Flat Earth

[grav]

The only thing that interests me is what you yourself have done, have experienced, have observed to prove these claims to yourself.
1. The FE is stationary.
2. It is not rotating,
3. nor is it moving upwards at a certain speed,
4. nor is it an infinite plane.

You are more of a cynic that I am (or claim to be).
4. the alleged infinite plane. We'll never know, any more than we can learn our true history. If we live in a computer program, infinity is possible.
Our own world is enclosed by a dome. But if Admiral Byrd was right, there are lands outside the Antarctic forbidden zone.
How about this analogy? Russian Matryoshka dolls, or nesting dolls, a set of typically seven wooden dolls of decreasing sizes that all fit inside of each other
Matryoshka Nesting Dolls: Meaning of Russian Wooden Stacking Doll

Domes within domes. One over earth. Another one over a wider area of the "infinite" plane. A total of 7 heavens. Nesting domes?
Of course this is all conjecture based on biblical, Norse, other myths.

 

[sandokhan]

Admiral Byrd flew over Antarctica and noticed that there are huge areas which are not frozen (forests, lakes). Not beyond Antarctica.

The Dome makes the infinite plane hypothesis superfluous.

The Russian Matryoshka dolls = imbedded universe theory: someone creates within his third eye (the place where tridimensional dreams take place) an Earth with a dome. Then a human being from that Earth is given the power to create, in turn, another universe within his/her own third eye.

 

[Jd755]

Domes, ice walls Admirals and so on and on are all well and good but the evidential experience of them is lacking. In truth the evidential experience of anything pertaining to the vastness of this place, where it is, what it is, is lacking save for one thing.
Contained water always but always displays a level surface.

This is evidence that the ocean as we have been taught to call it must be contained by something. Where that something is, what it is no-one has ever found out, or so it seems. Either way I don't know and have never had any experience of the container.
What we have been told to call 'air' is in reality another state of water as in water vapour. Does water vapour display a level surface?
I don't know as it is invisible to the eyes I use to get about with. If mist and fog are any guide or clouds even when viewed from above water vapour does not exhibit a level surface ergo it is most likely not contained.

Taken together these two things seem to point to the ocean being a puddle of some description. Contained all around by something but the water vapour over the ocean and land and us is not so contained which suggests, sadly nothing more but a suggestion, that this puddle is not the only puddle and there are others beyond the boundary of the one we are in.
They may be at different elevations to this one which is possibly where the deluge myths come from.
Just like the Tibetan plateau has been mooted as once being an ocean whose container fractured and may have also been the source of the deluge myths
Hyperborea and Atlantis type worlds could well be still extant in another of these puddles and heaven and hell could also be explained by the multi elevation puddles. All real places, as real as this lunatic asylum we find ourselves in today, and all connected by the sky above us all.

Journey to the centre of the earth doesn't mean going down, down, deeper and down (with apologies to Status Quo!) it would more likely mean travelling across the plane to reach a centre but the only way to establish the probability there is a centre to be found one has to find the extreme edge and work ones way around it to establish it is finite. Trouble is I doubt anyone can live long enough to accomplish such a feat.

The ball theory prevents such exploration from even getting going but based on how much effort those who deign to act as controllers put into keeping the ball theory rolling my guess is they have no more idea about what is really out there than we do.
[automerge]1607016951[/automerge]

1. Global SAGNAC EFFECT formula proves the Earth is stationary
2. See 1
3. The vertically pointed Sagnac interferometer would pick up any upward movement in a fraction of second on the fringes (Sagnac applies to both rotational and linear/translational/uniform motion)
4. An infinite plane requires attractive terrestrial gravitation: the Biefeld-Brown effect exact formula derived by H. Weyl and B. Ivanov proves that gravity cannot be attractive

So you've done nothing, experienced nothing, observed nothing just accepted other people theories.

 

[sandokhan]

I have derived the global SAGNAC EFFECT formula.

The most direct proof that indeed the Earth is stationary.



Domes, ice walls Admirals and so on and on are all well and good but the evidential experience of them is lacking.

