One thing about the submarine cables (SCs) is how their lengths can and necessarily have to be verified independently of the speed of light (2.14 x 10^8m/s in a fiber optic cable), even cost aside. I think everyone with a 1/2 a brain (I may have just excluded flerfs) understands that even with exceptional clarity of the optical cable used in SCs, optical signals will need to be boosted on their way down a long cable, the longest unrepeated cable that I am aware of is in the order of 400km long. We are talking about cables in the 10^4 km magnitudes. Thus, repeaters are necessary, and they are placed at certain distances, every 100km or so, to boost the signal along the way. As a side note, even knowing how many repeaters there are, we already know the relative length of the cables, but that's not where I am going with this. These repeaters (typically EDFA) are powered, in series, via wires that provide anywhere from 3000 to 15,000 VDC. Actually, another way we can independently verify the length of the fibers would be to solve for wire distance given a few values (voltage, current, at least the type and size of the conductor used, and power consumption per repeater), but that's still not where I was going with this. There are roughly 100 fiber breakage events of submarine cables every year. These breakages must be promptly detected and repaired, which requires knowing almost precisely where the breakage occurs. Sending a ship to examine 100km of deep underwater cable because we only know the location down to the nearest repeater would be highly inefficient and time-consuming. Another way of finding the breaks is needed, which is where the spread-spectrum time-domain reflectometry (SSTDR) comes in. I'll include a DOI about what it is and how it works. Because we need to know the precise location of the brakes because we have a method for detecting them that works repeatedly and consistently, this method can also be used to verify the length of the SCs independently of fiber and cost. And SSTDR is not something scientists use in a lab; it's applicable anywhere from aircraft and automotive wiring to fault detection and location in power grids, to examining pre-stressed concrete stranded cables in dams. More on SSTDR: doi.org/10.3390/s21165268
@@PhDTony_original I dare any globe dreamers to answer these: 1. If sun is 93 million miles away, then we should feel the same scorching heat in the morning and in the noon, but why there's huge difference in heat between noon and morning-evening? Why light intensity of the sun becomes magnitude higher in the noon? 2. If sun is burning, where is the smoke? 3. Vacuum cannot conduct heat as there's no molecules, so how sun's heat is traveling 93 million miles wide vacuum to reach here? 4. Magnets lose magnetism when heated up, then how your ball earth's inner core burning for billions of years at extreme temperature and yet doesn't lose its magnetism? Compass still works. 5. If satellites are real, then some countries that have satellite TV dish antennas on top of houses should point straight up 90°, but why all TV antennas in all countries always point sideways? 6. Point your finger at the direction in which your computer ball earth is flying at 800,000 kmph speed as you read this, can you? 7. Winter when sun is closer and summer when sun is farther? How? Tilt of the earth? It's sphere anyway regardless of tilting according to you. 8. If space expanding and things are red shifting and moving away from one another then how will andromeda and milky way collide ? 9. Why there are no stars in those earth images allegedly taken from space? 10. During 2017 american total eclipse, why moon's shadow went from west to east? It's supposed to go from east to west. 11. Rail roads are laid flat for thousands of KM, they are not curved. This proves earth is flat. 12. Ball earth is 3D , so why you use only 2 coordinates? Where is your third coordinate? 13. Why above equator has 19 time zones and below equator has 32 time zones? If earth is a ball, then there should be 24 time zones on each side.
@@Flat_Earth_Isaac 1) in the morning and evening the sun is low in the sky. As a result, the angle of incidence of the sun's radiation is low. The same level of radiation is spread out over a larger area. At noon the sun is shining directly down and the intensity of the radiation is much higher. To see how this works, shine a flashlight/torch/lamp onto a table top you will see the same effect. At a low angle the light will be spread out and diffuse. At a high angle the light will be concentrated and intense.
@@Flat_Earth_Isaac 3) There are three mechanisms by which heat energy may be transported: Conduction Convection Radiation As you say, conduction and convection require a material medium. However, radiation does not require that any matter is present.
... and at the end PhD Tony anounces a video about lies flerfs tell. I really wonder what that could be about as so many of them are affiliated with a religion following a holy book of rules, one being not to lie. Do they all risk to go their religion's hell one day?
@@mittelwelle_531_khz i dunno about other holy books, but the goat herders' guide to the galaxy violates its own rules with all the BS that's written in it. and that is one of MANY reasons why i don't believe such BS.
Haha you bet. Hey Tony, I had a chat with Rachie on Limey’s show and tried to explain that while she is busy trying to understand GR with no underpinning physics or mathematics education, at an undergraduate level, she is ignoring the huge herd of elephants in the room. This is one of those elephants. A bloody killer one at that. I’m looking forward to it.
@@PhDTony_original indeed, not knowing or even understanding is forgivable because it depends on circumstances at the time she should have learned to think critically. The wilful ignorance, simply ignoring the incontrovertible evidence in order to deliberately remain ignorant is unforgivable. Especially when you have had free access to people who are normally paid to share information and knowledge like that.
😊 tried this "four equidistant locations" approach in one of the first videos I ever made. Less "mathematical", more in "tangible" approach, with a styrofoam balls and cut wires. Though my four locations were only "approximately equidistant" because I wanted more "well-known" names and ended up with Sydney, Mexico City, Capetown, and Novosibirsk. Well, that was five years ago, time flies ... (the more the older you get).
This is a nice demonstration of why flat Earth would require a HUGE number of people and organisations to be in on it. The globe shows up in anything large enough. At the scale of your kitchen a flat Earth is a workable approximation. The curvature at that scale is so slight that water sticking to the surface of a glass and water's surface tension curve the water more than the variation in vertical does.
@@jamesd6973 I don’t claim he’s wrong, so I don’t need to show why. And just because I don’t have a thorough knowledge of the maths, it doesn’t mean I don’t understand the concept being demonstrated.
@@ChoirFan1 I didn't claim he was wrong or right, i asked you where were the facts presented in the video. You're telling me that you don't understand it, so it must be true. All you have is the concept, nothing empirically verifiable.
Excellent video, Tony!!!! I am forever indebted to you for the phrase, "rather inappropriate appellation." Most of us already facepalm ourselves into unconsciousness when we hear "Brian's Logic" but now that phrase will add days of helpless laughter every time I hear his name. Thank you!!!
