Prove the Earth is round

[TillEulenspiegel]

OOOh! Ohhh! I forgot .......... ( I don't know is someone raised this , I stopped reading the thread as it's stoopit)
the proof is in the sky tonight
Look at the shadow of the earth on the moon during the eclipse tonight. I live in souht florida and I am able to see it as I look out my window. The aussie's will have a better view.

 

[Zep]

If you are referring to the effects you posted and labelled 1, 2, 3, and 4, then, no, they do not explain how a ship can disappear over the horizon. When a ship goes over the horizon, it vanishes completely from sight. In order for your explanations to apply, the ship would have to be completely under water in order to disappear from sight. And this clearly does not happen. Your proposed explanations are simply nonsense and do not hold up to even the simplest scrutiny (not to mention being seriously flawed scientifically).

You are starting to catch on, Xouper. It doesn't get any better from here, BTW...

 

[Zep]

Zep & others,

Please take it as 636.6 metres not 6366 metres. Just think, because I am unable to think at present by finding this calculation. It seems my calculator is giving wrong calculations. I taken formula as: E.Radius divided by 1/4th of E.circumfrance i.e 6378.1/10018.15 = 0.6366 Kms. It may mean If we tavel 1 km on round earth surface we will go deep by 0.6366 Km OR 636.6 metres. We can also take it as: to cover 6378.1 depth(slope i.e. maximum depth eqv. to radius) we have to travel a distance of 10018.15 Kms on round plain earth surface or at Sea surface.

I could not understand how it is coming like that. Pls do clarify.

My request to you, STILL NOT ANSWERED by the way, was to go find the slope of a tennis ball or a cricket ball or a hockey ball. Have you done that? Where is that answer?

Until then, why are you bothering me with your mystical numbers from a broken calculator? If that is where they are coming from?

 

[Zep]

Reason for this is that the earth is spherical. The value you got was an average over the whole 1/4 turn.

Your first km from your starting point is almost all alongways and hardly donward at all. Your last km is almost all downward and hardly alongways at all.

you have to do all your caluclations with respect to your starting point

Pearls before swine...

 

[Zep]

Zep,You have posted the above quotes [repeated request for the "slope of a tennis ball"] in this topic. Can you please tell your real intention behind these postings! Seriously Pls?

I want you to perform a calculation that will express in one number the slope of a tennis ball. Show us your workings, how you arrived at that calculation and number. Is that so hard to understand?

 

[Skeptoid]

OOOh! Ohhh! I forgot .......... ( I don't know is someone raised this , I stopped reading the thread as it's stoopit)
the proof is in the sky tonight
Look at the shadow of the earth on the moon during the eclipse tonight. I live in souht florida and I am able to see it as I look out my window. The aussie's will have a better view.

The Aussies were unable to see this eclipse at all. It was mid-day there.

 

[69dodge]

Originally posted by Kumar
How then we are able to travel near to last km which is almost downword. It means we will not be able to see a ship from a distance of 1 km. at this last km point because it will be almost downward.

It's downward relative to a point 90 degrees away. It's not downward relative to a point just 1 km away; relative to a point that close, it has the very small slope of 16 cm / km, which is nearly horizontal.

 

[TillEulenspiegel]

The Aussies were unable to see this eclipse at all. It was mid-day there.

D'OH! (_8-(o) forgot about the time difference

 

[BillyJoe]

I left out the part about showing the rotation of all these bodies

Discs can be rotating as well.

and showing that following a single point across the face of a body shows that it appears to travel fastest across the middle and slower near the edges.

Remember the lesson of the triangle. The light travel longer on the longer side.

The shadows being curved also indicates sphericalness.

Curvy hills can giving the shadows like that.

The timing of the transits of Jupiter's moons through the planets shadow also provides evidence of Jupiter's being a sphere.

If the moons are dics that would do as well.

The rings of Saturn are exceptionally difficult to explain using the flat disc theory.

They are contrary discs like the planets. That is not difficult to the underastanding

The method does have a flaw, however. The person could say that just because all those are spheres does not provide proof that the Earth is a sphere.

The bag of black jellybeans might keep a green baby happy.

Also, anyone who says that every space photo of the earth is a doctored hoax probably would discount anything seen through a telescope because the device might be rigged to show what the inventor wants it to show.

Yes, a person must verify directly what might be wrong

Kumar.

 

[Kumar]

Zep,

My request to you, STILL NOT ANSWERED by the way, was to go find the slope of a tennis ball or a cricket ball or a hockey ball. Have you done that? Where is that answer?

