Support NeoGAF

[DunDunDunpachi]

I’m actually glad you posted that picture although a timelapse shouldn’t be needed to make the stars appear as trails if we’re moving as fast as we are. I understand relative position. It’s like driving down the highway and seeing a mountain far off in the distance appear to move slow. Trouble is the speed that we move around the sun as well as through the galaxy is too fast for any of that to be applicable. Take that time lapse pic. If earth is spinning, and then we’re also orbiting the sun, those trails should look like spirals instead of curved lines..

Then no, you don't understand relative position. Our speed and in fact our entire solar system is incredibly tiny when we are talking about the scale of the distance between stars. Our local movement isn't going to change which stars we can see, nor will it make them streak (or spiral) across the sky. Over the course of a century, the relative position of the Solar System to a distant star might only change by 1 degree. Depending on how far away the star is, it might take 100,000 years before our relative position changes by 1 measly degree. At those speeds, any spiral or streak would not be noticeable during the course of a single night.

On the other hand, a rotating planet will cause the stars to streak, because our relative position turns 360 degrees in a short 24 hour period.

 

[AngularSaxophone]

Yet I just explained it in my post. this is funny. So I just had to pull up the numbers just to see how absurd they are and we have these three measures of movement. Earth is spinning at 1000mph, it’s also orbiting the sun at 66,600 (how convenient) mph, and we’re also moving through the galaxy as 660,000 (again, how convenient) miles per hour. So with three different directions of movement, unbelievably fast movement at that, you’re going to tell me I’m a little off for thinking the way I do when looking at the sky only shows one direction of movement? And stars NEVER spiral. We should see spirals all over the place. At minimum in time lapse photography. We don’t.

 

[julio_grr]

Thales' theorem is false. Next.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Yet I just explained it in my post. this is funny. So I just had to pull up the numbers just to see how absurd they are and we have these three measures of movement. Earth is spinning at 1000mph, it’s also orbiting the sun at 66,600 (how convenient) mph, and we’re also moving through the galaxy as 660,000 (again, how convenient) miles per hour. So with three different directions of movement, unbelievably fast movement at that, you’re going to tell me I’m a little off for thinking the way I do when looking at the sky only shows one direction of movement? And stars NEVER spiral. We should see spirals all over the place. At minimum in time lapse photography. We don’t.

If the earth is spinning at 1000MPH but is orbiting the sun at 67x that, why do the stars streak due to the rotation of earth but they don't streak/spiral due to the orbiting around the sun?

I'm glad that you can at least admit the earth is a spinning globe.

 

[AngularSaxophone]

I’m not admitting it. I’m just going with the narrative for conversation sake. And your question is exactly what I’m talking about.

why do the stars streak due to the rotation of earth but they don't streak/spiral due to the orbiting around the sun?

Time lapse photography of the sky should look like this at minimum but in 3d.

It doesn’t. Anywhere. Ever.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

I’m not admitting it. I’m just going with the narrative for conversation sake. And your question is exactly what I’m talking about.



Time lapse photography of the sky should look like this at minimum but in 3d.

It doesn’t. Anywhere. Ever.

You keep saying "should".

Prove it with math. This is actually a really easy problem to solve so you should be able to enlighten us. We have an approximate distance between ourselves and the stars in the sky, we know how quickly we're orbiting the sun, and we know how quickly we're moving through the galaxy.

The question is:

By how many degrees does the relative position of the earth change in relation to the nearest star? (nearest because that would be the highest number and therefore most in favor of your argument).

Get working.

Plus, you can hop into any competent space sim, navigate to a planet, and watch the same effect from there. I recommend Space Engine.

EDIT: I even went ahead and simplified the question further.

By how many degrees does the angle at C change in 24 hours?

 

[bigedole]

Hi Angular, can you explain how the physics behind the Coriolis effect works in your flat earth model?

 

[AngularSaxophone]

DunDunDunpachi
I wouldn’t even know where to begin there. Doesn’t make my statement any less true. You’re literally saying yeah I know that our eyes don’t see the way they’re supposed to be seeing it but prove it with math. What for? If I poke you in the eye do you need to run a few calculations to prove that you’re injured?

bigedole
All you’re doing is proving that people can hide behind math if they choose to. Doesn’t make you smart.

