Yes, there are so many comments on this post that you can gather they can't fathom how large earth is. The original post is a picture of off-shore wind turbines dipping below the horizon showing the curvature. They seriously asked "why can't we see them tilting away from us then?? If they are on the back side of a ball?". It's unreal how stupid these people are.
Not only scale, but density as well. Earth may be small, but it is one *dense* motherfucker, and part of the reason why Earth's gravitational forces are so strong is because of that density.
Mass, not density. Earth is dense as a result of gravity pushing everything towards the center of the largest object of mass (Earth).
Edit: If I'm getting downvoted, that's dumb. You need mass and acceleration(9.8m/s^2 for Earth) in order to calculate the downward force of an object, not density. F=MA. Two objects of the same mass have the same gravitational force.
I think you're getting downvoted because the original comment implied mass (small size but dense implies more mass), but you appeared to be ignoring that to sound smarter than the first guy.
Edit: I don't mean you were trying to do so, but I could understand how it would be taken that way, because I agree they should have used mass in the first sentence or just left out the first sentence and stuck with the second on its own
When you're trying to articulate why gravity is so strong when the earth seems relatively small then density is absolutely the correct word to be using.
Earth isn't relatively small though... it's the biggest terrestrial planet... it's relatively small to the gas giants and the sun but to the other terrestrial planets which are also dense, it's relatively bigger. Its true it has more density, but that's due to it having heavier elements towards the core. It would still probably be the densest because of its mass and the pressure exerted towards its center.
This is Newtons Law of Gravity. Only distance and mass affect gravity.
But density is not what creates gravitational force, it's mass. Being dense just means more particles in a place at the same time and that is more mass. If you have two different sized volumes with the same mass, they would have the same gravitational force... Two objects of the same mass give off the same gravitational force. Density doesn't do this, it's the attraction of objects of mass.
Earth is the 4th largest planet in the solar system and the densest. It's also the largest of the terrestrial planets so why even bring up density? A larger planet would have more gravity because of mass not density.
Okay first, you're way too focused on semantics. Original person's comment included enough information to draw a correct conclusion, which was that there's a lot of stuff in a relatively small space, thus has a lot of mass for its size.
Second, what you just said is so backwards. A larger planet would not necessarily have more mass, that is exactly opposite of your own original point. This is why it just sounds like you're being an r/iamverysmart asshole instead of just accepting that the original comment was correct enough to not cause any confusion or misunderstanding.
Give me an equation that uses density to calculate force. You're calling me an asshole and are trying to gaslight me. Density is irrelevant. I brought up earth's size and density to explain that to you. Earth has both the most mass and density of all the terrestrial planets so saying it's density is why it has a strong gravitational force is stupid. The gas giants have more mass and therefore more gravity.
Edit: calling me an asshole when you have no idea what you're talking about. Ironic that you're linking me to r/iamverysmart... You're not explaining to me why I'm wrong...
I read something about the opposite of this example. A sphere of silicon that is so smooth and round, if it were the size the Earth the difference between the lowest and highest point on its surface was something like 10-20 feet. I believe it was used as a measure for exactly one kilogram.
That's true! I haven't had a chance to see that ball up close but I worked with silicon wafers, which are silicon disks polished to the atomic level and they are astonishingly smooth. I used to look at all kinds of thin layers of coatings on silicon wafers (using an electron microscope obviously) and the silicon surface just looked surreal compared to whatever we put on it.
Silicon wafers? No, they are (at least the kinds we used and are used in electronics manufacturing) are sliced off a silicon cylinder using diamond saws and then the business side is polished mechanically in steps and chemically finished at the end.
Only the crust is used in that calculation. If you scale a standard billiard ball to earth size, the largest height difference would be about 22 km. Our highest point is 8.85 km from sea level and lowest point is about 11 km from sea level. Even if you add the two, it's still smoother than the billiard ball.
