Like I lean towards round but both sides make good points

what is a good point for a flat earth

How?

^

Like you should see the things people post on here

I dont get into the nasa stuff

But

Well I specialize in NASA stuff.

Really

What don't you get?

Space travel in general really.

yeah i'm best at talking about laws of physics, and space technicalities

Like they are kinda secretive about what goes on in space yoo

Too

Only spy satilites.

As the public, we don't know half they know

But if you go here https://www.nextspaceflight.com/

@CROONCH i KNOW it's Round flat and round <:BigSmiles:556070613224259594>

You can see all launches for the next few years.

a COOKIE is "round" too! 🍪 <:BigSmiles:556070613224259594>

lol

That's cool

It is pretty nifty.

kid dont even know that "round" is a MISNOMER <:lul:484994724118134784> ? and.. he wants to "debate"? 😆 lmfaofff

It lets you watches the live streams live.

damDummy

im pretty sure that they are required to publicly release what they find out

what livestream

Mike please.

Haha

Yes NASA has 48 hours to release pictures and info as it gets it.

But beside that is there anything space wise that has you on edge?

@cocobanana

i think he dosent need persuading

Just making sure.

yeah

I've seen people who think the fairing of a rocket is some kind of holoroom.

Nothing that comes to mind tbh lol I know it sounds dumb

I just always find it fascinating how people are so passionate on both sides

yeah

Honestly I could care less about the FE. All it does is spread ignorance. What peeves me off is when people are to ignorant to understand how rockets work.

it just gets under my skin sometimes how there is so mush information now, more than ever. And you see some people who dont believe in the most common things

^

are people ignorant to how rockets work?

Is there a reason noones been on the moon in such a long time

Just no reason

We did it to beat the Russians during the space race.

However NASA is planning on sending people back to the moon by 2024.

and we dont have too much (in relation to other missions) to learn from sending another mission there

there is better ways for nasa to spend money

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/exploration/spacecraft/index_prt.htm

Exactly

That's true

Do you guys believe in global warming

It's proven it's self but I don't have enough facts gathered to give you a solid answer.

yeah. especially due to the greenhouse effect being accelerated because of higher gas emissions

^

That's true but hasn't global warming been a thing for millions of years

It has accelerated due to the industrial revolution.

the earth has had ups and downs (like the ice ages) and this could be one but its safe to say that we are in trouble. due to ^^

Ya forsure we aren't helping

because it came so quick

yeah

But I don't believe when people say we will run out of trees or water

We could obviously do better

Like clean the oceans

if humanity keeps living in denial then we could easily

We can't really run out of water as it's stuck on earth. But we can polute it to the point of useless.

yeah

As for trees if we cut down more than we replant we will run out eventually.

ESPECIALLY with the production of palm oil. that is destroying the planet

Now that I don't know. I'm talking about the deforestation of the amazon and stuff.

yeah

Ya

im not sure of the statistics but i know a large portion of the Amazon had been cut down for farmland and the production of palm oil

like in the last 15-20 years

and thats scary

mhm

But hey you got anymore questions about NASA, space, spacecraft, ect?

I love teaching people about that stuff.

have you done a course on Aerospace engineering?

you seem into it

No just very well educated on it.

thats good

I love learning about nasa

i hope to go into the field of Astrophysics when i go to Uni

Like the fact that the last STS mission (STS-135) launched on july 8th, 2011. It was Atlantis.

I was actually there for that one

Cape Canaveral

Shoot really?

Only one I ever saw

Man I wish I went and saw one. It was truly the end of an era.

Yeah, My Dad took me and some friends

that sounds awesome

What about the SLS

I'm hopefully going to see the next FH launch in June.

Was a few hours drive, we lived in St. Augustine

ok guys i gtg

ttyl

Is the sls ever going to launch

Cya rocl

SLS is tricky

Rofl

Later, ROFL

Later

The SLS is moving very slowly.

