flatearth

flatearth

log in
sign up
subreddits
search
sidebar

Gravity explained(self)

0ポイント0ポイント 投稿 Iknowmytruth1による

Im not your average flat earther, im alot more intelligent.

Flat earthers would shrug off sattelites as a hologram or a plane. Not the case at all, we can detect sattelites with homemade devices and confirm they are real. But how do they stay up there? Gravity, ofcourse. Now your question is how does gravity work on a flat earth? Let me show you. http://imgur.com/a/4Klsj

The reason flat earthers shrugg of gravity as false information, is because they are uninformed and dont know how to answer. Much like an average man cant answer questions that a sientist can answer.

Lets get started on gravoid. What is the gravoid? Its where sattelites can get into orbit. What causes it is unknown but its real and we observe it. What causes gravity on earth, unknown. I may add that its unknown what causes gravity on the supposed ball earth.

I have also done some tests to find out amazing things about gravity. One of them is that for some odd reason, Gravity is stronger in the round circle of antartica and on the north pole. But on equator its weaker.

全 58 件のコメント

Demon_God_Burny 3ポイント4ポイント 4時間前

Boy, these bait accounts keep getting worse and worse. I wish we had some of the pros still, like /u/8mark and junkerfes

Iknowmytruth1[S] -3ポイント-2ポイント 4時間前

i can assure you im not a bait account. I have been a flat earth beliver since 2010 and ive never really been a user of reddit. But you peoples ignorance just had to be put down.

Demon_God_Burny 3ポイント4ポイント 3時間前

No, you're definitely a bait account. I can tell by the shitty grammar, the fabricated post, and the fact at you still think that things like "muh perspective" still work as proof. You aren't fooling anyone.

Iknowmytruth1[S] -5ポイント-4ポイント 3時間前

Thats your personal belief.

stillobsessed 3ポイント4ポイント 4時間前

How do Sun-Synchronous Orbits work in your model?

Iknowmytruth1[S] -1ポイント0ポイント 3時間前

I am not qualified enough to answer that.

DethFiesta 3ポイント4ポイント 3時間前

What qualifies you to toss out literally all of human understanding of Gravity and replace it with your own model which, by your own admission, you can't even apply to existing things like Orbit?

Iknowmytruth1[S] -3ポイント-2ポイント 3時間前

We have been lied to for years, all that understanding is falsified information. Again Gravoid explains orbit, We dont know if Orbiting mass is a thing outside of earth.

DethFiesta 5ポイント6ポイント 3時間前

We can watch the Jovian Moons orbiting Jupiter. We can watch Mercury and Venus orbit the sun. We see the moon orbit the Earth.

And explain how we were able to use that understanding to predict the EXISTENCE, LOCATION, and MASS of Neptune if the math is nothing but fantasy.

We have enormous predictive power using the standard model -- how can this be if it is all false?

oldhippy1947 0ポイント1ポイント 49分前

Well, at least you're honest. You are not qualified.

DethFiesta 2ポイント3ポイント 4時間前

The Gravoid, LOL.

And gravity seems weaker at the Equator because of the Earth's centrifugal force created by rotation.

Where are the write-ups of the experiments you performed? No one will take you seriously until you provide this.

What can this model of gravity explain that our current one cannot?

Can you use your model to describe the orbit of Mercury?

How do you reconcile gravity with the Sun and Moon circling overhead? Orbits makes sense, but circling overhead.....how does this work with gravity? What keeps the Sun and Moon from falling into the Earth? How do they maintain their distance from us? What force compels them to circle overhead if the Gravity vector is perpendicular to the plane of the FE?

Remember the Scientific Method

stillobsessed 1ポイント2ポイント 3時間前

And gravity seems weaker at the Equator because of the Earth's centrifugal force created by rotation.

That's about half of it. The other part of the difference is due to the earth's oblate shape - at the equator you're a little further from the earth's center of mass so the total force of gravity is reduced.

DethFiesta 1ポイント2ポイント 3時間前

Ah yes, very good point that I usually forget.

stillobsessed 0ポイント1ポイント 2時間前

Ultimately the pole vs equator difference in gravity is all due to the earth's rotation -- Earth's oblateness is due to the interplay between centrifugal force and gravity, shifting the hydrostatic equilibrium of the earth's matter and slightly squishing the globe.

Iknowmytruth1[S] -1ポイント0ポイント 3時間前

i have traveled the world and measured different items in different conditions in the last 3 years, Such as temprature. So Far, Heat and cold does not seem to do any difference on gravity. Not on a large enough scale for me to detect atleast. Other planets are a mystery, We know nothing about them. We dont know if we live in a heliocentric or geocentric model, Or any of those. Gravity might not even exist outside of earth.

DethFiesta 4ポイント5ポイント 3時間前

LOL. Why can't you answer any of the questions I asked you about your model of gravity?

And yes, we can say with completel confidence that Gravity permeates the universe. We used Newton and Keppler's understanding of the universe to predict the EXISTENCE, LOCATION, and MASS of the Planet Neptune. It was found where the math predicted it would be, and that was before our better understanding of Gravity provided by Einstein.