Hi Tony. I just got through watching the debate from yesterday on FTFE's channel and just wanted to say: You were amazing! I think we all expected you to lose it on that bunch and somehow you remained surprisingly under control and even with constant interruptions, being talked over and extreme derp levels you kept to explaining things. I know I couldn't have stayed that calm, nor have your knowledge and experience but it was your staying calm that surprised and impressed me hugely. You really didn't need to apologise for being involved so much either, YOU made that interesting enough that I could sit through that entire thing. If it had just been Craig and that bunch, I definitely couldn't have stayed listening to them right through. Thank you🖖🏻👍!
do you really think Tony provided empirical evidence his spherical distance formula proves Earth's surface is spherical? The only thing Tony proved is that he's an indoctrinated fool. Provide 1 timestamp to where he validated any of his claims.🍿
@@jamesd6973 Spherical distance formulas ONLY work on a sphere. The calculated distances match the actual, measured, distances. IF the calculated distances match the measured distances, then, the Earth can ONLY be a sphere. The Earth just CAN NOT be flat. It's a physical impossibility. A flat earth would break several natural laws. On a flat earth, the Sun and Moon could NEVER EVER set. The can never come lower than 8° above the horizon, and, that's for an observer at the Southern tip of Terra Del Fuego at midnight on the December solstice looking straight North. In reality, at that moment, the Sun is straight South from the point of view of that observer. Reality say that the Earth is a slowly rotating oblate spheroid orbiting the Sun once a year.
Outstanding! A great presentation. I had no idea that submarine cables were so expensive. I assume that the companies involved probably use the Vincenty formula. Just added this video to my Spherical geometry playlist.👍
One has to wonder why flerfs have never bothered to figure out how cartographers know to draw the sizes & shapes of continents. Or even how the source datasets are compiled.
@@profphilbell2075 there are some who do (think about it) but they don't stay in the flerf crazy ... like TigerDan25 several years ago, who tried to come up with a "true map of the flat earth". Obviously it was a honest attempt as he failed and failed again and at one point finally gave up the idea of a flat earth.
Love the video, Tony. Awesome stuff. Unfortunately there are flat Earthers out there who don't know how many metres there are in a kilometre, or the size of the angles in an equilateral triangle.
Everyday, more globe believers are shocked to know that: 1. All earth images from space are fake. 2. No rocket has gone above 100 km in altitude. 3. Antarctica circumnavigation has never happened. 4. Satellites don't exist. 5. Flights never nose dive because of no curvature. 6. Flights between australia and south america never fly over Antarctica, instead it goes through northern part. 7. Moon landing is fake. 8. No 24 hour sun in Antarctica. 9. A huge difference in heat from the sun between noon and morning-evening. 10. Polar star trails are circular, but it should be straight lines or some other abstract shape if earth is flying at 800,000 kmph speed. 11. So-called space videos are from balloons using a fish eye lens camera and from 3D softwares. 12. Moon's night side is same as sky instead of black. 13. "A live telecast of rocket attached with a regular lens camera going up atleast 20,000 km in altitude or upto whole earth comes in a single frame" has never happened, no one even tried. 14. Go fast rocket hit the dome about 98 km. 15. During solar eclipse the alleged moon's shadow is about only 100 km wide and it moves from west to east , north-east to south-west and many directions. 16. Sometimes lunar eclipse occurs while the sun is still above the horizon. 17. Our eyes and senses tell that we are not moving and not spinning.
Celestial navigation by its very nature falsifies the idea that the Earth is anything other than an oblate spheroid. The first non-trivial computer program I ever wrote (1982) was to calculate great circle distance and initial angle of departure for any two points on Earth given the latitude and longitude of the two points. I tested it against the outer markers for Long Beach California and Singapore which is a known distance. I was off by about 32 feet (10m). I called it a success.
I've learned a lot (again) from your video. Since flerfers aren't willing, or able to learn anything, I'm afraid this whole video is just pearls before swine.
You will see flerfs say that Admiral Byrd discovered land past Antarctica (in conflict with the Flerfs who say Byrd hit the ice wall linit). No, Byrd said he found land larger then the US. How did he know? Because he knew his location and the location of the coast of Antarctica on the opposite side of the continent. He didn't fly/ drive all the way across Antarctica to know its size. They also speak of Byrd as if he was alone and not part of a massive task force.
The azimuthal equidistant projection you showed with the point in South America as the center is just what I needed for a map idea my DM is asking me for. And with that, I shall watch the rest. :)
Azimuthal equidistant maps are used by amateur radio operator (such as myself) because it becomes very clear in what direction you want to point your antenna for any given destination
@@PhDTony_original yes, you're in the centre. Of course : ) Frankly, it can be eye-opening, as you also see what the shortest distance to places on the "other side of earth" is, which isn't obvious when all you've been looking at is usually "regular maps". For example, if you're in Europe, and want to reach, say, Hawaii, you point the antenna _due North._
@@mmixlinus I was just clarifying that you had to be at the centre for the benefit of any flat earth pedants who try to take comments out of context. Obviously you already knew all that. And yes, great circle paths often go in weird and wonderful directions.
A possibly cleaner approach/presentation. Start with 4 cities, A, B, C, and D. Present them as the corners of a quadrilateral on a 2-D plane. Focus exclusively on the edges, of this quadrilateral: AB, BC, CD, and AD. Use average flight time / air speed to show most-likely distance of each edge (approx 13,000 km). Demonstrate, via minimum flight time and max air-speed of associated jets, the shortest possible length of each edge (presumably, between 10,500 and 11,000 km). Re-draw the quadrilateral to show the (near-square) shape that reflects these distances at scale. Inside this quadrilateral, draw a perfect 10,000km x 10,000km square. Point out that no matter what the actual edge distances are, the distance between the diagonals AC and BD must be at least 10,000 x sqrt(2), or 14,000km. Now make three predictions about AC and BD. First, show that based on the most-likely edge lengths, 13,000km, the distances of AC and BD would be 18,300 km. Second, show that even if ABCD actually formed the perfect inner-square, the shortest *possible* distance of AC and BD are 14,100 km. Finally (and I think this is key), pull out a globe. Cut 4 pieces of string showing AB, BC, CD, and AD. Lay them on the table. Cut 2 more pieces, AC and BD; lay them on the table next to the first 4. Show that the string/globe predicts an expected distance of AC and BD as similar to 13,000 km. Make it very clear: the 2-D model would make anything less than 14,000 km physically impossible. Then, reveal the actual distances/flight times of AC and BD.
