/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9630242
The air rotates with the earth

>>9630242
>>9630242
>One shot should go father and one shot should go shorter than a third cannon shoot north, due to the motion

By how much?

>>9630251
Why would the it matter?

>>9630254
Because, you waste of space, it matters highly for the experimental confirmation. If you predict a difference of 0.3 pico metres, but you measure it using a tape measure, of course you're not going to prove the hypothesis.

Very much like you cannot show gravitational time dilation using a grandfather clock.

So how much is the difference?

>>9630242
>The earth does spin
>Proof 1.) Foucault pendulum

>>9630258
4000km

>>9630266

Kek. Well done for wasting my time and getting a response out of me.

>>9630258
It doesnt matter, all it has to be is longer then a neutral shot. And it isnt.

>>9630242
cannons are flat

>>9630268
Are you saying it should not be 4000km? Then what should it be since you seem like you already know

>>9630263
Counter disproof https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oC6Eq2Nc_mw
Proof two, earth doesnt move: shoot a gun straight up and the bullet will come straight down.

>>9630275

>>9630263
This is not a proof. If the earth spins, then Foucault's pendulum would behave as it does. The converse is not true

>>9630272
Well, show me how you arrive at 4000km, and I'll be happy to comment.

>>9630279
It depends on the mass of the cannonballs, I can find the mass of the cannonballs given 4000km. Or do you want me to calculate the distance for a specific mass of cannonball of your choosing?

>HURR DURR WHEN I JUMP UP IN THE AIR WHY DOESN'T THE EARTH SPIN BENEATH MY FEET?

>>9630283
>He can't abstract to a general mass
Wew lad. Do you even elementary algebra?

>>9630286
You're the one asking how I arrived at the number 4000km

>>9630277
Do you have any counter arguments to my counter argument?

>>9630285
So at what point does the motion show itself?
Proof 3: a helicopter hovering will stay over the same ground, no matter high it is, even if it stays till fuel runes out.

>>9630290
I'm actually not, that was some other guy. I'm just laughing at your inability to generalize.

>>9630283
How about you just sketch down how you arrive at the length difference for any given m (mass of the cannonballs).

>>9630296
Why do you think I'm unable to perform basic algebra? I was responding to a post that was asking specifically about 4000km

Proof 4. The gyro doesnt move. Fulcrum lied in his paper.
https://youtu.be/-YwByNqkSPo?t=7m

>>9630303
You were autistically rambling about masses instead of just presenting the equation you used (it's derivation would also have been useful) and then supplying the variables you plugged in. From that I can only gather you can not into basic algebra.

>>9630242
>do a similar experiment on a moving train
>it proves the train is not actually moving

>>9630316
Um yeah, if you throw a ping pong ball p, it will actully take longer to hit the door in the direction of travel. If you stand on the roof and throw it straight up, the ping pong ball will not land in your hand, becuase the train is actually moving, unlike the earth.

>>9630318
Nah, we were talking about cannon balls. The train is therefore not moving.

>>9630320
You can also do the train experiment with lasers. Which brings us to proof 5. Highly tuned lasers that measure distance of firing will show distance varencice measured shot facing front or back of of a train but not movement when on stable earth.

It's called Galileos principle, all motion at constant velocity is relative to the frame of reference. If you jump inside a train you don't land further back in the train because the air inside the train as well as you move at the same velocity as the train. Same goes for Earth. if you drop a tennis ball out of a car window it wont drop straight down.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhVy1WG_lKQ

>>9630275
what is inertia?

>>9630324
>Highly tuned lasers that measure distance of firing will show distance varencice measured shot facing front or back of of a train but not movement when on stable earth.

Kek.

Gotta hand it to you!

>>9630340
Why does that look exzactly like a blurry camera filming a glass marble?

[math]x = \frac{1}{2}\frac{-2\Omega v}{m}(\frac{2h}{a})^2[/math]
a is 9.81

>>9630348
because round things look like other round things? fucking moron

>>9630301
[math]x = \frac{1}{2}\frac{-2\Omega v}{m}(\frac{2h}{9.81})^2[/math]
This is assuming the cannon ball is already at height h, velocity v

>>9630348
It's actually a close-up of my left testicle, the blurriness is attributed to the large aperture of the microscope.

>>9630329

The train is an enclosed system. According to batshit heliocentrists, the earth does not have a barrier between the atmosphere and the vacuum of space, so how could it be an enclosed system like a train is?

>>9630358
Because when you shoot something straight up it still has the same momentum as the earth even if it leaves the atmosphere.
What force would be accelerating said object opposite the earths rotation?

