{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
由The Cellar Door編輯：
8/23/2016 5:10:34 AM
81
Earth is not a sphere.
Let's take a moment to talk about this indisputable fact of reality. Earth is not round, nor is it a sphere. I will present actual scientific arguments for this idea, not the baseless speculation we've been accustomed to around #OffTopic. I'm going to school for this stuff, so you can trust that I know what I'm talking about.
Everywhere we look in the universe, we see flat disks. Our very solar system, all of the planets lie on a flat orbital plane around Sun. Pluto is not a planet anymore, partly because its orbit is angled very eccentrically away from the flat disk of every other planet's orbital path.
Our galaxy, the Milky Way, is flat. All of the stars and gas clouds rotate in pretty much the same orbital plane.
Our universe itself, is flat. Through measurements of the anisotropies in the Cosmic Microwave Background, we have determined that the distribution of energy density is so uniform, than any fluctuations can be reconciled for by quantum uncertainty.
Everything we see in the universe, is flat. This is because of the principle of least action. As angular momentum must be conserved, gravity will naturally influence objects to move in flat orbital planes. In other terms, it would take more energy for things to move in a more random way, so the universe naturally moves things in a manner which less energy is expended by these movements.
Anything that moves in a circle, tends to want to move outward, as the velocity of Any point on that object moving in a circle is perpendicular to the center. This is part of the reason why planets move in ellipses, rather than perfect circles. (Along with the forces exerted by precession and the fact that gravity is an attraction between two objects, so they move closer or farther apart from each other constantly.)
Because of Earth's rotation, the diameter from pole to pole (12,714 km) is [b]significantly[/b] smaller than the diameter at the equator (12,756 km). This is what we call an oblate spheroid, as in [b][i]not a sphere and not round[/i][/b].
We also must make note that Earth is not smooth. It's bumpy, there's almost a 20km difference between the highest peak and the deepest trench. A perfect sphere, or something that is perfectly round, cannot have these ridiculously enormous differences. The surface deviations prove that Earth is not a sphere, nor is it round.
So there you go, we've scientifically proven that Earth is not a sphere, nor is it round. I hope all of you fake scientists claiming that it is feel good about yourself for spreading ignorance.
-
1 回覆
-
1 回覆You do realize that our atmosphere is included right? Our atmosphere makes the earth round and smooth.
-
1 回覆
-
3 回覆
-
15 回覆由ttv/RitzyCheese編輯： 8/23/2016 1:27:44 PMSo... umm... let's talk for a second. I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to accomplish here, but it certainly isn't educating the public with anything. Definitely not anything useful at the very least. So first off you start by stating something that is completely incorrect, "the earth is not round". You repeat this a couple times throughout the post and the evidence that you thought you included to support this is I guess the 20km elevation difference? Though I'm again unsure what you aim to prove here as being "round" is not synonymous with being a "sphere" in that simply being round doesn't mean that it has to be "perfectly" round, hence the implications of the term "perfectly round". So anyway, you falsely claim that the earth is not round throughout the post only to abandon this in your conclusion where you state both that it is not perfectly round (which is correct) and that it is not round at all (which is incorrect). Then there's the spherical problem you present. I'll start this by pointing out that you specifically mention both the earth not being spherical and not being a sphere, again (edit: oops no you don't but this applies to the round thing and also later in rebuttal). You seem to not realize that these two things are completely different claims, as you use them interchangeably (edit: you don't but you do this with the roundness). Note that spherical simply means relating to a sphere or having a shape approximate to that of a sphere and that a sphere is simply a perfectly round object. So right off the bat, no, the earth is obviously not a sphere as it has elevation fluctuations and multiple different diameters. Although I'm not really sure who disputes this fact, you are technically right about this part. But you claim that the earth is not spherical as well (edit: oops no you don't but let's point this out anyway because the earth is spherical and there's really no reason to prove to people that it is not a sphere when nobody really tries to claim this), and this is not true. The evidence you use to support this is that the earth has a "massive" (edit: "significant") difference between multiple diameters. In order to be considered spherical, it would only need to be similar or close to a perfectly round object. The difference between the diameters that you gave is only .3% the length of the shortest one. If you're trying to argue (edit: you aren't) that .3% is a "massive" (edit: "significant") enough difference to knock it out of consideration for being approximately a sphere (spherical), I'm afraid you don't have much of an argument.
-
6 回覆
-
I am 150% sure OP has no idea what she's talking about, and just strung a bunch of big, astronomical words to TRY to confuse us. [spoiler]your games didnt work on me, OP. I found 6 imperfections in your argument. Git gud m8.[/spoiler]
-
1 回覆由Recon Number 54編輯： 8/23/2016 5:23:28 PMI remember once hearing a little factoid that has stuck with me and always given me an amazing mental image. The premise was that if you could alter the scale, but keep all of the relevant details and dimensions the same, if the Earth could be made so that its size relative to you was that of a billiard ball, that the atmosphere would be impossible to see, you couldn't detect the oceans using your sense of touch (not enough water) and despite the height and depth of the mountains and trenches that we see from our current perspective, that "Earth as a billiard ball" would be both more smooth and more of a perfect sphere than any billiard ball that can currently be made. Or, if one were to change the scale so that a cue ball were the size of the Earth, it would have higher mountains, deeper trenches, and be even less spherical than the Earth. I don't have the tools to measure a billiard ball down to that level of accuracy, but the premise did seem to have a certain amount of "truthiness" to it, it came from a respected source (who I assume had access to the relevant data), and the mental image was (as I said) both appealing and thought provoking.
-
6 回覆
-
由UnKnown-MD編輯： 8/23/2016 6:14:03 PMIt could be one of 2 : 1- earth is a perfectly smooth round ball (40km is a nothing compared to tlearth size) [url=https://forteansquirrel.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/roundearth1.jpg][/url] 2- it's flat and all the universe is flat.. you can't go past America to west or Japan to the east because there is nothing and it's the end of map .. [url=https://facesofjesus.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/earth-space-flat-2.jpg][/url] [url=http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT2q3KUyYBq7abRFCIGkeYk5_rWrJ2GjpCvMZKe3Age1KE6jhMX][/url] [url=http://www.amtvmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Dome-Main-629355-641x400.jpg][/url] Now choose which side you are on .. 3rd option is nonexistent..
-
2 回覆
-
4 回覆Tldr Also why even bother trying when we actually have pictures of earth, don't really see what's being accomplished here
-
1 回覆[quote]I'm going to school for this stuff, so you can trust that I know what I'm talking about.[/quote] So.... you are educating yourself to come to a forum to explain to a few people that really couldn't give a shit that the Earth isn't a perfect sphere..... Seems like education given a true purpose there.
