Is the Earth Flat?

[prodromos]

The pivot point or pivot mass must be external.

Citation please.

 

[Edwin Wright]

Citation please.

Basic dynamics. No citation required.

 

[Yttrium]

Concerning rocket thrust, any force (including any force associated with expelling gases) requires a pivot point or fulcrum from which to act.

For the casual reader:

There is no such rule in physics. What we have instead is Newton's Third Law of Motion. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. For example, if you're floating in space and you throw a ball in one direction, you will be propelled in the opposite direction. If you fire spaceship thrusters in one direction, the ship is propelled in the opposite direction. This is very basic physics, something you get in high school physics classes.

Not to mention the fact that gases shot out of a thruster are no longer part of the ship, so they couldn't act the way Edwin Wright describes anyway.

 

[prodromos]

Basic dynamics. No citation required.

LOL! not remotely. It is something you either made up yourself or you read it on some other flat earther's website.
Once again you demonstrate that flat earthers cannot do science.

 

[prodromos]

Many airline pilots know that the earth is a stationary plane but keep quiet about it to preserve job security.

I'm guessing the pilots who fly the route from Sydney, Australia to Johannesburg (QF63/QFA63) in less than 13.5 hours are not among those alleged pilots, nor those who fly the route from Sydney to Santiago (QF27/QFA27) in just under 12 hours. Compare that to the flight between Bangkok and Vancouver (AC66/ACA66) which takes 12.75 hours. All three flights use the same aircraft, the Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner.

There are no flat earth models in existence where these flights are possible, yet they happen on a daily basis

 

[Edwin Wright]

For the casual reader:

There is no such rule in physics. What we have instead is Newton's Third Law of Motion. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. For example, if you're floating in space and you throw a ball in one direction, you will be propelled in the opposite direction. If you fire spaceship thrusters in one direction, the ship is propelled in the opposite direction. This is very basic physics, something you get in high school physics classes.

Not to mention the fact that gases shot out of a thruster are no longer part of the ship, so they couldn't act the way Edwin Wright describes anyway.

Newton's Third Law requires a fulcrum or pivot point or pivot mass. You don't get that in the vacuum of (so-called) heliocentric space.

 

[Edwin Wright]

LOL! not remotely. It is something you either made up yourself or you read it on some other flat earther's website.
Once again you demonstrate that flat earthers cannot do science.

Show me an experiment.

 

[Edwin Wright]

I'm guessing the pilots who fly the route from Sydney, Australia to Johannesburg (QF63/QFA63) in less than 13.5 hours are not among those alleged pilots, nor those who fly the route from Sydney to Santiago (QF27/QFA27) in just under 12 hours. Compare that to the flight between Bangkok and Vancouver (AC66/ACA66) which takes 12.75 hours. All three flights use the same aircraft, the Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner.

There are no flat earth models in existence where these flights are possible, yet they happen on a daily basis

Why not book a flight and see what happens?

 

[Yttrium]

Newton's Third Law requires a fulcrum or pivot point or pivot mass. You don't get that in the vacuum of (so-called) heliocentric space.

Again, there is no such rule in physics. Newton's Third Law is very simple and straightforward.

 

[HantsUK]

Why not book a flight and see what happens?

Auckland (New Zealand) to Santiago de Chile: 11hr 0min direct flight. Latam LA800. A few seats are still available for Tuesday.

 

[prodromos]

Show me an experiment.

You haven't answered why the atmosphere has a pressure gradient if it is allegedly sealed beneath a vaulted firmament, nor have you provided any source for your "external pivot mass", however I'll try to be generous.

Picture a giant air hockey table. You are standing on one hockey puck and there is a large object sitting on another hockey puck. If you push against the object you will both move in opposite directions. The distance you each move will be inversely related to each of your masses. The lighter of the two will move further than the heavier.

Why not book a flight and see what happens?

I've flown on a number of intercontinental flights. I know what happens. Why can't you produce any flat earth model where these flights are possible? Based on the flight times, the distances between the pairs of cities are fairly similar. Show me a flat earth model where this is possible.

 

[Edwin Wright]

You haven't answered why the atmosphere has a pressure gradient if it is allegedly sealed beneath a vaulted firmament, nor have you provided any source for your "external pivot mass", however I'll try to be generous.

Picture a giant air hockey table. You are standing on one hockey puck and there is a large object sitting on another hockey puck. If you push against the object you will both move in opposite directions. The distance you each move will be inversely related to each of your masses. The lighter of the two will move further than the heavier.

I've flown on a number of intercontinental flights. I know what happens. Why can't you produce any flat earth model where these flights are possible? Based on the flight times, the distances between the pairs of cities are fairly similar. Show me a flat earth model where this is possible.

There has to be a pivot point or pivot mass; in your example, there has to be a frictional surface from which to pivot in order to exert a pushing force against the large object. It is just that simple.

Concerning your southern flights, a great circle flight from Buenos Aires to Perth should cross Antarctica very close to the South Pole. But intercontinental flights in the southern (so-called) hemi[sphere] (even if such flights remain in that (so-called) hemi[sphere]) (which is doubtful) do not cross nor cannot cross Antarctica. Why?

