Science and Money are the new religions. All other Gods have been slain. Let the flat Earthers have their fun. They do less harm than the scientists.

Everyone that skips the hard work and refuses to think critically is equally culpable.

There was a theory of gravity well before GR, and I doubt many of us (certainly not me) know much of anything about GR. Was thinking about your inverted constellation thing this morning, as it was new to me. I assume before good comms, sharing such observations wasn't common, might explain it in large part. Like, before we had phones or whatever, it'd be hard to verify its night time halfway around the world while it's daytime for me

it's true we had a theory, but it was still just a magical force right? it really WAS just "obviously this is a fucking ball, but we need a name for some force to hold the stuff onto it" until general relativity and the experiments that confirmed general relativity anyway.

I don't know the history or timing of it well at all, but it was precisely calculated from experiment with the constant x m1 x m2 / d^2 thing, I believe. I assume that was around for a 100+ years, and I think it wasn't derived from theory of globe earth but to explain Keplers 3 thingies...which I'm not sure about the timing of (maybe Kepler was post globe earth...). Looking to you to educate me, as I've got important things to do!

Is the magical ball force in the room with us now?

I don't know about Kepler but wasn't Cavendish the first recorded person to measure gravity? in like the 17th century? but I think that was just that mass generally has gravity, ie distorts spacetime (he didn't call it that of course) not the local gravitational acceleration of the Earth. I think Newton generally measured that. and a bunch of people also at the end of the 17th century refined the actual measurement. (and they also noticed that it was *different* at different elevations, destroying my guys "gravity is an inertial force due to upward acceleration" hypothesis)

as opposed to your "we're constantly accelerating upwards" force? you just replace one difficult-to-verify explanation with one you can't prove AT ALL. and the main difference is mine actually matches the observable data and yours doesn't.

The most insane mental gymnastics I've ever witnesse, the flat earth crew. Ive tried multiple time to have a discussion wirh a rlaf earther and it usually just divulges to insulst when I ask for a model that explains day and night cycle as well as the season. They can show me two separate models but those don't even jive with each other. The mathematics that secure bitcoin, is the same mathematcs that show you our world is NOT flat.

accelerometer in your phone shows the upward force. Wheres your proofsies?

let me get this straight, you believe that we're accelerating upwards at a constant rate, because your phone tells you so. please show me your data. I'm very interested in what the rate of acceleration is.

Cavendish rings a bell. And while GR/space-time distortions may work, I don't know more about it than like a single diagram and analogy of marbles on a rubber sheet thing. Certainly they didn't thing about it back then. The classical formula works very well, and I seem to remember Kepler having three laws of motion that were explained by maybe newton using calculus and the one classic gravity formula, but am very very hazy on details and timing

Check for yourself. Up is the Z axis in case you cant figure it out.

lol you're a liar as well as stupid. oh well.

i just looked it up. but yeah, marbles on a rubber sheet is a much better visual than moving heavy lead weights towards things hanging on a ribbon

HEAT ENGINE CYCLE

Yiu believe you are upside down on a ball held on by a magical force you cant prove exists because you look at the sky in the southern hemisphere? Have a word with yourself. 😅😂 I thought Monero bros were supposed to be smart.

now you're just repeating shit because you got called out and can't bring receipts.

Math checks out... 🫡

and so wheres the data that shows thats due to upwards acceleration?

In freefall it is 0. Check for yourself. Dont trust, verify.