>>9630387
Direction of acceleration due to Earth's spin is constantly changing. The momentum of the object you are throwing up is has the momentum of of the direction of acceleration due to Earth's spin at the moment you throw it up. The air is spinning with the earth, but the momentum is still there

>>9630396
The earth doesn't accelerate, it rotates at near constant velocity, there might be a slight change but the object will still land roughly where from you throw it.

Look at >>9630332

>>9630242
>trying to prove something wrong when you dont understand the thing you are trying to prove wrong

>>9630275
>mystery as to ... the reason why this velocity is that of the STARS not the EARTH
Does this retard not realize that under the globe model the stars are moving due to the rotation of the Earth?
It's not a fucking mystery. None of his problems with the pendulum were issues with the globe model, just his comprehension of the model.

>>9630433
Rotation at a constant velocity means the acceleration is always inwards

>>9630355
So what's capital omega here? Ignoring that, x has the unit of m^3/(kg s), which doesn't look like a distance. Even assuming you mean g with the 9.81 in m/s^2, you end up with units of (m s^3) / kg. So this mysterious cap. omega needs to be in units of kg/s^3 fo this equation to make sense. What is this ominous fudge factor?

>>9630295
>Proof 3: a helicopter hovering will stay over the same ground, no matter high it is, even if it stays till fuel runes out.
Air is moving with the rotation.
Helicopter on the ground is moving with the rotation.
Helicopter rises and hovers.
It's still moving with the rotation.

>>9630295
>retard didn't even understand my post

>>9630242
>empirical tests have shown they all go exactly the same distance
that's why we're launching our rockets eastward you goddamn imbecile?

>>9630509
Should be
[math]x = \frac{1}{2}(-2\Omega v)(\frac{2h}{9.81})^2[/math]
The unit of x is correct now (m), 9.81 is m/s^2. Omega is angular velocity

>>9630509
Fixed: [math]x = -2\Omega v(\frac{2h}{9.81})^2[/math]
The unit of x is correct now, 9.81 is m/s^2. Omega is angular velocity

>>9630509
Turned out it didn't depend on mass

>>9630522
I don't really think that affects things that are going to stay within the atmosphere, aka things below orbital velocities.

If you imagine that the Earth is rotating at a perfect 1600km/h and the air is also moving with the Earth at a perfect 1600km/h and your projectiles at rest are also moving with the Earth at a perfect 1600km/h before fired then their velocities are basically just 1600km/h + V and 1600km/h - V relative to the start point which is also going at 1600km/h.
So you can just remove the 1600km/h from all three points and you're left with deceleration from drag and gravity so they would travel the same distance in opposite directions.

Though if you went North/South there might be some deflection.

>>9630544
You are wrong because the Earth is round, not flat. See >>9630507

>>9630507
Exactly, and since the object is moving at the same velocity as the earth, it lands on the same point on the surface you threw it from. Acceleration in the lateral plane does not effect the velocity in the horisontal plane.

What is your objection?

>>9630554
You see how the velocity is perpendicular to the edge? That direction constantly changing, which means acceleration

>>9630547
It doesn't matter that the Earth is not flat.
The centripetal force exerted due to the rotation is really small due to the time it takes to complete a rotation. And an acceleration inwards would just assist gravity, so wouldn't affect the lateral distance in one direction different to another.

>>9630269
t.

>>9630580
There is no centripetal force unless you mean gravity

>>9630567
The angular momentum is constant, the direction of downward acceleration changes but that doesn't effect the horisontal movement of the object.

Watch >>9630332

Google Galileos principle, I'm tired of repeating myself since you refuse to understand.

>>9630242
You could've tested your non-spinning earth hypothesis with just cannonball had you shot it north or south

>>9630531
Wow, that's gotta be the quickest major revision of a groundbreaking publication in the history of publications.

The earth is not a ball.
The earth is not flat.
The earth is not what you think it is.
Nothing of nature is ever what you think it is. Ever.
You're always wrong. You lie to yourselves with tests, because tests can be right. You lie to yourself with predictions, because predictions can seemingly occur.
But you're wrong. You're always wrong. And the more you're wrong, the less likely you'll be right; the less likely the world works the way you think it ought to.
As soon as any of you have something figured out, it changes, and it changes for lack of provisions of functional deteriminism employed by the understanding of quantum. It is just as likely you will wake into a world where tests have proven inconclusive, because such a variety of infinite multiverses ought to exist through your indeterministic loose interpretations of infinity as well as the universe. It is just as likely that you awake into an alternate multiverse where things which could be predicted no longer can be. An alternate universe so identical to the current one, the only difference is two completely trivial things have been swapped.
Science existed for determinism. To know. Quantum science defacto requires you not to know.

