r/conspiracy: Flat Earth test

Flat Earth test

0 2015-11-15 by THE-1138

I am not a flat Eather but it bothers me that this conspiracy hasn't been completely debunked yet. I think this could be a method to show the definitive truth. One of the experiments flat Eathers look to is an experiment done in a canal that shows no curvature. But I suspect this may lead to inaccuracies because water may react differently when filling areas on flat land compared to a large ocean. My idea is to do somekind of test along the beaches of the ocean. The water should follow the curve of the Earth at the ocean shores. So you could build some type of small towers at this point and then go down shore and build another tower and try to measue the curvature there using lasers or a particle acclerator beam or even long cables stretched between towers.

71 comments

5 The_Noble_Lie 2015-11-15

If the water doesn't seem to follow the curve of the earth on canals, why should it follow the curve of the earth on ocean shores? Perhaps the true way to test this is by looking towards the horizon of the massive oceans (which, by either gravity ... or upwards acceleration, whatever you believe, should either be precisely flat or precisely wrap around the earth.) Are their claims of perspective being the reason things disappear have some truth to it? Does a telescope truly "recover" the sight of a ship that sunk past the horizon?

This seems to be the easiest of tests if you really wanted to know the answer (and one must perform it himself since there is no real reason to believe scientific or internet-found claims without a doubt . To measure the flatness or rotundity using your proposed method will likely result in unmanageable sources of error/deviation from the actual value.

2 THE-1138 2015-11-15

There's something called light refraction though.. this is why scientists claim that things look higher at the horizon than they should. But flat Earthers don't buy this claim.

The reason I think it doesn't follow with canals is because the localized gravity on land may prevent the curvature from taking effect. I think land filling valleys on Earth when geological formations were created may be totally flat for the same reason. And that flat Earth between mountains would cause the water to follow the same shape. The same with lakes too.

I think the curvature would follow on ocean shores because the water would follow the contour of the oceans more rather than the localized gravity on land. There are gravity maps that show gravity is stronger at different places on Eath. The shores may be affected a bit but I suspect not as much as on land due to the formations I talked about previously.

4 The_Noble_Lie 2015-11-15

light refraction

Can you explain that a little more? Are you suggesting this as a solution to why a telescope might make an object that disappeared over the horizon, appear again (assuming that its true, which I find hard to believe but haven't done the experiment myself)

Edit: Refraction would only be introduced if the local density above the water changes as one measures out towards the deep ocean/horizon. This is certianly plausible, since perhaps it generally gets colder out towards the ocean, causing light to bend downwards as it passes through the gradient of increasing index of refraction. But then why did the ship disappear in the first place? Too small to see?

As for local gravity and geological formation: It follows that the more flat a particular region is, the more curved it most be in another area. You can imagine this as we live on something less discrete than this random image of a 3d shape (http://www.pigsbladderfootball.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Screen-Shot-2012-07-01-at-23.30.50.png)

I think your point may be that flat earthers are focusing on measurements taken on the flat surfaces? But then we should be able to pinpoint areas of largely increased curvature to make up for the flat areas.

1 THE-1138 2015-11-15

Yes. It's the same kind of thing that causes mirages on deserts. Water in dense atmosphere causes refraction of light - just like how light refracts through glass for the same reason. Scientists claim this is why the curvature of the Earth isn't as noticeable as it should be and why you can see objects you shouldn't if the Earth is curved.

Since I believe you can't see the curvature as easily on land or water on land then that leaves the ocean. But getting accurate measurements on an unstable ocean surface is problematic. This is why I think the ocean shore is the best place to do a test like this. You would have an unimpeded line of site on the shore as well because people don't build on it or you could measure from 2 different outcrops or "points" downshore.

Refractions might be why a laser might not work.. but maybe if you use a high power laser pulse you could get around this problem.. or a particle accelerator. Or long cables you could measure in various ways.

