Re: Scientific proof the Earth is flat!
I didn't suggest anything. It just shows you don't understand how laws and science works. Like I've already said, we use this 'imaginary' line for mathematics. It shows the radius vector sweeping out equal areas in equal time, showing the planet travels faster while close to the sun and slows down when farther away.
They need to get an objectives and collect the hypothesis. The observations and experimentation comes next. Then, they collect the data. The analysis come comes next to see if the data fits and see if there is any relationship. They come with a conclusion with their findings.
Yes, I have.
I don't mind, nor do I care what you believe in; that doesn't bother me. What bother me is that you guys are so content in your religion, that you don't have any curiosity in science left to learn how everything actually happened. That's why I'm mostly on the 'creation scientific' threads. If you guys say that we scientists don't understand something or you guys don't understand it, does that mean God did it? Well, there is a list of things in the past that scientists at the time didn't understand, and would have said 300 years ago, "you can't explain it, so there must be a God..." However, 100 years later we scientists understand it, making God just a receding thing.
Yes, because there is nothing wrong with that.
Yes, it does. Wee can see what gravity does, like we can see what wind does.
That's why I've given you Kepler's Law.
I didn't even answer this because I thought it was too embarrassing for you. Nevertheless, I'll do it anyway. I'm not even sure why you would think this - there are other gases (oxygen, CO2, water vapour etc etc.) - they all form the atmosphere. The only why our planet would be a solidified in nitrogen, like you said, would be if our planet was much farther from the sun.
You can use different foci, depending on what you're looking for. Either you can have what I've just said, empty space, (which I'll explain in a bit) or you could have another planet, such as Mars, Jupiter, or even our moon. If we want the foci to be the empty space point, then we need to calculate it.
F=√j2-n2
F = the distance for each focus to the centre
J = semi-major axis
n= semi minor axis
It's only increasing by one micrometer (a millionth of a meter, or a ten thousandth of a centimeter)
They don't make it up. We scientist makes up explanations when acting from a scientific standpoint. They make the conclusion based upon the evidence they have.
Let's explain...
p=period
a=semi-major axis
K=constant of proportionality
p^2=Ka^3
365.25^2=149.6^3K
K=133.4075625 / 3,348,071.936
=0.040
I would love to see a post of me saying this - you won't find it. I work in science, and I studied at the University of Manchester in England.
Originally posted by Seth Campbell
View Post
Originally posted by Seth Campbell
View Post
Originally posted by Seth Campbell
View Post
Originally posted by Seth Campbell
View Post
Originally posted by Seth Campbell
View Post
Originally posted by Seth Campbell
View Post
Originally posted by Seth Campbell
View Post
Originally posted by Seth Campbell
View Post
Originally posted by Seth Campbell
View Post
F=√j2-n2
F = the distance for each focus to the centre
J = semi-major axis
n= semi minor axis
Originally posted by Seth Campbell
View Post
Originally posted by Seth Campbell
View Post
Originally posted by Seth Campbell
View Post
So, 365.25^2 = 149.6^3
133,407.56 = 3,348,071.94
133,407.56 = 3,348,071.94
a=semi-major axis
K=constant of proportionality
p^2=Ka^3
365.25^2=149.6^3K
K=133.4075625 / 3,348,071.936
=0.040
Originally posted by Seth Campbell
View Post
Comment