Fantastic presentation Tony! I was totally geeking out on the trig. Had a similar idea that you’ve totally blown out of the water so much more succinctly. 😂😂 Well done!
Good one. I am pleased to see it shown to them that it can also be done using Cartesian coordinates and the chord lengths, seeing that they don't like curved tangents. I am sure they don't know cross and dot products and Flatzoid will probably latch on to these words as he does and come up with his own inventions for their meaning.
"I have made no allowance for the effect of wind patterns." Well there you go - wind blows at constant hurricane speeds in precisely the directions and times needed to make flights work on a flat earth, in the same way that light magically warps and bends as needed for any observation.
Didn't realise you had a channel, so just subscribed and hope to catch up on your other videos. I really appreciate the knowledge you have and your willingness to share it (even if there are those who don't wish to hear it because it goes against their narrative). Also being a fellow Aussie, and being into astronomy and astrophotography, I see so many easily observable phenomena that if anyone had even 1/10th of a brain, would be able to figure out that we are not on a flat, stationary plane.
@@PhDTony_original No problems. Have you looked at any data from the tremor we experienced Sunday night in Melbourne? It was a very different feel and sound to the ones I have experienced in the past. The best way I could describe it = I used to live and go to school close to an aggregate mine where they used blast quarrying techniques. This felt the same as when they detonated charges in that it was a short, sharp thump and quickly dissipating shudder. I assume that the factors were 1) the proximity of the epicenter (around 35km away), and 2) the relatively shallow depth at ~2km that made it feel like that?
@@bowks1o_o669 the duration, character and magnitude of the trigger mechanism influences the duration of the tremor. A short sharp quake is characteristic of a small, close, shallow event with a simple, quick trigger event.
Beat me to it asking. I didn’t feel it here, but according to the GA reports plenty did around me. My work chat lit up immediately as the people I work with in this field all got extremely excited 😂
@@cartographicprojection Did you see / hear the security camera footage that was going around from someone's garage in Sunbury? Two very distinct "bangs" as it hit.
I'm appreciative that you had time to make another interesting video, though I don't know how you found the time with all the flerf demolishing you've been doing lately. I look forward to the next one. Thanks
What a great video. So understandable. And I'm rubbish at maths. When it comes to flight times, the ground manoeuvre suff can be a big issue. Cathay Pacific have just had to warn their pilots abut how long they are taking to taxi to and from the runway. (They get paid per hour).
It makes no difference to them. They like to feel special. My neighbour is a flat Earther, when I ask him why they don't just pop a go pro on a balloon and show us the wall or the edge or whatever he has a different answer every time. It would not cost them much money.
The lag times through a 10 megameter long fiber cable in the order of a tenth of a second is just another reminder of how slow the speed of light really is in the grand scheme of things.
Find four points in reasonably proximity to each other that are equidistant. By "reasonable proximity" I mean that it is possible to use surface triangulation (approximating a flat surface at each step) to measure the distance.
@@PhDTony_original Sorry, I did not watch that carefully. Maybe time to rewatch. I suspect the four points have to be completely encasing the sphere for this to work.
Well, i still love the "all maps are flat because cartesian coordinates" argument. Just once id like them to find me the one map that best represents the flat earth that uses uniform grid squares across the entire known surface. Still wondering why some of the maps even have triangles on them if that was the case
I would generally say that dealing with FErs is a waste of time. However, we now have a FEr who is the party chief for a certain state. This is now becoming serious. Wow! All of these calculations are reminding me of my Navy days.
I would dare say "any flerfer". I don't think the compared ...brain power?.. of the entire flerf community would be enough to get through the first set of data 😅
clear and well-presented explanation of science? You don't know the difference between science and science fiction. When did tony prove his spherical distance formula applies to the ground? Timestamp please.
@@paulmadryga But you said, "I fear that such a clear and well-presented explanation of science would go miles over the heads of most flerfers." It must have went over your head too, you cannot show 1 instance where tony presented any facts that validate their claim that a spherical distance formula confirms a spherical earth. Tony is not going to save you, you're on your own. PhD Tony has been confirmed to be a fraud. Tony doesn't know the difference between science and science fiction, and neither do you. Only Star Wars fanboys believe space travel is possible. Science without the scientific method is pseudo-science.
Using flight times and distances between airports, making a Flat Earth map should be very easy to do...and yet no "genius" in the Flat Earth cult has come up with one. I've offered to help Flat Earthers make one and they took it as an insult.
...and the video is exactly 13:37... purely coincidental, of course.. unfortunately there's just way too much logic and cohesive math in this video for any flerfer to comprehend, but the proof is in the so called pudding. Well done sir!
I had to implement this equation in code while working on a walking distance map project. You'd think that at city-scale the difference between the simple flat map approximation and the spherical formula would be marginal, but nope, it's enough to visually screw up the results.
These arguments are fascinating and as a graphics programmer I love them, but flat earthers have trouble with basic math, they'll never understand this stuff. I did find it incredibly interesting though so you've earned yourself a like :)
Great Video, though sadly most Flerfs will just tune it out and ignore it because it conflicts with their fundamental beliefs. I can't even get them to explain where the top of a ball is, or how far it is between Sydney, Australia, and Auckland, New Zealand. They just start trying to change the subject, then throw insults, and finally run away.
Oh, another proof we live on a spinning cannon ball .... But all evidence for a sphere Earth can easily be debunked by Flerfers' personal incredulity ...Or Nu-uh, for short.
I can see much further from much higher up, proof that the horizon must drop off in every direction. This can't happen if the world is flat. This must happen if the world is spherical.
Well, this would be pretty much conclusive…to pretty much anyone who doesn’t have straight up dyscalculia(or simply stop listening once you showed that equation for spherical distance).
It will not make a difference to any flatearther. They are flatearthers because of the community, being part of something, being accepted by someone. Anything threathening that will simply be ignored.
I'm sure flerfs will say that ONLY five verification methods, fully explained, fully repeatable, and showing all workings is not even close to defeating their claims of "you are wrong" which they think is enough to win every argument. 😂 Great job Tony.