You haven't done your homework on the subject.

The most definite proof.



The calculation was carried out by Wolfgang Pauli, one of the greatest physicists of the 20th century.

"If the electromagnetic field would really have a non vanishing zero-point energy, 'the universe would not even reach to the moon'".

If the ether drift field (zero point energy, scalar waves) does exist, then the radius of curvature of the observable universe is 31 km.

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/9/1/011/pdf

C. P. Enz, A. Thellung : Nullpunktenergie und Anordnung
nicht vertauschbarer Faktoren im Hamiltonoperator ,
Helv. Phys. Acta 33, 839–848 (1960) pg 842

Walther Nernst: grandfather of dark energy?

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0810.2213.pdf

"If the electromagnetic field would really have a non vanishing zero-point energy, the radius of the universe would then be 31 km."

This is precisely what happens in reality.

The distance from the center of the flat surface of the Earth to the top of the second dome is 31 km.


Newton, in the official chronology of history, assumes that there are TWO GRAVITATIONAL FORCES AT WORK: a pressure type of terrestrial gravitational force, and a rotational gravitational forces which moves the planets/stars.

These two forces are separated by a dome (ether/aether).

 

[Jd755]

You are just offering up the language of mathematics no experience, no observations just other peoples maths.

 

[sandokhan]

My math/physics.

As for the 31 km radius of the universe, the formula is 100% valid.

It doesn't take much to see that the surface of the Earth is flat.

Professional videos taken on the European side of the Gibraltar strait, showing the other shoreline bottom to top (13.5 km distance, 3 meters maximum midpoint curvature).

 

[Jd755]

I have derived the global SAGNAC EFFECT formula.

Indeed you did. My apologies for the forumla derivation but the comment stands for everything else you have posted.
https://www.scienceforums.net/topic...ffect-formula/?do=findComment&comment=1101035

 

[grav]

Gravity is not a force; it is a property of matter, specifically the ratio of densities of adjacent substances. We can verify this observation through experimentation to obtain empirical data.
The Electric Universe is the Aether in the form of matter, radiation, consciousness. I may be missing other manifestations of dielectricity. Magnetism?

But equations with manmade constants (speed of light is useless) are fancy and farcical posturings by theoreticians. Like that old humbug, Einstein, the father of pseudoscience.
The true scientist was Tesla, who wanted to give us free energy.
hmm, was he a Tartarian engineer in a previous life?

 

[6079SmithW]

We should start a thread with just images of "space missions " that are ridiculous, with a caption.

Like the NASA lunar tin foil lander, and then the calculation for the differential of earth atmosphere inside the capsule versus the official vacuum of space.

Just for quick reference. Ie if I'm trying to make a colleague question their heliocentric belief system.

I realise I should start the thread and I will if I get time, working flat out during the plandemic and have a 11 month old to care for doesn't leave me much time sadly

Feel free to beat me to it

 

[sandokhan]

Einstein's TGR is a subluminal theory. However, the singularity is described by quantum entanglement, superluminal speeds.

The deepest connection between gravity and quantum entanglement:

“The universality of the gravitational interaction comes directly from the universality of entanglement- it is not possible to have stress-energy that doesn’t source the gravitational field because it is not possible to have degrees of freedom that don’t contribute to entanglement entropy.”

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1405.2933.pdf

Universality of Gravity from Entanglement


Advanced Flat Earth Theory (quantum entanglement, gravity)

Advanced Flat Earth Theory (longitudinal boson strings, transverse subquark waves)

Advanced Flat Earth Theory (Biefeld-Brown effect)


The Weyl-Majumdar-Papapetrou-Ivanov solution is the exact formula for the Biefeld-Brown effect:




https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0507082.pdf

Weyl electrovacuum solutions and gauge invariance
Dr. B.V. Ivanov

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0502047.pdf

On the gravitational field induced by static electromagnetic sources
Dr. B.V Ivanov

Nipher electrogravitational experiments:

Advanced Flat Earth Theory

The electrostatic solutions discovered by Hermann Weyl in 1917 prove that there is functional relationship between the gravitational and electrostatic potentials, thus theoretically justifying the movement of a capacitor towards one of its poles.

