Flat Earth

[sandokhan]

You have northern circumpolar star trails, southern circumpolar star trails, and regular star trails. Only the bipolar map can describe these features on a flat surface of the Earth. The unipolar map was introduced by users who did not understand (some 12 years ago) the issues involved (namely, that there are TWO sets of circumpolar star trails).

If Ewaranon is using the unipolar map, then his model will encounter great difficulties in properly explaining the solar precession, which is crucial to understanding how FET relates to the new chronology of history.

 

[wise]

According to the claims, the rocket lands back to a platform in the ocean. Now we will scientifically examine the accuracy of this claim.

It has caught my attention while watching the video, I am sure it caught the attention of many of you; the rocket did not come vertically, it had an angle. This can be demonstrated as follows, depending on the angle with the vertical:

As the rocket rises, it can be directed in the direction it will go. This is because the movement depends on the motor power. Speed is low during landing and engine power is intended to balance gravity. Therefore, engine power should have an angle to compensate for gravity. Lets try to make a solution. The problem is here:

here, the force provided by the engine power and the gravitational force must be equal or approximately equal in order to achieve a constant and decreasing rate of descent.

We define To the motor power (Fe) and the vertical component (Fev) of the motor power;

It should be; Fev = Fg

Fev= Fe . cos α

herefrom:

Fe. cos α = Fg.

The weight of Falcoln9 rocket is approximately 1900kgs.

Hence;

Fg = 1900kgs >

angle of inclination at the time the photo was taken :

Alpha= 20 degrees as follow;

So:

engines must apply the following force for a smooth landing:

Fe x cos α = Fg

so;

Fe = Fg / cos α = 1900kg / cos 20° = 1900 / 0,94= 2021 kgs.

that is, the engine must exert a force equivalent to 2021 kg to balance gravity.

In this case, we will have to calculate the horizontal components, since the vertical component forces will be balanced. I called it as F(h)

F(h) = Fe x sin α = 2021kgs x sin 20 = 691kgs.

we see that this force is not balanced. this force causes the rocket to spin under normal conditions.

Although I take the wind from opposite direction here, it will not prevent the spin movement. The reason for this is that the wind acts all along the rocket, but the component of the motor that causes the spin movement acts from a single point.

As a result, the rocket will spin and fall during such a non-vertical landing attempt. This physical evidence proves that this landing is not real.

Rockets also lift vertically during their first launch. After a while, their direction changes undesirably by wind and other factors. however, then the routers step in and slowly correct this error. a rocket does not have the technology to correct such a sharp angle in such a short time, and such a local and sudden wind situation cannot be predicted to correct the rocket's direction.

Conclusion: This landing movement does not comply with the laws of physics, it does not comply with natural flow of the life. but can be created as a simulation, Fake and cgi; or cgi and fake, or any or both of them.

Ellon Musk, his followers and NASA have trolled the world by this claim.

MUSK is failed!

 

[grav]

TWO sets of circumpolar star trails).

Can you expand on this?
It seems to me that Polaris woud be the central point in the dome.
I do understand that northern and southern views of star trails are different, but wouldn't that be a matter of perception? specifically, the perspective of the observer on the plane. Not unlike how two people located miles apart point to the end of a rainbow.

Cartography is another weird trick of establishment science. Here are maps of Mercator and Peters, which show hugely differing sizes of continents.
https://www.google.com/search?clien...eters+projection+map&aqs=mobile-gws-lite..0l5

Regarding the Musk rockets landing butt-first in the middle of nowhere.
I don't think I have ever seen the hoax played on teevee. Maybe once, but the freemasons are aware that if enough people see it enough times, they may smell the rat who plays footsies with Nasa.

The silly rocket tube landing was obviously done by playing the video in reverse.
No telling how big the thing is, or its construction materials. Aluminum and plastic, probably. It's been suggested also that we could be looking at a balloon being lifted by a helicopter, then fast forwarded to look like the launch of a real heavy rocket.

 

[sandokhan]

It seems to me that Polaris woud be the central point in the dome.

You are forgetting about Sigma Octantis.

Sigma Octantis is the southern pole star, whose counterpart is Polaris, the current North Star. To an observer in the southern hemisphere, Sigma Octantis appears almost motionless and all the other stars in the Southern sky appear to rotate around it.

A unipolar map cannot handle the southern circumpolar star trails.

http://www.kabraham.co.uk/images/STARTRAILS.jpg
http://imgur.com/IeBwbHl.png
The sun does rise and set, something most FE also forget.

That's the Black Sun passing in front of the Sun during a solar eclipse (while the Moon will pass behind the Sun).

