Win / Conspiracies
Conspiracies
Communities Topics Log In Sign Up
Sign In
Hot
All Posts
Settings
All
Profile
Saved
Upvoted
Hidden
Messages

Your Communities

General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
News
Changelogs

More Communities

frenworld
OhTwitter
MillionDollarExtreme
NoNewNormal
Ladies
Conspiracies
GreatAwakening
IP2Always
GameDev
ParallelSociety
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service
Content Policy
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES • All General AskWin Funny Technology Animals Sports Gaming DIY Health Positive Privacy
Conspiracies Conspiracy Theories & Facts
hot new rising top

Sign In or Create an Account

9
Any flat earther here who can show me their calculations to predict an eclipse based on a flat earth model?
posted 1 year ago by vpnsurfer 1 year ago by vpnsurfer +14 / -5

Predictions: at best some incoherent rant that they can but won't do it for some bullshit reason

87 comments share
87 comments share save hide report block hide replies
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (87)
sorted by:
▲ 1 ▼
– ceva 1 point 1 year ago +1 / -0

Consider "my law" to be brand new, established only by me, and in no books. It is being published right here and right now, in this conversation. How can you possibly be sure that the law is incorrect, especially considering that you utterly fail to find any fault in it and cannot provide any measurement (your own or anyone esles) which contradicts it? Please attempt to answer this rhetorical question if you can.

My whole point is I have no desire to give weight to an anonymous someone's bare statement that has no supporting data and consider it to be a law.

surely this does not preclude the pressure the gas itself exerts in trying to expand the confines of the balloon.

Ah, so the gas is exerting pressure trying to expand the confines! Precisely.

So, we're back to a model where, logically, the pressure should be equal throughout the balloon, as the gas is working to expand outward

Surely you have encountered this newtonian relativism before? Centripetal vs centrifugal?

Not relevant here, actually! These are rotational forces. We're talking about air in a container.

The gas sits on the gas beneath it

But it's not sitting. It's expanding

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– jack445566778899 1 point 1 year ago +1 / -0

My whole point is I have no desire to give weight to an anonymous someone's bare statement that has no supporting data and consider it to be a law.

How about many hundreds (likely thousands) of non-anonymous statements and all the supporting data in the world coupled with none which contradicts it? That's the case here.

You can continue to refuse to research/read and doubt the former all you like, but the latter is undeniable. You cannot measure or find anyone who has measured anything to contradict the law. That's what makes it a law (and no other reason; publishing, anonymity of author, etc do not factor in in any way)

So, we're back to a model where, logically, the pressure should be equal throughout the balloon, as the gas is working to expand outward

If gas itself had no weight, indeed that might be the case. Because the gas has weight, and that weight exceeds the expansion force of the gas - it isn't. In imagination all things are possible - not reality.

Not relevant here, actually!

It's an analogy... It is conceptualizing/modeling the same phenomenon from 2 different angles/directions. In this regard, what we are talking about is virtually identical. You can conceive of the gas applying the force (of pressure) outwards or the walls applying it inwards and either (or a combination of both) will work fine. As long as you are consistent, it doesn't matter - your equations will work and apply to what we observe.

The reason the law is that the gas pressure is derived from the container walls is because there are no measurements of gas pressure without such a container and there are only measurements of pressure inside a container. Indeed, the entire concept of "pressure" is nonsensical without such a container. Gas expansion (indeed, any motion) without a container, at best, would/could be called wind.

But it's not sitting. It's expanding

Until it cannot anymore! It is prevented from expanding more by the confines of the container and the weight of the gas itself. Gas reaches rest too - or if you prefer, equilibrium.

It continues to try to expand, as that is gas' nature.

permalink parent save report block reply

GIFs

Conspiracies Wiki & Links

Conspiracies Book List

External Digital Book Libraries

Mod Logs

Honor Roll

Conspiracies.win: This is a forum for free thinking and for discussing issues which have captured your imagination. Please respect other views and opinions, and keep an open mind. Our goal is to create a fairer and more transparent world for a better future.

Community Rules: <click this link for a detailed explanation of the rules

Rule 1: Be respectful. Attack the argument, not the person.

Rule 2: Don't abuse the report function.

Rule 3: No excessive, unnecessary and/or bullying "meta" posts.

To prevent SPAM, posts from accounts younger than 4 days old, and/or with <50 points, wont appear in the feed until approved by a mod.

Disclaimer: Submissions/comments of exceptionally low quality, trolling, stalking, spam, and those submissions/comments determined to be intentionally misleading, calls to violence and/or abuse of other users here, may all be removed at moderator's discretion.

Moderators

  • Doggos
  • axolotl_peyotl
  • trinadin
  • PutinLovesCats
  • clemaneuverers
  • C
Message the Moderators

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy

2025.03.01 - j6rsh (status)

Copyright © 2024.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy