Flat Earth?

[korifugi]

Its never been entirely clear to me WHY there should be a conspiracy about whether the earth is flat or spherical? Who gains from the (so called) conspiracy?

 

Globe salesmen...

 

Some globes light up as they contain a bulb...

 

They illuminate...

 

Illuminati!

[Katy]

Globe salesmen...

 

Some globes light up as they contain a bulb...

 

They illuminate...

 

Illuminati!

 

Dinner table placemat salesmen also profit from the flat theory - as they can put a flat earth on the flat place mat

[mavhc]

People selling flat earth crap profit from it, which is why they keep going on about it

[mikeprice]

As we know Australia does not exist and all the Australinas that you meet are actually actors being paid to support the concept

 

 

I now have discovered how they do this. We=hne on our Honeymoon in British Columbia - plusa cruise up to Alaska - it became clear the the WHOLE OF AUSTRALIA must have been there as well.

It appears that this is where the actors are trained and then tested in controlled environments such as hotels and cruise ships

 

t

[mikeprice]

Former England cricketer ‘Freddie’ Flintoff revealed last year that he was obsessed with a podcast called the Flat Earthers – and coming round to their ideas.

 

Flintoff said, ‘If you’re in a helicopter and you hover why does the Earth not come to you if it’s round?

 

 

 

just seen this in the Metro

 

I have no clue what he means

[DCUK6]

Im trying to understand what on earth he mean too.

 

How will earth come to you if its round or flat?

 

Does he mean if u hover why doesn't the land moves beneath you as it spins?

[Rob_D]

Former England cricketer ‘Freddie’ Flintoff revealed last year that he was obsessed with a podcast called the Flat Earthers – and coming round to their ideas.

Flintoff said, ‘If you’re in a helicopter and you hover why does the Earth not come to you if it’s round?

just seen this in the Metro

I have no clue what he means

 

Acutally, I've always wondered that (or variations of it) myself. How can a fly hover in a car travelling at 70mph as though it were stationary? Is the fly technically also travelling at 70mph? And how does that factor into the whole E=MC(2) speed of light thing? If you had a rocket travelling at half the speed of light and fired another rocket inside it also travelling at 0.5C wouldn't the second rocket be travelling the speed of light?

[3s-gtech]

Air speed. The air inside the car isn't going at 70mph, but the volume of air is travelling at 70mph. As a demonstration, drive a car without windscreen/roof/back window. The fly is flying in that body of air - how would it not? Freddie Flintoff is fairly clearly as daft as a brush, so the fact that he's coming round to the idea of a flat Earth is meh. I suspect he'd believe in most woo if he read about it enough on the internet. Again - if you think the Earth is flat, and that ANYTHING in the physical world correlates to that, you need help. Edited November 19, 2018 by 3s-gtech

[localzuk]

The helicopter one is simply "gravity". Just because it is hovering, doesn't mean it is unaffected by gravity. It is still rotating around the Earth's axis as if it were sat on the ground - just like the air above it.

[Andrew_C]

The helicopter one is simply "gravity". Just because it is hovering, doesn't mean it is unaffected by gravity. It is still rotating around the Earth's axis as if it were sat on the ground - just like the air above it.

Nope. Gravity only sucks towards the centre of the earth*. This is all down to "frames of reference". In the case of the helicopter, it, the air, and the earth are all moving together. You have to move the 'copter relative to the earth by forcing it through the air.

 

 

 

* And the sun, the moon, the Great Attractor, and everything else. But in this context that is irrelevant.

[tg12]

Nope. Gravity only sucks towards the centre of the earth*. This is all down to "frames of reference". In the case of the helicopter, it, the air, and the earth are all moving together. You have to move the 'copter relative to the earth by forcing it through the air.

 

 

 

* And the sun, the moon, the Great Attractor, and everything else. But in this context that is irrelevant.

 

I was trying to work out the best way to explain that but failed. You've beaten me to it!

[jinnantonnixx]

Nope. Gravity only sucks towards the centre of the earth*.

 

 

This is another failing of flat-earth "theory". Gravity doesn't act 'downwards'; it acts towards the centre of mass. If you walked towards the edges of the flat earth, it would be as if you were trying to walk up a cliff as gravity is pulling you towards the centre of mass, not 'down'.

