Flat Earth: Why doesn't a Plane's altitude meter (gyroscope) pitch up and down if it's a round earth

[Strathos]

Just wondering Morse86, where do you live?

 

[Aryeh Jay]

.

 

[AceHero]

Second, what is the point of the conspiracy? Why go to so much bother to try and convince people that the world wasn't flat? It's pointless. Also, they must be pretty rubbish if a few guys on the internet can figure it out. Why haven't they got rid of you yet?

It's kind of in the same vein as the "truthers" who say that we never send a probe to Pluto...and that space travel itself is physically impossible. What would be the purpose of deceiving people with something that simply didn't matter?

You don't even have to go to the that height to see the curve. Try flying in a business jet.

Besides for a flat earth I would have to change all my calculations.

Yeah, just flying at 35,000 feet on a clear day above the clouds you can see a curvature to the skyline.

Coincidentally, they released a bunch of photos from the Apollo mission recently, many of which show a clearly round Earth from the Moon.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/albums/with/72157658999650280

I know Morse won't find it convincing, but it's interesting, nonetheless.

Obviously Photoshopped with those giant computers that weren't able to send people to the moon!

IIf fewer people would believe the earth is round, more people would wake up and realize how vain it is to ever travel five thousand miles. I really, honestly, have an extremely hard time believing there is even one human being To-day who can fully motivate their trip across the World. Therefore I see the discussion as a contribution, people could calm down; postal mail (and it's not like it's any one person going thousands of miles with the parcels), internet (and phone in some cases when it's cheap), and God travel across the World, individual people don't have to, that's my point with this post.

I have a friend who has flown from the West Coast to Asia multiple times. That entails traveling more than 5,000 miles...

 

[Strathos]

The Bronze Age.


Oh, you said where, my bad.

I'd like to know his geographic position. Not specific, city or state/province will do.

 

[Unix]

Fine. But how about this idea: if all space programs except the ones needed for keeping the GPS system up would be ended, would that really be any great loss at all?:

Also, what does NASA gain by making everyone think the world is round when it's really flat? How does that benefit them?

What do I personally now gain from now again knowing the Earth is round - just say even one thing? OK, so since internet works pretty well nowadays what are the reasons for some to still keep traveling more than 5,000 miles by flight, i.e. why do they have to? If You say "work" well do they work for giant enterprises and if they quit would they not get work in any smaller companies? - I would find the latter part hard to believe? If it's solely or combined with vacation trips that really doesn't add any justification to the matter.
My point was that if it would be a less important matter for people to know that the Earth is round (not implying they wouldn't actually know) they would travel shorter distances only because they would realize there is no such thing as a shortcut when it comes to traveling by flight. Airplanes really take the shortest route each time already and You really consume all that fuel and cause the wear on the mechanical parts of the airplane and the parts holding it together if You book a long flight, it always pollutes a lot - there's really no other way to pollute less than to stop booking the long flights - I find it peculiar how the simple Maths is so difficult for so many people to grasp! As I'm not a stubborn person myself I find the motivations difficult to understand, but we are all different personalities I suppose others may of course be better than me at something, it's just funny how it doesn't bother some even a bit that they keep polluting:

I have a friend who has flown from the West Coast to Asia multiple times. That entails traveling more than 5,000 miles...

It's round.
[...]
Well, you're wrong. It's been done:

II really, honestly, have an extremely hard time believing there is even one human being To-day who can fully motivate their trip across the World.

 

[SkyWriting]

Huh? The bible said the core of the earth is hot before scientists even found that out. It never used the word core. It said underneath......which implies a flat earth..

According the the scriptures, Adam and his environment were not 7 days old at the end of creation week.
The plain and simple reading suggests Adam was scientifically 20 or so when Created.
The age of the trees he ate from is also an estimate larger than 7 days based on literal reading.

 

[SkyWriting]

1) Why doesn't a Plane's altitude meter (gyroscope) pitch up and down constantly if it's a round earth? NASA says the curvature is 8 inches per mile. The average speed of a plane is 580mph......how come the altitude meter stays mostly constant?
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('div-gpt-ad-1431698694306-1'); });

it's true that a plane flies a mild arc, geometrically. You can ask a pilot.
But 8 inches in a mile is quite flat. Very few would argue.

 

[ecco]

Hahhaha, who believes this stuff?

Mr. Morse,

Is this what you believe to shape of the earth to be? If not, then what?

