Force the Line?

Rick et al following this whole flat stuff – what do you think of this experiment? Brian seems genuine and intelligent. Will this work?

Be the 1st to vote.

5 thoughts on “Force the Line?”

  1. His project depends on a lot of money from others. That’s a problem that I don’t like. Another problem is that you’d have to trust that the engineer marking the right angles did it honestly and accurately enough that you don’t have to go out and double check his work. It’s not easy. The concept is okay however.

    Concepts like circumnavigating Antarctica and testing flywheel angles with a 3 axis motored gyroscope are okay too– but are costly or not easy. I like the concept of Forced Line but put it on the same “backburner” as the gyroscope and the circumnavigation.

    Aside from that conclusion, I wondered where the word “rectilineator” came from. It turns out that originally it referred to rectangular blocks placed end to end…

    quote
    He imagined a number of perfect and rigid solid rectangles placed end to end to establish a perfectly straight row, and therefore constitute a perfectly straight reference line, independent of telescope or visual sighting methods.
    unquote

    The original rectangle-line-maker experiment turned out to have serious practical problems too, as seen in this article…
    www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/hollow/morrow.htm

  2. A 2-mile stretch and 32inches of supposed drop would still leave people exclaiming “conspiracy”! If anything is going to be proven conclusively, it would have to be an experiment on a very large scale. Just look at the experiments already done to (attempt to) prove that the earth is spinning, or the curvature tests, all were swept under the rug. 2miles and 32inches is a bug on the windshield of whoever is driving this deception train.

    1. He made it stick near the end by saying this should be repeated and done all over the world. But it’s not going to happen, because everyone has already seen the marble and spun the globe.

  3. The experiment in this video is fine in theory but not practical, on account of the accuracy required in the lower rail. At a distance of 2 miles, a drop of 32 inches amounts to only about 1/70 of a degree divergence from horizontal. Keeping the lower rail straight within that kind of tolerance over such a distance isn’t likely with a reasonable budget.

    Here is a different experiment, using a length of pipe and a telescope. This measurement of curvature needs far less time, effort and expense. However, as in the video, this method is more theoretical than practical, because a very even surface (a frozen lake, perhaps) and much precision by the experimenter are needed for the results to be valid. Still, if someone really wants to try measurements of this type, what follows is a feasible way to go about it.

    1. Get a 3 ft. steel drain pipe of 3 in. diameter, and a telescope (or other optics) able to resolve 2 seconds of arc.

    2. Position the pipe 3 ft above the ground, with its long axis – i.e. the length of the pipe – in a precisely horizontal orientation.

    3. At a distance of 2.0 miles from the pipe, align the telescope so it is looking straight through the interior of the pipe – that is, looking right into the pipe so the circular opening at the pipe’s farther end is completely visible within the circular opening at the nearer end. Note the height of the telescope above the ground while it is aligned this way.

    4. Move the telescope to a distance of 1.5 miles from the pipe. Align the telescope and note its height as in #3.

    5. Move the telescope to a distance of 1.0 miles from the pipe. Align the telescope and note its height as in #3.

    6. Move the telescope to a distance of 0.5 miles from the pipe. Align the telescope and note its height as in #3.

    On a flat Earth, the heights in #3, #4, #5 and #6 will all be the same. On a spherical Earth, these heights will vary with distance from the pipe according to the equation for vertical drop from a tangent line – for example, the difference in height between #3 and #6 will be 30 inches.

  4. The experiment in this video is fine in theory but not practical, on account of the accuracy required in the lower rail. At a distance of 2 miles, a drop of 32 inches amounts to only about 1/70 of a degree divergence from horizontal. Keeping the lower rail straight within that kind of tolerance over such a distance isn’t likely with a reasonable budget.

    I’d thought basically the same thing, 32inches isn’t much, but if this were repeated and we’re seeing the same trends, I’d say that would solidify the test. It’s independent of whatever slight natural formation might cause a plain or a hill, because you are attempting to “force a line”, the forced line is the controlled part of the experiment. This forcing this line does turn out to be very expensive even over 2 miles.

    Interesting idea with the telescope and pipe. This is a cheaper way and could perhaps be done at various supposed flat locations to see what we come up with, but I guess it would still be categorized in the theory section at your local media outlet.

Leave a Reply