/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9751101
>I'm not, that's how it works in all its forms.
...you think that relative motion is the same thing as general relativity.
you are a brainlet.

>So you haven't got any scientific proof to back up the mathematical models?
As I already explained to you, purely mathematical figures (like points, lines, angles, ellipses, and polygons) cannot be measured since they do not exist in the real world. All right angles being congruent is not a "mathematical model" but rather a definitional fact.

>It's second hand observational evidence, which is useful, but can be doctored too. If you want to prove curvature of the earth, then give me the empirical measurements.
please explain the difference between "observational" and "empirical" evidence.
you seem to be unaware that they are in fact the same thing.

>you're just going to ignore the fact Kansas is flatter than a pancake?
this is not only irrelevant to the topic at hand, but is also false. Kansas has a good bit of relief, pic related.
and if you think that Kansas is actually flat, how do you know it is? did YOU go out and chart every inch of it? or are you taking other people's word for it?

>But the glare gets smaller much earlier than that.
not in the footage you posted.

>I'd argue that would apply to you.
of course you would, because you're wrong almost all the time.
I've predicted the sun, in footage of sunsets, would disappear behind the curve of the Earth. You've predicted it would shrink away to nothing.
Since then, you've come up with a variety of excuses for why nobody's observed the shrinking yet. I've just been smug about the vindication of my predictions.

>>9466574
Anon, you are entirely bait and it is too obviously. You don't even have the attention span to completely read or understand the internet crap you continuously post. And you keep posting shit hoping it will make an argument for you because you don't understand anything enough to form an argument yourself or to even counter any rebuttal against your pic spam.

Here is an elevation map of Kansas. It is about 700 feet above sea level on the east side and 4000 feet above sea level on the west side. Now before you retardedly respond, this completely removes curvature from the elevation is from sea level, which is an approximation of the average radius of the Earth. Aka, the reference for the heights isn't someone standing in one end of Kansas looking at the other, but someone standing at the center of the Earth and subtracting the radius of the Earth from their measurements.

So on actual Earth, if you looked out across Kansas from the low end towards the high end, the other end of Kansas would be hidden below the horizon because of the curvature even though the high end of Kansas is 3500 feet above you. If you walked across the entire state from east to west, you would be climbing up a gental slope even though from the perspective of an observer who remains on the east end of the state to watch you, you would appear to be walking down a curve of a sloping hill, dropping more quickly below the horizon as you got further away.

Now let's compare on a flat Earth. If you were at the east end of the state and looked west, you would be able to clearly see the tallest peak just above 4000 feet above you, and if you looked perfectly level towards west, then you would see the horizon as being ever so slightly above eye level. If you watched your buddy walk west, you would see him all the way until he summits the peak.