Let us now apply this theory to the B-2 bomber.

Aviation Week — March 9 1992

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-2cbcfa7c2e0dcf5704ad84ee6ad2a861-c

B-2 electrostatically charges its exhaust stream and the leading edges of its winglike body.

"A scientist said other, more dramatic classified technologies are applicable to lasers, aircraft control and propulsion. However, the scientists and engineers were especially hesitant to discuss these projects."

"Besides it would take about 20 hr. to explain the principles, and very few people would understand them anyway."

What he meant is that this aircraft control and propulsion technology is based on physics principles that go beyond what is currently known and understood by the general public as well as most academic physicists.

The B-2 Advanced Technology Bomber

In 1993, LaViolette wrote a paper discussing the B-2 bomber and speculating on its probable antigravity propulsion system, based on a solid understanding of electrogravitics, the aircraft’s design and the materials used in its manufacture. It appears that the craft is using a sophisticated form of the antigravity principles first described by T. Brown. Support for this thesis came from the Aviation Week and Space Technology (March 9, 1992), which reported that the B-2 bomber electrostatically charges its leading edge and its exhaust stream. Their information had come from a small group of former black project research scientists and engineers suggesting the B-2 utilizes antigravity technology. This information was supported by Bob Oechsler, an ex-NASA mission specialist who had publicly made a similar claim in 1990. These findings support the contention that there have been major developments in the area of antigravity propulsion which are presently being applied in advanced aircraft.

Here is the data for the B-2 bomber Biefeld-Brown effect.

At sea level the aircraft maintains a voltage differential of 57 million volts, while at an altitude of some 9 km, the voltage differential will measure 20 million volts.

It was Thomas Townsend Brown who also invented the flame-jet generator to extract power out of the ionized exhaust stream.

To get the engine ionizers started, the B-2 bomber has electric generators mechanically driven by the jet turbines.

We have

d=0.5cm
e=1e4 [units] (barium titanate)
V=6.67e4 statvolts
G=6.67e-8 [cgs units]
u= 6.02 g/cm^3
S=4.78e6 cm^2 (wing area of a B2 bomber)

Then, F = 4.906e10 dyne (cgs) = 4.906e5 N

Gravitational force on an empty B2 is 7.1e4*9.81 = 6.8e5 N

THAT IS 72% of the force required to lift the B-2 bomber.

And the percentage can become 100% or even higher using supercapacitors.

This is the power of the Weyl-Ivanov electrogravitational formula.

 

[6079SmithW]

Einstein's TGR is a subluminal theory. However, the singularity is described by quantum entanglement, superluminal speeds.

The deepest connection between gravity and quantum entanglement:

“The universality of the gravitational interaction comes directly from the universality of entanglement- it is not possible to have stress-energy that doesn’t source the gravitational field because it is not possible to have degrees of freedom that don’t contribute to entanglement entropy.”

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1405.2933.pdf

Universality of Gravity from Entanglement


Advanced Flat Earth Theory (quantum entanglement, gravity)

Advanced Flat Earth Theory (longitudinal boson strings, transverse subquark waves)

Advanced Flat Earth Theory (Biefeld-Brown effect)


The Weyl-Majumdar-Papapetrou-Ivanov solution is the exact formula for the Biefeld-Brown effect:




https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0507082.pdf

Weyl electrovacuum solutions and gauge invariance
Dr. B.V. Ivanov

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0502047.pdf

On the gravitational field induced by static electromagnetic sources
Dr. B.V Ivanov

Nipher electrogravitational experiments:

Advanced Flat Earth Theory

The electrostatic solutions discovered by Hermann Weyl in 1917 prove that there is functional relationship between the gravitational and electrostatic potentials, thus theoretically justifying the movement of a capacitor towards one of its poles.

Let us now apply this theory to the B-2 bomber.