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

Is it true the sls will be the most powerful rocket

I just never understood whats taking so long

No if Starship is ready before SLS it will be scraped.

NASA is on a shoestring budget.

SpaceX is not.

Oh true

So its just about money

Yes

Rockets are expensive

And R&D is VERY expensive.

Do you think if they canceled it they would lose more Money then if they finished it

It cost about 300 mil do develope th Falcon 9.1

No

Especially if they cancle soon.

It would be much more efficient to scrap SLS and put the money towards Starship on New Shepard.

*or

Oh true

However.../

This is a picture my friend took while at KSP https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/394175090226626582/562065772109758466/image2.jpg

Damn

That is the SLS strong back.

That is what the SLS will roll out on.

Oh that's cool

<@319268767752519680> who told you there is an end?

Where is the end? How many miles?

What do you mean

If earth is a sphere, has anyone directly measured the curve using the scientific method?

They flew around the flat world

Not a sphere

<@319268767752519680> bye

>>ban 319268767752519680 death threats

<:vSuccess:390202497827864597> Successfully banned <@319268767752519680>

actually yes

hey is earth flat

@Citizen Z is earth flat. true question no troll.

@Citizen Z people have measured the curve bud.

And there are ways to do it very easily.

@here looking for a civil debate against the FE. Who's down?

that dosent ping anyone because you don't have any perms to use that

@CROONCH

@CROONCH show me a direct measurement

Hey

Who wants to debate me

meeeeeeee

debte me i need practice

Optical slant. Visibility

Amphidromic points

You have nothing but baseless assumption

we have

like

Good luck with your religion

well

nvm

anyone wanna talk abt how the earth isn’t flat

you a flat earther mae mae?

nope

hbu

same

just doesnt make sense to me

@Citizen Z Suppose that the earth is a sphere of radius 3963 miles. If you are at a point P on the earth's surface and move tangent to the surface a distance of 1 mile then you can form a right angled triangel. Using the theorem of Pythagoras a2 = 39632 + 12 = 15705370 and thus a = 3963.000126 miles. Thus your position is 3963.000126 - 3963 = 0.000126 miles above the surface of the earth. 0.000126 miles = 12*5280*0.000126 = 7.98 inches. That is the formula for finding the curvature.

Also there is a branch of mathamatics called Geodesy thats sole purpose is to calculate the curvature of the earth.

I suggest looking into that @Citizen Z .

Yes look into it

Pythagoras proves the flat earth

Do you have papers that weren't written by a crackpot?

Perhaps unbiased papers?

@CROONCH do your own math

I will assume you only use insults when you are pushed into the corner of globetardness

but

omg

Zoom on the back of your head?

The earth doesn't bend light that way

If you zoom you're zooming in the direction you're pointing

Such light cannot be bend by earth.

Exactly

That's their standard refraction model for 123 miles

Well the blue is the earth. The red is the path light takes in their standard refraction model
So anything on the earth at the blue will be elevated to the red
by refraction
So that is the standard 7/6 R

If your at 1000 miles altitude I guess you can see the other side lol

Here's the thing. Actual experiments show refraction varies from 20X to - 20X
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/379214321907007488/533401661776068669/unknown.png
On the other hand, our empirical results show that the
refraction coefficient k may reach magnitudes as large as +12 to +16 over grassland at 1.8 m. This clearly
exceeds previously published ‘extreme values’ (e.g., maximum values of k = +6 at 1.5 m height over grassland,
cf. Hübner [1977]). We acknowledge that surface types like ice or water may even produce larger refraction
effects, as described in section 2.

