FLAT EARTH

[Noose]

If the earth is spinning Eastward at approximately 1670km/hr and a plane has to fly westward at 700km/hr, does it mean the plane will take less time as compared to when it would be flying Eastward?

Is it also possible for the plane as much as it appears to be using a lot of energy and force to thrust forward that it is actually stationery or even moving backwards only that the destination on the spinning earth is fast approaching the air borne plane?

 

[posthuman]

If the earth is spinning Eastward at approximately 1670km/hr and a plane has to fly westward at 700km/hr, does it mean the plane will take less time as compared to when it would be flying Eastward?

Is it also possible for the plane as much as it appears to be using a lot of energy and force to thrust forward that it is actually stationery or even moving backwards only that the destination on the spinning earth is fast approaching the air borne plane?

Who is measuring and is the person measuring stationary relative to the sun, the earth, the plane or to something else?

It matters.

 

[dcontroversal]

If the earth is spinning Eastward at approximately 1670km/hr and a plane has to fly westward at 700km/hr, does it mean the plane will take less time as compared to when it would be flying Eastward?

Is it also possible for the plane as much as it appears to be using a lot of energy and force to thrust forward that it is actually stationery or even moving backwards only that the destination on the spinning earth is fast approaching the air borne plane?

That is one thing that has always perplexed me.....

a. How can a plane make head way when flying with the rotation of the earth if IT is flying at half the speed of the rotation of the earth?

b. If flying against the rotation of the earth is should be flying at about 1800 to 1900 miles an a hour and be able to make St. Louis from LA in about an hour instead of 3.75 hours

 

[Dino246]

If the earth is spinning Eastward at approximately 1670km/hr and a plane has to fly westward at 700km/hr, does it mean the plane will take less time as compared to when it would be flying Eastward?

Is it also possible for the plane as much as it appears to be using a lot of energy and force to thrust forward that it is actually stationery or even moving backwards only that the destination on the spinning earth is fast approaching the air borne plane?

That is one thing that has always perplexed me.....

a. How can a plane make head way when flying with the rotation of the earth if IT is flying at half the speed of the rotation of the earth?

b. If flying against the rotation of the earth is should be flying at about 1800 to 1900 miles an a hour and be able to make St. Louis from LA in about an hour instead of 3.75 hours

The answer to both of these is that the plane is moving at the same speed... about 1670 Km/h... when it is sitting still on the runway. Its airspeed is relative to a stationary observer on the ground. The air itself is also moving, with the earth, at about 1670 Km/h.

If the plane had to overcome 1670 Km/h just to make headway, we would not have aircraft, and we would have constant winds blowing East to West at... about 1670 Km/h.

By the way, "stationEry" is a noun denoting fancy paper. "StationAry" is an adjective meaning "still" or "not moving" - relative to the surroundings.

 

[tourist]

It often seems strange when we learn of theories that challenge our world view. For example, when I learned about how gravity was supposed to be the reason that water didn't spin off the ball-Earth, and the real-world example given was a spinning bucket full of water, I wondered why the same experiment couldn't be done with a spinning ball. Now I understand that ball-Earth theory is, as you put it, absurd.

I think you'd be surprised to learn that none of these things takes into account the curvature of the Earth. Indeed, there have been serious engineering errors when the alleged curvature of the Earth was taken into account.

What are some of these serious engineering errors due to taking into account the alleged curvature of the earth?

 

[Poinsetta]

What are some of these serious engineering errors due to taking into account the alleged curvature of the earth?

That there would be no atmosphere so the waters will leak out

 

[posthuman]

a. How can a plane make head way when flying with the rotation of the earth if IT is flying at half the speed of the rotation of the earth?

its airspeed is measured relative to an observer stationary with respect to the ground


if you're sitting in a bullet-train going 200 mph, eating sunflower seeds, and you spit a seed out in front of you, did you spit a seed at 205 mph out of your mouth, or 5 mph?

 

[posthuman]

if you're sitting in a bullet-train going 200 mph, eating sunflower seeds, and you spit a seed out in front of you, did you spit a seed at 205 mph out of your mouth, or 5 mph?

why doesn't the sunflower seed fly straight back into your face at 200 mph as soon as you spit it out?

 

[maxwel]

if you're sitting in a bullet-train going 200 mph, eating sunflower seeds, and you spit a seed out in front of you, did you spit a seed at 205 mph out of your mouth, or 5 mph?

What I want to know is....

how do you know what I've been doing on the bullet-train?

..

 

[Poinsetta]

why doesn't the sunflower seed fly straight back into your face at 200 mph as soon as you spit it out?

It happens to me all the time.

 

[dcontroversal]

its airspeed is measured relative to an observer stationary with respect to the ground


if you're sitting in a bullet-train going 200 mph, eating sunflower seeds, and you spit a seed out in front of you, did you spit a seed at 205 mph out of your mouth, or 5 mph?