Hate to be the AI dump guy, but there's a good overview: Big picture first The classical understanding of gravity wasn’t a single leap—it was a three-stage convergence: 1. Kinematics: how things move (Kepler, Galileo) 2. Dynamics: why they move that way (Newton) 3. Empirical grounding: what the constants actually are (Cavendish) By ~1800, the formula F = G \frac{m_1 m_2}{r^2} was no longer speculative—it was overdetermined by astronomy, mechanics, and laboratory experiment. 1. Galileo Galilei (c. 1600–1638) — Gravity as uniform acceleration Key ideas • Falling bodies accelerate at a constant rate (ignoring air resistance) • Horizontal and vertical motion are independent • Motion can be described mathematically, without invoking purposes or essences What gravity was not yet • No force law • No dependence on mass of Earth or object • No connection to planetary motion Why Galileo mattered He reframed gravity as a quantitative physical phenomenon, not a philosophical tendency. This made later force laws even possible. ⸻ 2. Johannes Kepler (1609–1619) — The planetary clues Kepler’s Laws 1. Planets move in ellipses with the Sun at one focus 2. Equal areas in equal times 3. T^2 \propto a^3 Why this was explosive Kepler gave exact, data-driven regularities that screamed: “There is a central force pulling planets toward the Sun, and it weakens with distance.” But Kepler did not know the force law. He suspected something like magnetism and thought the force weakened with distance—but not exactly how. ⸻ 3. Isaac Newton (1665–1687) — The synthesis This is the true birth of classical gravity. Newton’s key insights • If a force causes circular or elliptical motion and Kepler’s 2nd law holds, the force must be central • If Kepler’s 3rd law holds, the force must fall off as 1/r² • The same force explains: • Falling apples • The Moon’s orbit • Planetary motion The inverse-square law emerges From orbital mechanics alone, Newton showed: F \propto \frac{1}{r^2} Then he generalized it to: F = G \frac{m_1 m_2}{r^2} Important nuance Newton did not measure G. He only needed the product GM_\oplus, which could be inferred from orbital motion. What cemented Newton’s law (1687) • Exact recovery of Kepler’s laws • Quantitative prediction of tides • Correct explanation of projectile motion and pendulums • Predictive power across terrestrial and celestial physics After the Principia, competing gravity laws were basically dead. ⸻ 4. Henry Cavendish (1797–1798) — Weighing the Earth Cavendish performed the first laboratory measurement of gravitational attraction between masses using a torsion balance. What he actually measured • A tiny torque between lead spheres • From this: the density (mass) of Earth • Implicitly: the gravitational constant G This was the final missing piece. Why this mattered • Gravity was no longer inferred only from astronomy • The same inverse-square law held at human scales • G became a universal constant, not a fitting parameter After Cavendish, Newtonian gravity was: • Universal • Quantitative • Experimentally verified in the lab ⸻ When was F = G m_1 m_2 / r^2 truly “cemented”? Short answer: 1687 conceptually, ~1800 empirically

jfc dude. you need a basic high school physics class. okay I'll do some basic explanation. you don't feel like you're moving 500 mph in an airplane either right? likewise the accelerometer in your phone is measuring contact forces. it won't measure 500 mph either once the plane has completely accelerated. however there's 9.8 m/s ² of potential energy always pulling down on you. You're absolutely right about that. when that potential energy is converted to real (like in free fall or plane reaching cruising velocity) it shows zero. so your accelerometer shows that there's that amount of potential energy existing. it does NOT show that that's due to an upward acceleration, just that there's a force acting on it. very curious how you got to that conclusion. we would have to be *constantly* accelerating at 9.8 m/s squared in order for that downward force to be maintained (like how you feel acceleration when the plane takes off, but not when it's cruising). so in less than a year (after this acceleration began) we would be traveling AT THE SPEED OF LIGHT. so your model is this: we are hurtling through space on a flat plane at an UNCONCEIVABLE velocity that is constantly increasing but all that velocity is completely unpreceivable in any way. and for some reason that downward pressure is lower at higher elevations on the Earth. and you think this is a completely plausible explanation that doesn't require any magical thinking 👍

oh this is great. thanks.

curious which mathematics you're talking about? I can't think of any direct connection between elliptic curve cryptography and cosmology... I understand that people are mad at scientists these days. it's unfortunate.

The accelerometer shows an UPWARD vector or you saying accelerometer only shows acceleration only when not resting on earth? 😅 The earth is moving at a constant velocity but requires constant accelerstion to keep the veloxity. Like you keep your foot on the gas in a car to keep it moving, or the speed would drop off. If there was gravity downward force, it would show downward acceleration in freefall and when resting on earth, but accelerometer doesnt show that.