Aviation Week — March 9 1992

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-2cbcfa7c2e0dcf5704ad84ee6ad2a861-c

B-2 electrostatically charges its exhaust stream and the leading edges of its winglike body.

"A scientist said other, more dramatic classified technologies are applicable to lasers, aircraft control and propulsion. However, the scientists and engineers were especially hesitant to discuss these projects."

"Besides it would take about 20 hr. to explain the principles, and very few people would understand them anyway."

What he meant is that this aircraft control and propulsion technology is based on physics principles that go beyond what is currently known and understood by the general public as well as most academic physicists.

The B-2 Advanced Technology Bomber

In 1993, LaViolette wrote a paper discussing the B-2 bomber and speculating on its probable antigravity propulsion system, based on a solid understanding of electrogravitics, the aircraft’s design and the materials used in its manufacture. It appears that the craft is using a sophisticated form of the antigravity principles first described by T. Brown. Support for this thesis came from the Aviation Week and Space Technology (March 9, 1992), which reported that the B-2 bomber electrostatically charges its leading edge and its exhaust stream. Their information had come from a small group of former black project research scientists and engineers suggesting the B-2 utilizes antigravity technology. This information was supported by Bob Oechsler, an ex-NASA mission specialist who had publicly made a similar claim in 1990. These findings support the contention that there have been major developments in the area of antigravity propulsion which are presently being applied in advanced aircraft.

Here is the data for the B-2 bomber Biefeld-Brown effect.

At sea level the aircraft maintains a voltage differential of 57 million volts, while at an altitude of some 9 km, the voltage differential will measure 20 million volts.

It was Thomas Townsend Brown who also invented the flame-jet generator to extract power out of the ionized exhaust stream.

To get the engine ionizers started, the B-2 bomber has electric generators mechanically driven by the jet turbines.

We have

d=0.5cm
e=1e4 [units] (barium titanate)
V=6.67e4 statvolts
G=6.67e-8 [cgs units]
u= 6.02 g/cm^3
S=4.78e6 cm^2 (wing area of a B2 bomber)

Then, F = 4.906e10 dyne (cgs) = 4.906e5 N

Gravitational force on an empty B2 is 7.1e4*9.81 = 6.8e5 N

THAT IS 72% of the force required to lift the B-2 bomber.

And the percentage can become 100% or even higher using supercapacitors.

This is the power of the Weyl-Ivanov electrogravitational formula.

Dude, did you write this? If so, it's far too complex for someone like me to understand this early in the morning.

If you could summarise your overarching point - then the details would make more sense. Really good post, if you write this, you should write a book on the Flat earth fact.

Cheers
Smith

 

[sandokhan]

The best time to understand the Biefeld-Brown effect is early in the morning.

Flat earth theory is a subset of the new radical chronology of history field of study. If Hipparchus, Ptolemy, Kepler, Galilei, Copernicus were real historical figures, then the shape of the Earth cannot be flat. FET makes sense only within the context of a radical chronological reevaluation of history. That is, for the flat earth to exist, history must be much shorter than we have been led to believe.

On a flat earth, the diameter of the Sun is much smaller: its orbit has to fit a 6,102 km arc of a circle distance. Its upper and lower bounds are the two tropics. Its westward precessional shift is 1.5 km/year. Divide 6,102 by 6 (6 months period, Jan - June and July - Dec), and you get 1,017 km.

 

[grav]

@sandokhan, how does FE rely on Copernicus and Ptolemy and alternate chronology?
Yes, the Control System lies about everything. No, there is no direct correlation berween alt history and alt cosmology. I myself am an Electric Universe follower, but Laviolette's bomber's antigravity theory does not seem to mention density. And I'm a Sim Earth believer, which means that the computer code can rewrite the whole shebang from minute to minute. In a way, we wake up in a new world every day.
But even that does not help me understand your Biefeld-Brown effect.
Perhapd you could apply that formula to a fluffy cloud that weighs 100 tons. Sorry, my old brain can't work out metric measures.

