dome foundation is about 10000 miles wide, why not 5000, 20000, 1000, what workings out brought you to this figure represented by your markings?

You seemed to have taken no notice of the wild guess I offered.
But I'll answer it.
We're talking a gradient, so don't be looking at the area as being disc flat. The outer zone would be a gradual incline.

 

[legend7]

No but I drew the circle to scale, it represents 50000 miles wide so are you saying you placed them randomly not somewhere based on appx distances apart, what is the point of that?
So are you saying you have no idea where they go on that circle based on appx scale?

 

[Nukehasslefan]

No but I drew the circle to scale, it represents 50000 miles wide so are you saying you placed them randomly not somewhere based on appx distances apart, what is the point of that?
So are you saying you have no idea where they go on that circle based on appx scale?

I haven't used any ruler to scale it, no.
I'll leave that up to you seeing as you offered it to your scale.
All you need to do is work it out to suit, or don't. Either way I'm just going with your flow.

 

[legend7]

I haven't used any ruler to scale it, no.
I'll leave that up to you seeing as you offered it to your scale.
All you need to do is work it out to suit, or don't. Either way I'm just going with your flow.

Well I have worked it out and the figures I quoted were about right.
Anyway last one, joburg in South Africa

 

[taipeisafc]

Logon or register to see this image

It's not up to me to prove anything.

it is if you are making definitive statements - not musings but statements of fact. Especially when you edited out the copy of your quote from your reply which was "Aye and it works just fine around a circle but not on a spinning globe."

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Well I have worked it out and the figures I quoted were about right.
Anyway last one, joburg in South Africa

Logon or register to see this image

 

[DaveH]

The projector also knows when it is cloudy in a place (or is clownshoe saying clouds are projections too) so turns off the lights for that area but leaves them on the the rest, apart from that tiny bit of open sky which is tracks perfectly projecting the exact light show required. It can also make the sun appear in the sky in different places at different heights or indeed disappear completely in once place. It also can somehow keep the sun above the horizon for long periods in the North and the South of the planet and do the opposite. And it has never broken down in all of recorded existence. Hmmmm....I am struggling to see the flaws in that fantasy.

The projector is a fascinating bit of natural (or now apparently deliberate) machinery. It is either loads of independent crystals, all tilting round with their own clockwork motion giving the exact appearance of planets moving independently in orbit, or a single large crystal showing an exact hologram and projecting the whole lot in one. But in this hologram, the planets move exactly as they do in a scaled way down constructed orrery.

Consider Mars. If it were an independent crystal then you might think it has a fixed base and just slowly turns so the top (where the light comes out) draws a circle and that accounts for Mars's movement in the sky. Job done without any thought to what actually drives this crystal to rotate like that in such a uniform way. But that is not what we see. We might if we lived on the sun, but we don't. Mars is in orbit around the sun and so are we, so where Mars appears in the sky is relative to where we are in our orbit too. It does not describe a circle in the sky. But then you have to consider retrograde motion.

I mentioned Stellarium yesterday.

Stellarium Web Online Star Map

Stellarium Web is a planetarium running in your web browser. It shows a realistic star map, just like what you see with the naked eye, binoculars or a telescope.

stellarium-web.org

Search for Mars, set the time to 10pm and set your location. It should appear low in the sky. Click the date and advance the day by 1 each time. You will see night after night it gets higher and moves further west each night, appearing to move right against the background stars. But when you get to about the 24th January, something odd happens. It slows down and turns back on itself and starts going backwards through the sky. What is going on?

(If you can be bothered enough to click through another 6 months, you find by the summer solstice it is pretty light by 10am and Venus appears as a late evening object, that should give a lovely late evening view of Mars and Venus together shortly after sunset, and also helps validate that the information supplied by Stellarium is 100% accurate as we can check any of these observations and go out in 9 months time to see how accurate it's predictions are).

Anyway, enough of that sidetrack, what about this planet suddenly going backwards? This rotating crystal suddenly turns back on itself, turns the other way, then gets fed up of that and starts projecting forward motion again. I wonder what mechanism would do that? That is some complicated gearing or something.

But what would happen from our point of view if you built a working model of the solar system with Mars orbiting slower and further out than the earth? Earth would catch up with Mars in it's orbit then overtake. What effect would that have on the sky? It is nicely explained here by Brian Cox.