 

[bigedole]

I wouldn’t even know where to begin there. Doesn’t make my statement any less true. You’re literally saying yeah I know that our eyes don’t see the way they’re supposed to be seeing it but prove it with math. What for? If I poke you in the eye do you need to run a few calculations to prove that you’re injured?

No, he's not saying that. He's pointing out that your brain hasn't really grasped the physics of the situation to understand what your eyes should be seeing.

EDIT: Just editing my post to reply to your edit AngularSaxophone ,

I'm not hiding behind math at all. Physics is great because it is both observable and proven. All it takes is one case where a particular law is wrong to throw it all out as incorrect. The Coriolis effect is an observable and proven phenomena. Please tell me how it can possibly exist on a flat earth. Why would liquids behave differently in the US than they do in Australia if the Earth is flat? We can explain why they do as one of many natural outcomes of the Earth being a spinning spherical object. If you truly believe in a flat earth, you should be very concerned with any observable physical phenomena that can't be explained.

 

[AngularSaxophone]

That’s your opinion.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

DunDunDunpachi
I wouldn’t even know where to begin there. Doesn’t make my statement any less true. You’re literally saying yeah I know that our eyes don’t see the way they’re supposed to be seeing it but prove it with math. What for? If I poke you in the eye do you need to run a few calculations to prove that you’re injured?.

The statement that I'm asking you to prove is re-quoted below:

Trouble is the speed that we move around the sun as well as through the galaxy is too fast for any of that to be applicable. Take that time lapse pic. If earth is spinning, and then we’re also orbiting the sun, those trails should look like spirals instead of curved lines

Since you understand relative position, this should be easy for you to solve.

Point C on my diagram is moving away from Point A and Point B as earth spins on the galactic arm. The distances of all three sides of the triangle are easily solved as well as the angles at all three points.

Since Point C moves 514,000 MPH around the galactic center, how much does the angle at C change in 24 hours after traveling a distance of 12.3M miles?

 

[AngularSaxophone]

Again, you’re speaking nonsense to me. I look at that chart and wonder what difference does it make if earth could possibly be spinning away from the nearest star yet also toward or away from the center of the galaxy. It’s literally a one dimensional question.

 

[Rentahamster]

And then bring them right back into view with a zoom lense. Never mind the fact that if that even were the true curve it’d be far too close meaning earth would be insanely tiny compared to what we’re told. Next?

Uhhh, that doesn't happen.

Source: a telescope.

 

[AngularSaxophone]

Uhhh, that doesn't happen.

Source: a telescope.

Ugh



Imagine if we had infinite zoom.

 

[Rentahamster]

I’m actually glad you posted that picture although a timelapse shouldn’t be needed to make the stars appear as trails if we’re moving as fast as we are. I understand relative position. It’s like driving down the highway and seeing a mountain far off in the distance appear to move slow. Trouble is the speed that we move around the sun as well as through the galaxy is too fast for any of that to be applicable. Take that time lapse pic. If earth is spinning, and then we’re also orbiting the sun, those trails should look like spirals instead of curved lines.

lmfao what?

I don't think you understand the relative velocities that these objects spin and rotate, and that while the linear velocities might sound fast, the angular velocities are actually quite small due to the vastness of the Earth, the greatness of the orbits, and the large distance between the Earth and the stars. You know how if you're driving in a car, and the streetsigns look like they're moving fast, while the mountains a mile away look like they're moving slow? Yeah, try a star that's a bajillion light years away.

As for the rotation of the Earth relative to the orbit of the Earth around the sun, and how that would make spirals - dude, the time it takes to take a long exposure photograph like that is 10 hours. The time it takes for a full revolution of the Earth around the sun is 365 days. Or 8760 hours. Please tell me you can see the error in your assumed visualization of what it's "supposed to" look like.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Again, you’re speaking nonsense to me. I look at that chart and wonder what difference does it make if earth could possibly be spinning away from the nearest star yet also toward or away from the center of the galaxy. It’s literally a one dimensional question.

