[Sionisx2]

Re: Flat Earth? Hell Yes!

Hey uh.. you guys should know that I have unfalsifiable proof the earth is round. My Uncle, Jeffrey Williams, (Kyle M. Williams typing to you now) was on the space shuttle Atlantis back in 2000. He actually showed me pictures taken from just inside the shuttle (you could see the rim of the port hole) of the earth, they were orbiting when it was taken. (really nice pictures too! )

As I don't have a scanner, I can't upload them, but I assure you from the looks of them, and the from what billions of people , more unfalsifiable proof, say, and of course thousands of scientists, the earth is in fact, round. Sorry. We have the technology now to view what our planet looks like. After all, if the earth was flat, how could satellites orbit? Or ISS for that matter.

[StarrKingGrad]

Re: Flat Earth? Hell Yes!

And I'll be laughing when all your efforts here on Earth don't take you anywhere when you die.

There seems to be an awful lot of laughing at other people's imagined future pain going on around here. Wouldn't it be better to think of how you will rejoice when someone else finds the path to a fulfilling life, however you might personally define that (that goes for the "True Christians," too)?

Satan's barbed tallywhacker

I know I'm going to regret asking this, but how do you know that it is barbed?

[StarrKingGrad]

Re: Flat Earth? Hell Yes!

just wondering if you could explain the holographic principle in more detail, i couldn't get much out of the wiki site, as I have not yet take an elementary physics class, so much of the terminology went over my head.

I can't explain it, since my degree is in theology, not physics. I asked a physicist in my congregation to give me a two to three sentence summary, and here's what he said (like most physicists, he took more than three sentences, but that's true of theologians as well, so I won't complain):

In physics, we understand the world around us in terms of mathematical models. For example, we can write an equation that tells us how much energy is required to stop a car of a certain weight going at a certain speed, and we can use this to design brakes for automobiles.

Mathematically, objects in three dimensions can be described by equations in just two dimensions through a process called projection. It's difficult to show exactly what this means without graphs and equations, but think of it as something like your shadow--it is a two dimensional representation on the surface of the Earth of a three dimensional object (you).

A hologram is a two dimensional image that looks like a three dimensional object. If you haven't seen one, look at the funny colored sticker on most credit cards. It's obviously flat, but the object looks like it has depth, too. A hologram of an object tells you a lot more about the object than that object's shadow does. This is, in essence, the holographic principle--it says that all of the information needed to describe a three-dimensional world can be condensed into just two dimensions.

To be clear, I'm not saying that we can take one of our dimensions and throw it out the window (i.e., the holographic principle does not say that east and west and north and south are real, but up and down are illusions). If the principle is true, then the "real" two dimensions are constructed in a very different manner than east/west, north/south, and up/down.

One trend in modern physics is to think of our universe as containing not space, time, matter, and energy, but rather information (remember, physics is about building mathematical models of the real world, and information is something that can be described easily with math). If that concept is correct, then there really could be no difference between a three-dimensional object and its two-dimensional holographic projection, so we could say that the third dimension really is just an illusion.

Is the holographic principle true? It's hard to say. We certainly don't have a full-blown model of the universe that can be described holographically. On the other hand, theoretical results from the study of black holes (objects that are so massive that even light cannot escape their gravity) indicate that the information content of a black hole is proportional to the surface area of that black hole, rather to than the black hole's volume. That's a tough concept to grasp--if I told you that a balloon filled with water weighs exactly the same balloon filled to the same size with air, you'd (quite rightly) think I was crazy--but there are very good reasons to believe that's exactly the way black holes behave with respect to information.

Why does this matter? On a superficial level, it doesn't--we experience the universe in three dimensions, and if it's really just a two dimensional universe of information that appears to us to be a three dimensional universe of matter and energy, what difference does that make to us? It is important to physicists, however, since it turns out that many calculations are much easier to do when we think of information in two dimensions rather than matter and energy in three dimensions. Moreover, the holographic principle is our best explanation of the way black holes work--but if it's true for black holes, it has to be true for the rest of the universe, too, including you and me.

Let me add that there is currently no experimental evidence directly saying that ours is "really" a two dimensional world. There is a chance that, once the Large Hadron Collider in Europe begins operations this year, experiments will help us to see whether holographic models stand up. At the same time, there is no evidence today that would disprove the holographic principle.

