Leaderboard

Earth is said to be a sphere with a circumference of 25,000 miles, or 40,000 km, therefore it has to have a curvature of about 8 inches per mile squared. Can we observe or verify this? We are taught about the ancient observations like a sailing boat going over the horizon and the measurements of Eratosthenes. They are all falsified by our current observations and better understanding of the optical effects of the atmosphere. But how can we really measure the curvature of Earth in the 21st century? FECORE has established the Terrestrial Laser Targeting method, or “TLT method” for short, to measure the geopotential surface of the Earth. Geopotential means the shape that the ocean surface takes under the influence of gravity. With the TLT method, you can accurately verify or falsify the curved surface defined by the WGS84 geoid model on large bodies of water. This is what FECORE did to measure the curvature of the Earth. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsSanuUNygI Please, watch the entire video and let's discuss it here.

If you had a ball made of a material that could withstand any pressure, how much pressure would you need in the ball to make it so when you popped it the air would go near lightspeed?

The phrasing of the abstract is that these sources can’t be ruled out, which is quite different from claiming positive evidence that they are anti-stars

Why is one of the computations guaranteed to stop while the other isn't?

Stupid software! That's what happens when you quote from a quote rather than quoting from the original! 😃 My understanding is that 'efficient market' also includes the fact that information is available to all and therefore already factored into the price. Under this assumption it is 'reasonable' to buy any stock, and is the main reason that so many people invest in index funds. Active investing is the assumption that something may have been missed, which is where stock analysts earn their salaries. By reviewing PE ratios, which way the wind is blowing regarding specific regulations in congress, scandals, R&D spending, patents, likelihood of mergers, meetings with CEOs, discovered natural resources, etc., stock analysts compare stock price to their own valuations, looking for differences. It is this constant search for a slight edge that naturally keeps stock prices in line. This is not to say there can't be sharp drops or increases due to irrational behavior, but that in the long view, the values can be considered accurate. Bubbles only exist in the short term. In the long term they are smoothed out and are not significant. Part of our differing views on this subject may have to do with the time frames we are both considering.

Interesting piece about Canadian pilots seeing numerous UFOs: https://www.vice.com/amp/en/article/z3xewj/air-canada-westjet-porter-pilots-ufo-sightings By combing through thousands of reports in a government flight incident database, VICE World News has uncovered dozens of recent UFO sightings from Canadian and international airlines.

But that's not a specific country.

A serious eruption from a volcano at the bottom of the ocean (or a volcano on lonely island in the middle of nowhere), can result in a tsunami on the sea's surface.. https://www.google.com/search?q=underwater+volcanic+eruption+tsunami

Close to the surface of a large body of water, it is very common to have an inversion, whereby the cool water cools the air immediately above. So then it would not be true that the temperature decreases upwards within the layer. The opposite would be the case. For example this explains why Chicago is sometimes visible from a point 60 miles way on the far side of Lake Michigan. It is what is called a superior mirage, and its cause is the bending of light in an inversion layer above the lake: https://www.abc57.com/news/mirage-of-chicago-skyline-seen-from-michigan-shoreline

Domes would be the most dangerous. A dome signifies extremely viscous magma, typically "acid", with lots of silica. Volcanoes with this feature are notorious for eruptions in the form of pyroclastic flows (nuees ardentes). La Montagne Pelee is a classic, as is La Soufriere, currently going off in St Vincent. In the terminology I am used to, a volcanic neck is the exposed solidified magma plug (a sort of dyke) left after the erosion of an extinct volcano. So that would be 100% safe. But I admit my terminology may be out of date.

I seem to remember you are studying Environmental Science ? This is heavy geological stuff for that subject. Certainly explosively eruptive volcanoes offer an immediate candidate, especially the biggest ones. But these are still single point activities and the level of danger must depend upon where they are located. Under Tokyo or Mid Pacific ? Then some eruptions have put so much material into the upper atmosphere that world cooling for several years even to decades have resulted. Accompanied by noxious gases one of these could affect all humans. Finally some eruptions, such as the recent one in Iceland, are just large outflows of basaltic material. But there have been at least two such eruptions in the past that were continent wide in scale. The Deccan and the Siberian traps. Another such eruption from Xianging/Mongolia could wipe out most of Asia. Finally here is a good reference book for you Cambridge University press 2011 I'm very sorry I just re-read the title. You said the least dangerous. My mistake. The least dangerous will probably be found at the bottom of the oceans. I will leave you to investgate further as this is homework help.