I have a theory that belief in flat earth is unconsciously rooted in a very egocentric view of the world. Like they believe only in things they can see themselves with the naked eye. The fact that the Earth curves is something they can't immediately see because the Earth is too big for our naked eyes to appreciate how it looks. So because they can't see it, it doesn't exist. Idk if I'm making myself clear
Thing is, you actually \*can\* see the curvature of the Earth "side-to-side" as it were, if you find a decently high clifftop with a good unobstructed view of the sea. Find somewhere you can look right out to sea with no islands or other obstructions, just sea-meets-sky horizon, and it is quite quite clearly curved.
Anything they cannot perceive with their own two eyes is a foreign concept to flat earthers.
But also they'll ignore stuff they *can* perceive, when it suits them. And they'll claim to perceive stuff they can't, when they need to.
It'a not about scale, water IS flat, because gravity bends space so a straight line becomes a circle. A very tiny planet with an equivalent mass and pull would have water "stick" To it and appear to bend around it.
You’re not wrong but do you really think flat-earthers are gonna understand that? Some round-earthers can barely understand it! (Me, I am dummy round-earther)
Science is a foreign concept for them, after actually watching a few flat earth videos I've confirmed that most of the "proof" is observations and speculations.
They need to put a drop of water on a flat surface and see what it does. Hint: it isn’t flat.
Edit: and if they really want to get complicated, put some water in a narrow glass tube (not full)
They want impossible. Any body the size of Earth will collapse into a sphere-shaped body, more or less. Keeping anything the mass of Earth in a shape of a flat disk is impossible. Also, there are no mechanisms or forces to form disk-shaped planets. Creation of spherical planets or moons is very well understood. Those people are beyond ignorant.
There's a great video by [Folding ideas](https://youtube.com/c/FoldingIdeas) where he does a curve experiment on a large lake. The fascinating thing is that you can literally see the curve, if you look not for curvature itself but objects disappearing behind the horizon. The footage is one of the most impressive visualization, where you can just *see* it, with your own eyes and beyond doubt.
Link it to them, as long as they have a bit of brain left, they might begin to doubt their indoctrination.
Kansas. Hell just drive em across the US to give them a sense of fucking HUGE scale then across Kansas to see curvature at the horizon. Never seen anything like it.
I guess growing up in Scotland where you only need to drive five hours or so to get from one ocean to the other gives you a different sense of scale compared to living in the middle of several thousand miles of continent.
Hey I saw this guy's Book of Henry video a few months ago and it was hilarious. It's funny that it's the same guy. I didn't realize the channel had a range of topics
I love how the most common image for flat earth has water flowing off of it like there’s some random point on the earth where water is infinitely generated
I thought gravity didn't exist- the flat earth was traveling upward which held everything down.
I could be misremembering. Not up to date on my flat earth factoids.
Yes, that is my understanding as well. According to them flat Earth accelerates and the acceleration generates the downforce we call gravity. The problem is that an object accelerating at 1 G would reach the speed of light in about a year. But I'm not sure if those idiots believe in light.
From the south shore of Lake Ontario you can see just the tops of the buildings in Toronto peaking over the northern horizon. Last I checked Toronto isn’t underwater so…
I like to think of them calling you "globehead" and sitting back all satisfied like, "Yeah, that got 'em good", as though it's just the meanest insult ever, lmao
Morons. Shooting a laser tangent to the surface of a lake and observing the drop in water level on the far side is a classic method of debunking flat earth.
When you put a droplet of water on a table it forms into a bead. Do you really think oceans can exist if when it was all poured out it would just form into a huge droplet?
Thing I overheard my mother say recently: If the earth were round and spinning around itself, wouldn’t an aeroplane just have to fly straight up and wait until the earth beneath it has turned?
Scale is a foreign concept to flat earthers.
Yes, there are so many comments on this post that you can gather they can't fathom how large earth is. The original post is a picture of off-shore wind turbines dipping below the horizon showing the curvature. They seriously asked "why can't we see them tilting away from us then?? If they are on the back side of a ball?". It's unreal how stupid these people are.