 

[davedajobauk]

Hi,

It is so that at some point the moon accelerates any object near it, thus it goes faster.

I thought you might find this interesting. It is the weight/mass of the expelled gasses, time the velocity of those expelled gasses that produces the force for all propulsion of things like rockets.

That is from baloons to hypergolic fueled moon landers. Hypergolic fuel, and incredibly weird name for oxygen and hydrogen that are combined with Nitrogen, burns instantly on contact with each other. That is used in rockets to ask others silently and politely not to bomb us, with their rockets as it is always there ready to go, in less than a minute from the need to actually lauching a MIRV set on a Titan II, and later missles.

NH4 and NO4, Hydrazine and the oxygen one I no longer remember the name for it, were used in the Lunar mission, precisely because they don't need an ignition source. Just mix and go.

However thrust, I thought you would find interesting that it is actually found when measured to be a product of the expelled gas velocities and the mass of those expelled gasses, rather than pressure.

A rocket is a momentum device, in other words, it is not a pressure device.

LOVE,

I could not ignore some of this posts content

and would add... that rockets burn and function well, in air BUT
in the vacuum of space, they are totally useless, once a rocket leaves earth's atmosphere
and gravitational influence, that rocket is then FALLING through space ~until
another planetary body 'gets in the way'
There is no possibility (presently) to alter a rocket's direction (course) in-space ~it is in free-fall
Yes, as it approaches another 'celestial body' (mass) it may well receive some gravitational influence
The Moon, has only one-sixth of Earth's gravity... If, the rocket is made to accelerate toward the Moon
Then it is accelerating FASTER than 14 times faster than a average bullet (?)

~when, the rocket arrives, it has to slow down and, be 'captured' by gravity and an atmosphere
for, it's engine to be 'effective'
I thought the Moon had no appreciable atmosphere ?

Does anyone see FUEL TANKS on the lander module ??? (what does it use for Landing and Take-off ?)
Wouldn't it need, AT_LEAST one sixth of the fuel it used, to leave Earth ?

Just some logical thoughts... by no-means 'EXPERT CONSIDERATION'

 

[davedajobauk]

a large part of that change in velocity was by the long coast to the moon.
remember, we have about 200,000 miles with almost no thrust (except for course corrections).
it's quite likely we thrusted out of earth orbit with just enough velocity to reach the moon.
as a matter of fact, on apollo 11 and 12 that's exactly what happened.
if the SPS failed to light, then the craft would have simply looped around the moon and came back to earth.

if that is what you want to believe, then that's okay

not exactly sure what you mean by this.
i have over 75 gigabytes of material from NASA on my hard drive, and this is mostly all text type of reports.

i haven't read anything that would indicate this would be a problem.

the "void of space" is an almost text book example of the laws of physics.
how can you possibly deny that?

'long coast to the moon' ... with a speed of more than 14 times the speed of an average bullet
the rocket is 'thrown' into space, with nothing, to impede it's progress... (total vacuum)

'except for course corrections' ... with nothing to push against (?) course corrections are NOT POSSIBLE

'thrusted out of earth orbit' ... at at-least 7,000 feet per second (and perhaps much more) with nothing to stop it, it would fall faster and faster... UNTIL, 'something' got in it's way

'simply looped around the moon' ... assuming that the Moon's gravity could-capture that speeding missile, and what-if, the rocket arrived too late / too early to rendezvous with the Moon...it is a very distant target

'want to believe' ...What I want to believe, is entirely at-odds with, what my thoughts might tell me, is not possible (yet)

'not exactly sure' ... No I see, that some people are entirely 'taken-in' by some doubtful comments and
dubious claims... Let me just add, that if you inject a small amount of gas (rocket-exhaust)
into a vacuum, the gas will dissipate into the vacuum (vastness of space, until it bumps into a denser cloud of gas/ material)
ie: rockets are no good at-all in space, ~like; water down a plughole DOESN'T ...lift, the sink ??

'material from NASA' ... Sure, right 'out of the horses mouth' They, who have lost all of the plans for "working design rockets", and all of the videos, that cannot be re-examined, with advanced technology (?) All of the tons of paperwork and test results ALL MYSTERIOUSLY LOST (?)
ALL untestable and most certainly UNREPEATABLE even after 50 years of advancing knowledge and scientific advancement

'i haven't read anything' ... and there you go .... blindly accepting, what is placed before you
Whatever happened, to people with open-minds, aren't we told to, 'test the unlikely'


'"void of space"' is, a void, is, a void, is a void ....?? Nothing between the lumps ??? @ Absolute Zero
you cannot swim in it, even if you didn't need to breathe air ???