 

[sandokhan]

Ptolemy and Copernicus = axial precession of the Earth

That is why, in the context of the accepted chronology of history, flat earth theory cannot be valid.

Electric Universe = Ether Theory

Never forget about the POTENTIAL, that is, the field which gives rise to the electrical subquark wave.

Whittaker scalar wave/potential theory:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1994059#msg1994059
Density of Ethereal Medium
Dr. F. Gorbatsevich

Felix Gorbatsewich - The Ether and Universe

Euler Pressure Gravity

Advanced Flat Earth Theory

http://www.orgonelab.org/newtonletter.htm (I. Newton letter to R. Boyle)

4. When two bodies moving towards one another come near together, I suppose the aether between them to grow rarer than before, and the spaces of its graduated rarity to extend further from the superficies of the bodies towards one another; and this, by reason that the aether cannot move and play up and down so freely in the strait passage between the bodies, as it could before they came so near together.

5. Now, from the fourth supposition it follows, that when two bodies approaching one another come so near together as to make the aether between them begin to rarefy, they will begin to have a reluctance from being brought nearer together, and an endeavour to recede from one another; which reluctance and endeavour will increase as they come nearer together, because thereby they cause the interjacent aether to rarefy more and more. But at length, when they come so near together that the excess of pressure of the external aether which surrounds the bodies, above that of the rarefied aether, which is between them, is so great as to overcome the reluctance which the bodies have from being brought together; then will that excess of pressure drive them with violence together, and make them adhere strongly to one another, as was said in the second supposition.

AntiNewton antigravity formula:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2265207#msg2265207
If you are an EU follower, you must become an expert in the BIEFELD-BROWN effect (Dr. Paul Biefeld used to do Einstein's homework at the Polytechnic University in Zurich.

http://ttbrown.com/defying_gravity/12_biefeld-brown.html

“Yes,” Biefeld told the Denison campus newspaper, “when Einstein would forget to go to a class, he would come and borrow my notes to get caught up on what he had missed."

 

[grav]

Another dive into the pool of confusion.
First, Einstein was a yuuge liar, plagiarist, flim-flam artist.
Second, axial precession is One More theory without proof.
Thrid, will Mssr. Biefeld please explain why clouds with much mass don't fall down boom onto the ground.

 

[sandokhan]

Second, axial precession is One More theory without proof.

Not if Hipparchus, Ptolemy and Copernicus were real historical figures.

Thrid, will Mssr. Biefeld please explain why clouds with much mass don't fall down boom onto the ground.

The water droplets in the clouds are held up by the Biefeld-Brown effect:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg759968#msg759968

 

[grav]

Second, axial precession is One More theory without proof.

Not if Hipparchus, Ptolemy and Copernicus were real historical figures.

Thrid, will Mssr. Biefeld please explain why clouds with much mass don't fall down boom onto the ground.

The water droplets in the clouds are held up by the Biefeld-Brown effect:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg759968#msg759968

What do historical figures, real or fictional, have to do with the price of rice in China?
or anything else? Because if they were real and espoused heliocentrism, they were wrong. Copernicus, from what I've read, was more or less coerced into publishing his treatises.
The Jesuits have ways, you know. And people took excommunication seriously back then.

Now, really, seriously,,,...??? the Biefeld-Brown holds up water droplets? You are really pulling Auntie grav's leg with this thingamagiggle.
It's density.
Lighter-than-air particles float.
Heavier-than-air particles sink.
Clouds float.
Raindrops fall.

 

[sandokhan]

What do historical figures, real or fictional

If Hipparchus and Copernicus were actual historical figures, then their astronomical observations as they relate to the axial precession of the Earth prove heliocentrism.

Heavier-than-air particles sink.

No.

"Water, though eight hundred times heavier than air, is held in droplets, by the millions of tons, miles above the ground. Clouds and mist are composed of droplets which defy gravitation."