Once again the simplicity of planetary motion explains exactly what we see, with no magic fudge, just two planets in orbit and that is it. It is predictable mathematically and comes down to "two things moving in a circle". We don't need a deliberate hologram of the whole sky or individual planet hologram crystal that wobbles around and turns back on itself to exactly mimic circular motion of the planets.

 

[Pancho]

The projector is a fascinating bit of natural (or now apparently deliberate) machinery. It is either loads of independent crystals, all tilting round with their own clockwork motion giving the exact appearance of planets moving independently in orbit, or a single large crystal showing an exact hologram and projecting the whole lot in one. But in this hologram, the planets move exactly as they do in a scaled way down constructed orrery.

Consider Mars. If it were an independent crystal then you might think it has a fixed base and just slowly turns so the top (where the light comes out) draws a circle and that accounts for Mars's movement in the sky. Job done without any thought to what actually drives this crystal to rotate like that in such a uniform way. But that is not what we see. We might if we lived on the sun, but we don't. Mars is in orbit around the sun and so are we, so where Mars appears in the sky is relative to where we are in our orbit too. It does not describe a circle in the sky. But then you have to consider retrograde motion.

I mentioned Stellarium yesterday.

Stellarium Web Online Star Map

Stellarium Web is a planetarium running in your web browser. It shows a realistic star map, just like what you see with the naked eye, binoculars or a telescope.

stellarium-web.org

Search for Mars, set the time to 10pm and set your location. It should appear low in the sky. Click the date and advance the day by 1 each time. You will see night after night it gets higher and moves further west each night, appearing to move right against the background stars. But when you get to about the 24th January, something odd happens. It slows down and turns back on itself and starts going backwards through the sky. What is going on?

(If you can be bothered enough to click through another 6 months, you find by the summer solstice it is pretty light by 10am and Venus appears as a late evening object, that should give a lovely late evening view of Mars and Venus together shortly after sunset, and also helps validate that the information supplied by Stellarium is 100% accurate as we can check any of these observations and go out in 9 months time to see how accurate it's predictions are).

Anyway, enough of that sidetrack, what about this planet suddenly going backwards? This rotating crystal suddenly turns back on itself, turns the other way, then gets fed up of that and starts projecting forward motion again. I wonder what mechanism would do that? That is some complicated gearing or something.

But what would happen from our point of view if you built a working model of the solar system with Mars orbiting slower and further out than the earth? Earth would catch up with Mars in it's orbit then overtake. What effect would that have on the sky? It is nicely explained here by Brian Cox.

Once again the simplicity of planetary motion explains exactly what we see, with no magic fudge, just two planets in orbit and that is it. It is predictable mathematically and comes down to "two things moving in a circle". We don't need a deliberate hologram of the whole sky or individual planet hologram crystal that wobbles around and turns back on itself to exactly mimic circular motion of the planets.

You have the patience of a saint.

But thank you, because your stuff is always interesting.

I particularly liked your giant spirit level hypothesis, which was not only accurate but so elegantly unhinged it deserves to be included in every school curriculum.

 

[payne]

You have the patience of a saint.

But thank you, because your stuff is always interesting.

I particularly liked your giant spirit level hypothesis, which was accurate but so elegantly unhinged it deserves to be included in every school curriculum.

It is pretty impressive considering he's having to deal with someone who lies and is disingenuous continuously.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Anyway, enough of that sidetrack, what about this planet suddenly going backwards? This rotating crystal suddenly turns back on itself, turns the other way, then gets fed up of that and starts projecting forward motion again. I wonder what mechanism would do that? That is some complicated gearing or something.

Does it go back on itself or does it appear to?

 

[DaveH]

Does it go back on itself or does it appear to?

It appears to against the background of stars. Both planets continue in their orbital speed.

However if you were doing it from a projector then you would have to make it turn back on itself as you are talking about an object being projected on a 2d screen

 

[Nukehasslefan]

It appears to against the background of stars. Both planets continue in their orbital speed.

However if you were doing it from a projector then you would have to make it turn back on itself as you are talking about an object being projected on a 2d screen

It would be no different. It would offer the motion in the sky as we see it, so the argument is basically null.

 

[Pink Panther]

Logon or register to see this image

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

It would be no different. It would offer the motion in the sky as we see it, so the argument is basically null.

Misunderstanding stuff is in full swing there I see.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Misunderstanding stuff is in full swing there I see.

If you pay more attention you'll not misunderstand it.

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

I understand it

If you pay more attention you'll not misunderstand it.

I understand it just fine, you clearly do not