/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8980850
Because you can think whatever you fucking please.

>>8980850
Because assholes like you promote it.
Any attention helps - even negative.

>>8980877
this. and because people like to be attention whores nowadays, like liberals, fags with feminine hormones, you name it.

>>8980850
Can you prove the earth isn't flat?

Exactly.

>>8980915
Oh God here we go.

>>8980915
I have a few points that prove the roundness of the Earth.
1: The laws of gravity. In any instance of an object with high enough mass, its own gravity will cause it to collapse into a sphere. Naturally, the Earth the large enough to experience this effect. Even if you say we are only experiencing gravity because the planet is pushing 'upwards' and forcing us down to the surface, there is no way to have the Earth still be flat without violating everything we know of physics.
2: Travel. Have you ever seen a boat leave a port and cross the line between the sea and the sky? Have you ever wondered why space centers are always placed close to the south, r at least in the US? This is all the results of the Earth having a curvature. Horizons can only exist because of the curvature, and are of course well documented as existing. The space centers are placed nearest to the Equator, where the Earth is in geometric terms dead-on to other celestial bodies. Speaking of space travel, here's a question for you; if the Earth is flat and NASA exists, why has no one tried to view the bottom half of the planet?
Finally, there's miscellaneous points such as the fact that orbital bodies exist, that none of the other planets, moons, or stars we know are flat, and that the government isn't trying to block any information on the matter. I await your rebuttal.

>>8980850
Because people like to invent a reason to believe they are better and smarter than everyone else.

>>8980970
>In any instance of an object with high enough mass, its own gravity will cause it to collapse into a sphere.

Pretty flawed observation, the objects that contain the most mass are galaxies and they're overwhelming flat. I don't deny that there is space but there being space doesn't prove earth is a sphere.

>Even if you say we are only experiencing gravity because the planet is pushing 'upwards' and forcing us down to the surface, there is no way to have the Earth still be flat without violating everything we know of physics.

It doesn't violate the laws of physics at all, nobody denies that earth is spinning in a circle. This motion is what simulates gravity, only pushing that earth does is a normal vector back as described by Isaac newtons laws.

>Have you ever seen a boat leave a port and cross the line between the sea and the sky?

Are you not aware that light scatters? The point where we lose sight of the boat is that point where light scatters too far for us to see. Sun has far too much light for it to scatter all of it so we can see very large distances the more light there is.

>Have you ever wondered why space centers are always placed close to the south, r at least in the US?

That's simple, it is most effective to launch from the center of the circle because there is less spin in those areas which allows for better precision for the space crafts path.

>if the Earth is flat and NASA exists, why has no one tried to view the bottom half of the planet?

And how do you purpose we do something like that? Space craft orbit with with earths plane spin, how would you launch from orbiting on top to getting all the way around earth. When our tickets improve we will see the other side of earth. I would image it being like the other side of the flat moon which is plane dark.

>>8980850
>just started reading Newton's principia mathematica
>realize that these guys are literally saying that newton, kepler etc. were part of a conspiracy spanning from time immemorial to make everyone believe earth was round instead of flat
>specially when Newton was a hardcore christfag and everyone and their mothers in the Church were celebrating this new age of understanding of God's creation in that Era.
>mfw these guys are literally angering God.

>>8980850
Because the truth will always prevail.

>>8980995
>galaxies and they're overwhelming flat
no fucking galaxy even approaches being flat

>>8980850
nice try jew, nice try

>>8981007
>a elliptical spiral galaxy is not flat

You some kind of retard?

>>8981007
To be fair

They're closer to flat than spherical

if the earth is flat how come i can travel in one direction for years and never fall off it?