There must not be enough interesting stuff going on in the world. Its "let's be illogical as fuck and then clobber whoever resists" time. To be clear, flat earthers are retarded. But also the Mandela Effect is real, so bite me.

Well, actually yes. But if you think about it, is there anything that isn't a magical force?

Its not magical if objective reality shows something else. Thats retardation. Funny that most people think they didnt get brainwashed in a government school.

you can imagine the accelerometer to be a small weight in a box that is suspended by springs in all directions. when the weight gets pulled and a spring is lengthened, it reads acceleration in that direction. at rest on the earth surface, the "upward" spring is lengthened and it shows an upward vector. when you release the accelerometer and allow it to fall, the weight returns to neutral, no springs are lengthened and it shows no vector. >> The earth is moving at a constant velocity but requires constant accelerstion to keep the veloxity. Like you keep your foot on the gas in a car to keep it moving, or the speed would drop off. this doesn't make any sense. a mass either has "a constant velocity" or "constant acceleration", you can't have both lol. The car is either accelerating or holding a constant speed. and in order for us to experience a constant 9.8 meters per second squared of downward force, we would have to be *constantly accelerating* in the opposite direction. NOT maintaining a constant velocity. so according to your hypothesis, the sun and moon and earth and everything that we see is somehow holding itself together while hurtling through space at thousands of times speed of light. and accelerating every second. but without us having any observable data to confirm this fantastic speed of course. and this is more believable to you than " mass effects a pulling effect on other mass " something that actually has demonstratable evidence behind it.

homeboy wants us to believe in a DIFFERENT magical force. One that requires us to be constantly accelerating in an upward direction and traveling at many thousand times the speed of light. which... okay maybe... I haven't personally verified that the speed of light is an insurpassable constant... but this new model can't explain why the stars look different at different points on the plane. or why the downward force is lesser at higher altitudes on the plane. or why we have no observational evidence of this fantastic upwards speed. and what keeps the sun, moon, atmosphere and everything together while we're tearing along. All things which are quite neatly explained by the globe hypothesis. so I'm sticking with that.

I'm pretty sure he just enjoys trying to scramble people's brains. And there's so many ways to do it... Its a talent, I can appreciate it in a way

This appears to be a game of "whoever puts more effort into their replies loses"... and he's winning.

it's just that I can't compete with such compelling evidence as " the app tells me I'm moving upward " 😂

That is called special pleading logical fallacy. There is no imagining anything about an accelerometer. It reads acceleration or do you deny that? To have constant velocity, you need constant acceleration. It is constant because each second (time), the same measure is applied to keep the same speed. Changes in acceleration (called jerk rate) would be different amounts of force applied over time instead of same amount. When you start your car, your acceleration is higher until you get to the cruising speed and then to maintain the cruising speed requires the same acceleration/force applied.

The car tells me im going 100mph, but its not true, let me check the sky in the southern hemisphere for the truth.

I described to you how the device worked. predicably, you want to ignore its actual functioning also, you're making it very obvious that you dont have the basic knowledge required to have this conversation. acceleration is the *rate of change in the velocity* of a mass. "to have constant velocity you need constant acceleration" is a nonsense statement. The acceleration of a mass at a constant velocity is zero. and maintaining a constant velocity as in a car (ie, against friction) requires force, not acceleration. we're done here 🙏

Thanks for the discussion.

fun fact The acceleration of a car maintaining a constant hundred miles an hour is zero. you need to learn a lot more about physics before you can bash it.

So you can take your foot off the pedal and you stay 100mph? 😅😂 or you need to keep pressing the ACCELERATOR to maintain your speed? fucking hell

lol what a fucking idiot

Starting from 0 with you, seriously brain damaged

you don't even have the *most basic* vocabulary to explain the things around you dude "durr but lT caLlEd Da aCCeleRaTor AnD I pUSh It gO fAst" you MUST be trolling at this point 😂

Are you jabbed?

bro even eight-time vaccinated fucking retards know the difference between velocity and acceleration. you have no excuse, get your fucking shit together. I hope you have somebody around to wipe the spittle off your chin.

