UA Question

  • 27 Replies
  • 3738 Views
?

Blacksmith

  • 113
  • Debunker of Debauchery
UA Question
« on: August 28, 2014, 12:36:06 PM »
If the whole of the earth is being accelerated by the 'UA' force, then how come when I take a shovel full of earth, or dig a big rock out of the earth, they still obey gravity?
Tally Count of Every Piece of Evidence for a Flat Earth, Ever:

Re: UA Question
« Reply #1 on: August 28, 2014, 01:28:28 PM »
If the whole of the earth is being accelerated by the 'UA' force, then how come when I take a shovel full of earth, or dig a big rock out of the earth, they still obey gravity?
The dominant answer seems to be that the FE shields stuff above it from the UA, creating a kind of an air-pocket where the "wind" doesn't push stuff up.

?

Blacksmith

  • 113
  • Debunker of Debauchery
Re: UA Question
« Reply #2 on: August 28, 2014, 01:55:39 PM »
One has to wonder how far down you must go to feel the lack of gravity.
Tally Count of Every Piece of Evidence for a Flat Earth, Ever:

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: UA Question
« Reply #3 on: August 28, 2014, 04:09:36 PM »
I don't understand what you are saying.  If you pick up a shovel of dirt, then of course it will have weight.  Is it caused by gravity, or by UA?  How can you tell?   

?

Blacksmith

  • 113
  • Debunker of Debauchery
Re: UA Question
« Reply #4 on: August 28, 2014, 04:38:34 PM »
The point is, if the entire earth is being accelerated, then how come when you push a piece of the earth upwards, it doesn't just float upwards?
Tally Count of Every Piece of Evidence for a Flat Earth, Ever:

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: UA Question
« Reply #5 on: August 28, 2014, 04:56:48 PM »
The point is, if the entire earth is being accelerated, then how come when you push a piece of the earth upwards, it doesn't just float upwards?

Because it would be traveling at a constant velocity while the Earth is accelerating, maybe?  Would the Earth not rise up to meet the scoop of dirt? 

?

Blacksmith

  • 113
  • Debunker of Debauchery
Re: UA Question
« Reply #6 on: August 28, 2014, 05:39:16 PM »
Scratch that. Let me put it simply for you. If the earth is what is accelerating, then what causes every piece of the earth ever dug up to stop accelerating?
Tally Count of Every Piece of Evidence for a Flat Earth, Ever:

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: UA Question
« Reply #7 on: August 28, 2014, 05:54:30 PM »
Because the Earth is accelerating, but things that leave the Earth are not?  Seriously, what are you having problems understanding?   

?

Blacksmith

  • 113
  • Debunker of Debauchery
Re: UA Question
« Reply #8 on: August 28, 2014, 05:59:03 PM »
What defines something as being part of the Earth? Is there a deity that keeps track of what pieces of the earth aren't tied down and stops accelerating them? Come on, stop beating around the bush.
Tally Count of Every Piece of Evidence for a Flat Earth, Ever:

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: UA Question
« Reply #9 on: August 28, 2014, 06:16:48 PM »
If you were traveling in a space ship, and had a ball in your hand, the ball would accelerate at the same rate as you unless you toss the ball in the air.  Then, you would accelerate up to meet the ball. 

Re: UA Question
« Reply #10 on: August 28, 2014, 06:23:11 PM »
That's because the space ship's engines push on the hull of the craft, not the ball. This affect happens because the force is transmitted mechanically. The UA apparently pushes on the earth. What makes it stop pushing on parts of the earth that are detached?

Re: UA Question
« Reply #11 on: August 28, 2014, 06:25:09 PM »
And why doesn't the moon fall down?

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: UA Question
« Reply #12 on: August 28, 2014, 06:39:20 PM »
Of course, if something is detached, the Earth would no longer push on it.  You are getting more and more confusing with each post.  Are you drunk? 

Re: UA Question
« Reply #13 on: August 28, 2014, 06:45:05 PM »
Of course, if something is detached, the Earth would no longer push on it.  You are getting more and more confusing with each post.  Are you drunk?

Plastered

So which parts of the earth does the UA push on then?

And why doesn't the moon fall down?

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: UA Question
« Reply #14 on: August 28, 2014, 07:06:47 PM »
The parts that are touching the Earth are accelerated.  The parts that are not in direct contact are not.  It is not rocket science. 

?

Blacksmith

  • 113
  • Debunker of Debauchery
Re: UA Question
« Reply #15 on: August 28, 2014, 09:22:06 PM »
You still fail to see the point. What is considered the earth and what isn't? Because if the entire earth is being accelerated, then why do parts of the earth not accelerate? Dang it, you can't be too stupid to see the point, I don't believe anyone could be.
Tally Count of Every Piece of Evidence for a Flat Earth, Ever:

Re: UA Question
« Reply #16 on: August 29, 2014, 03:47:04 AM »
It looks like something similar to wilful ignorance on your side, Blacksmith. I don't believe any of this FE nonsense, but at least see what jroa is trying to say.

Take a large, vertically oriented propeller/fan(like the ones where you can simulate falling through the atmosphere) or a vertical aerodynamic tunnel. This will be an equivalent of the aetheric wind.

Now take a large, thick mattress. This will be the FE. Place it in the air current and it will be lifted and go up until the force pushing it is too weak(which for some reason doesn't happen in the FE model...).