 

Another thing - why can't everyone see Everest?

[Andrew_C]

Another thing - why can't everyone see Everest?

Cos it is too cloudy...

[smurfomatic]

Another thing - why can't everyone see Everest?

 

I can, every time I look out of my window...

[elsiegee40]

 

Another thing - why can't everyone see Everest?

Because it’s too far away

[6Foot2]

Because it’s too far away

 

[jthompson]

If you had a rocket travelling at half the speed of light and fired another rocket inside it also travelling at 0.5C wouldn't the second rocket be travelling the speed of light?

 

The firing of the second rocket would decelerate the first, thus absorbing a load of energy from the second rocket's propulsion. Imagine trying to leap forwards off a moving skateboard: you're likely to stall the skateboard and not go very far.

[Rob_D]

This is another failing of flat-earth "theory". Gravity doesn't act 'downwards'; it acts towards the centre of mass. If you walked towards the edges of the flat earth, it would be as if you were trying to walk up a cliff as gravity is pulling you towards the centre of mass, not 'down'.

 

But according to FE, the illusion of 'gravity' is due to the continued upward acceleration of the disk.

[localzuk]

Nope. Gravity only sucks towards the centre of the earth*. This is all down to "frames of reference". In the case of the helicopter, it, the air, and the earth are all moving together. You have to move the 'copter relative to the earth by forcing it through the air.

* And the sun, the moon, the Great Attractor, and everything else. But in this context that is irrelevant.

But what holds that reference frame together? There's gotta be a force in play that keeps those things moving relative to each other, otherwise as soon as that helicopter took off it would shoot in the opposite direction to the spin of the planet wouldn't it? The helicopter doesn't put any effort into countering this spin when it is taking off - its only focused on going upwards.

[Rob_D]

But what holds that reference frame together? There's gotta be a force in play that keeps those things moving relative to each other, otherwise as soon as that helicopter took off it would shoot in the opposite direction to the spin of the planet wouldn't it? The helicopter doesn't put any effort into countering this spin when it is taking off - its only focused on going upwards.

 

Wouldn't that be friction?

[Andrew_C]

Air resistance / friction - much the same in this instance.

[jthompson]

But what holds that reference frame together? There's gotta be a force in play that keeps those things moving relative to each other, otherwise as soon as that helicopter took off it would shoot in the opposite direction to the spin of the planet wouldn't it? The helicopter doesn't put any effort into countering this spin when it is taking off - its only focused on going upwards.

 

Momentum and air resistance.

[jthompson]

Former England cricketer ‘Freddie’ Flintoff revealed last year that he was obsessed with a podcast called the Flat Earthers – and coming round to their ideas.

 

Flintoff said, ‘If you’re in a helicopter and you hover why does the Earth not come to you if it’s round?

 

 

 

just seen this in the Metro

 

I have no clue what he means

 

One would expect a successful international cricketer to have a reasonably intuitive grasp of ballistics.

[ICTDirect_Dave]

One would expect a successful international cricketer to have a reasonably intuitive grasp of ballistics.

 

He always said he was never a Cricketers Cricketer (that's a mouthful), never one for the technicalities of the game, nor the stats side of it.

Freddie made best use of his limited intellect and ferocious natural talent. It's why we've named the road leading to Sainsburys after him here in Preston.

 

A lot of lads here play for local clubs and regularly play against his father and brother. From what they've said the tendency to believe n woo such as the Flat Earth drivel runs in the family!

[mavhc]

Acutally, I've always wondered that (or variations of it) myself. How can a fly hover in a car travelling at 70mph as though it were stationary? Is the fly technically also travelling at 70mph? And how does that factor into the whole E=mc(2) speed of light thing? If you had a rocket travelling at half the speed of light and fired another rocket inside it also travelling at 0.5c wouldn't the second rocket be travelling the speed of light?

 

Cricketer hit in the head too many times by cricket balls.

 

The rocket would appear to the people travelling at 0.5c like it was going at 0.5c, but that's because their perspective has changed, their clocks are running slower and their space has been compressed. From the perspective (frame of reference) of an outside observer the rockets are both heavier, thus their fuel accelerates them less.

 

From the POV of someone on Earth the 2nd spaceship is going at 0.8c

 

Similar issue if you're in the 0.5c spaceship and you fire a laser forwards