Flat Earth FAQ

Physics

Q: "What is the circumference and diameter of the Earth?"

Circumference: 125,891 km (78,225 miles)
Diameter: 40,073 km (24,900 miles)

In both the Davis and the Bishop model, the Earth is an infinite plane.

Q: "What about the stars, sun and moon and other planets? Are they flat too? What are they made of?"

A: The sun and moon, each 32 miles in diameter, rotate at a height of 3,000 miles above sea level. As they are spotlights, they only illuminate certain places. This explains why there are nights and days on Earth. The stars are at a height of 3,100 miles above sea level, which is as far as from San Francisco to Boston. In the dark energy model, the celestial bodies are spherical and are made of ordinary matter. These spheres are being held above the Earth by DE.

In the McIntyre model, the sun and the moon are metallic discs instead. These discs are being held above the Earth by photoelectric effect. See: Photoelectric Suspension Theory. The celestial bodies are also being suspended above the Earth by photoelectric effect in the Bishop model.

Q: "Why are other planets round, but not the Earth?"

A: The Earth is not one of the other planets. The Earth is special and unlike the other bodies in numerous ways.

Q: "Please explain sunrises and sunsets."

A: It is a perspective effect. The sun is just getting farther away: it looks like it is disappearing because everything gets smaller, and eventually disappears as it gets farther away.

UPDATE:The theory of Electromagnetic Acceleration is currently being developed and reviewed by members. Once completed, Electromagnetic Acceleration will be used as an alternative in explaining sunrises, sunsets and horizons for the dark energy model only.

Q: "What about satellites? How do they orbit the Earth?"

A: Since sustained spaceflight is not possible, satellites cannot orbit the Earth. The signals we supposedly receive from them are either broadcast from towers or any number of possible pseudolites. However, temporary space-flight is possible.

Q: "What is underneath the Earth?"

A: This is unknown. Most FE proponents believe that it is generally composed of rocks. Please note that in Hinduism, the Earth rests on the back of four elephants and a turtle.

Q: "What about gravity?"

A1: In the dark energy model, DE accelerates the Earth and all celestial bodies in the universe at 9.81m/s2. This is commonly known as Universal Acceleration, which produces the same effect as "gravity" in our local reference frame. See: Equivalence Principle.

A2: In both the McIntyre and the Bishop model, the Earth is being pushed up by the Universal Accelerator underneath it at 9.8m/s2. This mediates observable gravitational effects in our local reference frame.

A3: In the Davis model, the infinite plane produces a finite gravitational field with a downward pull. Click here for the mathematical formulation behind this model.

Q: "Aren't the accelerating Earth models flawed? Wouldn't planes crash into the Earth as it rises up to them?"

A: No. By the same argument, we could ask why planes do not crash into the Earth as they accelerate down towards it. The reason a plane does not crash is that its wings produce lift: when the rate of acceleration upwards equals that of gravity's pull downwards, lift causes the plane to remain at a constant altitude.

The same thing happens if the Earth is accelerating up. The plane is accelerating upwards at the same rate as the Earth, which means the distance between them does not change. Therefore, the plane stays at the same height and does not crash.

Q: "If the Earth's acceleration is constant, wouldn't it be traveling faster than light eventually?"

A: The equations of Special Relativity prevent an object with mass from reaching or passing the speed of light. Due to this restriction, these equations prove that the Earth can accelerate at a constant rate forever in our reference frame and never reach the speed of light. Click here for an in depth explanation.

Q: "In the accelerating Earth models, why does a feather fall slower than a bowling ball?"

A: It is due to air resistance. The Earth accelerates the air, and the air in turn accelerates the feather up faster than the bowling ball. In our reference frame, it appears that the feather is falling slower than the bowling ball.

Q: "In the accelerating Earth models, how does one reach terminal velocity?"

A: Once the acceleration of the object is equal to the acceleration of the Earth, the object reaches terminal velocity.

Q: "Wouldn't the Earth crunch up into itself and eventually transform into a ball if it's indeed a disc?"

A: The dark energy model assumes that the Earth does not possess a gravitational field. What we know as "gravity" is provided by the acceleration of the Earth.

Q: "What would happen if you jump off the disc's edge?"

A: You would become directly affected by UA as the Earth is, creating the illusion that you are standing next to it.

Q: "Why does g vary with altitude if the Earth simply accelerates up?"

A: The celestial bodies have a slight gravitational pull. Furthermore, a non-inertial relativistic object experiences different rates of acceleration along its length according to Special Relativity, as it is impossible for both ends to accelerate at the same rate without FTL communication between them. The front end accelerates at a lower rate than the rear end. This is why g decreases at higher altitude.

Q: "How is it that the Earth does not have a gravitational pull, but stars and the moon do?"

A: This argument is a non-sequitur. You might as well ask, "How is it that snakes do not have legs, but dogs and cats do?" Snakes are not dogs or cats. The Earth is not a star or the moon. It does not follow that each must have exactly the properties of the others, and no more.

Rafał, wyszła Ci z tego całkiem fajna pomoc naukowa również do gramatyki, np. do pytań w Present Simple:
"What about satellites? How do they orbit the Earth?"
"In the accelerating Earth models, how does one reach terminal velocity?"
Do trybów warunkowych mniej, bo widzę tam jakieś pomieszanie drugiego z pierwszym - znacznie wyższy poziom "zniuansowania".

Artykuł może też stać się, jak kultowe kino, źródłem sentencji na różne okazje. Mnie się np. podoba to: "Snakes are not dogs or cats" albo "It is due to air resistance" albo "It is a perspective effect", "This is why g decreases at higher altitude". ALe to się też przyda bardzo: "This argument is a non-sequitur".