In summary, it may truly be that we live in a holographic universe, and we cannot abandon the hypothesis out of hand, but it would not be accurate to say that our universe has been proved to be holographic. One dominant lesson from physics in the last 100 years or so is that the way universe really works is usually far stranger than we imagine, and, any way you look at it, the holographic principle is strange.

[Ahimaaz Smith]

Re: Flat Earth? Hell Yes!

So if the water falls over the edge, where does it go?

There are two schools of thought on this: First, the water gets recycled by God into the waters in the sky (you know, the ones that make the sky blue, see Genesis 1:7), then fall upon the Earth as rain or dew. Second, the water goes into the fountains of the great deep (see Genesis 7:11), which slowly let the water back into the seas. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

and how do the oceans stay at the same level?

Who said the oceans stay at the same level? I never saw that in the Bible. The oceans have currents, so obviously they are higher in some places than in others. Similarly, ocean levels change as the tides change.

if an earthquake happened, wouldn't that send more water over the edge due to the force of the earth on the water and thereby decrease the water level until the water reappears

Yes. Earthquakes in the seas cause tsunamis, which increase the amount of water flowing over the edge at any given time. This is why tsunamis eventually stop--if the oceans were a closed system, with no outlet, then each tsunami would continue zipping across the oceans basins forever. You have to understand, though, that the amount of water in a tsunami is small compared to the total volume of water in the oceans, so a little extra water going over the edge does not dramatically affect sea levels worldwide.

[Stella]

Re: Flat Earth? Hell Yes!

Your mouth will be too filled with Satan's barbed tallywhacker to even try to scoff.

Sounds like a sexy time to me.

[Dr. Ernest C. Ville, D.C.S.]

Re: Flat Earth? Hell Yes!

Your mouth will be too filled with Satan's barbed tallywhacker to even try to scoff. Besides, you will be too busy begging for mercy between anal gang-rapings by Satan & his minions to even think about us, playing badminton with Jesus and sipping wine coolers in the shade of the Tree of Knowledge.

[Stella]

Re: Flat Earth? Hell Yes!

You won't be laughing when Jesus sends you down to everlasting hell.

And I'll be laughing when all your efforts here on Earth don't take you anywhere when you die.

[Pastor Ezekiel]

Re: Flat Earth? Hell Yes!

*Falls off the edge of the Earth* Weee!!!!!

You people never fail to make me laugh.

You won't be laughing when Jesus sends you down to everlasting hell.

[Stella]

Re: Flat Earth? Hell Yes!

Dear Friend,

The fact of the matter is, there are all sorts of Biblical verses that make no sense if the Earth is a sphere -- without corners or ends. Therefore, the Earth must be flat.

"And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the Earth." Isaiah 11:12.

"And after these things I saw four angels standing on four corners of the Earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree." Revelation 7:1.

"That it might take hold of the ends of the Earth, that the wicked might be shaken out of it?" Job 38:13.

"O LORD, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ends of the Earth, and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit." Jeremiah 16:19.

"The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the ends of the Earth." Daniel 4:11.

Yours in Him,
BAB

*Falls off the edge of the Earth* Weee!!!!!

You people never fail to make me laugh.

[Brother Temperance]

Re: Flat Earth? Hell Yes!

But no, its a member of the US army doing an experiment. you know the UD army right?

No. Who are the UD army? Are they some kind of goth EBM outfit?

It was an analogy. You know what an analogy is right? If not, look it up.

You're saying the world's an analogy now? An analogy for what?

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Re: Flat Earth? Hell Yes!

Also, no-one has come up with an objection to my argument about light. Perhaps you can't?

Now, son, I’ve read this thread from end to end and I’ve come to the conclusion that you have fewer brain cells that a dyslexic jelly-fish.

I looked to help you with your search for your “question about light” and I saw a whole bunch of illuminating answers. There is an excellent post by Brother Ahimaaz Smith, who has more patience than I and a deep knowledge of these things, and who shows you the Truth, The Way and The Light.



Why you can’t just see that your questions are those of the cracked pitcher going to the well, I’ll probably never know.

However, you seem still to be in the darkness… I’m beginning to think you are just a wilful retard with a good spell-checker… and I will have an attempt to explain in far simpler terms.

You seem big on stars (or you think you are). See out there, there is roughly an infinite number of stars. Now if each star were only just emitting a small amount of light, as there are infinite stars, the sky at night would be bright as day – solidly filled with stars. Does your wandering, gibbering suppositions based on hearsay and irrelevant science explain that?

But, God created day and night and the moon to rule the night and, although comparatively only as bright as your brain, the night is a bit brighter than the “darkness that was upon the face of the earth.”