Did you notice that I put the word "denser" in quotes? And that's the lie: the claim that the air is homogeneous, when we know that it gets less dense as you go up. Here's the first page of the explanation from the 70s And here's the second page

As I said, I'm trying to track down a reference from this https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/The_Inventions_of_Daedalus/0Xt2QgAACAAJ?hl=en What I disagree with is the idea that they think it is appropriate to publish stuff that is obviously wrong. The essence of the point is simple. As they say, a alight beam will bend towards a "denser" medium (one with a higher refractive index). Imagine a beam of light shining horizontally as in their experiment. Eventually, if it didn't hit anything, it would go over the horizon and into space, But clearly "space" has a much lower density. So the light beam is bent towards the denser medium, i.e. the beam bends downwards. It's not a big effect, but nor is the curvature of the Earth. The book includes a couple of interesting calculations. One is that, if the earth was a bit smaller, the gravitational gradient would be a bit steeper and the curvature would be a bit more, and light would actually go all round the earth by refraction. The other is that, if you used a slightly more refractive gas - They suggested sulphur dioxide- the curvature would match that of the earth's surface. That would mean that light shone into a tube full of SO2 would go round the world. Now, I recognise that the predicted effect would only completely cancel the effect of the Earth's curvature if the planet was a bit smaller. But the effect we do get will cancel out most of the curvature. So their insistence on 8 inches per mile squared is simply wrong. And, by now, it's fair to assume they know it. Incidentally, at about 2 minutes in to the video, they point out that they are a not-for-profit organisation. That doesn't stop them claiming expenses. And I guess that's why they are ignoring physics that was widely published decades ago.

Thanks...I even had contributed to your thread when you posted it! My only excuse is that I had just had eye cataract surgery and still had one eye covered. [That'l do anyway till I think of something better! 😊

No offence on my part. My thread got trolled soon enough. I wonder if protists are this wonderfully complex meta-kingdom where multicellular life arose. A powerful platform for evolutionary experimentation, so to speak. I know that kelp are the only surviving protists that are multi-cellular. If you take a look at protists, there are amazingly varied solutions to the basic problem of how to survive and pass on your genes.

As iNow pointed out, SpaceX is privately funded. If it turns out to be a colossal waste of money, it's mostly his so he can piss it away any way he sees fit. Would we rather Musk put his money into diamond encrusted yachts and buying football clubs?

You need to talk to a Kiwi about that sort of thing! 😉 "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_humour "Australians are the butt of Kiwi humour (and vice versa) — even at the highest diplomatic level. During the 1980s, then–Prime Minister of New Zealand Rob Muldoon was asked about the increasing exodus of New Zealanders leaving the country to work in Australia. His comment was that by doing so, they were raising the average IQ of both countries.[3][4] The joke derives from the Will Rogers phenomenon. In general terms, Australians are stereotyped in New Zealand humour as being brash, boorish and lazy. New Zealanders, in return, are seen by Australians as being behind the times and mocked as "South Seas Poms" There are a large number of (mainly crude) sheep jokes. As befitting the trans-Tasman rivalry, Australians tell said jokes about New Zealanders, and New Zealanders tell them about Australians. [apologies to my cousins across the ditch 😁]

Canada ? Because we're nice guys. And we're waaaay behind in our vaccination targets. ( just got my 1st Pfizer shot today; second scheduled for Aug 23 !!! )

But ... they seemed like a good idea at the time.

Tesla is publicly traded. SpaceX is not. This is all moot.

In a similar vein, a host of organohalogens such as perfluorinated compounds, are not really biodegradable and have been seen to accumulate in humans and wildlife all over the world (including the arctic).

Today I learned the English term antipode. In geography, the antipode of any spot on Earth is the point on Earth's surface diametrically opposite to it. A pair of points antipodal to each other are situated such that a straight line connecting the two would pass through Earth's center.* For example Sevilla in Spain and Auckland in New Zeeland are (approximate) antipodes.** (I got curious about diametrically opposite when reading another thread, thanks @joigus! ) *) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antipodes **) according to antipodesmap.com

While searching for the previously recommended video, I found the following discussions on the possible and probably likely explanation of many UFO's/UAP Nice little video worth watching.... https://www.metabunk.org/threads/pyramid-ufos-in-night-vision-footage-maybe-bokeh.11695/ and the following lengthy article particularly with relation to the USA....and entitled..."Adversary Drones Are Spying On The U.S. And The Pentagon Acts Like They're UFOs" at... https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...entagon-acts-like-theyre-ufos?utm_source=digg I'm in no position to really judge the veracity of the second article or the many links within that link, I'll let others do that...plus apologies if this is seen to be in the wrong thread....a kindly mod may chose to move to a more appropriate one if needed.

It is not a cyborg, what I was talking about Whereas it used to be just a mode of social presence and surface, the body has, in these post-modern days , evolved into a symbol of personality. Being incarnate is in contrast to seeming to be/ in contrast to seeming or appearing to be there carnally ..............