>>8981013
you some kind of faggot?
fist, it's not even a solid fucking object
second, it's anywhere from 1000's to 10,000 of light years thick even at the fucking edge and third, there is a big fucking bulge stretching from the center roughly halfway through.
the spiral is a just a halo around the actual galaxy

>>8981024
Because you're traveling in a circular path

Only way to the edge of the world is to go to "antartica" which spans far greater distance than you can even imagine

This is why nobody has ever sailed off and those who attempt to go the distance end up freezing to death because tempature a approach 0 kelvin near the edges

>>8980877
good goyim

>>8980995
>Pretty flawed observation, the objects that contain the most mass are galaxies and they're overwhelming flat. I don't deny that there is space but there being space doesn't prove earth is a sphere.
As far as I am aware, galaxies are flat on two grounds: The objects in the galaxy are close enough to feel their gravity fields, but not close enough to merge at all; and the orbits of anything in space take place on a 2D plane, as galaxies are not much more than one giant barycenter.
>It doesn't violate the laws of physics at all, nobody denies that earth is spinning in a circle. This motion is what simulates gravity, only pushing that earth does is a normal vector back as described by Isaac newtons laws.
Are you telling me that the Earth is spinning to simulate gravity? How is this still physically valid since the Earth is still not a sphere in a situation, despite apparently experiencing gravity.
>Are you not aware that light scatters? The point where we lose sight of the boat is that point where light scatters too far for us to see. Sun has far too much light for it to scatter all of it so we can see very large distances the more light there is.
I do know that light is scattered, but the boat only disappears because of the horizon it crosses. If I was provided with a powerful enough telescope, should I not be able to see the boat travel an unprecedented distance according to your theory?
>That's simple, it is most effective to launch from the center of the circle because there is less spin in those areas which allows for better precision for the space crafts path.
My understanding of the flat Earth is that the center point is the North Pole and the edge of the circle is South Pole, usually represented by an impenetrable glacier. Your answer goes against this idea.
Will continue in a moment. Post length reached.

>>8980850

>>8981035
>this much damage control

not even considering dark matter, galaxies contain more matter than you can even imagine. The "bulge" (more like a light illusion) doesn't prove anything. Galaxies are largely flat but may vary in the thickness. They're nothing like a sphere.

Fuck off with you anti science views, you

>>8981038

i've graded first year calc papers (that score less than 30%) that make more sense than your post.

>>8981035
>believe in atoms
>somehow thinks that a regular object formed by many atoms constrained by electromagnetic forces and which is >90% vacuum is different from an object formed by a myriad of stars constrained by gravitational forces

u w0t m8?

>>8981044
>And how do you purpose we do something like that? Space craft orbit with with earths plane spin, how would you launch from orbiting on top to getting all the way around earth. When our tickets improve we will see the other side of earth. I would image it being like the other side of the flat moon which is plane dark.
As a matter of fact, despite what I may have said of orbital planes above, we can create artificial orbits that can cross the poles, the Equator plus the Meridian, etc just by launching at a certain angle. Given this fact, we should totally be able to see the bottom of the Earth. And understanding that we launch any spacecraft bound for orbit and an angle and the angle should always curve to see the bottom. Finally, who said the Moon was flat? I thought you would've said it was painted on a dome or something.

>>8981051
Picture says a 1000 words

Also
>first year calc

d/dx x^2 = 2x
Oh so hard...

All clac is a meme, arguably easier than most subjects

>>8981059

ah yes, you didn't even read my post

would your iq happen to be sub 60?

>>8980913
Oh look, /pol/ once again is proving it has no idea what the fuck it's talking about

>>8981059
how do you explain plate tectonics?
Are you aware that convection between 2 plates would irremeedably lead to subduction of tectonic plates at the outer ring? - something that contradicts every observation and the fact that anctartica is not an earthquake-prone region.

There is convection plumes going from the inner core to the outer mantle. Evidence = hawaii.

>>8981070
whoops i meant inner mantle*

>>8980913
>Liberals
Why do liberals always have to be blamed for everything? And here is makes even less sense than normal, for AFAIK most flat-Earthers are conservatives and YEC types.
>>8981066
Precisely. The kind of people who go out of their way to gather knowledge on the 10^30 genders or whatever are hardly the kind of people to fall for something as utterly outdated as the flat Earth. Rant over.