I just want a flat earther to explain to me why water circles a drain in opposite directions in the US and Australia (or any point in the northern hemisphere and any point in the southern hemisphere) This is easily explained on a globe but I've never once heard a flat earther explain why this would happen on a flat Earth. It really is the most simple way to show physical proof of a globe.
@@thanksb0b431 Actually, A professor at MIT, and a doctor at the University of Sydney both independently carried out this experiment in 1962 and 1965. They used a 150mm deep, 2 metre diameter container, filled it with water, waited 24 hours for the water to settle and drained it from a drain hole right in the centre. It took about 20 minutes to empty, and at about the half way mark the water started to rotate slowly. The results were, yes, the water does rotate in opposite directions. _Those stupid videos of people draining containers at the equator are complete BS though._ Professor Ascher H. Shapiro: MIT 1962 Dr Lloyd M. Trefethen: University of Sydney 1965
In general the influence of Coriolis is very small over small distances. This means that any other physical effect: the motion of the water as it was poured in any motion of the vessel the texture and shape of the vessel the character of the hole through which the water drains will have a greater impact on the result than Coriolis. In a carefully controlled setting the effect of Coriolis can be observed but it takes effort.
@@PhDTony_original Well to take it a step further, cyclones rotate in opposite directions in the northern and southern hemispheres, I'd like a explanation from a flat earther as to why that would happen on a flat plane.
@@nfamus540 I've tried asking flerfs to explain that, the flerf will just ignore it and instead responds with something vague about "seeing too far" or Black Swans.
I guess whether or not Australia win may depend on how many times Broad can hit a ball straight to a fielder and just refuse to walk or how many reviews Australia choose to waste.
@@PhDTony_original The guy's inhuman! I'm his age and I'd be finished after one delivery. He may even catch Warney. I'm still in shock about that! The fella was loved over here, despite the suffering he put us through over the years. A top bloke, certainly missed.
@@mehallica666 He's loved and respected everywhere. Just a great player. As an Aussie I hope he misses some Ashes games. But as a cricket lover if he plays all the test matches I'll get to watch a master at work.
Flat brain lobes cannot imagine spherical distances. This is definitely true. Possibly even based on the Bible. For example Proverbs 12:1 "The person who loves correction loves knowledge, but anyone who hates a rebuke is stupid". As if the author knew flat earthers.
far beyond the intelligence of any flat earther, they would have absolutely no clue (as for most things) what you are talking about, most of them can't work out the angles of a simple triangle
One thing about the submarine cables (SCs) is how their lengths can and necessarily have to be verified independently of the speed of light (2.14 x 10^8m/s in a fiber optic cable), even cost aside.
I think everyone with a 1/2 a brain (I may have just excluded flerfs) understands that even with exceptional clarity of the optical cable used in SCs, optical signals will need to be boosted on their way down a long cable, the longest unrepeated cable that I am aware of is in the order of 400km long. We are talking about cables in the 10^4 km magnitudes. Thus, repeaters are necessary, and they are placed at certain distances, every 100km or so, to boost the signal along the way. As a side note, even knowing how many repeaters there are, we already know the relative length of the cables, but that's not where I am going with this. These repeaters (typically EDFA) are powered, in series, via wires that provide anywhere from 3000 to 15,000 VDC. Actually, another way we can independently verify the length of the fibers would be to solve for wire distance given a few values (voltage, current, at least the type and size of the conductor used, and power consumption per repeater), but that's still not where I was going with this.
There are roughly 100 fiber breakage events of submarine cables every year. These breakages must be promptly detected and repaired, which requires knowing almost precisely where the breakage occurs. Sending a ship to examine 100km of deep underwater cable because we only know the location down to the nearest repeater would be highly inefficient and time-consuming. Another way of finding the breaks is needed, which is where the spread-spectrum time-domain reflectometry (SSTDR) comes in. I'll include a DOI about what it is and how it works.
Because we need to know the precise location of the brakes because we have a method for detecting them that works repeatedly and consistently, this method can also be used to verify the length of the SCs independently of fiber and cost. And SSTDR is not something scientists use in a lab; it's applicable anywhere from aircraft and automotive wiring to fault detection and location in power grids, to examining pre-stressed concrete stranded cables in dams.
More on SSTDR: doi.org/10.3390/s21165268
Excellent points
@@PhDTony_original I dare any globe dreamers to answer these:
1. If sun is 93 million miles away, then we should feel the same scorching heat in the morning and in the noon, but why there's huge difference in heat between noon and morning-evening? Why light intensity of the sun becomes magnitude higher in the noon?
2. If sun is burning, where is the smoke?
3. Vacuum cannot conduct heat as there's no molecules, so how sun's heat is traveling 93 million miles wide vacuum to reach here?
4. Magnets lose magnetism when heated up, then how your ball earth's inner core burning for billions of years at extreme temperature and yet doesn't lose its magnetism? Compass still works.
5. If satellites are real, then some countries that have satellite TV dish antennas on top of houses should point straight up 90°, but why all TV antennas in all countries always point sideways?
6. Point your finger at the direction in which your computer ball earth is flying at 800,000 kmph speed as you read this, can you?
7. Winter when sun is closer and summer when sun is farther? How? Tilt of the earth? It's sphere anyway regardless of tilting according to you.
8. If space expanding and things are red shifting and moving away from one another then how will andromeda and milky way collide ?
9. Why there are no stars in those earth images allegedly taken from space?
10. During 2017 american total eclipse, why moon's shadow went from west to east? It's supposed to go from east to west.
11. Rail roads are laid flat for thousands of KM, they are not curved. This proves earth is flat.
12. Ball earth is 3D , so why you use only 2 coordinates? Where is your third coordinate?
13. Why above equator has 19 time zones and below equator has 32 time zones? If earth is a ball, then there should be 24 time zones on each side.
@@Flat_Earth_Isaac 1) in the morning and evening the sun is low in the sky.
As a result, the angle of incidence of the sun's radiation is low. The same level of radiation is spread out over a larger area.
At noon the sun is shining directly down and the intensity of the radiation is much higher.
To see how this works, shine a flashlight/torch/lamp onto a table top you will see the same effect. At a low angle the light will be spread out and diffuse. At a high angle the light will be concentrated and intense.
@@Flat_Earth_Isaac 2) The sun is not burning, The sun produces energy via nuclear fusion.