>m-muh uncertainty principal

Face it, you're just terrified like cowards about the prospect of recombination.

>>9630832
you just need to lay off whatever you're flying on right now and wait a bit
it will get better eventually

>>9630242
Except you're wrong. They WILL be different, and we HAVE tested it. Just look into some of the math military snipers use.
>Coriolis Effect doesn't exist on this thread

>"scientists" claim earth is round
>run as far as you can in either direction, the ground is still at the same angle
amazing how basic logic undermines "science"

>>9630955
Don't you realize how much you're in debt to me?
It's not nearly enough just to stop breaking shit. You have to patch everything back up too.

>>9630269
>What is significance?
>What is effect size?
>What is power?

>>9630567
You would have to shoot the cannonball higher up than the entire earths radius for your numbers to work.

Given that the earth rotates at a speed of 1 whole turn in 24 hours we know this because of day and night. 1 turn = 360 degrees. That means an angular momentum of 360 / 24 = 15 degrees per hour. The radius of the equator is 6378 km.

distance on earth = angular momentum * radius * time / 2pi.

You said 400 km so I'll solve for time.

d = w * t * 2pi * r

t = d * 360 / (w * 2pi * r)

t = 400 * 360 / (15 * 2pi * 6378) = 0.239 ... h

Now solve for velocity of the object being tossed straight up with your 400 km.

I'll solve for starting height the bullet travels when shot straight up.

t = 0.239 h ... * 60 * 60 = 862.4 s

h = g * t^2 = 9.80 * 862.4^2 = 7 288 591 m = 7 289 km.

h > r

Can you buy me cannon that can shoot a distance into the sky larger than the entire radius of the earth? Hahaha, get real.

>>9631270
Correction:

distance on earth = angular momentum * radius * time * 2pi as says below.

>>9630978
>Just look into some of the math military snipers use.
>Coriolis Effect
I highly doubt that any snipers need to consider the Coriolis effect, given the (relatively) short distances they fire at.

>>9630242
Happens for snipers called Corvallis effect.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jX7dcl_ERNs

This thread reminds me of that retard on the conspiracy subreddit who thought gravity was a hoax and "density" was the true explanation for everything.

>>9630242
https://hepweb.ucsd.edu/ph110b/110b_notes/node14.html

NEXT

>>9630275
Dude, that vid is retarded, everyone that is scientifically literate either shuts up because they realise they don't know the exact time it takes for earth to take oone turn, or they know that every day has a slight different duration because winds and the tactonic plates movement affect the earth rotation time. at extreme cases the day can go about 2 mins faster or slower than AVERAGE. Also, that video says we are of by about 200 seconds, so what? It only proves that the earth is not rotating at a certain speed but it is still rotating.

Also, the bait is hard

>>9630358
The earth has been spinning for millions of years and have thus gotten the air with it due to friction, the empty space around the earth is just empty, nothing to stop the air from spinning with the earth. So the earth is separated with a layer of vaccuum, thus the air particles do not significantly interact with other particles to cause them friction and thus slow down once the earth gave them momentum...

The wind is due to energy received from the sun or released from the earths inner core.

>>9632692
He is literally retarded, there's no reasoning with him because he is the physical manifestation of the dunning-kreuger effect. I already made the necessary math to prove him wrong:

>>9631270

>>9631270
Correction again:

distance on earth = angular momentum * radius * time * 2pi / 360 degrees.

d = w * t * 2pi * r / 360

which is still what I wrote in the equation for time below.

>>9632029
My roommate was a sniper, he used the Coriolis effect all the time for moderate distance shots. Let me put it a way you can understand:
Bullet small! Target small! Earth big! Precision important!

>>9630242
This is the most retarded shit ive seen in a while.
Because the earth is spinning the launch point also changes so when you measure the distance traveled by the bullet the reference point from which you measure will have changed as well. Ergo you see no difference in the distance traveled based on what direction relative to the earths spin the launch happened.
Tl;dr thr earths spin is what makes it seem it traveled the same distance and not the other way around. What youre saying actually proves the earth spins.
Go back to wherever you came from buddy, /sci/ isnt the place for you.

>>9632029
I doubt it too.
Things like wind would have a bigger impact.

Maybe in the calmest of conditions with a north/south shot they would counter for the coriolis effect slightly, but it wouldn't be much.

>>9630510
This. You don't have to account for spin until you into suborbital speeds. Why would space agencies always lauch spinward to save fuel?

>>9633060
>coriolis effect

>all these replies

>>9630263
>Thy Earth does spin.
>Proof 2.) Go outside and look up from time to time.
>2.a.) Travel some, repeat.

>>9630270
CannonBALLS are flat.

Remider