I know its hard for you man, you havent used your brain before. Rest for now. Try to think again tomorrow.

thanks for helping me create a few threads which map mankind's attempt to understand the world from the stone ago on. too bad you weren't able to actually explain anything beyond "we're moving upward because my phone tells me so"

Instead of regurgitating mainstream nonsense, try to break down the claims and steel man them... you know.. use critical thinking..

lol says the guy who's evidence is " I have an app on my phone"

My layman understanding, you can use trigonometry to show curve of earth. Isn't Elliptic curve stuff all trig?

All good, if you figure out how to think, maybe it will help you. This is 5th grade level concepts u struggling with.

Do u deny it measures acceleration? but but springs and stuffsies 😅😅❤️

I think it's pretty different at this point. then physical geometric trigonometry I mean... but I think ECC started by calculating the arc length of an ellipse? which is a trigonometry problem so... maybe?

to tie it together, an accelerometer in free fall isn't accelerating, like a car going a constant 100 miles an hour isn't accelerating. think about it, you'll get there.

nobody who reads this threat is going to think that you explained anything but I understand you have to act tough and confident now 👍

Ill be the first to admit I'm wrong if proven otherwise, but this was my understanding. Always enjoyed this channel and the stuff they cover, I always enjoyed And thought their elliptic curve explaniation was not great but good and digestable for me Sucks it on YouTube

side quest: @Hanshan have you ever looked at the so-called "axis of evil" re: the CMB data sent back by two planck satellite missions which seemed, to many notable modern physicists, including Michiu Kaku and Lawrence Krauss amongst others, to indicate the the Earth is at the center of the universe? can learn about it here is you want:

Bitchute

The Principle (2015)

It really is astonishing ha You forgot to mention that the northern hemisphere and southern hemisphere have opposite seasons 🤣 How do the flat earther explain summer in Australia when it is winter in Japan?

I love how British people say "maths" 🙏

Answer the question. LOL Does it measure acceleration? And if you take the accelerometer with you in a car at 100mph, what would it show? 0 or some acceleration? 😅😂

"bro even eight-time vaccinated fucking retards know the difference between velocity and acceleration." Yet you dont... 😅😅 so you more dumb?

LoL.

The accelerometer measures forces that are acting upon a weight. and, at 100 miles an hour the accelerometer shows zero. because velocity is constant and there's no acceleration. iow, It will show acceleration *until you get to 100 mph* then it shows 0. I encourage you to try it and see.

cute ❤️

So you admit it is an accelerometer and measures ACCELERATION ahahahahaha Your mission is to do that experiment and share your results. It will get to 100 and reduce as you apply less accelerstion then be more or less constant acxeleration on the X axis 😀🫡 I await your scientific report Hanshan.

you obviously don't know the difference between "acceleration" and "velocity" and should probably keep your mouth shut before you end up looking stupider than you already are

Tell me high priest. Explain it in terms of Monero circulation.

this is great to explain why EC is more efficient than RSA

they're not in any hurry to explain anything apparently... why explain when you can just call someone a normie retard and post a meme?

unlike Bitcoin emission, which has sudden, abrupt *decelerations every 210000 blocks, but otherwise holds a constant *velocity, Monero emission slowly *decelerated from the start, until it reached a constant *velocity of 0.6 XMR per block.

In wrong bro, you are right.

