The earth is flat and we never went to the moon

[JudgeRightly]

I'll answer each of your points one at a time not all at once.

A marksman says that the flight of a bullet does not "rotate with the earth" so a correction must be made in order to hit a target a distance away as the earth is moving under the bullet as it moves through the atmosphere. He calls this the coriolis effect. You don't have to see the video to get this but others viewing may want to.

[video]https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-omr-001&hsimp=yhs-001&hspart=omr&p=coriolis+effect+on+bullets#id=2&vid=9998a4a973ccb81482d0b902aeae9eb1&action=click[/video]

Does a plane adjust it's path as it flies thorough the atmosphere as the earth moves under it like the bullet has too?

--Dave

Dave, you and I talked about this already. The answer is yes, the pilot of a plane does adjust for the spinning of the earth.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[DFT_Dave]

Dave, you and I talked about this already. The answer is yes, the pilot of a plane does adjust for the spinning of the earth.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

Refresh my memory, how does a jet flying from LA at 600 mph ever arrive at NY if the earth under it moves at 1000 mph in the same direction?

--Dave

 

[JudgeRightly]

Refresh my memory, how does a jet flying from LA at 600 mph ever arrive at NY if the earth under it moves at 1000 mph?

--Dave

Because the plane is moving at 1600 mph total speed (not ground speed). Ground speed is 600, but you add that to how fast the earth is spinning.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[DFT_Dave]

A baseball pitcher throws a pitch that curves. Did the ball curve because the earth moved under it?

--Dave

 

[JudgeRightly]

A baseball pitcher throws a pitch that curves. Did the ball curve because the earth moved under it?

--Dave

It curves mostly because of the way he threw the ball, but it also curves because the earth moved under it. HOWEVER, because the distance is so small, and the time spent in the air is not very long, the effect is not noticeable.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[DFT_Dave]

Because the plane is moving at 1600 mph total speed (not ground speed). Ground speed is 600, but you add that to how fast the earth is spinning.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

In other words the plane is moving with the rotating earth in the atmosphere that rotates with it. The earth, ground, is not rotating or moving under the plane. Right?

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

It curves mostly because of the way he threw the ball, but it also curves because the earth moved under it. HOWEVER, because the distance is so small, and the time spent in the air is not very long, the effect is not noticeable.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

Maybe the pitcher put spin on the ball and that's why it curved?

Not all pitches curve.

--Dave

 

[JudgeRightly]

Maybe the pitcher put spin on the ball and that's why it curved?

--Dave

Please read my previous post.

It curves mostly because of the way he threw the ball, but it also curves because the earth moved under it. HOWEVER, because the distance is so small, and the time spent in the air is not very long, the effect is not noticeable.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[JudgeRightly]

In other words the plane is moving with the rotating earth in the atmosphere that rotates with it. The earth is not rotating under the plane. Right?

--Dave

Relative to someone on the ground, the atmosphere (unless it's a windy day) and earth is not moving, but the plane is.

Relative to someone inside the plane, the earth and atmosphere is moving, but not the plane.

Relative to someone in space, the plane, the earth, and the atmosphere are moving.



Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Refresh my memory, how does a jet flying from LA at 600 mph ever arrive at NY if the earth under it moves at 1000 mph in the same direction?

--Dave

This is hilarious.

If the air is traveling at the same rate there would not need to be an adjustment as the first 1,000 miles an hour is achieved at stand still.:rotfl:

Not sure why JudgeRightly said there would need to be an adjustment, are you?

 

[DFT_Dave]

Relative to someone on the ground, the atmosphere (unless it's a windy day) and earth is not moving, but the plane is.

Relative to someone inside the plane, the earth and atmosphere is moving, but not the plane.

Relative to someone in space, the plane, the earth, and the atmosphere are moving.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

The man in the video said that the bullet does not move with the atmosphere and that the ground moves under it. The target will move away from the path of the speeding bullet if not adjusted for that movement. The Target will move into the path of a speeding bullet if the sights are adjusted properly.

You have told me that a jet does the opposite of a bullet. The jet moves with the atmosphere and the ground does not move under it. Planes do not have to adjust for a moving earth because they move with it. This is an obvious contradiction. You can't have it both ways. You can't have a bullet act one way and a jet act the opposite way.

The bullet curves slightly on the way to its target because the bullet spins just like a curve ball does, because of spin not because the earth is moving.

--Dave

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

The man in the video said that the bullet does not move with the atmosphere and that the ground moves under it. The target will move away from the path of the speeding bullet if not adjusted for that movement. The Target will move into the path of a speeding bullet if the sights are adjusted properly.

You have told me that a jet does the opposite of a bullet. The jet moves with the atmosphere and the ground does not move under it. Planes do not have to adjust for a moving earth because they move with it. This is an obvious contradiction. You can't have it both ways. You can't have a bullet act one way and a jet act the opposite way.

The bullet curves slightly on the way to its target because the bullet spins just like a curve ball does, because of spin not because the earth is moving.