Since it's "nonsense" to you, perhaps you shouldn't draw conclusions about other things, like the shape of the earth or how stars move through the sky.

 

[Rentahamster]

Ugh



Imagine if we had infinite zoom.

You link to me a video of a ship traveling laterally? lol. It should be traveling away from the camera.

 

[julio_grr]

It doesn’t. Anywhere. Ever

It does. Everywhere. Always.
We're so small, and or lives are so short we only see a tiny bit of it. You see you don't understand relativitiy at all.

Ugh



Imagine if we had infinite zoom.

The guy is not even at see level, he's on a hill. You just prove our point.

 

[AngularSaxophone]

I understand relative position. It’s like driving down the highway and seeing a mountain far off in the distance appear to move slow.

Then no, you don't understand relative position.

I don't think you understand the relative velocities

You know how if you're driving in a car, and the streetsigns look like they're moving fast, while the mountains a mile away look like they're moving slow?

So basically I don’t know what I’m talking about as long as it’s coming from me and not you guys. Yeah, I'm Good™

 

[Geki-D]

Ugh



Imagine if we had infinite zoom.

Just curious, but seeing as we see ships "sink" when they get further, why doesn't this video show the boat rising when he zooms in? Instead we can see the ship better, but we can't suddenly see more of it when the video zooms which is what you're saying happens. This video doesn't prove your point in any conceivable way.

Say, Haven't we been here before? I'm still curious to know how distance causes a physical barrier of water to block our view of a ship from the sea up.

Oh wait:

So basically I don’t know what I’m talking about as long as it’s coming from me and not you guys. Nah I'm Good™

You bailing on this topic, AGAIN.

 

[bigedole]

So basically I don’t know what I’m talking about as long as it’s coming from me and not you guys. Nah I'm Good™

You may understand the concept, but you don't understand how it's applied to the distances involved in space. Rentahamster laid it out pretty well in post #265 so I'm not surprised you completely ignored his last 2 sentences. You're comparing things moving a hundreds of thousands of mph to objects that are literally billions of miles away. Many orders of magnitude are involved, and that's why the time lapse looks how it does.

 

[Rentahamster]

So basically I don’t know what I’m talking about as long as it’s coming from me and not you guys. Yeah, I'm Good™

Position isn't velocity, and angular velocity isn't linear velocity.

Please do the math and calculate how many degrees of orbit the earth goes around the sun in 10 hours.

 

[AngularSaxophone]

You bailing on this topic, AGAIN

I’m laughing too TBH. I mean if I can literally say the exact same thing yet not know what I’m talking about then come on. Really there’s no point. Honestly. I’ve never seen anything like that in my life. btw the stars aren’t far away from my point of view so our math is never going to check out the same anyway.

 

[Rentahamster]

I’m laughing too TBH. I mean if I can literally say the exact same thing yet not know what I’m talking about then come on. Really there’s no point. Honestly. I’ve never seen anything like that in my life.

Just because you repeat words doesn't mean you understand the concepts behind them. You can repeat those words and acknowledge the phenomenon when you see it on Earth, but when you see it in the sky, you are unable to extrapolate and relate those two things. You can even do a simple geometry calculation to make it more clear to you, but you also don't want to do that.

 

[Geki-D]

Guess my simple questions will yet again go unanswered. Maybe next time, huh.

 

[AngularSaxophone]

Just because you repeat words doesn't mean you understand the concepts behind them.

Except I didn’t repeat the words. You did. Exactly the same because it’s the same concept. There really is no point in arguing about this anymore.

 

[Rentahamster]

Except I didn’t repeat the words. You did.

I haven't seen you mention the words "angular velocity", "linear velocity", nor demonstrate any ability that you understand the difference between those two things.

You also haven't demonstrated that you understand how "relative position" analogizes with the stars.

 

[julio_grr]

Time lapse photography of the sky should look like this at minimum but in 3d.

Let's try something else for a change.
In you world view, how do you explain the time-lapses of the night sky?
Do you know about the Polaris star? How do you explain it does not move through those time-lapses?
How do you explain it gets closer and closer to the horizon when you get to the equator?
How do you explain you don't see the Polaris star below the equator?
How do you explain stars turn around a totally different point of the sky below the equator?
And how do you explain constellations change during seasons?