If you were sitting on the mattress, you would feel it pushing against you. If you held something and dropped it, it will hit the mattress, as the mattress is accelerating upwards while the thing you dropped is no longer affected, directly or indirectly(through your hand), by the wind. You are not pushed up by the wind directly because the mattress shields you from it while it is being pushed by it. If you ripped a piece of mattress and dropped it, it will still drop, as there is no wind blowing on it either way.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2014, 03:49:09 AM by Macpie »

Re: UA Question
« Reply #17 on: August 29, 2014, 06:04:36 AM »
It is not rocket science.
That, I think we can agree on.  It's certainly not science.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

?

Blacksmith

  • 113
  • Debunker of Debauchery
Re: UA Question
« Reply #18 on: August 29, 2014, 08:49:09 AM »
*sigh* I understand what their saying. However, they say the entire earth is accelerating, so I thought I would point out how naive it is to say the whole earth... Because you can't really define what's the earth and what isn't. It seems to me that they see the UA as a, well, universal force. Just like gravity. So it doesn't make sense to me that it would only push on the bottom unless it were actually something else pushing on the earth (like rocket engines for the earth) and the UA hypothesis is so ill-defined and shoddy that you can basically just say whatever you want about it because there are no facts on the subject. It just doesn't make sense.
Tally Count of Every Piece of Evidence for a Flat Earth, Ever:

Re: UA Question
« Reply #19 on: August 29, 2014, 11:11:03 AM »
It just doesn't make sense.
I've never quite understood why they rejected gravity.  I know the argument is that gravity would pull the earth into a sphere - but surely you could just say that the earth contains some kind of superdense rigid disc,  made of unobtanium or something, that keeps it all lovely and flat, whilst generating sufficient gravity.

As a hypothesis, UA is broken out of the box.  My "superdense disc" hypothesis, whilst piffle, is harder to debunk.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

*

DuckDodgers

  • One Duck to Rule Them All
  • 5479
  • What's supposed to go here?
Re: UA Question
« Reply #20 on: August 29, 2014, 12:07:49 PM »
What is a "part of the earth"? Anything in contact with the earth through anything rigid. What isn't?  Stuff that is not in direct contact with the earth through a rigid object.
markjo, what force can not pass through a solid or liquid?
Magnetism for one and electric is the other.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: UA Question
« Reply #21 on: August 29, 2014, 09:04:50 PM »
It just doesn't make sense.
I've never quite understood why they rejected gravity.  I know the argument is that gravity would pull the earth into a sphere - but surely you could just say that the earth contains some kind of superdense rigid disc,  made of unobtanium or something, that keeps it all lovely and flat, whilst generating sufficient gravity.
Because gravity acts towards the center of mass of an object. 
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: UA Question
« Reply #22 on: August 30, 2014, 08:52:16 AM »
It just doesn't make sense.
I've never quite understood why they rejected gravity.  I know the argument is that gravity would pull the earth into a sphere - but surely you could just say that the earth contains some kind of superdense rigid disc,  made of unobtanium or something, that keeps it all lovely and flat, whilst generating sufficient gravity.
Because gravity acts towards the center of mass of an object.
Yes, but I am positing some kind of exotic material that makes up the disc.

As I say, piffle, but harder to debunk.

Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: UA Question
« Reply #23 on: August 30, 2014, 09:13:57 AM »
It just doesn't make sense.
I've never quite understood why they rejected gravity.  I know the argument is that gravity would pull the earth into a sphere - but surely you could just say that the earth contains some kind of superdense rigid disc,  made of unobtanium or something, that keeps it all lovely and flat, whilst generating sufficient gravity.
Because gravity acts towards the center of mass of an object.
Yes, but I am positing some kind of exotic material that makes up the disc.

As I say, piffle, but harder to debunk.
If gravity makes things fall towards the center of mass and the center of mass is somewhere below the center of the disc (the north pole), then things are likely to fall somewhat diagonally for most people, especially for people in the southern hemiplane.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: UA Question
« Reply #24 on: August 30, 2014, 09:57:18 AM »

If gravity makes things fall towards the center of mass
The Unobtanium disc does not have a centre of mass.  Every part of the disc pulls equally downwards.

Quote
southern hemiplane.
Let's not bring that into it.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: UA Question
« Reply #25 on: August 30, 2014, 04:43:06 PM »
If gravity makes things fall towards the center of mass
The Unobtanium disc does not have a centre of mass.  Every part of the disc pulls equally downwards.
If it's finite and it has mass, then it has a center of mass.  An infinite plane is a different story, however.
« Last Edit: August 30, 2014, 04:44:53 PM by markjo »
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: UA Question
« Reply #26 on: September 04, 2014, 09:06:00 AM »
What is causing this 'uniform acceleration' anyway?

Newton's first law of motion is that an object in a state of uniform motion remains in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it. If the earth was moving at a constant speed, it would not need an external force. But acceleration does require an external force.

In 2001 A Space Odyssey, the astronauts were on board a circular space ship which was revolving at a constant speed, creating a centrifugal force equivalent to gravity. But if the speed of the rotation increased, the centrifugal force would increase as well, and if it was constantly accelerating, the centrifugal force would reach a point at which the astronauts would be unable to stand up, and their bodies would eventually be crushed. Wouldn't the same thing happen on an eternally accelerating earth?

Re: UA Question
« Reply #27 on: September 04, 2014, 09:51:47 AM »
In 2001 A Space Odyssey, the astronauts were on board a circular space ship which was revolving at a constant speed, creating a centrifugal force equivalent to gravity. But if the speed of the rotation increased, the centrifugal force would increase as well, and if it was constantly accelerating, the centrifugal force would reach a point at which the astronauts would be unable to stand up, and their bodies would eventually be crushed. Wouldn't the same thing happen on an eternally accelerating earth?

Nope, it wouldn't, as the FErs say the FE is accelerating at a constant rate(equal to 1g). There are still a LOT of holes in the UA thingy, though.