@@Flat_Earth_Isaac 3) There are three mechanisms by which heat energy may be transported:
Conduction
Convection
Radiation
As you say, conduction and convection require a material medium. However, radiation does not require that any matter is present.
Big words, complex sentence structure, tables, mathematics. You've completely lost every flerf.🤣
Yeah, this is so far above any flattard's head that they'd need a powerful telescope to even see it.
... and at the end PhD Tony anounces a video about lies flerfs tell. I really wonder what that could be about as so many of them are affiliated with a religion following a holy book of rules, one being not to lie. Do they all risk to go their religion's hell one day?
@@mittelwelle_531_khz i dunno about other holy books, but the goat herders' guide to the galaxy violates its own rules with all the BS that's written in it. and that is one of MANY reasons why i don't believe such BS.
@@mittelwelle_531_khz really? In my experience flerfs are strongly atheistic and don't like any organised religion or governance.
@@asdfssdfghgdfy5940
Nope. Flerfs tend to be fundamentalist Christians.
Haha you bet. Hey Tony, I had a chat with Rachie on Limey’s show and tried to explain that while she is busy trying to understand GR with no underpinning physics or mathematics education, at an undergraduate level, she is ignoring the huge herd of elephants in the room. This is one of those elephants. A bloody killer one at that. I’m looking forward to it.
Hi Phil, I saw your video. I'm coming at it from a different angle, but it kills FE stone dead.
@@PhDTony_original it certainly does.
@@profphilbell2075 I am more than a little sad. Rachie doesn't possess sufficient understanding to know how ignorant she is.
@@PhDTony_original indeed, not knowing or even understanding is forgivable because it depends on circumstances at the time she should have learned to think critically. The wilful ignorance, simply ignoring the incontrovertible evidence in order to deliberately remain ignorant is unforgivable. Especially when you have had free access to people who are normally paid to share information and knowledge like that.
Rachie I can only say is wilfully ignorant she had a LOT of help
😊 tried this "four equidistant locations" approach in one of the first videos I ever made. Less "mathematical", more in "tangible" approach, with a styrofoam balls and cut wires.
Though my four locations were only "approximately equidistant" because I wanted more "well-known" names and ended up with Sydney, Mexico City, Capetown, and Novosibirsk.
Well, that was five years ago, time flies ... (the more the older you get).
This is a nice demonstration of why flat Earth would require a HUGE number of people and organisations to be in on it. The globe shows up in anything large enough. At the scale of your kitchen a flat Earth is a workable approximation. The curvature at that scale is so slight that water sticking to the surface of a glass and water's surface tension curve the water more than the variation in vertical does.
Every Flerf: “I don’t understand! It can’t be true”
can you timestamp where tony supports his claim with facts and evidence that his spherical distance formula emiprically proves the shape of the earth?
@@jamesd6973 no. Why?
@@ChoirFan1 just to show you that you're projecting your misunderstanding of the subject onto others.
@@jamesd6973 I don’t claim he’s wrong, so I don’t need to show why. And just because I don’t have a thorough knowledge of the maths, it doesn’t mean I don’t understand the concept being demonstrated.
@@ChoirFan1 I didn't claim he was wrong or right, i asked you where were the facts presented in the video. You're telling me that you don't understand it, so it must be true. All you have is the concept, nothing empirically verifiable.
Excellent video, Tony!!!! I am forever indebted to you for the phrase, "rather inappropriate appellation." Most of us already facepalm ourselves into unconsciousness when we hear "Brian's Logic" but now that phrase will add days of helpless laughter every time I hear his name. Thank you!!!
Seven minutes forty-five seconds, for those who need to hear it!
I am very glad you like it :)
Brian have his own, private, kind of «logic» that is completely outside and unrelated from any form of actual logic.
I preferred his "mercifully brief interaction" quip. Burn.
@@davelister2961 Tony is the master of the polite sounding burn!!!
Hi Tony. I just got through watching the debate from yesterday on FTFE's channel and just wanted to say: You were amazing! I think we all expected you to lose it on that bunch and somehow you remained surprisingly under control and even with constant interruptions, being talked over and extreme derp levels you kept to explaining things. I know I couldn't have stayed that calm, nor have your knowledge and experience but it was your staying calm that surprised and impressed me hugely.
You really didn't need to apologise for being involved so much either, YOU made that interesting enough that I could sit through that entire thing. If it had just been Craig and that bunch, I definitely couldn't have stayed listening to them right through.
Thank you🖖🏻👍!
Unfortunately, all that math and logical thinking can be summarily dismissed with a simple 'nuh-uh'.
All CGEye.
As most flatards seems to suffer from discalculia, this is all magic and voodoo for them.
It's all mattematickal nansense, it's impassible, it doesn't work, it can't work (in a suitably Oirish accent) snigger snigger...🤡
do you really think Tony provided empirical evidence his spherical distance formula proves Earth's surface is spherical? The only thing Tony proved is that he's an indoctrinated fool. Provide 1 timestamp to where he validated any of his claims.🍿
@@jamesd6973 Spherical distance formulas ONLY work on a sphere.
The calculated distances match the actual, measured, distances.
IF the calculated distances match the measured distances, then, the Earth can ONLY be a sphere.
The Earth just CAN NOT be flat. It's a physical impossibility. A flat earth would break several natural laws.
On a flat earth, the Sun and Moon could NEVER EVER set. The can never come lower than 8° above the horizon, and, that's for an observer at the Southern tip of Terra Del Fuego at midnight on the December solstice looking straight North. In reality, at that moment, the Sun is straight South from the point of view of that observer.
Reality say that the Earth is a slowly rotating oblate spheroid orbiting the Sun once a year.
Love watching and learning,
Thanks Tony.
@2:51, I LOVE that projection as I do feel like I am the center of all things.
Outstanding! A great presentation.
I had no idea that submarine cables were so expensive. I assume that the companies involved probably use the Vincenty formula.
Just added this video to my Spherical geometry playlist.👍
One has to wonder why flerfs have never bothered to figure out how cartographers know to draw the sizes & shapes of continents. Or even how the source datasets are compiled.
They dare no think about that
@@profphilbell2075 there are some who do (think about it) but they don't stay in the flerf crazy ... like TigerDan25 several years ago, who tried to come up with a "true map of the flat earth". Obviously it was a honest attempt as he failed and failed again and at one point finally gave up the idea of a flat earth.