 

[Elcid]

I love how new NeoGaf lets this conversation happen. Pre the split this would have ended in Angular getting banned and no discussion other than a barrage of insults.

 

[Nelsin]

I love how new NeoGaf lets this conversation happen. Pre the split this would have ended in Angular getting banned and no discussion other than a barrage of insults.

Pretty much yup although I have no benefits and 0 believe of flat earth I like just enjoy to see other people point of view instead of insulting them and shutting them down.

 

[Elcid]

Pretty much yup although I have no benefits and 0 believe of flat earth I like just enjoy to see other people point of view instead of insulting them and shutting them down.

I like the freedom of discussing all topics and theories regardless how ridiculous some may be.

 

[Keylime]

More than anything I'm just surprised how much stamina some of you have to continue...

Spoiler

If the earth was round then how can you explain planes staying at a constant altitude while flying and not shooting off into space? Their initial trajectory would have them progressively get further from the planet with each mile, and eventually leave the planet into orbit.

Have you people EVEN THOUGHT THIS THROUGH?!

 

[AgentP]

Why do you guys argue with someone who is utterly and willfully ignorant? What good will comes of it? He has a world view, he will gladly warp reality to fit it. He's not going to do the math or a thought experiment that people did in 500BCE.

 

[Geki-D]

What good will comes of it?

Entertainment.

 

[AngularSaxophone]

How do you explain it gets closer and closer to the horizon when you get to the equator?

Let me take this one just to see if I’m not far off in my thinking. As you move closer to the equator, it’s moving closer to the horizon in the north and not the horizon in the south, correct?

 

[Wings 嫩翼翻せ]

You can't just dismiss people's cited claims by saying "that's your opinion" without at least providing some type of supported rebuttal, if you wish to be heard in return and/or taken seriously.

 

[AngularSaxophone]

If someone is basically calling me an idiot without using the word then yes, I am going to go with “that’s your opinion”. There’s no point in going further than that.

 

[Wings 嫩翼翻せ]

bigedole replied to this thread in a respectful manner, and you swatted him calling him a smart aleck for referencing a physical model.

 

[AngularSaxophone]

He's pointing out that your brain hasn't really grasped the physics of the situation to understand what your eyes should be seeing.

Nah. And I don’t even claim to know half the stuff these guys are talking about. Just because one doesn’t have the ability to throw out formulas and calculations on command doesn’t mean my eyes are lying to me. Talk about no sense. It’s like I’m repeatedly being told to stop using my senses. What do we have them for? Anyway I’m waiting for my guy julio_grr that one really has my brain going.

 

[Elcid]

Nah. And I don’t even claim to know half the stuff these guys are talking about. Just because one doesn’t have the ability to throw out formulas and calculations on command doesn’t mean my eyes are lying to me. Talk about no sense. It’s like I’m repeatedly being told to stop using my senses. What do we have them for? Anyway I’m waiting for my guy julio_grr that one really has my brain going.

You ever read or listen to Eric Dubay's 100 proofs?

 

[AngularSaxophone]

I did awhile back. Haven’t revisited them. Haven’t really listened to much of the flat earth stuff at all because I think it may be a distraction from something else along with a way to cause more division. Then again the philosophers of old used to debate back and fourth about this stuff anyway. It’s just happening all over again it seems.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Nah. And I don’t even claim to know half the stuff these guys are talking about. Just because one doesn’t have the ability to throw out formulas and calculations on command doesn’t mean my eyes are lying to me. Talk about no sense. It’s like I’m repeatedly being told to stop using my senses. What do we have them for? Anyway I’m waiting for my guy julio_grr that one really has my brain going.

You keep repeating this line about "using your senses" and your "eyes lying" to you.

Aren't you religious? Aren't you familiar with the notion of inferring something even if you cannot experience it with your senses? Do you believe, for instance, that the microscopic world doesn't exist?

Just because you can't see it for yourself doesn't change the truthfulness of something. It's incredibly naive to prop up your own personal experiences against facts that can be easily tested, even by yourself.