When I chunk something out the window it leaves my truck at the same speed I am going and of course loses velocity immediately..... HAH

 

[Dino246]

It often seems strange when we learn of theories that challenge our world view. For example, when I learned about how gravity was supposed to be the reason that water didn't spin off the ball-Earth, and the real-world example given was a spinning bucket full of water, I wondered why the same experiment couldn't be done with a spinning ball. Now I understand that ball-Earth theory is, as you put it, absurd.

Only when you don't understand relatively simple physics.

The effective acceleration due to centrifugal force (outward) at the equator, where it is greatest, is only about 0.0339 m/s^2. Acceleration due to the earth's gravity (inward) at the same point is about 9.78 m/s^2... about 290 times greater.

In other words, your argument is absurd.

 

[KnowMe]

When I chunk something out the window it leaves my truck at the same speed I am going and of course loses velocity immediately..... HAH

the object tossed is no longer part of the atmosphere in your truck. i think it’s physics,

 

[KnowMe]

For those who fly in airplanes next time flying west from east at or near sunset check out the sun chasing. It will appear that the sunset almost freezes and takes forever to finish, almost as if time were to slow down. This is because your position relative to the sun is changing very slowly because you are traveling in the opposite direction of earth's rotation and effectively "chasing the sun". However, time does not slow down either for you or the people on Earth who the pilots are communicating with. Time would not stop as it always continues in the same manner.

 

[KnowMe]

Only when you don't understand relatively simple physics.

The effective acceleration due to centrifugal force (outward) at the equator, where it is greatest, is only about 0.0339 m/s^2. Acceleration due to the earth's gravity (inward) at the same point is about 9.78 m/s^2... about 290 times greater.

In other words, your argument is absurd.

yup and air is heavy about 14.7 pounds of air pressing down on every square inch.

 

[Noose]

Who is measuring and is the person measuring stationary relative to the sun, the earth, the plane or to something else?

It matters.

These are approximations from the measured Earth's circumference and an assumption that a point at the equator (Biggest circumference) will take at least a day (approx-24hrs) to make a complete turn.

 

[Noose]

The answer to both of these is that the plane is moving at the same speed... about 1670 Km/h... when it is sitting still on the runway. Its airspeed is relative to a stationary observer on the ground. The air itself is also moving, with the earth, at about 1670 Km/h.

If the plane had to overcome 1670 Km/h just to make headway, we would not have aircraft, and we would have constant winds blowing East to West at... about 1670 Km/h.

By the way, "stationEry" is a noun denoting fancy paper. "StationAry" is an adjective meaning "still" or "not moving" - relative to the surroundings.

Ok.

Are you also saying that the earth's atmosphere is one with the ground (earth's surface)?

I mean, if the plane is only bouyed and there's no force to displace it forwards or backwards, just the force to keep afloat, does it mean the plane will be rotating at the same speed relative to the earth in the same direction as the earth's spin?

If so, can we say a plane moving westward against the earth's spin is actually doing nothing but overcome the earth's spin according to an observer in space? more like a Hamster on a rotating wheel.

The earth is also rotating way too fast for an observer in space to even take a photo, not unless space is also rotating at some speed close to that of the earth.

https://tenor.com/view/hamster-wheel-at-work-gif-13203311
https://media1.tenor.com/images/0e2e4610eb50a5498abfcebe4fcf7790/tenor.gif?itemid=13203311

 

[he-rat_of_the_circus-mice]

If the earth is spinning Eastward at approximately 1670km/hr and a plane has to fly westward at 700km/hr, does it mean the plane will take less time as compared to when it would be flying Eastward?

Yes.

Is it also possible for the plane as much as it appears to be using a lot of energy and force to thrust forward that it is actually stationery or even moving backwards only that the destination on the spinning earth is fast approaching the air borne plane?

Yes. If the Earth actually were spinning. It's stationary.

What are some of these serious engineering errors due to taking into account the alleged curvature of the earth?

I'll have to find the references. From memory, one was a bridge constructed from both ends at once, which was out by the alleged curvature of the Earth. The other may have been a tunnel.

Only when you don't understand relatively simple physics.

The effective acceleration due to centrifugal force (outward) at the equator, where it is greatest, is only about 0.0339 m/s^2. Acceleration due to the earth's gravity (inward) at the same point is about 9.78 m/s^2... about 290 times greater.

So explain to me, if you can, how the water stays on all sides of the ball without spilling out. It certainly can't be demonstrated experimentally. However, it is fairly simple to demonstrate experimentally how water stays within a bucket. The simplest experimental evidence supports flat Earth theory over ball-Earth theory.

 

[KnowMe]

 

[KnowMe]