They think and forget the first point after thinking on the 2nd point. Lol
Flat Earther: "I was told there wouldn't be any math."
I really enjoy when you're on with Toon and FTFE. I am decidedly a student of the humanities, but I feel that I have learned a lot from you three.
Hi Tony, good explanation and as always, learnt a few new things. Your effort is appreciated.
Love the video, Tony. Awesome stuff. Unfortunately there are flat Earthers out there who don't know how many metres there are in a kilometre, or the size of the angles in an equilateral triangle.
Everyday, more globe believers are shocked to know that:
1. All earth images from space are fake.
2. No rocket has gone above 100 km in altitude.
3. Antarctica circumnavigation has never happened.
4. Satellites don't exist.
5. Flights never nose dive because of no curvature.
6. Flights between australia and south america never fly over Antarctica, instead it goes through northern part.
7. Moon landing is fake.
8. No 24 hour sun in Antarctica.
9. A huge difference in heat from the sun between noon and morning-evening.
10. Polar star trails are circular, but it should be straight lines or some other abstract shape if earth is flying at 800,000 kmph speed.
11. So-called space videos are from balloons using a fish eye lens camera and from 3D softwares.
12. Moon's night side is same as sky instead of black.
13. "A live telecast of rocket attached with a regular lens camera going up atleast 20,000 km in altitude or upto whole earth comes in a single frame" has never happened, no one even tried.
14. Go fast rocket hit the dome about 98 km.
15. During solar eclipse the alleged moon's shadow is about only 100 km wide and it moves from west to east , north-east to south-west and many directions.
16. Sometimes lunar eclipse occurs while the sun is still above the horizon.
17. Our eyes and senses tell that we are not moving and not spinning.
Celestial navigation by its very nature falsifies the idea that the Earth is anything other than an oblate spheroid.
The first non-trivial computer program I ever wrote (1982) was to calculate great circle distance and initial angle of departure for any two points on Earth given the latitude and longitude of the two points. I tested it against the outer markers for Long Beach California and Singapore which is a known distance. I was off by about 32 feet (10m). I called it a success.
Thanks for your explanation of this, Tony! I'm not a big math guy, but I'm plenty open to learning!
I've learned a lot (again) from your video. Since flerfers aren't willing, or able to learn anything, I'm afraid this whole video is just pearls before swine.
You will see flerfs say that Admiral Byrd discovered land past Antarctica (in conflict with the Flerfs who say Byrd hit the ice wall linit). No, Byrd said he found land larger then the US. How did he know? Because he knew his location and the location of the coast of Antarctica on the opposite side of the continent. He didn't fly/ drive all the way across Antarctica to know its size.
They also speak of Byrd as if he was alone and not part of a massive task force.
Flat-earther looks at flat screen of their monitor: "BUT THE SCREEN I AM LOOKING AT IS FLAT! THEREFORE EVERY OBJECT IN THE SCREEN IS FLAT IN REALITY!"
The azimuthal equidistant projection you showed with the point in South America as the center is just what I needed for a map idea my DM is asking me for. And with that, I shall watch the rest. :)
I found this channel quite by accident and I'm a new subscriber! Great job Dr. Tony ✊🏼
Thank you so much for your support
One correction, it's pronounced skoy moils. Great video 👍
Azimuthal equidistant maps are used by amateur radio operator (such as myself) because it becomes very clear in what direction you want to point your antenna for any given destination
Yes, provided you're at the centre of the map, equidistant azimuthal projections yield completely accurate azimuths and very accurate distances.
@@PhDTony_original yes, you're in the centre. Of course : ) Frankly, it can be eye-opening, as you also see what the shortest distance to places on the "other side of earth" is, which isn't obvious when all you've been looking at is usually "regular maps". For example, if you're in Europe, and want to reach, say, Hawaii, you point the antenna _due North._
@@mmixlinus I was just clarifying that you had to be at the centre for the benefit of any flat earth pedants who try to take comments out of context. Obviously you already knew all that.
And yes, great circle paths often go in weird and wonderful directions.
@@PhDTony_original 👍
Yes, all that. OR, just ask them to present their FE map that physically works with all relative distances of earth and watch them run.
5:38 - Yeh, those "magic winds" are particularly hilarious, because they blow, at 1000 km/h or so, in both directions simultaneously.
A possibly cleaner approach/presentation. Start with 4 cities, A, B, C, and D. Present them as the corners of a quadrilateral on a 2-D plane. Focus exclusively on the edges, of this quadrilateral: AB, BC, CD, and AD. Use average flight time / air speed to show most-likely distance of each edge (approx 13,000 km). Demonstrate, via minimum flight time and max air-speed of associated jets, the shortest possible length of each edge (presumably, between 10,500 and 11,000 km). Re-draw the quadrilateral to show the (near-square) shape that reflects these distances at scale. Inside this quadrilateral, draw a perfect 10,000km x 10,000km square. Point out that no matter what the actual edge distances are, the distance between the diagonals AC and BD must be at least 10,000 x sqrt(2), or 14,000km. Now make three predictions about AC and BD. First, show that based on the most-likely edge lengths, 13,000km, the distances of AC and BD would be 18,300 km. Second, show that even if ABCD actually formed the perfect inner-square, the shortest *possible* distance of AC and BD are 14,100 km. Finally (and I think this is key), pull out a globe. Cut 4 pieces of string showing AB, BC, CD, and AD. Lay them on the table. Cut 2 more pieces, AC and BD; lay them on the table next to the first 4. Show that the string/globe predicts an expected distance of AC and BD as similar to 13,000 km. Make it very clear: the 2-D model would make anything less than 14,000 km physically impossible. Then, reveal the actual distances/flight times of AC and BD.
I did consider something like this as an approach but I didn't come up with an effective visualisation.
Fantastic presentation Tony! I was totally geeking out on the trig. Had a similar idea that you’ve totally blown out of the water so much more succinctly. 😂😂 Well done!
Good one. I am pleased to see it shown to them that it can also be done using Cartesian coordinates and the chord lengths, seeing that they don't like curved tangents. I am sure they don't know cross and dot products and Flatzoid will probably latch on to these words as he does and come up with his own inventions for their meaning.