They are thinking critically, they just don't have the same assumptions. One could spend a long time arguing back and forth on whether or not the Earth rests on the backs of 4 elephants sitting on a turtle. The argument isn't important. What you should try to understand is why they are arguing for it on both sides. The proponent of the turtle theory is professing their world view as expressed by their religious leaders. There are benefits and detriments to having a society believe this. It gives people a common mythology and builds social cohesion. If they believe in the turtle theory, they might also believe in the other religious aspects such as loving and respecting each other. The flat Earthers similarly are professing their believes. Beliefs are a religion. They are building social cohesion based on this belief that others refute. They are forming these believes because the World has been lying to them on so many things. The Scientists have lost credibility in their eyes due to their corruption and subservience to corrupt elites. When you espouse reasonable arguments sourced from scientific theory this hardens their resolve. They spend copious efforts to try and refute your claims. Again they have very different assumptions and your differences will never be resolved but it is incorrect to say they are unwilling to put in the work. If they accept what you say and accept scientific reasoning, what do they gain? They lose the social cohesion of their fellow Flat Earthers. They lose the sense of belonging they have found. To believe in Science you don't understand (referring to them not you), is to believe in nothing. Understand the man not the problem and you will answer your questions in a more meaningful way.

except I didn't enspouse reasonable argument sourced from scientific theory. I asked them why the same constellations look different in the southern hemisphere. and received no response. I studiously avoided any non-personally verifiable theory for the very reason you mention. at least until much later when it became clear that they weren't going to talk about basic observational data anyway. It is better to lose the social cohesion of mistaken viewpoints and acccept personal responsibility for developing a viewpoint of the world that is coherent with observational data, then it is to just languish in cultish agreement for the sake of belonging.

iow it's not just that they're "thinking critically from different assumptions." The viewpoint doesn't explain basic observational fact.

None of that means the earth is flat though lol

it doesn't but its also true social cohesion is important. I just don't think its worth suspension of personal responsibility and critical thinking, which is what I'm observing.

Sure but there are levels. If someone denies gravity and jumps off of a cliff, their beliefs will be very short lived. Most concepts have little or no consequences if you disbelieve them. If the flat Earthers tried to circumnavigate the Earth by the stars they would realize their errors but I guess they will not. On the point of suspension of personal responsibility and critical thinking, I don't think that is a fair framing. From their perspective that they are not suspending personal responsibility and critical thinking. From their perspective they believe the opposite, that they are the one exercising the highest degree of personal responsibility and critical thinking. Their thinking doesn't align with a coherent and well argued scientific reasoning but they believe they are engaging in deep thought. I would posit that Flat Earthers engage in more thought on these matters than the vast majority of people who passively believe Science even tho they don't understand it. If one considers all of human history much effort and thought has been put into belief systems. Was no critical thinking put into early human history just because it doesn't align with current Science. If a scientist from the distant past was alive today and arguing for the science of their time because he couldn't grok modern Science, would you call him out for suspending personal responsibility and critical thinking?

I started with this today.

Why is it better to lose the social cohesion of mistaken viewpoints? What tangible benefits do you receive? Also, a man who lived through Covid must acknowledge that the cultish agreement for the sake of belonging still exists under the guise of Science.

If they approach this as a true belief system, then applying any logic will fail. Most religions have this at their core. Irrefutable faith in their belief system. Any attack on their belief is a test of their faith. Should they waver they will have failed their faith.

oh I argue with those people too it's okay to have smaller, more fractured groups that identify by niche interests. smaller groups that compete or cooperate on the basis of *the effectiveness of their ideas* is a better social outcome than large groups driven by herd mentality. but this is maximally effective if people are actually thinking critically and creating views that map to their observations.

and it's fine if people want to do that. but they should be clear that's what they are doing.

They can't be clear they are doing that because it would go against their faith. For these flat Earthers their belief system seems to extend into a belief that they are engaging in truth.

so which is it? are they applying MORE critical thinking than normies or is it as a belief system? 🤔

I think to have success with changing these people's minds, one would need to offer a framing of tangible benefits. Like for instance if they were to attempt navigating the ocean by the stars.

therefore the stars in the southern hemisphere

since the benefits are primarily social as you pointed out I think that's unlikely to be effective. like covid hysteria, it's mostly just flag waving and group identification.

Ok I just watched that Antarctica video. The idea that that somehow suggests the earth is flat is patently insane lol.