 

[comana]

There has to be a pivot point or pivot mass; in your example, there has to be a frictional surface from which to pivot in order to exert a pushing force against the large object. It is just that simple.

Concerning your southern flights, a great circle flight from Buenos Aires to Perth should cross Antarctica very close to the South Pole. But intercontinental flights in the southern (so-called) hemi[sphere] (even if such flights remain in that (so-called) hemi[sphere]) (which is doubtful) do not cross nor cannot cross Antarctica. Why?

Flights do not go over the South Pole because there are no diversion airports within range should the flight encounter an emergency. That’s it. No conspiracy.

 

[Edwin Wright]

Flights do not go over the South Pole because there are no diversion airports within range should the flight encounter an emergency. That’s it. No conspiracy.

There are no diversion airports over the Southern Ocean either. You can't have it both ways.

 

[comana]

There are no diversion airports over the Southern Ocean either. You can't have it both ways.

There are. Look it up.

Edit: Why Don't Planes Fly Over Antarctica? Can They Fly Over The Poles?


“The closest commercial airports to Antarctica include Ushuaia (Argentina), Invercargill (New Zealand), Hobart – Tasmania (Australia), and Port Elizabeth (South Africa). The exact ones that would be used would depend upon the route being taken.”

 

[prodromos]

There has to be a pivot point or pivot mass; in your example, there has to be a frictional surface from which to pivot in order to exert a pushing force against the large object. It is just that simple.

For something you claim to be a basic mechanical principle, you sure are having a hard time providing any source which backs you up. Simply repeating the same false statement does not magically make it true.

You also continue to avoid answering why the atmosphere has a pressure gradient despite being, according to you, sealed under the firmament dome.

Concerning your southern flights, a great circle flight from Buenos Aires to Perth should cross Antarctica very close to the South Pole. But intercontinental flights in the southern (so-called) hemi[sphere] (even if such flights remain in that (so-called) hemi[sphere]) (which is doubtful) do not cross nor cannot cross Antarctica. Why?

I can think of a number of reasons, but it is obvious that you are incapable of answering my question to you. There simply is no flat earth model in which those flights are possible, yet they happen on a daily basis, ergo the earth is not flat..

 

[prodromos]

Concerning rocket thrust, any force (including any force associated with expelling gases) requires a pivot point or fulcrum from which to act. For example, when you push a car that is stuck in the mud, your feet are pivoting against the ground so that muscular force can be directed onto the car. Similarly, for gases to push against a rocket, they have to pivot against (initially) the ground and then the atmosphere. Think of blowing up a balloon and then releasing it from your fingers. The balloon takes off by expelling pressurized air pivoted against the surrounding ambient air. The rocket engine nozzle cannot be the pivot point because it is part of the rocket. Getting back to that car stuck in the mud, try pushing the car by pivoting against the bumper that is part of the car instead of the ground. The pivot point or pivot mass must be external. If there is no pivot point, i.e., no pivot mass, as in the case of a vacuum, the rocket goes nowhere.

There are more than a few videos on youtube where people have demonstrated thrust in a vacuum chamber. I particularly like the one below as he mounted his rocket motor on a fidgit spinner, so there is no question of thrust supposedly being against the side of the vacuum chamber.

 

[The Liturgist]

Concerning rocket thrust, any force (including any force associated with expelling gases) requires a pivot point or fulcrum from which to act. For example, when you push a car that is stuck in the mud, your feet are pivoting against the ground so that muscular force can be directed onto the car. Similarly, for gases to push against a rocket, they have to pivot against (initially) the ground and then the atmosphere. Think of blowing up a balloon and then releasing it from your fingers. The balloon takes off by expelling pressurized air pivoted against the surrounding ambient air. The rocket engine nozzle cannot be the pivot point because it is part of the rocket. Getting back to that car stuck in the mud, try pushing the car by pivoting against the bumper that is part of the car instead of the ground. The pivot point or pivot mass must be external. If there is no pivot point, i.e., no pivot mass, as in the case of a vacuum, the rocket goes nowhere.

You’re confusing the mechanics of levers with the mechanics of motion, and specifically Newton’s Three Laws of Motion, which describe to a reasonable extent how rockets work (relativistic motion is needed when, for example, caclulating the difference in time as measured on a spacecraft in orbit vs. the surface of a planet).

 

[The Liturgist]

For something you claim to be a basic mechanical principle, you sure are having a hard time providing any source which backs you up. Simply repeating the same false statement does not magically make it true.

You also continue to avoid answering why the atmosphere has a pressure gradient despite being, according to you, sealed under the firmament dome.

I can think of a number of reasons, but it is obvious that you are incapable of answering my question to you. There simply is no flat earth model in which those flights are possible, yet they happen on a daily basis, ergo the earth is not flat..

In the 1970s Air New Zealand operated luxury sightseeing flights over Antarctica in the B747-200, but these were discontinued after the pilots of one became disoriented and flew into a mountain.

 

[prodromos]

In the 1970s Air New Zealand operated luxury sightseeing flights over Antarctica in the B747-200, but these were discontinued after the pilots of one became disoriented and flew into a mountain.

Actually, I believe it was a DC-10.

Antarctic flights | NZ History

A brief history of Air New Zealand's flights to Antarctica

nzhistory.govt.nz