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

You should've just taken a single physics course before traveling the world measuring Temperature vs. Gravity, which everyone knows are not correlated whatsoever.

If you actually did those things then you WASTED ALOT OF TIME AND MONEY.

And yes, we know the way the Solar System is organized.

Your Dunning-Kruger is showing.

Iknowmytruth1[S] -1ポイント0ポイント 3時間前

And yes, we know the way the Solar System is organized.

No we dont, proof?

DethFiesta 2ポイント3ポイント 3時間前

Thanks to Einstein we know that you can describe any motion from any reference point accurately. In that sense, you can ultimately describe the Solar System from ANY arbitrary center point.

However, there's a reason why no one actually uses a Geocentric model: there is NO explanation for why the Solar System would be organized that way.

We have perfect reasoning to justify the Heliocentric model: it works and can be explained using known physics. There is no way to explain all the crazy motion required for a Geocentric Model to match our observations.

Want to desscribe a Geocentric solar system? Be prepared for the wackiest, unjustifiable motion of planets and moons.

Want to decribe a Heliocentric solar system? Breathe easy with simple calculations that actually make sense given our understanding of physics.

Here's a fun example: http://i.imgur.com/AReqgfP.gif

And if you really want to learn, here's a detailed series of videos that explains the many, many ways that Geocentrism just doesn't work. Sorry.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLmWeueTF8l82THrHwihtcmhQdjcBQBXjT

In short: we can justify describing the Solar System Heliocentrically because that model matches our PROVEN physical models. The Geocentric model can't be justified through any empirical process.

cristi1990an 2ポイント3ポイント 4時間前

Here, ladies and gentlemen, we have a flat-earther trying to explain what he thinks gravity is... Keep in mind that he's "smarter than the average flat-earther".

Ok, in all seriousness now... You have no idea what gravity is. "gravoid"? Wtf? Did you actually make this word up? Omg, I'm dying here... Ok, ok... First of all, your image makes no sense. What exactly is supposed to be the force that makes those satellites spin? [The movement of satellites is created by the combination of the gravitational attraction of the Earth and their initial velocity... You know... An object in motion stays in motion until acted upon...]. Second of all, gravity is not some magic force that attracts one object to another. I can tell you're confusing the way it works with magnetism. The gravitational force of an object will always attract other objects to its center! In your picture, everything on Earth would be pulled towards the North Pole, including the Earth itself. There's a reason why every celestial object is a sphere... Third of all, we kinda do know what gravity is. It's the curvature of space and time, created by every object with mass. https://youtu.be/MTY1Kje0yLg

DethFiesta 2ポイント3ポイント 3時間前

You say that satellites are real but that we don't actually understand gravity. YOU are the person who has come up with the correct explanation of gravity.

So how did we get thousands of satellites into orbit before we discovered the "Gravoid" ?

Why are the vast majority of orbital insertions successful if our model is so completely wrong?

Why aren't you employed already in SatCom or another aerospace industry?

Iknowmytruth1[S] -1ポイント0ポイント 1時間前

the gravoid has been known in every Space agency since the very first sattelite.

DethFiesta 1ポイント2ポイント 1時間前

No it hasn't. No one has ever written about the Gravoid but you. Because you just made it up.

You are a fraud and liar. Obviously.

Iknowmytruth1[S] 0ポイント1ポイント 1時間前

Cause me and about 8 other people have figured it out, on a private invite only flat earth forum. Its obviously not mentioned anywhere because it would reveal earth is flat.

DethFiesta 2ポイント3ポイント 1時間前

So show us the math. How do we use the "Gravoid" to achieve orbit?

You are obviously lying.

oldhippy1947 0ポイント1ポイント 1時間前

Man... You just can't get flat earth trolls like the good old days. Now we end up with the ones that aren't even trying. Well, it was fun while it lasted.

Hachfredditor 2ポイント3ポイント 2時間前

"Im not your average flat earther, im alot more intelligent." LOL, you're all beyond help

MaximaFuryRigor 1ポイント2ポイント 1時間前
  • I'm not...
  • a lot more intelligent.
  • satellites
  • shrug
  • Let's
  • it's

You might want to start showing your greater intelligence in the form of improved grammar.

Iknowmytruth1[S] 0ポイント1ポイント 1時間前

just cause i dont care about my spelling online doesnt mean im not intelligent. I use good grammar where it matters, Like work.

MaximaFuryRigor 2ポイント3ポイント 1時間前

I use good grammar where it matters, Like work.

So you don't feel good grammar is important when claiming you are more intelligent than other people?

Iknowmytruth1[S] -2ポイント-1ポイント 1時間前

No, i dont have to prove that i am more intelligent on every single level. I already know that i am, i dont care if you think im not intelligent. What i do care about though, is the truth and spreading it.

MaximaFuryRigor 0ポイント1ポイント 13分前

What i do care about though, is the truth and spreading it.

Then you should probably reconsider the sources of your truth. Your information comes from YouTube and personal blogs, and can't be scientifically or mathematically replicated.

The only truth of the world comes from scientifically founded replicable evidence. And all that evidence points to a spherical earth.

TotesMessenger 0ポイント1ポイント 1時間前

I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)