You come across as someone who has no interest in knowledge, and no interest in anything except what your own whims decide to believe today.

 

[AngularSaxophone]

Aren't you religious? Aren't you familiar with the notion of inferring something even if you cannot experience it with your senses?

I’m guessing you’re referring to God and we experience Him with our senses every day we live on this earth whether you believe that or not. As far as knowledge goes I have a huge interest in it. You and I just have different views on what knowledge is. Knowing the formula for a puzzle that was designed by man, meh. Understanding how the stars move and the true history of this thing we live on and how it relates to what’s in scripture is what interests me.

 

[Wings 嫩翼翻せ]

Right. So are we then supposed to scratch our buttholes while we wait for Kingdom Come or do we try to understand the beauty of the universe we are a part of?

Surely you would agree it's not in good faith to simply dismiss current understanding of the world as we know it as folly, considering the work put into developing it. There's much more about it we don't and may never know, and a lot of the "evidence" we rely on for postulating the more scientifically complex concepts is already deemed "theory" for argument's sake.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

I’m guessing you’re referring to God and we experience Him with our senses every day we live on this earth whether you believe that or not. As far as knowledge goes I have a huge interest in it. You and I just have different views on what knowledge is. Knowing the formula for a puzzle that was designed by man, meh. Understanding how the stars move and the true history of this thing we live on and how it relates to what’s in scripture is what interests me.

So you choose to believe your eyes when it suits you, but you'll also believe the writings of others when it suits you.

I think the common denominator is that you just like believing what you want, arbitrarily picking the reason.

 

[Rentahamster]

show me visual proof, not taken from a space station or satellite that proves earth looks like what we’re taught it does. Curvature. Please.

What do you make of this video?

 

[AngularSaxophone]

What do you make of this video?

They’re only 13 miles up for one, for two it keeps going back and fourth between curved and not curved which leads me to believe it’s the lense again so what he says doesn’t really matter. Goes back to that whole space agency/media thing.

but you'll also believe the writings of others when it suits you.

Except this isn’t the writings of others. It’s the writings of the Holy Spirit. Kinda in cahoots with the One that created this whole place so yeah there’s that.

 

[#Phonepunk#]

the main thing about Flat Earth theory is that it just raises a million other questions. you aren't just looking at one physics problem and saying it's wrong. you are undermining a number of concepts, from outer space to volcanic & tectonic plate activity to the magnetic poles to global weather systems, etc.

the other main thing is, i have been in an airplane, i have seen the curvature of the Earth.

third, the seasons being related to the tilt of the Earth makes common sense; they are variations mostly in temperature so less direct exposure to the sun would naturally create lower temperatures, if the Earth is a globe. this is just one problem you have to describe, from scratch, when you figure a Flat Earth. why do the seasons occur? we already have an answer that is extremely simple and elegant.

 

[AngularSaxophone]

you are undermining the very concept of outer space.

Space as you’re referring to doesn’t exist in my mind anymore. There are the skies and then the heavens which nothing physical can enter.

the other main thing is, i have been in an airplane, i have seen the curvature of the Earth.

I never understand this one because you can’t. Someone once told me you have to be on an international flight to be high enough to see it which I’ve been twice now and saw no curve.

third, the seasons being related to the tilt of the Earth makes common sense; they are variations mostly in temperature so less direct exposure to the sun would naturally create lower temperatures. this is just one problem you have to describe, from scratch, when you figure a Flat Earth. why do the seasons occur?

Seasons occur depending on what course the sun is on. The sun and moon are what change orbits and circuits. Not us tilting back and fourth. You can see the sun and moon set in different places all the time. The earth would have to constantly be tilting back and fourth no matter what season it was. If we have direct exposure to the sun, don’t you find it odd that after traveling millions of miles to get here, you can see temperatures fluctuate as little as 50 miles away? If you’re truly interested in where I get my knowledge of the sun and moon from you can read some of this.

http://www.ancienttexts.org/library/ethiopian/enoch/3astron/astro.htm

Keep in mind these are seen and unseen things.

 

[Iorv3th]

AngularSaxophone Is there any chance you sell AdvoCare?