Questions about the Earth

[servant]

Did science or the bible first note that the earth hangs on nothing?

Did science or the bible first note that the earth was a circle and not flat?

[Kenisaw]

In an earlier post I said:

"Job merely stated that the earth (from man's observation) hangs on nothing. As I observe the verse it appears that he did not state by what power the earth was sustained in it's orbit.

For that matter, the questions should be asked:

By whaT power is the earth held in it's orbit and position?

By what power are the countless billions of other planets held in there positions, orbits
in such a stable manner that prevents total collision and destruction on a mass scale?

In my observation there is no such existing science that can clearly account for these countless galaxies and universes which maintain all of these creations in their respective orderly orbits."

I might add that I find magnetic forces fascinating to say the least. I many years ago bought a very powerful magnet that weighs less than 25 pounds. The magnetic flux lines between the two poles are so powerful that I have yet to find a man that can move a large nail or spike between the poles of this magnet without being sucked to one pole or the other.

Looking at this from a massive magnetic scale, I would like to see anyone that can demonstrate how this supposed magnetic source or for that matter a gravitational force can hold these billions of planets into their respective positions, rotations and orbits. If anyone can demonstrate to me how this occurs and where these magnetic or gravitational forces are located, please, by all means enlighten me. I, for one, would love to see the hard facts and evidence.

I understand the control of these many solar systems to be controlled by a superior and different power. But first let me hear your evidence otherwise.

Regards,
RT

There are thousands of different sources available on how gravity works. Read one.

Your were given that advice nine months ago. You are still asking the same question. So you are given the same advice.

It is not the responsibility of someone at this website to attempt to condense, into a few paragraphs, a summation of all the evidence, testing, verification, and validation that has been done on the theory of gravity for the last few hundred years. Go to a university library, and read a book. Call a physics professor, and ask them. Sign up for a class, and become educated.

[McCulloch]

I am a little curious to know as applied to the law of gravity, how you can show and demonstrate how and in what manner these billions of planets throughout the universe are kept in their specific orbits?

If you are truly interested, here is some information:

• Physics classroom.com/ /Mathematics-of-Satellite-Motion
• Wikipedia /Orbit

Here is a hint. Magnetism is not involved.

Why are they not sucked to the center of the flux core source?
Where is this super gravitational center located?
[…]
Is there more than one super magnetic flux source?

Can you demonstrate that there is a flux core source? Is there a super gravitational center? Is there even one super magnetic flux source?

How and by what means is it controlled?

It is not under control.

[Revelations won]

Dear McCulloch,

Thanks for your response. The equations presented do apply to satellites, but one must remember that these man made items at some point fail to remain their orbit and fall to the earth.

You claim that magnetic forces are not applicable to planetary orbits and rotation.

Then by what means do you claim these billions of planets are maintained in their specific orbits?

[Tired of the Nonsense]

Dear McCulloch,

Thanks for your response. The equations presented do apply to satellites, but one must remember that these man made items at some point fail to remain their orbit and fall to the earth.

You claim that magnetic forces are not applicable to planetary orbits and rotation.

Then by what means do you claim these billions of planets are maintained in their specific orbits?

Thanks for your response. The equations presented do apply to satellites, but one must remember that these man made items at some point fail to remain their orbit and fall to the earth.

The reason man made objects in orbit often eventually fall back to earth is because of friction. Objects (man made satellites) are placed into orbit above the earth at a certain distance and at a particular velocity which is great enough to sustain the orbit. A moving object will attempt to move in a straight line. This is called inertia. The mass of the planet however causes a depression or curvature in the fabric of spacetime. Inertia causes objects to attempt to move in a straight line. The curvature of space near the earth results in the objects reaching a balance between the propensity to follow a straight line, and the curving of space around the earth. We refer to this as an orbit. Man made satellites in orbit around the earth are still close enough to encounter molecules of the earth's atmosphere, however. These molecules of atmosphere are very diffuse, but over time they can cause enough friction (drag) on the object to slow the object below the point where it's inertia is not enough to sustain an orbit. When this happens the object falls back to earth.

You claim that magnetic forces are not applicable to planetary orbits and rotation.

Then by what means do you claim these billions of planets are maintained in their specific orbits?

Magnetic forces have nothing to do with gravity. The orbits of the planets are all about the balance between inertia and the gravitational attraction of objects with mass and the curvature in spacetime which their mass causes. The largest mass in our solar system is the sun. The planets follow an orbit around the sun which is a balance between their inertia and the depression in space caused by the mass of the sun. Over long distances this background gravitational attraction is very weak, but it is also very unrelenting. It is strong enough to cause stars to clump into groups we call galaxies, much as the sun and our solar system are a part of the milky way galaxy. The Milky Way galaxy itself results in a massive depression in the fabric of spacetime, causing it's 400 billion or so stars to orbit around each other.

Not knowing the answer to something is known as ignorance. Ignorance is in fact our natural state. We are all ignorant of those things we don't know. The state of human knowledge however is vastly greater than it was, say, 2,000 years ago. As it rightly should be. Through the invention of writing humans have achieved the ability to store knowledge and to pass it on from generation to generation. The invention of computers and the advent of the internet is a quantum leap forward in our ability to have immediate access to the general store of human knowledge; the things we individually may not know. Making up answers and then deciding that they must be true, as people once routinely did, is no longer justifiable. Because it perpetuates ignorance.

[Trump]

Did science or the bible first note that the earth hangs on nothing?