I think I already mentioned. The average slope will be the same as I mentiond i.e. 0.6366 per unit.

69 dodge: It's downward relative to a point 90 degrees away. It's not downward relative to a point just 1 km away; relative to a point that close, it has the very small slope of 16 cm / km, which is nearly horizontal.

Is it not all confusing?

 

[Zep]

Kumar,

You posted this post:

Zep,
I think I already mentioned. The average slope will be the same as I mentiond i.e. 0.6366 per unit.

and this one:

Originally posted by Kumar Attention all,

I assume that the slope of the earth will be 0.63662998955907156051722753192515 kms
(apprx. 636.6metres) on travelling 1km on earth if it is round.I am sorry to mention the same.

Where did you get this number from? Will you show your workings that arrived at this number? Have you done any workings at all on this? Is this the information you intend using to calculate the slope of a tennis ball?

 

[Kumar]

Zep,

Just read the previous posts. I mentioned the calculation i.e. radius/ 1/4th of circumfrance.

The above consideration of slope can be if we move from north towords south i.e along with longitude lines. What wll happen if we move alongwith latitude lines?

 

[69dodge]

Originally posted by Kumar
Is it not all confusing?

It can be confusing, I guess. I think I understand it pretty well. If I've said something that you don't understand, feel free to ask for clarification. Try to be specific; tell me exactly what the problem is.

 

[69dodge]

Originally posted by Kumar
The above consideration of slope can be if we move from north towords south i.e along with longitude lines. What wll happen if we move alongwith latitude lines?

Spheres are spherically symmetric. Any direction is the same as any other.

On the other hand, lines of latitude aren't great circles, except for the equator, so they're not exactly like lines of longitude. But that's because they're curved, not because one direction is different from another.

I'm not sure what you're asking.

 

[Zep]

Zep,

Just read the previous posts. I mentioned the calculation i.e. radius/ 1/4th of circumfrance.

The above consideration of slope can be if we move from north towords south i.e along with longitude lines. What wll happen if we move alongwith latitude lines?

OK, if you are quite certain that this is the correct formula and you can do calculations, what is so hard about calculating the slope of a tennis ball as a single number? Or a cricket ball?

What is the answer, please? Will you tell me?

69dodge, don't help him, please. This exercise is for Kumar to work out the problems entirely by himself.

 

[Kumar]

69dodge,

If we look at a model of earth(round). we can see that there is a great slope from North Pole to Equator's last point on surface. So if we walk from NP along with longitude line upto the center point we have to cover more distance than the radius which looks like a big slope. If we walk along with latitude lines, there is minimal slope(i.e. just the bending of the earth).

69dodge, don't help him, please. This exercise is for Kumar to work out the problems entirely by himself.

Zep,

Ok, I will find out myself. Till then 'Earth will remain Flat' as per my justifications.

 

[Zep]

69dodge,

If we look at a model of earth(round). we can see that there is a great slope from North Pole to Equator's last point on surface. So if we walk from NP along with longitude line upto the center point we have to cover more distance than the radius which looks like a big slope. If we walk along with latitude lines, there is minimal slope(i.e. just the bending of the earth).

Umm, yeah? Care to draw a picture of this?

Zep,

Ok, I will find out myself. Till then 'Earth will remain Flat' as per my justifications.

Will you answer my question? What is the slope of a tennis ball? Do you agree you have a formula that you said applies to all spheres? Do you agree it should be VERY SIMPLE to do this according to your formula? If so, what is the answer, please? Will you post it here any time soon?

 

[xouper]

Kumar: If we look at a model of earth(round). we can see that there is a great slope from North Pole to Equator's last point on surface. So if we walk from NP along with longitude line upto the center point we have to cover more distance than the radius which looks like a big slope. If we walk along with latitude lines, there is minimal slope(i.e. just the bending of the earth).

I may be going out an a limb here, but I'm willing to venture the supposition that the above explanation wouldn't even pass a Turing test.

 

[Charlie in Dayton]

Rocky -- your proof is simple yet elegant. I really like the 'travel until the stars change' idea. May I abscond with that one for commentary/discussion at the astro society meeting next week?

Kumar -- you're Gene Ray, the Time Cube guy, ain't ya? Everybody else, go look -- the general command of the English language is suspiciously similar, not to mention the overall unscientific behavior and overwhelming trollishness...

 

[Kumar]

AboveGod
Your father was a fish. You evolved from an egg laid in water, fertilized by a sperm fish swimming upstream - just as salmon swim up stream to fertilize female egg laid in the water.
Maybe, you should worship a fish god.

Intermediate knowledge . Why don't we learn like this, scientific?