 

[veeall]

You are forgetting about Sigma Octantis.

But is it right to say that the earth between or under the startrails of Polaris and Sigma Octantis can be of any shape and it won't change the scenery in the sky? Thus, the mere existence of the pole star in south doesn't disprove FE, pertaining more to the shape and mechanics of heavenly 'sphere' rather than earth.

Also, it would be interesting to take a look into Milky Way. Is the straightened up photo of the Milky Way, advertised as a 'galaxy' really 360˚ view of the Milky Way around the earth or rather a 180˚ degree panorama? Is there a place on the globe where, in the night sky, the Milky Way is glowing all around the horizons circle? I know there are pics claiming this, even though not full 360˚ panos, but ... It could be that it's actually the arch of the Milky Way still standing straight up, as in the north, just barely visible from behind the vanishing point at the horizon.

 

[FarewellAngelina]

Has anyone actually stood beneath true north pole and true south pole on the supposed globe and time lapsed those star trails around the pole stars?

 

[sandokhan]

In the bipolar model, the North Pole has never actually been discovered.


The Hollow Earth

It is well known that the North and South Magnetic Poles do not coincide with the geographical poles, as they should were the Earth a solid sphere, convex at its poles. The reason why the magnetic and geographical poles don't coincide is because, while the magnetic pole lies along the rim of the polar opening.

In support of the above conception regarding the magnetic pole being situated in the rim of the polar opening, Palmer refers to the following facts: Between each magnetic pole around the Earth pass magnetic meridians. In contrast with geographical meridians, which measure longitude, the magnetic meridians move from east to west and back again. The difference between the geographical meridians, or true north and south, and the direction in which a magnetic compass points, or the magnetic meridian of the place, is called the declination. The first observation made was in London in 1580 and showed an easterly declination of 11 degrees. In 1815 the declination reached 24. 3 degrees westerly maximum. This makes a difference of 35. 3 degrees change in 235 years, which is equal to 2,118 miles. Now if we make a circle around the Pole, with a radius of 1,059 miles, so that it is 2,118 miles in diameter, this would represent the rim of the polar opening along which, in this case, the North Magnetic Pole traveled from one point to its diametrically opposite point on the circle, 2,118 miles away, in 235 years.

According to Marshall Gardner, the rim of the polar opening, which is the true magnetic pole, is a large circle 1,400 miles in diameter.

No one has ever discovered either the North or the South Pole:

The Hollow Earth


No one has managed to travel inside this large circle which measures some 1,400 miles in diameter.

The orbits of most the northern circumpolar stars are inside this large right cylinder.

No one has ever visited this area to actually verify that the Polaris will be observed at an exact 90 degree angle overhead.

This is how the northern star trails looks like from Alaska:

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/5Wu7MrTp3EE/maxresdefault.jpg

https://i1.wp.com/ianajohnson.com/w.../Long-Island-Star-Trails-2.jpg?resize=474,317

Observed from the equator they look like this:

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/pXL3yIY5fFQ/maxresdefault.jpg

The difference in view is due to the existence of multiple indices of atmospheric refraction of the ether.
Los Cielos del Ecuador, From Southern Pole to Northern Pole

Here is the latest and most extraordinary research done on star trails to date, including this stunning picture which completely confirms the FE model I have been proposing here all along, two poles, northern and southern circumpolar star paths and regular star orbits:

http://sguisard.astrosurf.com/Pagim/SGU-From-pole-to-pole-PE-half-1200-cp9.jpg

Note also the divergent path of the stars at the equator (angular distance between stars varies; this could not happen on a spherical earth).

http://www.eso.org/public/archives/images/screen/paranal-trail-ut1-4.jpg

Star Trails Of The Celestial Equator by Luis Argerich

IBM Almaden Research Center Star Trails

https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0712/2007_09_14-orion_vanGorp800.jpg

 

[FarewellAngelina]

I asked the question because this link http://www.kabraham.co.uk/images/STARTRAILS.jpg shows "what you would see if you were standing under the pole stars according to globe model.

I like that info on the North pole's magnetic dip pole length . This makes me think that Polaris might not be at the actual centre of the arctic region but maybe it manifests in the torus magnetic field that rings around the arctic . Polaris would still appear as true north wherever you viewed from outside the torus pole - what would we see inside that magnetic field ring?

Is Polaris the inner hollow earth sun?

That the earths magnetic dipole field is fictional is mentioned here Magnetic Poles

The southern magnetic pole ( southern magnetic anomaly ) is placed at 64S 135E , but we cant check that since we are excluded entry . I suspect that south pole extends around Antarctica - the outer ring of the torus .

