Hello

I have a question, if gravity isn't real what accelerates us towards the earth?

And if it's the earth accelerating wouldn't it eventually have a velocity faster tna light Wich is impossible?

Can anyone debate my pints?

I have a question, if gravity isn't real what accelerates us towards the earth?

And if it's the earth accelerating wouldn't it eventually have a velocity faster tna light Wich is impossible?

That doesn't even debate my question

It completely ignores it and class it irrelevant, which it is not

oakheart do you have any living clue what a theory means in science?

Hi

@CryptoCypher the angle of refraction of the window is very close to that of air, meaning that the distortion that you speak of negligible, and photos and views seen through it are deemed accurate

Crypto I'll admit I made a mistake in my explination

But when light passes from air to glass it refracts by 37 degrees , when it leaves it refracts back to it's original path

Although the glass is curved it is not a lense

Maybe you should research lense desing

Design

Cause if you do you will realize your claim is false

Fredward that isn't the effect

The curve is the same on both sides

The change of angle is constant

Meaning no distortion like you speak of

Think of water in a glass, the glass is curved. If you look at a straw in the water through the glass the straw is still straight

Or it is larger

Meaning that the glass causes a linear transformation to the image

Not a nonlinear one like you suggest

Physics is hard

It's usually in intuitive

@CryptoCypher

What's your counter

Crypto how did the experiment go

What are you reading

Ahh

Well the windows from end is concave, and the other is convex

When light enters the convex side it bends x degrees in one direction, when it exits through the concave side the light bends x degrees but in the opposite direction

Meaning that the net changein angle is 0

Note there can be magnification , but that is a linear transformation

Which doesn't distort

So the view from airplanes is legitimate

So there is a curve

Does a flat Earth predict that curve?

Okay?

That talks about the formation of glass

Not the way light flows through it

Yes

Of the glass

Not the properties of it's optics

On the orders of micromillimeter s

And it would flex uniformly from the concave to the convex side

Okay hold up

You saying

That deformation of the shape when it's formed means that it's optical properties change

The arrival as before mentioned speaks of the mechanical properties if the glass, it speaks nothing of it's optical properties

Which is what we are debating

So not only are you moving the goal post, you are inaccurate ly extroplating what the arrival says to apply to optical properties

Arrival*

Article*

*the proof is trivial and left to the user*

But in all seriousness even a quick look at optics on Wikipedia will tell you this

Or actually for scientific and mathematical pages it's very accurate

People are constantly fixing it and checking sources

Okay

Any book on optics used for any college class in the past half century

https://www.googleadservices.com/pagead/aclk?sa=L&ai=DChcSEwinjpy0z-XlAhViGH0KHfmVDlYYABAAGgJwdg&ae=1&ohost=www.google.com&cid=CAESQOD2443ZXloR7IXsIOxSBsbXS2X77g6yIiX7Qe5yDL5H5kxXniawSbKlKVfhp_SiVjgzHWGX8rH40a_dERS_-m0&sig=AOD64_17wBY7lzVbEKFHqq1cWBlQ9xzPfg&q&adurl=http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie%3DUTF8%26keywords%3Dintroduction%2Bto%2Bmodern%2Boptics%26index%3Daps%26tag%3Dhydsma-20%26ref%3Dpd_sl_2jr0rvtaee_e%26adgrpid%3D55037435974%26hvpone%3D%26hvptwo%3D%26hvadid%3D274706076173%26hvpos%3D1t1%26hvnetw%3Dg%26hvrand%3D12491416335119315815%26hvqmt%3De%26hvdev%3Dm%26hvdvcmdl%3D%26hvlocint%3D%26hvlocphy%3D1022588%26hvtargid%3Dkwd-300800383885%26hydadcr%3D29884_10734838%26gclid%3DCjwKCAiAzanuBRAZEiwA5yf4uqdlHPVfCNM_gbl09ShWtfBHwvJpYWerAVujVYa0hGdUbZYWc02vlxoCQXcQAvD_BwE&ved=2ahUKEwigt5G0z-XlAhV0FTQIHVMGDcUQ0Qx6BAgSEAE

It's in that book

Yeah

Lemme delete it

Proof for what exactly

Okay

Get a piece of plastic wrap

Put it in a box

It's translucent and deforms with change in pressurr

That's the properties we are stesting

Testing

Ugg

Glass doesn't deform from pressure

It shatters

Then why would you use a source talking about deformations in the structure of glass

As proof

You just disporovved one of your previous points

IT said GLASS

And my claims apply to any transparent material

I use using glass as an example

And youve said glass as well

You only posted 1

Where is the link for that source

Of what?

Your moving the goal post and it's driving me nuts

I had to prove their was no non linear deformation of the light

Now I have to prove that under static stress

If the deformation was enough to cause a sigficant and acknowledgable deformation to the light you would have died flying the airplane

The other factors are negligible

And are therefore ignored

If they weren't negligible they would've included them in this beautiful source of you

Yours

I told you a simple experiment you could peform

That is proof

I was debating laws of optics

The light going through the window experiences a linear deformation

You know what a linear transformation deformation is right?

Right?