As you can see from what I just posted , they measured what would be radius that would be 16 times larger than the earth radius
They think k they model refraction ,.In fact they model the deviation from from the globe radius.
They don't measure the refractive index of the air. the impute it from the deviation of an expected value
of course. Their model follows earths curve perfectly
think about how nonsensical that is. exactly equals the curve of the earth...idiocy...

spam

!mute @McMaartenz

McMaartenz#0607 (345583472104046594) is now muted for '**Unspecified.**', alright? <:THUMBSUP6:403560443345371137>

I see the moon

*In conditions that produce superior mirages, there are inversion layers in which the ray curvature exceeds that of the Earth. Then, in principle, you can see infinitely far — there really is no horizon.
Of course, we all know that visibility is limited by the clarity or haziness of the air. And the duct that (in principle) might allow you to see around the whole Earth doesn't really extend that far; it typically exists for some limited region, perhaps a few tens or a few hundreds of kilometers.*
- https://aty.sdsu.edu/explain/atmos_refr/horizon.html

The 7/6R is acknowledged to be a mere *assumption*
Remember that this "standard atmospheric refraction" is not the same as typical refraction you get with Snell's law, this is ad hoc reification.
You don't need to take into account anyones hypothetical in your experiments, they have to empirically derived it by experimentation, onus is on them.

hey guys

@Citizen Z image text is wrong, can't see the bottom of the mountains

THus we can throw that one out

their are so many places we see farther than we should

and now they are using infra red and seeing even farther

@Frolic never said bottom. Said bases

Your mind must have made that up

How do we know the observer height there?
That can be tricky, as google earth is often inaccurate, and we often don't have the means and data to determine it

you don't poop out your poop hole

first of all what is the curvature formula for earth ?

are we using 8 inches per mile squared

o

im not a mathmetician but i dont think thats a good number or formula

lets say its 8 inches for now ill show u how the formula is wrong maybe

4 people in a straight line all 1 mile apart man a man b man c man d all in a row in that order

the curve drop from man a to b is 8 inches and the man from b to c is 8 inches but from a to c should be 16 inches

but a to c is 32 inches

ok

ok

@jeremy Ok, and?

before we start debating if earths a sphere or not we should know the curvature forumla

8 inches per mile squared approximately works, for maybe less than 100 mile distances

well what works for a whole sphere

thats what we are on

needs to work for more than 100 miles lol

Yeah, but it is rounded, and that slight difference adds up over long distances

7.98 is a more precise figure

whats the formula that works for 24,000 miles

And if you wanted to get even more precise, there is the slight oblate shape of the earth

But approximations are fine

yeah i know its pear shaped now

but i think we should know the formula that works for a whole sphere

It depends on what you are trying to find

the amount of curve

1 mile out 8 inches 2 miles out is what? whats the real formula

need something that works with more than 100 miles

do u know what the real formula is ?

You could calculate it with the pythagorean theorem, but 7.98 inches per mile squared works fine. You square the mile because it is curved.

people are claiming we see too far so im trying to figure out the amount of curve er mile but 8 inches squared is clearly not correct

but it only works for 100 feet

sorry 100 miles

i need something that works with a whole sphere

or 24,000 miles

we arent on a 100 mile big sphere

Well, let's see.
8 inches*100^2= 80,000
7.98 inches*100^2= 79,800
200 inch difference after 100 miles. Because rounding

It is calculated from an approximately 25,000 mile circumference sphere

so 7.98 inches per mile squared wotks for a full sphere?

works

A sphere with a radius of 3,963 miles

im gonna have to research this

It assumes earth is a perfect sphere, but for general purposes, that assumption works even considering the model states it as slightly oblate

because did u see the thing i said earlier about man a man b and man c all in a straight line 1 mile apart?

man a to man b 8 inches of drop then from man b to man c 8 inches of drop but from a to c is 32 inches of drop that doesnt seem possible where did the extra amount of earth come from to drop

sorry im not great with math but reality i can handle fairly well

From the curvature.
If it was 16 inches from a to c instead of 32, it wouldn't be curve. Instead, it would be like you are on a cone, a straight line slope.

i understand why the math needs to work but in reality where did the extra earth come from somehow

from a to b its 8 inches right

and b to c is 8 inches

ur telling me that would never make a circle ?