Did science or the bible first note that the earth was a circle and not flat?

Well, going strictly by observation, the Earth is definitely flat.

It hangs on nothing, because it is created by the Creator. Like, what does Star Trek Earth hang on, or any of the other science fiction planets hang on? They hang on the imagination of their creators.

The Bible will never contradict scientific observation, maybe confuse it with a miracle or two, but isn't every creation in the hands of its creators? If you watch any science fiction movies, you know it is.

[Trump]

Did science or the bible first note that the earth hangs on nothing?

Did science or the bible first note that the earth was a circle and not flat?

I think the more important thing is which one PROVED these things after all anyone can say nearly anything and if it is ambiguous enough it can be interpreted as being correct, prophets and seers have been doing this for millenia. Over two thousand years ago Democritus(iirc) put forward the basics of the atomic theory but it was quickly discarded in favor of the elemental theory. In just the last few hundred years have we dusted it off and PROVEN to be essentially correct.

It's not the only ancient thing that new-age-science dusted off and once again find essential:


https://www.google.com/search?q=shiva+a ... 80&bih=620

[Trump]

In an earlier post I said:

"Job merely stated that the earth (from man's observation) hangs on nothing. As I observe the verse it appears that he did not state by what power the earth was sustained in it's orbit.

For that matter, the questions should be asked:

By whaT power is the earth held in it's orbit and position?

By what power are the countless billions of other planets held in there positions, orbits
in such a stable manner that prevents total collision and destruction on a mass scale?

In my observation there is no such existing science that can clearly account for these countless galaxies and universes which maintain all of these creations in their respective orderly orbits."

I might add that I find magnetic forces fascinating to say the least. I many years ago bought a very powerful magnet that weighs less than 25 pounds. The magnetic flux lines between the two poles are so powerful that I have yet to find a man that can move a large nail or spike between the poles of this magnet without being sucked to one pole or the other.

Looking at this from a massive magnetic scale, I would like to see anyone that can demonstrate how this supposed magnetic source or for that matter a gravitational force can hold these billions of planets into their respective positions, rotations and orbits. If anyone can demonstrate to me how this occurs and where these magnetic or gravitational forces are located, please, by all means enlighten me. I, for one, would love to see the hard facts and evidence.

I understand the control of these many solar systems to be controlled by a superior and different power. But first let me hear your evidence otherwise.

Regards,
RT

There are thousands of different sources available on how gravity works. Read one.

Or, look at a video of it, like this one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqZEjiIzmjc

[Trump]

Dear McCulloch,

Thanks for your response. The equations presented do apply to satellites, but one must remember that these man made items at some point fail to remain their orbit and fall to the earth.

You claim that magnetic forces are not applicable to planetary orbits and rotation.

Then by what means do you claim these billions of planets are maintained in their specific orbits?

Thanks for your response. The equations presented do apply to satellites, but one must remember that these man made items at some point fail to remain their orbit and fall to the earth.

The reason man made objects in orbit often eventually fall back to earth is because of friction. Objects (man made satellites) are placed into orbit above the earth at a certain distance and at a particular velocity which is great enough to sustain the orbit. A moving object will attempt to move in a straight line. This is called inertia. The mass of the planet however causes a depression or curvature in the fabric of spacetime. Inertia causes objects to attempt to move in a straight line. The curvature of space near the earth results in the objects reaching a balance between the propensity to follow a straight line, and the curving of space around the earth. We refer to this as an orbit. Man made satellites in orbit around the earth are still close enough to encounter molecules of the earth's atmosphere, however. These molecules of atmosphere are very diffuse, but over time they can cause enough friction (drag) on the object to slow the object below the point where it's inertia is not enough to sustain an orbit. When this happens the object falls back to earth.

You claim that magnetic forces are not applicable to planetary orbits and rotation.

Then by what means do you claim these billions of planets are maintained in their specific orbits?

Magnetic forces have nothing to do with gravity. The orbits of the planets are all about the balance between inertia and the gravitational attraction of objects with mass and the curvature in spacetime which their mass causes. The largest mass in our solar system is the sun. The planets follow an orbit around the sun which is a balance between their inertia and the depression in space caused by the mass of the sun. Over long distances this background gravitational attraction is very weak, but it is also very unrelenting. It is strong enough to cause stars to clump into groups we call galaxies, much as the sun and our solar system are a part of the milky way galaxy. The Milky Way galaxy itself results in a massive depression in the fabric of spacetime, causing it's 400 billion or so stars to orbit around each other.

Not knowing the answer to something is known as ignorance. Ignorance is in fact our natural state. We are all ignorant of those things we don't know. The state of human knowledge however is vastly greater than it was, say, 2,000 years ago. As it rightly should be. Through the invention of writing humans have achieved the ability to store knowledge and to pass it on from generation to generation.

I believe they had writing 2,000 years ago.

Making up answers and then deciding that they must be true, as people once routinely did, is no longer justifiable. Because it perpetuates ignorance

This sounds much like what comes from NASA's Mars Rover team:

[benchwarmer]

Well, going strictly by observation, the Earth is definitely flat.

I'm not sure which Earth you are looking at, the one I see is not flat. Are you from Saskatchewan by any chance Even if you are, you should be able to get your telescope out and wave to the people you see in China if it was flat.

[Neatras]

Can this forum ever graduate from being a cesspool for flat earthers?

Let's at least stay within the realm of reality while addressing the OP.