--Dave

Yup.

The bullet drops due to mass, density, and propulsion also.

Course we wouldn't want to overload somebody's donkey cart.

Them bearings might overheat or even worse.

 

[DFT_Dave]

Dave was using the term predeterminism in the sense of fatalism. Fatalism implies a higher power, which SR doesn't imply. SR is deterministic, in the same sense that virtually all scientific theories are (quantum theories excepted), but Dave said (wrongly) that to accept SR was to accept fatalism. Even the philosophers disagree.

The link you supplied is interesting (thanks - I enjoyed reading it through) but it is not convincing. The argument seems to rest on sophistry rather than a rigorous deduction, and it seems to rest on some naïve conceptions of time and existence within the space-time diagrams. It tries to show that since an event in one observer's future may appear in another observer's past, it must therefore exist in the future of the first observer in a predetermined manner. But this neglects the issue of the second observer not being able to observe this past (for them) event until a later time due to the distance the light has to travel, such that the future has not been observed by either one in advance of the event itself. This is a problem with philosophers trying to interpret conceptually heavy physics.

I corrected you when you said that space-time was part of General not Special theory of Relativity. The concept of space-time, space and time being the same thing, was the foundation of SR.

Now I have to correct you again. "Fatalism" is a general term, there are more than one kind or cause for it. That there is a "fatalism" in the theory of relativity is an accurate statement that does not imply a higher power. The fatalism of the theory of relativity is intrinsic, not extrinsic.

--Dave

 

[gcthomas]

I corrected you when you said that space-time was part of General not Special theory of Relativity. The concept of space-time, space and time being the same thing, was the foundation of SR.

Now I have to correct you again. "Fatalism" is a general term, there are more than one kind or cause for it. That there is a "fatalism" in the theory of relativity is an accurate statement that does not imply a higher power. The fatalism of the theory of relativity is intrinsic, not extrinsic.

--Dave

I gave a technical reason why those philosophers were wrong about the predeterminism of SR
Care to comment? Or are you just posting third person opinions without understanding?

 

[gcthomas]

The bullet curves slightly on the way to its target because the bullet spins just like a curve ball does, because of spin not because the earth is moving.

--Dave

A bullet spins around is long axis which points at the target, so the air flow is symmetrical with no sideways forces, A curve ball spins around an axis at right angles to its path, which drags air around it asymmetrically to produce different air pressure on different sides, which makes it swerve.

Care to comment on the technical level, or are you just posting third part comment without understanding the details again?

 

[gcthomas]

Refresh my memory, how does a jet flying from LA at 600 mph ever arrive at NY if the earth under it moves at 1000 mph in the same direction?

--Dave

The plane is not flying at am absolute speed of 600mph, but at that speed relative to the air. It is an airplane after all. And the air rotates with the earth, unless you have rejected Newton's First Law of Motion along with the rest of modern physics.

 

[gcthomas]

Ridicule and questioning the sanity of either side is not helpful.

Will you take back your comments about people being brain dead for disagreeing with you?

For me every cosmological view needs to be looked at, re-evaluated and debated from ancient flat earth, to Copernicus, to Einstein, to Alan Guth and Max Tegmark.

What I don't want to debate is that there is nothing here to debate.

--Dave

You haven't taken the precaution of actually understanding the theories you are trying to critique. You are woefully ignorant of even the most basic physics principles (Newton's laws of motion, for example) so you are unable to discuss anything at a level more than just pontificating and posting third party quotes.

This would be much more fun if you tried to understand the arguments of all those who are trying to help in this regard, and your arguments would be aimed much better of got knew what you were aiming at.

 

[Nihilo]

This is hilarious.

If the air is traveling at the same rate there would not need to be an adjustment as the first 1,000 miles an hour is achieved at stand still.:rotfl:

Not sure why JudgeRightly said there would need to be an adjustment, are you?

Because both NY and LA are also moving the same quote-unquote 1,000 mph. LA is constantly chasing NY.

Yup.

The bullet drops due to mass, density, and propulsion also.

Course we wouldn't want to overload somebody's donkey cart.

Them bearings might overheat or even worse.

It drops due to gravitation, it's measurable in mil-dot sights/moa. Predictable. The bullet released from your hand, at the same height as the bullet shot horizontally out of a gun, are going to drop the same amount, in the same amount of time, it doesn't matter at all that one of them is flying 1,000-2,000 mph from side-to-side.

 

[DFT_Dave]

I gave a technical reason why those philosophers were wrong about the predeterminism of SR
Care to comment? Or are you just posting third person opinions without understanding?

You don't know any thing about philosophy or logical fallacies which is why you believe in evolution and relativity.

--Dave

 

[gcthomas]

You don't know any thing about philosophy or logical fallacies which is why you believe in evolution and relativity.

--Dave

Can you put the reason you believe that SR is fatalistic into your own words? Summarise it for me, if you think I got it wrong.

(I must have missed you recalling your 'brain dead' comments about posters who disagreed with you. :wave: )