<<  >> (p.234)
    Author Topic: Flat Earth  (Read 1095238 times)
    notbatman (OP)
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 2212
    Merit: 1038



    View Profile
    April 16, 2017, 04:24:01 PM
    Last edit: April 16, 2017, 04:38:08 PM by notbatman
     #4661

    Fuck off, both M&M and Airy's Failure (keyword here is failure), prove the Earth is motionless. As for Sagnac's interferometer measurements at 10% of the predicted velocity of Earth's rotation and with a sidereal cycle they most certainly do not prove the Earth is rotating but that there's an aether drift.

    So yes, we've done this dance before and you're still on the losing side of the argument, faggot.

    Your ability to draw conclusions from data is right up there with your ability to will over people using your eloquent terms of endearment for others who don't share your point of view.

    First you state that Michelson-Morley's and Airy's experiments prove that the Earth is motionless, then you go on that Sagnac's experiment proves that there's an aether drift. Your failure here is that if there is an aether drift then the Earth is moving through this aether and your two statements contradict each other.


    [...snip...] I made a minor edit; M&M actually measured the aether drift (10% predicted velocity), I believe they used Sagnac's interferometer.[...snip...]


    Again, if the experiment proves an aether drift then it proves the Earth is moving.

    Lastly, Sagnac didn't perform his experiment until the early 1900s and yet you believe that Michelson and Morley used his version of interferometer back in 1887??? Lift your game son.

    Sagnac's experiment proves the aether using an interferometer and discredits the relativistic interpretation of Michaelson & Morley's experiment. M&M's experiment proves the Earth is motionless using a similar interferometer.

    That's what I got and you're not going to beat it even if I get a bit mixed up without all the documents in front of me on my phone.

    Also the aether drift cycle is 23h 56m, that's sidereal time and it's the stars that are in motion; Airy's Failure proves this empirically. The aether drift is the aether in motion, it has properties like a liquid crystal.


    I've got three peer reviewed repeatable experiments that when taken together prove empirically that the Earth is motionless.


    You have to ignore Sagnac's results, say there are waves in nothing and claim Airy's failure is an aberration to maintain that the Earth is moving. Go fuck your mother.

    I'm not questioning the validity of the three experiments, nor their outcomes, as you say, they are peer reviewed and repeatable experiments. What I am questioning is your conclusions from the results and your inability to do this objectively.

    All three experiments failed to provide evidence of an aether. Now you can draw a number of conclusions from this:

    • There is no aether.
    • The Earth is not moving through the aether.
    • The Earth and the aether move together in such a way as to cause zero aether wind (drag/drift).
    • The experiment was flawed.

    We can rule out the last conclusion as many others have reviewed the experiments and stated that they should work.

    Given that you believe that the aether exists you should be able to see that both the second and third options are valid conclusions for an Earth and aether model, but given that you're pushing a flat Earth model you subjectively choose option two as it suits your needs rather than actually proving the Earth to be motionless.

    Something that puzzles me is why you would believe in an aether in the first place. The aether was proposed as a medium for light to travel through in the vacuum of outer space. If you're a flat Earth believer you don't need the presence of an aether for light to travel through as the entirety of the Earth's atmosphere is contained within the dome.

    If you claim there's no aether then you have to accept Einstein's relativistic interpretation of the M&M experiment. Einstein's relativistic interpretation claims there's waves in nothing, that's like dividing by zero. Go fuck yourself kike.

Page 233
Viewing Page: 234