I wouldn't call it a stake through the heart. Instead it is shooting a dead horse.
"I have made no allowance for the effect of wind patterns." Well there you go - wind blows at constant hurricane speeds in precisely the directions and times needed to make flights work on a flat earth, in the same way that light magically warps and bends as needed for any observation.
Damn, my whole argument blown out of the water!
Didn't realise you had a channel, so just subscribed and hope to catch up on your other videos. I really appreciate the knowledge you have and your willingness to share it (even if there are those who don't wish to hear it because it goes against their narrative). Also being a fellow Aussie, and being into astronomy and astrophotography, I see so many easily observable phenomena that if anyone had even 1/10th of a brain, would be able to figure out that we are not on a flat, stationary plane.
Many thanks for your support. I genuinely appreciate it.
@@PhDTony_original No problems. Have you looked at any data from the tremor we experienced Sunday night in Melbourne? It was a very different feel and sound to the ones I have experienced in the past. The best way I could describe it = I used to live and go to school close to an aggregate mine where they used blast quarrying techniques. This felt the same as when they detonated charges in that it was a short, sharp thump and quickly dissipating shudder. I assume that the factors were 1) the proximity of the epicenter (around 35km away), and 2) the relatively shallow depth at ~2km that made it feel like that?
@@bowks1o_o669 the duration, character and magnitude of the trigger mechanism influences the duration of the tremor. A short sharp quake is characteristic of a small, close, shallow event with a simple, quick trigger event.
Beat me to it asking. I didn’t feel it here, but according to the GA reports plenty did around me. My work chat lit up immediately as the people I work with in this field all got extremely excited 😂
@@cartographicprojection Did you see / hear the security camera footage that was going around from someone's garage in Sunbury? Two very distinct "bangs" as it hit.
I'm appreciative that you had time to make another interesting video, though I don't know how you found the time with all the flerf demolishing you've been doing lately. I look forward to the next one. Thanks
What a great video. So understandable. And I'm rubbish at maths.
When it comes to flight times, the ground manoeuvre suff can be a big issue. Cathay Pacific have just had to warn their pilots abut how long they are taking to taxi to and from the runway. (They get paid per hour).
Thorough and well-presented. Nice work.
Flat earthers - you can slow the video down if needed, click the settings symbol top right
It makes no difference to them. They like to feel special.
My neighbour is a flat Earther, when I ask him why they don't just pop a go pro on a balloon and show us the wall or the edge or whatever he has a different answer every time. It would not cost them much money.
While flat earthers will go through the new words they have never heard to add to their wordsalad.
The lag times through a 10 megameter long fiber cable in the order of a tenth of a second is just another reminder of how slow the speed of light really is in the grand scheme of things.
I don't even want to know what they are doing upstream on Dumpy Creek.
I really appreciate your effort here to teach some advanced mathematic principles. Thank you
Your comment about hating nested acronyms just earned you a sub. Great video. Keep up the good work.
Find four points in reasonably proximity to each other that are equidistant. By "reasonable proximity" I mean that it is possible to use surface triangulation (approximating a flat surface at each step) to measure the distance.
This is physically impossible for reasons I discuss in my video.
@@PhDTony_original Sorry, I did not watch that carefully. Maybe time to rewatch. I suspect the four points have to be completely encasing the sphere for this to work.
@@57thorns if the points are close they are approximately planar
@@PhDTony_original Yes, I realized that. I guess there is really only one configuration that works.
No flat earther will be able to follow any of this...... their heads would explode
Very satisfying and enjoyable. Thank you.
Well, i still love the "all maps are flat because cartesian coordinates" argument. Just once id like them to find me the one map that best represents the flat earth that uses uniform grid squares across the entire known surface. Still wondering why some of the maps even have triangles on them if that was the case
I'm not the best at Math but I understood most of this presentation a flatard would be lost
Pģ
brilliant and simple great stuff as usual tony
I would generally say that dealing with FErs is a waste of time. However, we now have a FEr who is the party chief for a certain state. This is now becoming serious.
Wow! All of these calculations are reminding me of my Navy days.
I don't know about stake through the heart of flerf, more like splitting the atoms of the flerf heart because there is nothing left of the heart.
1:45 - This was elegant!
Thank you.
Excellent video. Alas, I fear that such a clear and well-presented explanation of science would go miles over the heads of most flerfers.
I would dare say "any flerfer". I don't think the compared ...brain power?.. of the entire flerf community would be enough to get through the first set of data 😅
clear and well-presented explanation of science? You don't know the difference between science and science fiction. When did tony prove his spherical distance formula applies to the ground? Timestamp please.
@@jamesd6973 - Would you mind fielding this one, PhD Tony? You know your own video better than I.
@@paulmadryga But you said, "I fear that such a clear and well-presented explanation of science would go miles over the heads of most flerfers."
It must have went over your head too, you cannot show 1 instance where tony presented any facts that validate their claim that a spherical distance formula confirms a spherical earth.
Tony is not going to save you, you're on your own. PhD Tony has been confirmed to be a fraud. Tony doesn't know the difference between science and science fiction, and neither do you.
Only Star Wars fanboys believe space travel is possible.
Science without the scientific method is pseudo-science.
@@jamesd6973timestamp? It's the whole fucking video! Watch it first before commenting! Jesus, what a loser!
KrakaTony! I've just found your channel. I will sub and try to watch (and like) as much of your content as possible. Cheers cobber! 👍
Using flight times and distances between airports, making a Flat Earth map should be very easy to do...and yet no "genius" in the Flat Earth cult has come up with one. I've offered to help Flat Earthers make one and they took it as an insult.
Globe Earth: Math, physics, surveying, photographs, video, flight tables, geography, astronomy, shadows, perspective, science, eclipses....
Flat Earth: Nuh-uh.
...and the video is exactly 13:37... purely coincidental, of course.. unfortunately there's just way too much logic and cohesive math in this video for any flerfer to comprehend, but the proof is in the so called pudding. Well done sir!
I’d love you to do a video on verifying the moon landings, if you have the time?
I will think about it.
I thought I understood coordinates - thank you for this amazing explanation!
Didn't know you had a channel. Subscribed!
The Cartesian coordinates argument baffles me even more than most flerf arguments. How do you not notice that there are 3 coordinates?