 

[whois]

davedajobauk,
ok, i have some simulations of the apollo flights that i can upload if you really want to pursue this.
these are programs that run on quickbasic, i can provide them and the app that runs them if you wish.

the only real questions i have in regards to the apollo flights pertain to solar radiation hazards.
i have a manuscript that explains most of these hazards, but i'm not sure if it's small enough to upload.

the main thing to remember about all of this is, what is the capability of the saturn 5.
once you prove the capability, it's almost a certainty that we went.
the simulations i mentioned above does that.

 

[davedajobauk]

Do you seriously believe that 'billions of dollars' of tooling and manufacturing sources
were dismantled on an apparently 'working' rocket program
AND, that many tons of paper drawings and construction details [PLANS]
up, and went missing from secure premises along with all photos and videos...
WHILE being 'Top-Secret'

not exactly sure what you mean by this.
i have over 75 gigabytes of material from NASA on my hard drive, and this is mostly all text type of reports.

It wouldn't be much help to NASA, were you to offer it back to them
always assuming anything you held from them was at-all useful

AND the astronauts faces, (in photos) visible through the helmets (visors UP)
were actually possible with the sun glaring down on the surface
and reflected light from the surface ~DID NOT blind them ? (white-out)

i haven't read anything that would indicate this would be a problem.

Really ?
Did your parents never tell you NOT-TO look at the sun
and, when you did so, anyway, did it not burn your eyes, give you a headache
and make it difficult to see anything afterwards, after you looked-away ?
Why do Inuits, wear snowglasses ??
As the moon has no atmosphere to filter the Sun's rays, the reflection of the Sun's radiation from the surface of the Moon, would have been too bright, to look at the regolith
as astronauts were obviously doing, in the photo

Conspiracy Theory ..... lol

I am not conspiring with anybody .... I heard the 'story' and watched the TV like everyone else
I am the kind of guy, who WILL NOTICE when an actors marked face, will be marked on the other side in the next scene, and when a boom mike appears along the top of the screen, and when the principal actors have changed cars between scenes....and also I will see when the moving background, of a in-car scene
is repeated during a conversation

I don't believe I ever 'caught-on' that the journeys to the Moon were real at-all

 

[ecco]

and would add... that rockets burn and function well, in air BUT
in the vacuum of space, they are totally useless
Just some logical thoughts... by no-means 'EXPERT CONSIDERATION'

Illogical and completely wrong.

Why do you think rockets don't work in a vacuum?

Is it because:

• They need oxygen to fire
• In a vacuum, there is no air to push against

Or do you have another theory as to why rockets do not work in a vacuum?

 

[SkyWriting]

I could not ignore some of this posts content

and would add... that rockets burn and function well, in air BUT
in the vacuum of space, they are totally useless, once a rocket leaves earth's atmosphere
and gravitational influence, that rocket is then FALLING through space ~until
another planetary body 'gets in the way'
There is no possibility (presently) to alter a rocket's direction (course) in-space ~it is in free-fall
Yes, as it approaches another 'celestial body' (mass) it may well receive some gravitational influence
The Moon, has only one-sixth of Earth's gravity... If, the rocket is made to accelerate toward the Moon
Then it is accelerating FASTER than 14 times faster than a average bullet (?)

~when, the rocket arrives, it has to slow down and, be 'captured' by gravity and an atmosphere
for, it's engine to be 'effective'
I thought the Moon had no appreciable atmosphere ?

Rocket engines work fine in a vacuum. They carry oxygen or an oxidiser in tanks onboard.
The reason the lunar lander had small tanks is that it only had to lift a small capsule
and only up the the orbiting command module. Most of the lander stayed behind.