Sheds new light on the Land beyond the poles . Interesting stuff

 

[sandokhan]

If the earth were solid throughout, the geomagnetic pole would coincide with the earth's rotational axis.

The fact that the Earth's magnetic field has a major NON DIPOLAR contribution which cannot be explained by modern science, especially in the view of the only accepted hypothesis, the dynamo theory.

The non dipolar feature is explained ONLY by HE and FE.

Since HE can be ruled out immediately due to the fact that there is no curvature at the surface of the Earth, we are left with FE.

Certainly it relates to the FE model, since it is the only one which can explain why the geographical and the magnetic poles do not coincide.

The RE cannot invoke the shape of the globe (geoid) since then we can remind them of the distribution of the continents paradox.

 

[FarewellAngelina]

There is no doubt that we inhabit a plane . No survey has ever found curvature . The poles are hidden from us.

What lies beneath our plane .? We can only speculate . I do know from experience that it gets hotter as you descend .

 

[grav]

The fact that the Earth's magnetic field has a major NON DIPOLAR contribution which cannot be explained by modern science, especially in the view of the only accepted hypothesis, the dynamo theory.

Here is my problem (besides my obvious lack of understanding of how batteries work).

The sun rolls around inside the dome, right?
Where do the stars reside?
multiple domes?

Your equator dual star trails requires that we look at real world applications of how batteries generate electromagnetism.

Could it instead be a matter of perspective? The sun's annual path is the same in both hemispheres, right?
But the FE sun's dome is not a perfect bowl shape, as the picture below suggests. It's more like a hat with a brim, which image I cannot find right now, thanks again to the cancel culture at Google. I have posted it here before.
The search continues.

In addition, as the DITRH video showed on the last page, when a glass of water is moved in front of two arrows, the arrows change direction.

Last, the sun's dark twin, Rahu/Ketu/Nibiru mentioned earlier -- is what? What function does it serve in the dynamo's torus?

 

[sandokhan]

Two domes. The first separates the Sun/stars/Moon/Black Sun/Shadow Moon from our atmosphere. The second dome marks the boundary of our universe.

What is magnetism? Two streams of particles (magnetic monopoles): NORTH-SOUTH but also SOUTH-NORTH.

The Black Sun emits the laevorotatory subquarks (emissive magnetic monopoles) also called Vril/Udana.

The Shadow Moon releases the dextrorotatory subquarks (receptive magnetic monopoles, electrons, gravitons) also called Apana.

Here is the most extraordinary finding concerning the electrogravitational field of the Earth:

Advanced Flat Earth Theory (part I)

Advanced Flat Earth Theory (part II)

Advanced Flat Earth Theory (magnetricity)

 

[grav]

Two domes. The first separates the Sun/stars/Moon/Black Sun/Shadow Moon from our atmosphere. The second dome marks the boundary of our universe.

What is magnetism? Two streams of particles (magnetic monopoles): NORTH-SOUTH but also SOUTH-NORTH.

The Black Sun emits the laevorotatory subquarks (emissive magnetic monopoles) also called Vril/Udana.

The Shadow Moon releases the dextrorotatory subquarks (receptive magnetic monopoles, electrons, gravitons) also called Apana.

Here is the most extraordinary finding concerning the electrogravitational field of the Earth:

Advanced Flat Earth Theory (part I)

Advanced Flat Earth Theory (part II)

The experimental proof was given by Howard Johnson in his Spintronics treatise:

SPINTRONICS, secret world of magnets, the most thorough work on the double helix theory of the magnetic field (double helix of the telluric currents):

http://freenrg.info/Misc/The_Secret_World_Of_Magnets.pdf

Advanced Flat Earth Theory (magnetricity)

Once again I will complain about jargon.
I appreciate simplicity and plain language.
While I also appreciate your contributions, I have problems grasping the two poles and magnetricity.
For insrance, "dextrorotativity" and "subquarks" do not advance our understanding of advanced FE. You would gain more interest in the FES site if you avoided technical vocabuary and summarized main points coherently.

Memes and images help tremendously. The images above are from yout link.
I meant to place them at the bottom of this post. So much for my own coherence.

By the way, I have had several problems posting since the last update.

 

[sandokhan]

Memes and images help tremendously.

That is why I included so many images from Spintronics which feature the North-South and South-North streams of particles (let's call them magnetic monopoles).

Fact: a magnet has a CENTER, and TWO POLES. Analogy: center of the Earth (somewhere near to the sea of Marmara), and two poles as seen on the global Piri Reis map:

 

[E.Bearclaw]

Anyone ever noticed on the classic magnet, it is shaped like a U. And with the S and the N for South and North you get a nice anagram of our favourite orb in the sky.