 

[Wolfgang]

7 ways you can easily prove that the Earth is not flat
Posted Sunday 24 May 2020 10:00 by Mimi Launder in tech
UPVOTE


Picture: iStock
Pretty much everyone knows the Earth is a globe. But a very, very small minority of us cling inexplicably to the idea of a flat Earth.
So, with everyone staying inside over the course of the Covid-19 pandemic, we thought it was the perfect time to compile the ways you can prove that the Earth most definitely a globe.
1. Look upwards

Yep, this one's pretty simple. When you look up at the night sky, you can only see certain constellations from certain points on Earth.

Someone in Australia will see a different sky to someone in England at night - for example, you can't see Polaris, the North Star, from the southern hemisphere.
If the Earth was flat, everyone would be able to see the same constellations.
2. Look down
An equally straightforward way to prove the Earth is not flat is to simply measure your shadow.
If you get two people at different distances from the equator, and they measure their shadows at the same time, their shadows will be different lengths. But if the Earth was flat, their shadows would be the same.
Eratosthenes, who conducted a version of this experiment, knew this 3,000 years ago
3. Weigh yourself


Gravity, which pulls everyone towards the centre of our planet's mass, means we weigh the same wherever we are in the world.

But a flat Earth would mean that those at the edge of the disk would be pulled sideways, while those at the centre would be pulled down.
To iron out this problem, Flat Earthers have concluded there is no such thing as gravity - you know, that force that pretty much holds the entire Universe together.

But if they were correct, you would not be able to weigh yourself at all. You would also be dead.
4. Take a trip to Antarctica
Flat Earthers argue that Antarctica is actually a massive ice wall around a flat Earth.
But, if that were true, the countless planes that fly over Antarctica would surely have just... fallen off?

5. Check your watch

Picture: iStock / FoxysGraphic

To explain seasons, Flat Earthers argue that the sun orbits in a circle above us.
But that doesn't explain time zones, though this is their attempt, which shows the sun as some kind of spotlight,

Everyone whose ever used a torch at night knows you can see its beam from the side - and that would apply to a flat Earth too.
6. Grab a compass
Our planet has a magnetic field generated by the molten iron at the core of our planet.
If the Earth was flat, it would have no core. And even if it had a flat layer of liquid metal instead, the planet wouldn't rotate in a way that created a magnetic field.

7. Grab a pendulum
This famous experiment was first demonstrated in 1851 by Leon Foucault and is now found in museums around the world.

If you watch a pendulum for long enough, you'll notice it starts to swing in a slightly different direction, which proves the Earth is rotating beneath your feet.

This is complete nonsense, this user really needs to get a warning for spreading false government propaganda. That the earth is not a globe is common knowledge by now, some more substantial response (written in haste friday evening if you know what I mean):

1. By looking up you see different views because you see the stars from different locations. Also Polaris is always above the north pole, no matter where you observe it (for thousands of years) which is clearly impossible if the earth was a spinning space ball rotating around the sun.
2. Same here, since the sun is small and moves above us, our relative distance to the sun creates different shadow lengths. Funny you mention Eratosthenes experiment, isn't it strange that it still is held as the experiment which proves the earth is a globe, isn't it more realistic photos, videos or any modern technology as official proof of the shape of the earth?
4 There are not countless planes, there's is one single company doing guided tours to Antarctica and you are not allowed to leave the trip to explore freely. Check the Antarctic Treaty, for example you are not allowed to bring fuel below a certain latitude.
6 "Our planet has a magnetic field generated by the molten iron at the core of our planet", that would make the compass point down towards your feet. Truth is compasses always point to the north, since the south "pole" is actually an ice barrier, the compass ONLY ever points towards your back as you travel south.

 

[trismegistus]

While this discussion overall has been civil, I am issuing a blanket warning to everyone to avoid using statements like “anyone with two eyes and a brain can obviously see” or that “__________ is common knowledge”, that is a begging the question fallacy and does the discussion no good.

Also, one of the primary rules of SH is to treat others as you want to be treated, and accusations of shilling/propaganda in these threads will not be tolerated. If anyone has a legitimate concern regarding this, please privately message a moderator or file a report for review.

As you were