I had to implement this equation in code while working on a walking distance map project. You'd think that at city-scale the difference between the simple flat map approximation and the spherical formula would be marginal, but nope, it's enough to visually screw up the results.
I'm almost shocked enough by that to use the incredulity fallacy
These arguments are fascinating and as a graphics programmer I love them, but flat earthers have trouble with basic math, they'll never understand this stuff.
I did find it incredibly interesting though so you've earned yourself a like :)
Excellent presentation. It's baffling they can still muster their, "Nu-uh's...!"
The things you need to debunk flat earth... 1. intelligence. 2. see 1.
Good video.
The intro is Deus Ex: Human Revolution, right? Be careful with copyright.
Fantastic work on this. I would love to see a flerf try to debunk this one.
Great Video, though sadly most Flerfs will just tune it out and ignore it because it conflicts with their fundamental beliefs. I can't even get them to explain where the top of a ball is, or how far it is between Sydney, Australia, and Auckland, New Zealand. They just start trying to change the subject, then throw insults, and finally run away.
Can you fix the link for jessica g's channel? The intro music is fantastic.
Jessica G has made her channel completely private
Missed last 4 shows , no wonder I didn't get enough sleep lately.....I'll be back for therapy...4 shows. Wow ‼️
Oh, another proof we live on a spinning cannon ball .... But all evidence for a sphere Earth can easily be debunked by Flerfers' personal incredulity ...Or Nu-uh, for short.
I can see much further from much higher up, proof that the horizon must drop off in every direction. This can't happen if the world is flat. This must happen if the world is spherical.
On a Flat Earth map the known distances between two points do not appear .
Even the combined intellect of every flerf ON THE GLOBE would be less than PhD Tony's pot plant
Trying to convince flerfers with vector geometry? Yeah, THAT's gonna work....
Excellent work, PhD Tony!
Hey PHD TONY, now that’s a awesome video, thanks 🙏💕
Well, this would be pretty much conclusive…to pretty much anyone who doesn’t have straight up dyscalculia(or simply stop listening once you showed that equation for spherical distance).
QED and so beautifully done.
It will not make a difference to any flatearther. They are flatearthers because of the community, being part of something, being accepted by someone. Anything threathening that will simply be ignored.
Careful near the edge there.. you might fall off.
I'm sure flerfs will say that ONLY five verification methods, fully explained, fully repeatable, and showing all workings is not even close to defeating their claims of "you are wrong" which they think is enough to win every argument. 😂
Great job Tony.
I just want a flat earther to explain to me why water circles a drain in opposite directions in the US and Australia (or any point in the northern hemisphere and any point in the southern hemisphere)
This is easily explained on a globe but I've never once heard a flat earther explain why this would happen on a flat Earth.
It really is the most simple way to show physical proof of a globe.
It doesn’t, this is a myth.
@@thanksb0b431 Actually, A professor at MIT, and a doctor at the University of Sydney both independently carried out this experiment in 1962 and 1965.
They used a 150mm deep, 2 metre diameter container, filled it with water, waited 24 hours for the water to settle and drained it from a drain hole right in the centre. It took about 20 minutes to empty, and at about the half way mark the water started to rotate slowly.
The results were, yes, the water does rotate in opposite directions.
_Those stupid videos of people draining containers at the equator are complete BS though._
Professor Ascher H. Shapiro: MIT 1962
Dr Lloyd M. Trefethen: University of Sydney 1965
In general the influence of Coriolis is very small over small distances. This means that any other physical effect:
the motion of the water as it was poured in
any motion of the vessel
the texture and shape of the vessel
the character of the hole through which the water drains
will have a greater impact on the result than Coriolis. In a carefully controlled setting the effect of Coriolis can be observed but it takes effort.
@@PhDTony_original Well to take it a step further, cyclones rotate in opposite directions in the northern and southern hemispheres, I'd like a explanation from a flat earther as to why that would happen on a flat plane.
@@nfamus540 I've tried asking flerfs to explain that, the flerf will just ignore it and instead responds with something vague about "seeing too far" or Black Swans.
Love Tony, great job. I wonder if there is a FLERF out there that can follow that high school mathematics?
That's great work, Tony, but it won't prevent an Aussie Ashes defeat! Bring it on!
I guess whether or not Australia win may depend on how many times Broad can hit a ball straight to a fielder and just refuse to walk or how many reviews Australia choose to waste.
@@PhDTony_original LOL! May the best team win.
@@mehallica666 exactly p.s. how big a legend is Jimmy Anderson?
@@PhDTony_original The guy's inhuman! I'm his age and I'd be finished after one delivery. He may even catch Warney. I'm still in shock about that! The fella was loved over here, despite the suffering he put us through over the years. A top bloke, certainly missed.
@@mehallica666 He's loved and respected everywhere. Just a great player.
As an Aussie I hope he misses some Ashes games. But as a cricket lover if he plays all the test matches I'll get to watch a master at work.
Good one ! FE lies sounds like it will have to be a series. 🤣
This was really well explained. The maths is fairly basic but maybe a bit too complex for flat earthers.
I am going to pretend that I understood everything you said...😅... Yeah...
It’s almost like the scientific consensus is so redundant that even novel means of proof agree with reality!
First class, Tony, but it will take many big stakes to kill the FE troll.
Flat brain lobes cannot imagine spherical distances. This is definitely true. Possibly even based on the Bible. For example Proverbs 12:1 "The person who loves correction loves knowledge, but anyone who hates a rebuke is stupid". As if the author knew flat earthers.
When anyone wants Flerfs to be destroyed send in Nuke Tony.
Brilliant video Tony.
To bad not a single flat earther understands this at all
Woohoo! Another video from PhD Tony!
Too Good!
I'd love to see Nathan Oakley debate this topic with Tony 😂
It takes one hour for a flat earther to successfully consume a sentence, even if they are genuinely trying in good faith
far beyond the intelligence of any flat earther, they would have absolutely no clue (as for most things) what you are talking about, most of them can't work out the angles of a simple triangle
Any mathematics beyond _1+1_ will whoosh over the heads of flerfers.
Hi, Tony,
"Lies that Flerfs Tell"?
You obviously mean any sound that comes out of their mouths?
"Lies that flerfs tell." Jeez thats gonna be a lengthy series of vidz...Got your work cut out covering the mountain of BS they've spued.