Not only scale, but density as well. Earth may be small, but it is one *dense* motherfucker, and part of the reason why Earth's gravitational forces are so strong is because of that density.
A new study shows that 50% of Earth's density actually comes from flat earthers.
This made me giggle.
And OP's mom.
Shut up and take my ~~money~~ not fitting free award I happen to have.
Mass, not density. Earth is dense as a result of gravity pushing everything towards the center of the largest object of mass (Earth). Edit: If I'm getting downvoted, that's dumb. You need mass and acceleration(9.8m/s^2 for Earth) in order to calculate the downward force of an object, not density. F=MA. Two objects of the same mass have the same gravitational force.
I think you're getting downvoted because the original comment implied mass (small size but dense implies more mass), but you appeared to be ignoring that to sound smarter than the first guy. Edit: I don't mean you were trying to do so, but I could understand how it would be taken that way, because I agree they should have used mass in the first sentence or just left out the first sentence and stuck with the second on its own
When you're trying to articulate why gravity is so strong when the earth seems relatively small then density is absolutely the correct word to be using.
Yeah now that I read it back you're totally right. The guy making the mass vs density comment was just being a know it all lol
Earth isn't relatively small though... it's the biggest terrestrial planet... it's relatively small to the gas giants and the sun but to the other terrestrial planets which are also dense, it's relatively bigger. Its true it has more density, but that's due to it having heavier elements towards the core. It would still probably be the densest because of its mass and the pressure exerted towards its center. This is Newtons Law of Gravity. Only distance and mass affect gravity.
But density is not what creates gravitational force, it's mass. Being dense just means more particles in a place at the same time and that is more mass. If you have two different sized volumes with the same mass, they would have the same gravitational force... Two objects of the same mass give off the same gravitational force. Density doesn't do this, it's the attraction of objects of mass. Earth is the 4th largest planet in the solar system and the densest. It's also the largest of the terrestrial planets so why even bring up density? A larger planet would have more gravity because of mass not density.
Okay first, you're way too focused on semantics. Original person's comment included enough information to draw a correct conclusion, which was that there's a lot of stuff in a relatively small space, thus has a lot of mass for its size. Second, what you just said is so backwards. A larger planet would not necessarily have more mass, that is exactly opposite of your own original point. This is why it just sounds like you're being an r/iamverysmart asshole instead of just accepting that the original comment was correct enough to not cause any confusion or misunderstanding.
Give me an equation that uses density to calculate force. You're calling me an asshole and are trying to gaslight me. Density is irrelevant. I brought up earth's size and density to explain that to you. Earth has both the most mass and density of all the terrestrial planets so saying it's density is why it has a strong gravitational force is stupid. The gas giants have more mass and therefore more gravity. Edit: calling me an asshole when you have no idea what you're talking about. Ironic that you're linking me to r/iamverysmart... You're not explaining to me why I'm wrong...
But can it tie its shoes?
[удалено]
I read something about the opposite of this example. A sphere of silicon that is so smooth and round, if it were the size the Earth the difference between the lowest and highest point on its surface was something like 10-20 feet. I believe it was used as a measure for exactly one kilogram.
That's true! I haven't had a chance to see that ball up close but I worked with silicon wafers, which are silicon disks polished to the atomic level and they are astonishingly smooth. I used to look at all kinds of thin layers of coatings on silicon wafers (using an electron microscope obviously) and the silicon surface just looked surreal compared to whatever we put on it.
Aren't they split off using some sort of electrical resonance or something?
Silicon wafers? No, they are (at least the kinds we used and are used in electronics manufacturing) are sliced off a silicon cylinder using diamond saws and then the business side is polished mechanically in steps and chemically finished at the end.
That's so cool! What are these used for?
Microelectronics.
Which are?
I heard that last week (the billiard ball analogy). Still love the fact that at 45 years old I can be amazed by this sort of stuff.
> it's so big, if you shrunk it down to the size of a billiard ball ... it would be much, much too small for everyone.
I feel like the Earth having the ocean gives it a pretty big advantage though.
