I only just joined and I already feel like I've lost half my braincells

NASA is just trying to sell you globes, don't worry about them

You want evidence, then go to the "ice wall" yourself and see if it actually exists
There's plenty of flat earthers
Just band together and fund it
Most globe earthers would accept flat earth it that evidence was found, I think everyone just wants an answer

0 d e g r e e t i l t

That's just

no tilt

If you want to prove flat earth

Get a bunch of flat earthers

Get funding

And make a fully recorded trip there

And give real visual evidence of the ice wall

What about the claims of having military keeping people from the ice wall
Just live stream it
And any military interference will be caught too and will give evidence

u h

Greenland having ice walls?
What are you even on about
u h
That's not the kind of ice wall I mean

I mean

The ice wall

Surrounding the entire earth

Why are there just random neutron?
They have no inherent charge
They would not be attracted to either side

uh

What I was looking at was further up

And yes

The diagram only shows neutrons on the left side

"lmao you can't prove it"
"neither can you"
You do realise, if he can't prove that it isn't edited then maybe that's because it is edited?

Yeah

He literally just said something that supports your point

I'm sorry, but a 5 word sentence in fancy text as an image means literally nothing

And quotes can be completely up to judgement

F = ma
Therefore a = F/m
m = F/a
You could also say that a stationary cube has no acceleration, and their mass cannot be calculated as you cannot divide by 0 so it cannot exist

This kind of reasoning does not work

But mass is part of the relationship between both

How can you have a mass with no acceleration?

Same equation

Same logic

The acceleration _of the object_ is what matters

What I was saying is actually going against your line of reasoning

You can't use the equation to argue that way
Rearrange the equation and your logic causes the value of mass to be uncalculatable

Hmm
sorry

But I don't see any mass pushing that woman

Must be fake

Same logic

Uh

This seems a lot like silencing people that are bringing up genuine points

Mass, Force and acceleration are all linked by the same equation
A question including acceleration will often include, you need to understand this

So your point doesn't stand

Right

So if you shine a laser through a glass wall

The light will defract if it is at an angle

The light collides with the glass first at one part of the beam, causing a change in direction as there is some kind of resisting force
This force opposes the acceleration of the light
So the light accelerates slower on one part, and then angles based on the refraction index
The light will decelerate due to glass

So some kind of force must be resisting the light

And to have a resisting force like that, the light must have a force acting against the glass

Probably got some terms wrong in my explanation

But this what I've been taught

Usually it's written as F = ma
a=F/m is a rearrangement

Television isn't even relevant anymore

Hmm
Maybe more numbers got involved by proof of the globe earth, and no numbers involved in flat earth then does that not mean the flat earth is not provable by math?

Animals become entirely new species when their genetics have differed enough for them to be unable to breed

Ha

Weight can't even exist without gravity, which I doubt you even believe in

Buoyancy works off of weight

You actually need to apply calculations to convert that to mass if you want to use it in other equations related to force

Afterall

Weight is just force

Nope

it's mass x acceleration

But

You still do not believe in gravity

So you can't claim anything about Archimedes considering weight is just the mass x the acceleration due to gravity that the object is experiencing

u h

Mass isn't any kind of quantity

I mean

I worded that wrong

Mass itself is not a specific measurement

Mass can be representing in kg and plenty of other forms

Atoms != matter

How many atoms does an electron contain?

Or a proton?

What are you even thinking?

Are you... asking for a picture.. Of something that makes up an atom?

Are you saying... Electrons don't exist?

Or they have no mass?

Basic physics would be more accurate to say...
At least stay on the right field

No considering it's probably too small to give a photograph with our current technology

But

You are also saying protons and neutrons do not have mass

How many atoms in a proton?

Uh

Why are you asking here?

Two spinning ball models

Why does that matter?

Afterall

One is about atoms

and the other is a planet

I see literally no relationship between a model for atoms and a model for a planet

Sure
And I can pick any definition?

Tell me the only definition of a model

Because that site lists a lot more than 1

I said

The only definition

And you've already given 4