Now if God has decided to make it night (which he created) in Australia and day (which he created) in America (which he created), then that’s a matter for him.



Either you can take Brother Ahimaaz Smith’s faultless True Christian™ reasoning or you can just say that, as water is wet and the desert is not, it is night in Australia and Day in America. Either is good as neither contradicts the Bible.

Anyway, why do you want to go poking your nose into the ineffable mind of The Almighty, The Lord of Hosts? He’s told you all you ever need to know in The Bible (KJV).

Oh and on the question of The Sun Ruling the Day and The Moon ruling the Night and yet the moon being visible in daylight – The Queen of Britain, by the Grace of God, rules Britain and The King of The Norway, by the Grace of God, rules Norway… do you think for one moment that if the King of Norway came to Britain he would become invisible?


Amen


Bathfire E

[Stranger]

Re: Flat Earth? Hell Yes!

What do you think explains all of the Bermuda Triangle disappearances? I'm sure it's been seen, but if you get close enough to see it, you'll get sucked over the edge by the falling water and atmosphere. So nobody who has seen it has lived to tell the tale.

So if the water falls over the edge, where does it go? and how do the oceans stay at the same level?
for if an earthquake happened, wouldn't that send more water over the edge due to the force of the earth on the water and thereby decrease the water level until the water reappears, however you explain that.

[Stranger]

Re: Flat Earth? Hell Yes!

It's always good to ask questions, but I don't think we should rush to throw out the flat Earth hypothesis. Many of my parishioners in the Unitarian Universalist church are flat-Earthers, and I think we can all gain something in our own quests for spiritual knowledge by looking at the world in a way that radically differs from our preconceived notions.

According to one of my congregants, who is a well respected theoretical physicist, there is considerable evidence (based on the thermodymics of black holes) that the universe is indeed two dimensional, with the third dimension serving merely as an illusion. This is known as the holographic principle, and plays an important role in many formulations of string theory. I wouldn't dismiss the Biblical view of a 2D universe as silly when many of the world's top physicists consider it to be a very real possibility.

just wondering if you could explain the holographic principle in more detail, i couldn't get much out of the wiki site, as I have not yet take an elementary physics class, so much of the terminology went over my head.

[StarrKingGrad]

Re: Flat Earth? Hell Yes!

that parishioner of yours' most likely works for Lawrence Livermore National Lab on nuclear weapons.... I am curious why you would even allow a man like that in your precious Berkley Unitarian Church?

An excellent question. He works at the less well known Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, a lovely facility on the University of California, Berkeley campus overlooking the Bay that is devoted to peaceful energy research, including some excellent work in renewable energy. There are also many professors and students from Cal Berkeley in our congretation. I'm not aware of any members who work at Lawrence Livermore, but we do not enforce particular political views on our congregants. We prefer encouraging them to moderate their warmongering views using gentle persuasion, candlelight vigils, and setting good examples.

Berkeley being a nuclear free zone and all that (that issue came up when I was transporting a bottle of Thoruim for our mission their San Fransisco....

The City of Berkeley is, indeed, a nuclear free zone, and I'm proud to say that my congregation played a large role in that (though it was before my time here).

Why was your mission was transporting thorium? On second thought, I don't think I want to know.

[Bobby-Joe]

Re: Flat Earth? Hell Yes!

It's always good to ask questions, but I don't think we should rush to throw out the flat Earth hypothesis. Many of my parishioners in the Unitarian Universalist church are flat-Earthers, and I think we can all gain something in our own quests for spiritual knowledge by looking at the world in a way that radically differs from our preconceived notions.

According to one of my congregants, who is a well respected theoretical physicist, there is considerable evidence (based on the thermodymics of black holes) that the universe is indeed two dimensional, with the third dimension serving merely as an illusion. This is known as the holographic principle, and plays an important role in many formulations of string theory. I wouldn't dismiss the Biblical view of a 2D universe as silly when many of the world's top physicists consider it to be a very real possibility.

Considering your’ location Starkinggrad that parishioner of yours' most likely works for Lawrence Livermore National Lab on nuclear weapons. I am curious why you would even allow a man like that in your precious Berkley Unitarian Church? If I recall correctly his job is against the law there, Berkeley being a nuclear free zone and all that (that issue came up when I was transporting a bottle of Thoruim for our mission their San Fransisco. Had a bit of a nasty time of it with a Alameda County Sheriff's Deputy)