Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

1.3K

Polar coordinates would have us on an r value from the core, and a kind of x/y from there. Since the r would be basically static (not true but basically), we'd be considered to be on just an x/y coordinates. Thus flat.

Polar coordinates would have us on an r value from the core, and a kind of x/y from there. Since the r would be basically static (not true but basically), we'd be considered to be on just an x/y coordinates. Thus flat.

(post is archived)

[–] • 3 pts

the earth is not flat.

[–] • 0 pt

How are you able to see not just 3-4 miles, but rather hundreds? Why don't we ever observe this curve? Why do they need to fake all the space stuff if it is a real place we go all the time? How do objects not fly off from the spin? How do the constellations stay the same over thousands of years if the solar system is flying at millions of miles an hour and the whole universe is expanding apart? The heliocentric globe worshiper model is really just pathetic when you think about it for even a few seconds

[–] • 1 pt

Obviously the Earth is flat because it flies around the sun like a frisbee. If it were round, it would bounce.

[–] • 1 pt

I'm from the north hemisphere, but immigrated to new Zealand. The sky rotates in the opposite direction here, understandably as the southern pole (around which the stars can be seen rotating) is in the sky much to same as the north. But again, rotating the opposite direction, which is clearly the result of being on the southern hemisphere of the planet. Fiat earthers don't have an explanation for that yet..

[–] • 0 pt

If the Earth were flat my cat would've pushed everything off already.

[–] • 0 pt

In polar coordinates as you travel the surface of the earth the radius coordinate would stay relatively constant while the two angular coordinates change according to your position. A constant coordinate is not enough to say it is flat though.

Start traveling on the surface in a straight line for a large distance, such as the distance required to go from the north pole to the equator. Then stop and turn left 90 degrees, then travel straight again the same distance. Then stop and turn left 90 degrees and travel straight for the 3rd time. Then do it again for the 4th time. The surface is flat if you end up at your starting position even if you tracked your R polar coordinate and noted it hardly changed. The earth is curved so you won't be in the same spot after the 4th straight line...in fact, if you use the extreme example of pole-to-equator distance, you will end up at the starting position after the 3rd straight line, and will be somewhere wildly different after the 4th.

[–] • -1 pt

Yes but you're in polar coordinates now. Those 90 degree angles in cartesian, are now 60 degree angles. You made a triangle.

[–] • 0 pt

Wtf are you smoking?

[–] • -1 pt (edited )

Polar coordinates are going to have an r from the core and two angles. To make the three turns you were suggesting in cartesian, would be three 60 degree turns in the difference in the polar cordinate's two angle values.

Well 60 if you walked equal distance for the first three walks. Otherwise either way the sum of the interior angles in polar cordinates will be 180 not 270.

To make it more clear... The 3 points you end up standing on. Make a plane out of this. Now draw lines connecting the 3 dots. The angles between these lines will add up to 180 not 270. It's a triangle. That plane will be perpendicular to the core. These are the angles you turned in polar cordinates.

[–] • 0 pt

You would have to use a spherical coordinate system for elevation.

[–] • 0 pt

Changing map coordinates does not change the shape of the Earth. You might want to investigate the distinction here.

[–] • 0 pt

Standing on the earth could be seen as standing on a looping flat surface if you understand the dimensions differently.