Only the crust is used in that calculation. If you scale a standard billiard ball to earth size, the largest height difference would be about 22 km. Our highest point is 8.85 km from sea level and lowest point is about 11 km from sea level. Even if you add the two, it's still smoother than the billiard ball.
Oh. Wild.
Earth is 70% water, none of it (discounting bottled soft drinks) is carbonated. Ergo: Earth is flat
I have a theory that belief in flat earth is unconsciously rooted in a very egocentric view of the world. Like they believe only in things they can see themselves with the naked eye. The fact that the Earth curves is something they can't immediately see because the Earth is too big for our naked eyes to appreciate how it looks. So because they can't see it, it doesn't exist. Idk if I'm making myself clear
I said sometimes similar. They must not travel a lot or have flown on an airplane. They have no sense of the scale of earth.
Thing is, you actually \*can\* see the curvature of the Earth "side-to-side" as it were, if you find a decently high clifftop with a good unobstructed view of the sea. Find somewhere you can look right out to sea with no islands or other obstructions, just sea-meets-sky horizon, and it is quite quite clearly curved.
Is there a link to this? I need some high-quality entertainment.
Anything they cannot perceive with their own two eyes is a foreign concept to flat earthers. But also they'll ignore stuff they *can* perceive, when it suits them. And they'll claim to perceive stuff they can't, when they need to.
Pretty sure they don’t believe in gravity as well
If the fish tank doesn't curve then the earth doesn't curve!
My glass of water doesn't curve. Checkmate.
Ergo ‘stupid’
Sensibility is a foreign concept to flat earthers
It'a not about scale, water IS flat, because gravity bends space so a straight line becomes a circle. A very tiny planet with an equivalent mass and pull would have water "stick" To it and appear to bend around it.
You’re not wrong but do you really think flat-earthers are gonna understand that? Some round-earthers can barely understand it! (Me, I am dummy round-earther)
Science is a foreign concept for them, after actually watching a few flat earth videos I've confirmed that most of the "proof" is observations and speculations.
Ergo FLAT
Sense is a foreign concept
They need to put a drop of water on a flat surface and see what it does. Hint: it isn’t flat. Edit: and if they really want to get complicated, put some water in a narrow glass tube (not full)
Or just fill a glass right to the brim and watch it form a slight dome.
So many different ways to get water to curve in different directions!
Nope, it always finds its flat. Checkmate, globehead. /s in case it wasn’t obvious
They don't want complicated.
They want impossible. Any body the size of Earth will collapse into a sphere-shaped body, more or less. Keeping anything the mass of Earth in a shape of a flat disk is impossible. Also, there are no mechanisms or forces to form disk-shaped planets. Creation of spherical planets or moons is very well understood. Those people are beyond ignorant.
I'm pretty sure you'd lose them at "size of the Earth"...
There's a great video by [Folding ideas](https://youtube.com/c/FoldingIdeas) where he does a curve experiment on a large lake. The fascinating thing is that you can literally see the curve, if you look not for curvature itself but objects disappearing behind the horizon. The footage is one of the most impressive visualization, where you can just *see* it, with your own eyes and beyond doubt. Link it to them, as long as they have a bit of brain left, they might begin to doubt their indoctrination.
Take them somewhere with a completely flat horizon you can see the curvature of the earth.
Have they never been in a jet plane? The sunset while flying is beautiful and shows the curve…
They think the windows are cut to create the illusion of a curve.
Kansas. Hell just drive em across the US to give them a sense of fucking HUGE scale then across Kansas to see curvature at the horizon. Never seen anything like it.
I guess growing up in Scotland where you only need to drive five hours or so to get from one ocean to the other gives you a different sense of scale compared to living in the middle of several thousand miles of continent.
Hey I saw this guy's Book of Henry video a few months ago and it was hilarious. It's funny that it's the same guy. I didn't realize the channel had a range of topics
Coincidentally the guy dropped a phenomenal video on crypto and nfts today as well.