 

[grav]

earth :: a global map of wind, weather, and ocean conditions

Null School used to show an azimuthal-equidistant projection of weather.
When FEers started to use it, the AE option was removed.
I now have to apply the CE projection to put wind, water, other features into motion.

 

[grav]

Bi-Polar Model

The Bi-Polar Model is a model of the earth which was devised by the Universal Zetetic Society, the precursor to the Flat Earth Society, in the early 1900's following claims of further exploration of Antarctica and discovery of the South Pole. This model features two poles and an Antarctic continent which exists in standard contexts. An 'Ice Wall' still exists in this model, but it is not Antarctica. It is assumed that beyond the rays of the sun the waters will naturally freeze.

The existence of a South Pole has been long theorized. Prior to Samuel Rowbotham's Earth Not a Globe, the Flat Earth model had multiple poles (See: The Anti-Newtonian). It is thought that Rowbotham simplified the matter to one pole in his work due to the lack of direct evidence at the time for additional poles. The Bi-Polar Model reverts to the original concepts of multiple poles.
- - - -
Since Sandokhan introduced the magnetic model of dual sky trails, I have been doing my best to understand this bifurcated perspective.
As is often the case, language struggles to describe optics.
Researchers have not, unfortunately, been able to provide a simplified animation of how the whole sky system operates. Flat Earth Crush, for example, presents a very good video which concentrates on disproving how the globe fails to address related topics. We already know GE is a bust.

Sorry, Sandokhan, your illustrations do not suffice, especially that map which implies that Antarctica is a continent separate from the actual ice wall. So here we go again looking for a FE map we can all agree on.
I apologize if I come across as a complaining dunce.
My goal is always to understand a concept well enough to be able to explain it to a globehead dunce.

Many flatearthers are downright hostile to The Flat Earth Society, I think because of the gravity issue. Eric Dubay also triggered FEers on his site a few years ago.
And then we have your typical ego trips and hardheadness that crop up when facts are almost impossible to find.

 

[The Illuminator]

What a fantastic, informative thread. Loved reading it from start to finish. I've made so many more research threads tangent to what's been discussed. Just wanted to say thanks everyone.

 

[6079SmithW]

Bi-Polar Model

The Bi-Polar Model is a model of the earth which was devised by the Universal Zetetic Society, the precursor to the Flat Earth Society, in the early 1900's following claims of further exploration of Antarctica and discovery of the South Pole. This model features two poles and an Antarctic continent which exists in standard contexts. An 'Ice Wall' still exists in this model, but it is not Antarctica. It is assumed that beyond the rays of the sun the waters will naturally freeze.

The existence of a South Pole has been long theorized. Prior to Samuel Rowbotham's Earth Not a Globe, the Flat Earth model had multiple poles (See: The Anti-Newtonian). It is thought that Rowbotham simplified the matter to one pole in his work due to the lack of direct evidence at the time for additional poles. The Bi-Polar Model reverts to the original concepts of multiple poles.
- - - -
Since Sandokhan introduced the magnetic model of dual sky trails, I have been doing my best to understand this bifurcated perspective.
As is often the case, language struggles to describe optics.
Researchers have not, unfortunately, been able to provide a simplified animation of how the whole sky system operates. Flat Earth Crush, for example, presents a very good video which concentrates on disproving how the globe fails to address related topics. We already know GE is a bust.

Sorry, Sandokhan, your illustrations do not suffice, especially that map which implies that Antarctica is a continent separate from the actual ice wall. So here we go again looking for a FE map we can all agree on.
I apologize if I come across as a complaining dunce.
My goal is always to understand a concept well enough to be able to explain it to a globehead dunce.

Many flatearthers are downright hostile to The Flat Earth Society, I think because of the gravity issue. Eric Dubay also triggered FEers on his site a few years ago.
And then we have your typical ego trips and hardheadness that crop up when facts are almost impossible to find.

I don't see any reason to shoe horn in a second pole.

There is one magnetic pole, you can test this yourself with a compass.

At no point does your compass reverse to accommodate the second magnetic pole, because.... It doesn't exist

 

[fega72]

I don't see any reason to shoe horn in a second pole.

There is one magnetic pole, you can test this yourself with a compass.

At no point does your compass reverse to accommodate the second magnetic pole, because.... It doesn't exist

A compass will never revers, because the south pole of the compass (magnet) will always point to the North Pole and never ever will point to the South Pole even if it is exist. Or can we say the north pole of the compass always point to the South Pole?