Twelve questions for u/Eisenhorn
(www.youtube.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (48)
sorted by:
When? Could you quote me? I think you have misunderstood.
We are still talking about the one clam that i made. Nothing has been added or changed about it. Best not to "go for another bite" until we're done chewing the food already in our mouths, don't you think?
Can't what? Can't come up with a procedure to measure the curvature of still water directly? Are you sure you aren't describing your own shortcomings?
It isn't hard to measure the surface of still water directly, and there are many ways to go about it. But you always have to measure the surface of the water in order to do it.
Are you claiming that measuring the surface curvature of water is impossible?
What point are you trying to make?
How on earth did you misunderstand my previous comment that badly? Could you please quote what you read and how you interpreted it to come to this conclusion? I was saying the opposite of that.
There are a few, but as i said - we should finish chewing the one bite before moving on to others. The main point is that the initial claim i made is correct - even though it is admittedly wild to recognize and accept.
You claimed that the link I provided did not provide a method to measure the curvature of the Earth.
Do you stand by that claim?
Let me make it very simple for you:
If there is a method to measure the curvature of the earth, it also measures the curvature of the oceans covering the earth.
So, if you agree that it is possible to measure the curvature of the Earth, you also agree that this method will measure the curvature of the oceans covering the Earth.
Do you understand what I am saying?
It's not really a claim, but what i said was that the link you provided was not an example of directly measuring the surface of water and measuring it to curve convexly the way the globe model describes. There is no measurement of any curvature OR the surface of water in the link you provided, This isn't so much "a claim" as it is plainly obvious and without any possible refutation.
Agreed! This is what i mean by "taking more bites before you are done chewing the one in your mouth". We are still only discussing one claim - my first one. We can get to the rest once we are done with it.
You responded to that claim that there was a procedure to measure the curvature of the surface of water (specifically the curvature described by the globe model) and then provided a link to a procedure which didn't in any way do that. Pretty simple right?
This seems a bit like a tautology. The oceans are a part of that earth, so if you had a method to measure all of the earth - you would necessarily have to measure the oceans in order to do it... We are currently struggling to measure (even purely in imagination/hypothetically!) even a small to moderately sized lake (frozen or otherwise) - so measuring the entirety of the world instead is obviously quite out of the question.
Yes! And i pose the same question to you - forever and always while discussing. Please ask me questions if you do not understand, or disagree! The more specific the question, the more likely i can provide the specific answer you are looking for (assuming i have it to give, of course!)
Exactly that.
There are many approaches, but the most practical / easiest to execute are done when the water is frozen in place.
You could use a ruler in that case, if you were crazy and/or wanted to. There are, of course many more efficient ways than that.
How long would that ruler have to be to measure the curvature of an ocean?
Are you implying that it's impossible to measure the curvature of the Earth unless the surface is perfectly smooth?
Such as?
Most of the oceans don't freeze over, but the ones which do freeze (a few miles or so of them anyway - enough to measure such curvature) you could do with the same standard ruler the crazy (and obsessively committed, no doubt) person in my first hypothetical used.
Again, i am confused by your interpretation of the things i've said. What specifically did i say to make you think i implied that? Please provide specific quotes, as it will help me to understand the disconnect and possibly communicate with you more effectively in the future!
I was saying that measuring the surface of water to determine its curvature (or distinct lack thereof as the case may be) is much easier when the water is frozen solid - and mostly smooth. Accounting for and navigating topology is obviously not impossible - but it is much more difficult.
A surveyor's/trundle wheel for one! Lol.