3 The_Noble_Lie 2015-11-15

This still didn't answer my question. I completely comprehend why refraction might make curvature less detectable. But then we'd be able to reverse this affect by looking from the deep ocean towards the shore (supposing the temperature increases in that direction and the index of refraction decreases.) Objects should disappear over the horizon faster. (Closer to the measurer)

Regardless this still doesn't get to the idea that objects might very well reappear if looking through a telescope. As mentioned in my first post, I am most curious in substantiating this claim that I've read in numerous places. Perhaps its blatantly false. But let's suppose the phenomenon happened. Do you believe it can be explained by light refractions?

1 THE-1138 2015-11-15

I'm not sure that were are talking about the same thing. When you say "appear again" are you refering to how you can see an object through a telescope that you couldn't see with the naked eye?

2 The_Noble_Lie 2015-11-15

Yep. That's the unsubstantiated, confusing claim I've read in a couple of places. But it would have great ramifications if true. And I don't believe it can be explained using refraction. But also, my first paragraph shows that the earth would appear more curved depending on which you are measuring. Also if in the very deep ocean, I don't believe refraction would be part of the equation at all.

1 THE-1138 2015-11-15

My understanding is that the object doesn't reappear... not sure how you interpret reappear. My view is that it's made visible through the telescope. The reason for this is perspective. The object is just too small when not magnified to be able to see it properly. The refraction is always there.

Also.. I get the impression you are saying that temperature is an issue with refraction and that's why it shouldn't work towards shore? I think temperature is just a small part of it but the refraction is always there.

2 The_Noble_Lie 2015-11-15

Refraction can't just always be there. You'd have to at least suggest why it'd always be there. If there are no local deviations in some physical property of the air above the surface of the ocean, then I'd see no reason why it'd be there unless we begin discussing the potential electromagnetic field effects inherent in our earth-atmosphere system.

I feel like the argument that refraction is "always there" stems from scientific explanation of one aspect of sunsets. In this case, I'd agree refraction is always there, since light is traveling through greatly differing densities/temperatures of the atmosphere at steep angles.

And for clarification, yes, i meant disappear/reappear in the sense that our biological eyesight had insignificant magnification to identify some far away object still in line of sight.

1 THE-1138 2015-11-15

Refraction can't just always be there.

I'm not following here.

1 The_Noble_Lie 2015-11-15

I thought I explained it the next few sentences and paragraph. What wasn't clear?

Are you suggesting that light can never travel straight within atmospheres? Then why not also within space? Where can it never travel straight?

1 THE-1138 2015-11-15

Yes, that's the claim.. anywhere in the atmosphere there is refraction. The denser the atmosphere the more refraction. In space this isn't the case because there is no atmosphere. But our view of space is not accurate because of the atmosphere. I mean I am not saying there isn't a possibility that this is wrong a lie. But according to their claims it is consistent.

-1 THE-1138 2015-11-15

As for local gravity and geological formation: It follows that the more flat a particular region is, the more curved it most be in another area. You can imagine this as we live on something less discrete than this random image of a 3d shape (http://www.pigsbladderfootball.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Screen-Shot-2012-07-01-at-23.30.50.png) I think your point may be that flat earthers are focusing on measurements taken on the flat surfaces? But then we should be able to pinpoint areas of largely increased curvature to make up for the flat areas.

Regarding this comment.. imagine you blew that geometric shape up dramatically.. I imagine the land areas on the Earth's surface being a more detailed version - many more connecting rods and geometric surfaces. And the connecting rods would be mountain ranges. The inner wells would be like concave troughs. Or flat spots or troughs with flat spots in the center. And shallow water would follow this gravity shape as well.

4 Rockran 2015-11-15

but it bothers me that this conspiracy hasn't been completely debunked yet

Which is another way of admitting you don't know much on the subject.

Just watch the sun going over the horizon. Such a thing cannot happen on a flat earth.

1 THE-1138 2015-11-15

Flat Earthers claim this is just due to perspective.... they also point out that the sun doesn't light the bottoms of the clouds as it should when going down. I don't know about this but that's their claim.

4 Rockran 2015-11-15

They can spout all the nonsense they want, it's not possible for the sun to go over the horizon if the Earth were flat.

they also point out that the sun doesn't light the bottoms of the clouds as it should when going down.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/Sunset_2007-1.jpg

???

0 austinitise 2015-11-15

All I hear is crickets.