>>8981044
>As far as I am aware, galaxies are flat on two grounds: The objects in the galaxy are close enough to feel their gravity fields, but not close enough to merge at all; and the orbits of anything in space take place on a 2D plane, as galaxies are not much more than one giant barycenter

Exactly orbits take place on a 2D plane so it would logically make sense that all objects would form into a 2D object. It's funny how the most observable objects all appear to be flat.

>Are you telling me that the Earth is spinning to simulate gravity? How is this still physically valid since the Earth is still not a sphere in a situation, despite apparently experiencing gravity.

Learn physics please, Gravity is nothing more than a force that is created from spin. Much like how mate tics fields are created from current moving through a wire. The earth is enducing gravity on us through a massive object spinning.

>I do know that light is scattered, but the boat only disappears because of the horizon it crosses. If I was provided with a powerful enough telescope, should I not be able to see the boat travel an unprecedented distance according to your theory?

But that is how it works, you can lose sight of an a bait with your eyes but use a telescope to locate it. Eventually you'll lose enough light concentration that you'll lose sight of the boat. Also photons are affected by the earth enducing Gravity making it appear as if the boat is a bit lower, this is simply an illusion.

>My understanding of the flat Earth is that the center point is the North Pole and the edge of the circle is South Pole, usually represented by an impenetrable glacier. Your answer goes against this idea.

You want a good balance between distance and climate. It just so happens that the equator is 1/2 the radius which is the optimal area to launch

>>8981070
Tell me exactly how plate tectonics disprove flat earth? The two can coexist, Infact it would probably make more sense in a flat earth since the plantes would be more stable without a curvature to them.

>>8981049
Haha this is a good troll

>>8981065
I answered your question dumbass

You think you're traveling in a straight line but you're not. Tell me exactly ho you can confirm you haven't changed your course at all in 1000+ miles? You can't

>>8981084

bread crumbs

>>8981089
Is this your way of conceding?

>>8981082
what do you mean by stability?
Also, pic related.in 2 parallel plates, the outer boundaries would be subject to an either downward or upward stream due to symettry reasons. This leaves us with the problem of antarctica having to either present large mountain ranges or subduction and earthquakes, neither of which are present.

Moreover, the existence of such a layer (the mantle) which is fluid over periods of millions of years leaves us with another problem: the boundary of earth. For if mantle wasn't bounded, it would flow outwards... But what material would be still be solid at these temperatures and knowing that there would be no pressure since the outmost layer would be open to space? Also, if your answer is
>because it's le cold XD
i have some bad news lad... heat transportation laws would have had earths core, mantle and the whole world frozen by now. Even if you assume that the sun is heating our surface and that prevents freezing, it still leaves the problem that the "core" would be dead and no plate tectonics (nor volcanoes) could happen.
Now if somehow you argue that the sun heats the lowest part of earth during night, how comes the core is at an estimate of 7000 K and the surface at an average of 288K? And still leaves us with the problem of the "supermaterial".

The only plausible explanation for all this is:
1. Earth is a sphere
2. Inner heat is preserved because earth's spherical form insulates it, making it only possible to lose heat due to radiation which is an extremely slow process at 288K.

>>8981092

It's my way of winning. Do you actually think I mean literal bread crumbs?

>>8981066
>>8981076
he didn't say that flat earthers are liberals. he gave an example of other attention seekers. for a supposedly smart board i would expect people here to have better reading comprehension skills and not fall for such petty dishonest strawmen

>>8981110
>he

Are you sure you don't mean "me"?

The guy has the same crappy grammar as you.

>>8981102
Nice flat picture you have there, thanks for contributing to my point.

This does not help you cause at all for several reasons.

>Also, pic related.in 2 parallel plates, the outer boundaries would be subject to an either downward or upward stream due to symettry reasons. This leaves us with the problem of antarctica having to either present large mountain ranges or subduction and earthquakes, neither of which are present.

Wtf are you talking about, Antarctica does have large mountain ranges, pic related.

>Moreover, the existence of such a layer (the mantle) which is fluid over periods of millions of years leaves us with another problem: the boundary of earth. For if mantle wasn't bounded, it would flow outwards... But what material would be still be solid at these temperatures and knowing that there would be no pressure since the outmost layer would be open to space?

It is flowing outwards, hence volcanoes. the edges of the world are bounded by cold space which keep the edges frozen solid. The middle part of our flat earth still has a hot mantel under. The earth has a thickness nobody is arguing against that but its not a sphere and your points don't prove its a sphere at all.

>i have some bad news lad... heat transportation laws would have had earths core, mantle and the whole world frozen by now. Even if you assume that the sun is heating our surface and that prevents freezing, it still leaves the problem that the "core" would be dead and no plate tectonics (nor volcanoes) could happen.

I'm well aware of thermodynamic and obviously it depends on what sort of material the heat is transferred through. It would be highly improbably for that much heat and pressure to just transfer away.

The earth is frozen away on the surface but it is cooling away at a slow rate, the sun like you mentioned is merely slowing the process.

Earth is flat, space is bent.

>>8981105
Obviously not, you just nothing else to say which indicates you lost.

>>8981114
attacking someone's grammar (particularly when there are no grammar errors) is a good sign of intellectual dishonesty and inane pettiness. i'm assuming you're the same guy who "misread" the comment by the other anon and are just too vane and proud to admit you either failed to read a simple one line text of english (probably you're going to blame it on this "crappy grammar" residing in your head) or you purposely misconstrue his comment for reasons that i'm not going to impute on you.
again this is a board for intelligent discourse, so if childish name calling is the best you can contribute i suggest you find a board more suitable for you, such as /b/ or possibly /trash/

>>8981076
Liberal out right deny biology, admit it both sides are shit

>>8981118

sorry you cant understand a basic fucking concept like leaving bread crumbs.

>>8981134
I understand it dipshit, I'm just saying that's a weak response.

Clearly you can't refute my points

>>8981137

haven't the time of day to explain a concept you learn at the age of 5 or 6 to an autist such as yourself.

>"hurr, looks like i won the argument xD!!"

sure, whatever helps you sleep bud.

>>8981138
>being this triggered

Calm down bud, god it's so easy to troll some of you. Obviously I don't believe in flat earth, all my fucking point were insane and basically almost none of you called me out on it.

>>8981115
>thinks 2-3 kilometers high is high
yeah whatever.
>It is flowing outwards, hence volcanoes.
that'd be freezing UPward, also how does a boundless plate imply there is going to be volcanoes in anyway? Thats the implication of convection, has nothing to do with the boundaries or even geometry.
> It would be highly improbably for that much heat and pressure to just transfer away.
The sun surface is 6000 kelvin. A 7000 K surface would be radiating at a higher rate than our sun. Now, the energy that Earth's surface gets from the sun is estimated to be 174 petawatts. You flatcucks say that the sun is a tiny disk (which already contradicts the energy intake and the observed temperature but anyway let's continue) and that earth's surface is even larger than that of a spherical Earth. You can imagine that under those conditions the heat rate transfer through radiation would be much much higher for the core but i'm still just using those 174 PW to give you the upper hand here.
So what does that give? Earth's internal energy is around 10^31 Joules. So 174 PW would deplete earth's total energy in a mere 5.7471264e+13 seconds =1822401.82 years; or less than 2 million years.
That's under an EXTREMELY CONSERVATIVE assumption on heat loss through radiation on the lower part of the disk! Of course in reality heat loss would decrease as temperature did, but again that would leave the lower earth cold and solid, perhaps not catastrophic for the planet but surely catastrophic for plate tectonics and volcanoes.

It's going to be my last post anyway.
You have made me lose enough time mr troll. I can't help it, flat earth is the only thing that truly triggers me.

>>8981144

>"I was only pretending to be retarded!"

