Brian Cox

Chippy_boy said:
On the subject of gravity, here's another proof:

Does hodge have Sky, I wonder? If so, his satellite dish is pointing at a satellite (Astra, is it, or Hotbird? I forget). These satellites are in geostationary orbit, so they remain in the same position the sky. If gravity exists (which it must, or we'd all be floating around the room), why don't these satellite fall to earth? What's keeping them up?

What's keeping them up is them orbiting our rotating planet at a speed of about 3km per second. So that the centrifugal force perfectly counteracts gravity and they don't fall to earth and don't fly off into space either.

This would be impossible if the earth was flat. Sky satellites would just fall to earth. There would be no Sky TV.

I suspect this piece of evidence may be a bit beyond Hodge's comprehension however!
Click to expand...
Satellites. Lite? That’s why they don’t use Satelheavies.

Plus a creator created them. Just saying like in case you also believe that they evolved from Satelapes.
 
Chippy_boy said:
Pressure and temperature are not dependent on one another. Temperature of a gas is a function of the speed of the molecules, not how many of them there are.

Pressure is not the reason it's colder higher up.
Click to expand...

P, V and T are related. (Pressure x Volume)/Temperature is a constant [Ideal gas law].

For a fixed volume of gas, lower P must mean lower T (and vice versa).

Obviously gas expands at lower P, so it's not directly proportional as P:T.
 
hodge said:
Yeah that's right. Look I ain't explaining myself anymore, you believe you live on a spinning sphereoid even though its nothing like the blue marble created by Robert simmonds it's photo shopped cause it has to be, but I don't, you believe they have been to the moon and I don't. Thats it full stop.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. I know I live on a spheroidal planet. It's not belief, it's absolute certain knowledge. I'm a scientist, and have been trained to question any new theory, but there is absolutely no point whatsoever to question this. It's an incontrovertible fact, 100% certainty, completely and utterly proven and backed up by absolutely every aspect of science.

hodge said:
Absolute rubbish. Two words cognative dissonance
Click to expand...

well, one of those two words isn't a word (cognitive)... but to your point, you are implying that what aguero93:20 says isn't true? Please do expand on this. Which part is not true? The existence of gravity? Or that gravity affects liquids? Well, gravity most certainly exists (you can test this by jumping off your bed); And gravity certainly affects liquids - you can test this on a small scale by pouring water out of a bottle or on a planetary scale by observing the tides. (Incidentally, there is no flat-earth model that can explain tides satisfactorily).

Now don't get me wrong, I can see how it's difficult to believe something that is very hard to observe yourself (it's not impossible to observe, by the way, but it is difficult). But that's why science exists - people asking questions and challenging the accepted wisdom. But then, if you're a non-scientist, and unwilling to believe any of the generally accepted scientific norms, it opens up a whole range of subjects that you have to start disbelieving (atomic physics/radiation; evolution by natural selection; most of modern medicine; and so on).
 
lazza said:
Incorrect. I know I live on a spheroidal planet. It's not belief, it's absolute certain knowledge. I'm a scientist, and have been trained to question any new theory, but there is absolutely no point whatsoever to question this. It's an incontrovertible fact, 100% certainty, completely and utterly proven and backed up by absolutely every aspect of science.



well, one of those two words isn't a word (cognitive)... but to your point, you are implying that what aguero93:20 says isn't true? Please do expand on this. Which part is not true? The existence of gravity? Or that gravity affects liquids? Well, gravity most certainly exists (you can test this by jumping off your bed); And gravity certainly affects liquids - you can test this on a small scale by pouring water out of a bottle or on a planetary scale by observing the tides. (Incidentally, there is no flat-earth model that can explain tides satisfactorily).

Now don't get me wrong, I can see how it's difficult to believe something that is very hard to observe yourself (it's not impossible to observe, by the way, but it is difficult). But that's why science exists - people asking questions and challenging the accepted wisdom. But then, if you're a non-scientist, and unwilling to believe any of the generally accepted scientific norms, it opens up a whole range of subjects that you have to start disbelieving (atomic physics/radiation; evolution by natural selection; most of modern medicine; and so on).
Click to expand...

Reading this thread, Evolution needs to hurry the fuck up!!
 
Cheesy said:
The actual difference in proximity to the sun is negligible. The sun is approx 100,000,000 million miles from Earth. The top of Everest is something like 30,000 feet.

The colder temperatures at altitude are all down to atmospheric pressure. The higher you go, the less pressure on the air. Lower pressure = lower temperature.
Click to expand...
Thought it was about 93,000,000 miles from the earth, a little(!) less than you have quoted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.