Because he simply cannot answer. :frown:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoii
Printable View
Because he simply cannot answer. :frown:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoii
not sure, it could be that they came here in response to Vendaku's coming to their forum, of vendaku came there in response to them coming here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Khadia
Let's look at this another way.Quote:
Originally Posted by xeLJoYo
You are in the car. It starts to accelerate. Relative to you, the car is not moving. To you, the car's acceleration is zero. Next, someone outside the car decides to measure the acceleration by timing the car and using the stripes on the road. This person will measure a different acceleration than you did in the car. Someone else on the moon, decides to measure the acceleration by bouncing a laser off the car. Do to the moon orbiting the earth, the acceleration measured by this person is different from the other two. Yet these all describe the same event. Relativity states that all inertial frames of reference are equivalent.
lol that's exacly what i'm saying. here can't base his theory properly, but still claims that the theory is correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vendaku~Metal
Hum, retarded fanboy syndrome ? Or another know-it-all?Quote:
Originally Posted by Unleashed Hell
Are all you FE guys just ignorant or is it just me who thinks that?Quote:
Originally Posted by me that's who
We are trying to prove here that constant acceleration of this magnitude (the acceleration rate necessary to keep us on earth) is simply not possible.
Let's continue with our example: Even though relative to the car the acceleration is zero, that doesn't mean the car isn't going as fast as it is (or that it isn't accelerating at the rate it's accelerating). If the car is going 100 mph and you're in it, relatively to you the car is stationary. But that doesn't mean the car isn't going 100 mph! The same is with the rate of acceleration. If the car is going 1 mph faster every 2 seconds, you (the guy in the car) still thinks the car is what you call stationary (because you are being dragged along), but that doesn't stop the car from accelerating! And this acceleration is certainly not stopped by some outside observer (observers don't affect anything).
This is the same with the planet earth with your flat-earth theory. If the Earth is accelerating at a constant rate, it WILL eventually reach the speed of light UNLESS the rate of acceleration changes (in this case, lowers). We'll take out the car example again. If you're in a car accelerating at a fast rate, and suddenly the acceleration rate changes (in this case, lowers (just like with the earth)) you WILL feel it. You will be pushed MUCH less into your seat (and if the rate lowers alot, you will be pushed OUT of your seat unless you wear a seatbelt).
The problem with the flat-earth theory is that the acceleration rate is a little more extreme then that of a car. If the acceleration rate lowers, which it has to if it approaches the speed of light, you won't feel it just a tiny bit, you will feel it IMMENSELY. First you wont fall so easily to the ground anymore (just like on the moon pictures where the guys jump and it takes ages to get back on the moon again <--- just an example) and later on you wont come back at all --> you fall off the earth. This all depends on how fast the acceleration rate changes of course, it could be that you immediately fall off the earth because of the immense rate change which could occur all of a sudden. The fact remains that with this theory, you WILL fall off the earth (unless you can go faster then the speed of light, which you can't or if something else keeps you from falling off the earth, which is also known as gravity. The problem with that is that your theory is based on the fact that gravity does not exist, which is probably one of the major problems in your theory).
Now, if you still don't understand what the hell I'm talking about, then I suggest you read it again before posting. Your theory is a piece of crap, and this is not the only example that proves it (I still haven't seen you guys answer my other problem in this forum or you own).
I find it funny that you keep arguing the same thing yet you still have yet to look up relativity.
Let's go back to the car.
I am in it and we are accelerating. To me, the car is stationary, thus it's acceleration to me, is zero. To the person outside the car, it is accelerating. To the person on the moon it is accelerating. However, the rate of acceleration will not be aggreed upon by the three. I say it is zero. You say I am accelerating at 3m/s^2. The person on the moon says I am accelerating at 10m/s^2. All are describing the same thing, yet they don't agree.
Now, using Newtonian mechanics, an object accelerating at 9.8m/s^2 will reach the speed of light in just under one year. However, Newtonian mechanics is wrong, and the error only shows itself as we approach relativistic velocities.
Under relativity, velocity does not add linearly, but does so in a logrithmic fashion. One could accelerate at a constant rate, yet they would approach the speed of light asymptotically.
http://physics.nmt.edu/%7Eraymond/cl...ook/img845.png (7.16) Plug in the numbers and let me know when we reach the speed of light.
Or you can actually look it up:
Acceleration in Special Relativity
Thank you for finally posting something relevant which we havent already heard. Now, I will look into this tomorrow as it's past midnight here. Maybe you can reply to my earlier post about the pole star? Thank you...Quote:
Originally Posted by me that's who
Let's back up for a second and take a look at what we're talking about here. The important thing to remember is that Earth's mass only increases from a reference frame in which Earth is approaching c.
As an example, imagine two observers, Bob and Jim, who are floating in space, watching Earth accelerate away from them.
Bob is moving forward at 10m/s, Jim at 20m/s*. If Earth is accelerating at 9.8m/s^2 for three seconds, its velocity relative to both of them has increased by 29.4m/s. This means that to Bob, Earth is now traveling at 19.4m/s, and relative to Jim it is now traveling at 9.4m/s. If things continue on like this, Earth will near c sooner for Bob than it will for Jim, which means its acceleration will start to decrease sooner for Bob than it will for Jim.
From this it is fairly obvious that in a frame of reference accelerating along with Earth (us), Earth will never approach c, and its acceleration will never slow.
If this isn't enough to convince you, here's a link to "PhysicsForums" where one of our members asked the exact same question.
From the linked thread:
And here's a link to the thread on the FE forums discussing this exact question.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parlyne
*Since velocity is relative, we'll say that both are moving with respect to the point where Earth began accelerating.
Why are you avoiding 90% of the questions presented? I'll keep asking until you give an answer. I've noticed you do it all the time on your forum too.
How could I have missed this thread :D We have talked about this in school and it's a really great discussion subject! I love theoretical solutions that just doesn't work in practics but noone can explain why.
You know, all you have to do is go on a 1 day flight....get in the air, set your GPS and just fly...keep on the same set path, and guess what, YOU'LL END UP IN THE SAME F*CKEN SPOT...you sir, are a retard.
Well, you'd probably have to pick a flight path that doesn't involve flying through other countries airspace without permission. But, yeah that's the whole idea. :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by DaCheat
Now that's a theory. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by DaCheat
You are obviously not a pilot...Quote:
Originally Posted by DaCheat