>>8981148
Would you rather I actually be a flat earthier?

>>8981149

I'd rather you sort yourself out if pretending to be retarded is your idea of spending your Saturday.

>>8981147
Im sorry you took the time to write that post

who cares

>>8981149
Yes that would make me feel so good and give me a sense of accomplishment because I on my intellect alone managed to defeat a flat earth worthy opponent in a scientific debate.

>>8981150
I live in Alaska, it's still morning here.

What's your excuse?

1) General Relativity teaches us that gravity isn't a force. Following the flow of "gravity" is the inertial state of objects.

2) This means that to remain on the surface of the earth, the surface of the earth has to be constantly accelerating into you.

3) Spheres can't do this without expanding. Earth is not topologically expanding.

4) Earth cannot be a sphere, even though it topologically looks like one and you see it as a circle from space.

5) Flat earth, even though has the appearance and topology of a globe. QED

>>8981161
relativity is a jewish lie so your argument is invalid

>>8981162

prove it

>>8981167
>(((einstein)))

>>8981161
not sure if you understand what topology is.
Either you are saying that earth (the disk) can be mapped to a sphere, which is topologically correct but would leave the lower part of the disk as the south pole for example; or you are saying that space bending makes a flat earth seem a sphere, which is not topologically equivalent since you would be creating either a hull (which doesn't share the topology of a sphere and even then, you are violating the bijectivity of the mapping because borders of the disk would be merging) or a sphere through reducing the inner hull, but that violates the bijectivity of the mapping because maps a infinite set of points (the lower plane) to zero.

>>8981170

where's your peer reviewed paper refuting general relativity?

>>8981174
>oy vey. where's your jew paper goy?
>t. shlomo golderberg

>>8981175

evading the question?

where's your peer reviewed paper refuting general relativity?

>>8981173
No I'm saying topological spheres are flat under general relativity

>>8981177
no, mossad, but thanks

>>8980850
Basically for the same reason /pol/ is still a thing

Here's the deal: there are three types of Flat Earthers who regularly post to 4Chan: assholes who troll for spite, asshole intellectuals who troll to test your knowledge and debate skills, and literal Bible interpreters (LBIs). They all have the freedom to make shit up (lie) because truth and understanding are not their goals, and they end the arguments with "prove me wrong." This nefariously places the onus on you to spend your precious life's time to provide information already available that they haven't and won't consider. By disavowing any science or proofs put forward and continuing to make shit up, they "win" by eroding your patience. It is simply impossible to keep up with having to explain away the barrage of violations on the most basic principles of geometry, math, science, and logic.

They aren't interested in critical thinking, refuse to put in the requisite effort to do the science, are blind to 3D visualization, and regularly refuse to respond when they can't fabricate anything that would pass even their own red-faced test. LBIs concentrate on believing what their leaders tell them while ironically calling you a "sheeple," and will not allow any sense to mar their fractured perception of the universe. They believe their interpretation of the Bible is flawless, and are actually trying to save your soul. The trolls will simply post sillier arguments and regularly resort to insults and taunts to keep you posting.

In any case, there is simply no arguing. Like trying to paint over mud, you just end up with a dirty brush.

>>8981392
Because (((they))) secretly subvert us all to be unproductive homosexuals that don't produce offspring, while replacing with people all over the world with the same inbred tribes of arabs and africans?

Really makes you think...

>>8981610

http://www.personalityresearch.org/metatheory/flatearth.html

GLOBULARS ETERNALLY
BTFO
T
F
O

Once you go flat you never go back. Why haven't you taken the flatpill yet, /sci/?

>>8981610
>at that moment bill realized he had made a mistake. One he won't ever recover from.
>He had sold his soul to the Jew, and not even death would free him from their God, Moloch. If anything, it would only make it worse...

>>8981973

>>8981079
>Learn physics please, Gravity is nothing more than a force that is created from spin. Much like how mate tics fields are created from current moving through a wire. The earth is enducing gravity on us through a massive object spinning.