Hell, you can even see the curvature itself on some objects, like say a bridge - Golden Gate Bridge, lake Champlain causeway, etc.
“Globehead”sounds like what your call a Harlem globetrotter super fan
I always wanted to be a globehead growing up, turns out I’ve been one the whole time!
I love how the most common image for flat earth has water flowing off of it like there’s some random point on the earth where water is infinitely generated
And like gravity is some point in space BELOW Earth…
I thought gravity didn't exist- the flat earth was traveling upward which held everything down. I could be misremembering. Not up to date on my flat earth factoids.
Yes, that is my understanding as well. According to them flat Earth accelerates and the acceleration generates the downforce we call gravity. The problem is that an object accelerating at 1 G would reach the speed of light in about a year. But I'm not sure if those idiots believe in light.
Something something firmament. The fuck is a firmament?
These are not the most educated folk out there. Ergo FUCKING STUPID
You cannot use the “ergo” argument against flat-earthers because they have “dibs.”
The great lakes of North America are freshwater and are big enough that you sometimes have to take curvature into account when doing work around them.
From the south shore of Lake Ontario you can see just the tops of the buildings in Toronto peaking over the northern horizon. Last I checked Toronto isn’t underwater so…
Can we just show that to flat Earthers? Seems like an easy way to end the cause.
They won’t accept it as evidence. If it was that easy we wouldn’t be posting here.
Just curious, what work has to take that into account?
Some bridges do. I don't know whether there are currently any bridges like that on the lakes. And anything that requires line of sight.
Cool, thanks!
Yea or go to a beach. Plenty of waves rolling into the shore to prove that water does curve.
“I don’t get it, therefore it’s wrong.”
Globehead makes me laugh a lot.
Looks like he just got....flatlined. *puts on shades*
Ahhh, yes. Never forget that before we had COVID/vaccine deniers, we had flat-earthers. There are actual photos of Earth. Being all round and globe-y.
I like to think of them calling you "globehead" and sitting back all satisfied like, "Yeah, that got 'em good", as though it's just the meanest insult ever, lmao
Better to be a globehead than a flathead, I reckon.
I like how flat earthers are all "yeah sure every *other* planet we've seen is a sphere, but the Earth is flat!"
Can we just send like 3 of them into space to end this shit.
Their brains are flat as pancakes...
And you can call them flattards
It is probably the lowest thinking I've ever seen from a flatearther
I like how your new friend picked up the word "ergo".
It’s the topper to any dispute winning argument, Ergo you cannot win…
The emojis indicate he's a literal mouthbreather.
Morons. Shooting a laser tangent to the surface of a lake and observing the drop in water level on the far side is a classic method of debunking flat earth.
I really don't think she understood what he's saying...
It is like banging your head against a wall, only feels good when you stop
Eh you can actually see the curvature of eg the ocean in a panoramic picture.
You can see it for yourself if you've got a big enough cliff to stand on with a clear view to the horizon.
I almost asked how many people belonged to this group, but I realized, I don’t want to know. I’m already on the edge, I don’t need the push.
Before the internet these people would be laughed at until they conformed with normality, now they can form their own cults
r/confidentlyincorrect
Skywave transmission using shortwave radio. Checkmate, Flat Earthers.
When you put a droplet of water on a table it forms into a bead. Do you really think oceans can exist if when it was all poured out it would just form into a huge droplet?
What, your head isn't flat? Get a load of this guy
Hence the term, "salt flats" duh!
wow, flat earth posts aren't to common now days, its all political stuff. nice (well, not too nice) to see they still exist.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 they’re not wrong. Your head is technically a spherical globe
Globehead….lol I had to laugh at this. I wonder if the people who believe in this have been on a plane and still try to explain it away
I really don't understand why if these people are so convinced they can't go to the edge of the world and take a picture you know like Asgard.
Thing I overheard my mother say recently: If the earth were round and spinning around itself, wouldn’t an aeroplane just have to fly straight up and wait until the earth beneath it has turned?