 

[davedajobauk]

yes,


Newton's Laws - Lesson 4 - Newton's Third Law of Motion
Newton's Third Law

• Newton's Third Law
• Identifying Action and Reaction Force Pairs

A force is a push or a pull that acts upon an object is a result of its interaction with another object.
Forces result from interactions! As discussed in Lesson 2, some forces result from contact interactions (normal, frictional, tensional, and applied forces are examples of contact forces) and other forces are the result of action-at-a-distance interactions (gravitational, electrical, and magnetic forces). According to Newton, whenever objects A and B interact with each other, they exert forces upon each other. When you sit in your chair, your body exerts a downward force on the chair and the chair exerts an upward force on your body. There are two forces resulting from this interaction - a force on the chair and a force on your body. These two forces are called action and reaction forces and are the subject of Newton's third law of motion. Formally stated, Newton's third law is:

For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Let's stay real on this (?)

if you are suspended in a vacuum.... (outside of gravitational influence)
you cannot move anywhere in any direction, even using rocket energy
rocket exhaust NEEDS to push (against) something... and there is, nothing to push against OUT-THERE

Yes a rocket deprived of oxygen (an additive to provide oxygen)
will simply fizzle ...IF, it even ignites

I say, that the speed of a rocket at the moment it breaks free from earth's gravity
commits it to, it's then defined trajectory, which cannot be altered / changed except by a means similar to this¬v
To save on money when shooting for far-away planets such as Jupiter,
some spacecraft whip around a planet (say, Venus) and use its gravity to get a speed boost.
This shortens the time it takes to get to other destinations.

I say, that in the absence of an atmosphere (to push against) to slow the rocket for landing
14 times + the speed of an average bullet, makes the rocket into a missile

Are you volunteering for the First Manned Mars Mission ?

 

[SkyWriting]

yes,


Newton's Laws - Lesson 4 - Newton's Third Law of Motion
Newton's Third Law

• Newton's Third Law
• Identifying Action and Reaction Force Pairs

A force is a push or a pull that acts upon an object is a result of its interaction with another object.
Forces result from interactions! As discussed in Lesson 2, some forces result from contact interactions (normal, frictional, tensional, and applied forces are examples of contact forces) and other forces are the result of action-at-a-distance interactions (gravitational, electrical, and magnetic forces). According to Newton, whenever objects A and B interact with each other, they exert forces upon each other. When you sit in your chair, your body exerts a downward force on the chair and the chair exerts an upward force on your body. There are two forces resulting from this interaction - a force on the chair and a force on your body. These two forces are called action and reaction forces and are the subject of Newton's third law of motion. Formally stated, Newton's third law is:

For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

​

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Let's stay real on this (?)

if you are suspended in a vacuum.... (outside of gravitational influence)
you cannot move anywhere in any direction, even using rocket energy
rocket exhaust NEEDS to push (against) something... and there is, nothing to push against OUT-THERE

Yes a rocket deprived of oxygen (an additive to provide oxygen)
will simply fizzle ...IF, it even ignites

I say, that the speed of a rocket at the moment it breaks free from earth's gravity
commits it to, it's then defined trajectory, which cannot be altered / changed except by a means similar to this¬v
To save on money when shooting for far-away planets such as Jupiter,
some spacecraft whip around a planet (say, Venus) and use its gravity to get a speed boost.
This shortens the time it takes to get to other destinations.

I say, that in the absence of an atmosphere (to push against) to slow the rocket for landing
14 times + the speed of an average bullet, makes the rocket into a missile

Are you volunteering for the First Manned Mars Mission ?

The not-so-obvious force is the somewhat small amount of mass accelerated to very high speed.
Like a very high pressure, but small garden hose. Or air hose.

 

[Nithavela]

This is what you get when you slash education spendings.

 

[davedajobauk]

Just hot air (in other words) tch tch

 

[Nithavela]

Look, let's have a little experiment, Davebajobauk:

Go into your shower and turn up the water. You will feel the shower head push against your hand in the opposite direction of your hand. You will realise that this force stays constant, no matter if the water is directed against a wall or against the ceiling.

Why? Because for every force in one direction, there is another force in another direction. If you sit in a boat on a lake, and you throw a bowling ball over the side of the boat, the boat will move a short distance in the opposite direction. This is not because of the bowling ball "pushing" against the air.

And yes, this works in a vacuum, too.

 

[ecco]

A force is a push or a pull that acts upon an object is a result of its interaction with another object.

WRONG

For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

RIGHT

if you are suspended in a vacuum.... (outside of gravitational influence)
you cannot move anywhere in any direction, even using rocket energy
rocket exhaust NEEDS to push (against) something

WRONG

I say, that the speed of a rocket at the moment it breaks free from earth's gravity
commits it to, it's then defined trajectory, which cannot be altered / changed

WRONG

some spacecraft whip around a planet (say, Venus) and use its gravity to get a speed boost.
This shortens the time it takes to get to other destinations.

RIGHT

Two right out of five statements. That puts you at 40%, which, if I recall, is an "F".