According to wiki:
>Gravity, or gravitation, is a natural phenomenon by which all things with mass are brought toward (or gravitate toward) one another

Hi, are you retarded?

>>8980913
>liberals cause the conservative belief in today earth
whut

>>8981480
As I said, we see demonstrated:
100% Shitposting. No argument explaining anything in support of flat Earth (because there *is* nothing):

>>8981610
>>8981953
>>8981959
>>8981973 (although he's probably right about Bill's realization)
>>8982078
>>8982207
>>8982246

>>8982246
>>8981110
learn to read

Hey /sci/, I thought it was crazy as well. But read this and tell me what you think
http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2015/08/200-proofs-earth-is-not-spinning-ball.html?m=1
If you knew how much the government lies to you(9/11, faking moon landing, pizzagate, pedogate just to start and realize the people behind this literally worship Satan), things start to come together.
T. Electrical engineer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foucault_pendulum

what's the general flat earther's interpretation of this?

>>8982562
My ... you are so edgy, and so knowledgeable about all stuff that no-one is supposed to know.

Give me your best single shot on how the Earth is flat that cannot be explained by a round Earth. Pick it. Anything. Prove to me with some measurable example where you have proof or even evidence that can be explained only by a flat Earth paradigm. Go on...

>>8982635
It's not even that I truely believe the earth is flat, the shape of it does not concern me. IT's that (((they))) are lying to us. Antartica is the key, we have to wake up sheeple.
Know that science is biased, follow the money, see who fund them, you'll see it all connects.
Read the Three world war plans from 1871 describing our world wars in great accuracy, look at the elders of the protocols of zion, research project blue beam and mk ultra.
(((They)) are preparing to have a fake alien invasion to then have an antichrist lead them away.

>>8982659
That's an awful lot of jibber-jabber with absolutely nothing to back it up.

>>8982685
I'm just trying to give a warning to people. Stick in your little science fantasy world, I did for 20 years being fascinated with space dinosaurs and rejection of God. I'll help you make the connections, but you won't beleive me until you do your own research. DOn't trust (((wikipedia))), or first (((Google))) results. Notice for every one conspiracy thoery sites there are 10 debunking them, hmmm....
Start with Pizza Gate, look at why they are pedophiles(learn what the occult beleive) and go from there. God Speed anon.

>>8982693
>I'm just trying to give a warning to people.
Your level-headed altruism is truly commendable.

>science fantasy world, I did for 20 years being fascinated with space dinosaurs
Yes, you sound very scientfical and pragmatic.

>but you won't beleive me until you do your own research.
As if I haven't. You think you're the first asshole who tried to sell snake oil? I've been on this planet for six decades - yours isn't my first rodeo.

>DOn't trust (((wikipedia)))
Right. I should trust like-minded paranoid schizophrenics such as yourself? You know that only works in movies, right?

>Pizza Gate
A claim of a pizzeria fronting a child porn ring in a non-existent basement, nearly ruining the owner's business and causing one of your fellow tards to got there with a gun and cause real harm? GTFO.

You're nuts. seek help.

>>8982718
I'm not trying to sell snake oil,make any money or troll you. I am a very pragmatic and scientific person, keep an open mind anon. Do your own research, don't take my word for it. Follow the rules of critical thinking, and don't fall into circular logic.
>The world is round because Nasa shows us photos
>How do you know they are real?
>Nasa Tells us it's real
Just know the government lies to us and through leaks and declassified documents, we can see they have done fucked up shit(Mind control with LSD- MK ultra).
They love to taunt us by hiding symbols and plans in plain sight.
I am not nuts, I live a good life. HAve a job, friends, am in very good shape and am very happy. I just truely care about you anons.

>>8982562
>>8982635
>>8982659
>>8982685
>>8982693
>>8982718
>>8982732
that's the most pathetic samefagging i've seen in my life

>>8982750
Nah man, last post. Good luck anon, have an open mind.