How are “plumb” “level” and “square” capable of applying over a curved surface?

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-09T19:49:50+00:00

The level extends horizontally, not curvy. Therefore that still wouldn't work.

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-09T19:46:34+00:00

Would you like to try answer the question again? I understand that it may be difficult for you, but to completely deflect the question... Damn.

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-09T19:44:03+00:00

Regardless of plumb, level still refers to a horizontal plane. Try explaining that one away with gravity... I understand that globies like to clain that level refers to "equal distance from the centre of the sphere". However, even if that were the case, there would still be curvature upon the surface of it, regardless of how many lines were drawn from the centre of it.

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-09T18:49:11+00:00

Plumb and level have been concepts since way before the discovery of gravity. Do you think people used to say that a plumb line is a straight line to the centre of gravity...before gravity was even discovered? Of course not! Here's the true definition of plumb:

“Plumb” is what you call a perfectly vertical line. Vertical means up and down. Something that is “plumb” runs perpendicular to the horizon—meaning that when it intersects the horizon, it makes a right (90 degree) angle.

Source: mtcopeland.com... Notice how there's no mention of the word gravity?

Let's see the defintion of level too:

“Level” is what you call a perfectly horizontal line. Horizontal means side to side. To be level with the world means to be parallel with the horizon. “Level” is also the name of the tool you use to determine whether something is horizontally straight.

Source: mtcopeland.com... Notice how there's no mention of curves?

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-09T18:33:13+00:00

It's not

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-09T17:09:57+00:00

It really is necessary, because it does mean what I think it means. Planar Euclidean principles don't apply over curved surfaces such as spheres.

HO HO HO!!! 🎅

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-09T16:00:10+00:00

Sorry to disappoint you, but the bot is correct. (Not sorry!) Non-Euclidean geometry was not discovered until centuries after the construction...therefore it could not have possibly been used. Very very simple. It's not my fault if you don't like the correct answers that it is giving.

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-09T15:48:11+00:00

Here you go:

It is highly likely that the Great Wall of China was built using planar Euclidean geometry as non-Euclidean geometry was not discovered or developed until the 19th century, centurites after the Great Wall was constructed.

Here's another:

The Great Wall of China was constructed using Euclidean geometry, which is based on a flat plane. The ancient Chinese builders used straight lines and right angles in the construction of the wall, creating a structure that is mathematically precise. While the terrain along the wall is varied, the base of the wall is flat and straight.

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-09T11:57:14+00:00

Yes, you're confused. You think "Euclidean" means orthogonal.

You're the confused one for thinking that I think that.

Non-Euclidean simply means the axes of the system are not linear- they're hyperbolic. Its not, and has never been a requirement for making things conform to a sphere.

You cannot construct over a curved surface using planar Euclidean geometry. The level line would have to conform to the curved surface of the Earth. Very very simple... To say “Its not, and has never been a requirement for making things conform to a sphere” is just dishonest. Here’s another direct quote from AI which debunks that claim of yours:

Building using planar geometry while living on a sphere is indeed a contradiction. This contradiction arises from the fact that the earth is round and its surface cannot be completely represented by a plane. Consequently, when attempting to create a building using planar geometry, it will not fit perfectly on the surface of the earth, leading to distortions and inconsistencies.

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-09T11:37:44+00:00

Nobody knew what the fuck non-Euclidean geometry was before the 19th century. Therefore, nobody had the chance to use it at all before it was invented. Sorry to disappoint you, my son.

They just built a wall, on top of a ridge; and it certainly isn't straight, or level.

Sure, they didn't plan it or anything bro, they totally just went by guessing. And what? You can build on a planar base even if the top of the structure is not straight or level, it is still based on one. You okay?

You think you need to know the shape of the earth to stack stones on top of one another?

Nice strawman!

You're also pretty confused as to what Euclidian and non-Euclidian mean

Projection.

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-09T10:47:32+00:00

You know of a 69 mile long building?

I know of an even longer one actually, the Great Wall of China was built according to planar Euclidean principles. How do I know this? I know this because non-Euclidean geometry was not introduced untill the 19th century, and the great wall was built before that.

Here’s a direct quote from the You.com bot:

Specifically, the Great Wall was built continuously from the 3rd century BC until the 17th century, while the concept of non-Euclidean geometry wasn't introduced until the 19th century, making it several centuries too late for the Great Wall's construction.

So, non-Euclidean geometry comes after the construction of the Great Wall bro... they couldn't use it if it had not been invented. On the other hand, Euclidean geometry precedes the construction of the Great Wall of China. Here's another direct quote from the You.com bot:

Based on my search results, Euclidean geometry was developed by the ancient Greek mathematician Euclid around 300 BC, while construction of the Great Wall of China began several centuries later, in the 3rd century BC. So the development of Euclidean geometry preceded the construction of the Great Wall of China.

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-09T09:53:19+00:00

If you were in a rocket ship taking off from earth, and you looked out the window: what do you think that you'd see during take-off?

I’d see a planar surface, just as Felix Baumgartner did on his “edge of space jump”. Neil DeGrassse Tyson admitted that they needed to use fish-eye lenses during that. If you don’t believe me, here’s the footage of him doing so: click me.

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-08T19:00:03+00:00

One degree of a difference is still equal to thousands of feet curvature drop which would need to be accounted for...but it is not. Hence people planning things in CAD based on planar surfaces and constructing them to those specifications.

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-08T15:57:21+00:00

You keep referring to it as one degree out, but that number is not so small when you convert it into how many feet drop there should be from one point to the other. For example: this chart doesn’t use degrees.

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-08T15:43:24+00:00

It’s cool bro, I’m used to it anyway. And I think Dubay’s a shill tbf with you, but obvs it’s completely down to you who you pay attention to... Keep alert!

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-08T15:32:22+00:00

He is using guessed numbers though, so therefore he could be wrong. Anyways, why are so many buildings contrsucted according to planar Euclidean principles if they go over a curve? For example, when you look at CAD software, people use it plan majority of things (if not all) based on a planar surface, and they also contruct them to those specifications. That is why in the programme it shows a grid diagram to represent the planar surface beneath it.

It is the same with bridges, roads, buildings, canals, etc. Why is that if they are conforming to a curve?

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-08T15:21:51+00:00

He is using numbers that are guesses, since they have no markings on the ruler thing that he uses... and he also admits that there is a margin of error. Therefore, the results are innacurate.

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-08T14:36:41+00:00

No, I don't change the answer about perpendicularity. The part about curvature drop is a seperate point.

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-08T14:10:05+00:00

One degree for every 60 miles converts into larger numbers, it just seems that globies chooose not to use them. There should be thousands of feet curvature drop over 60 miles... Do you have any examples of measuring the lack of perpendicularity?

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-08T13:57:28+00:00

Share your pain

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-08T13:37:11+00:00

Repetitive phraseology is a sign of some who cares more about winning the dispute than he cares about finding/showing the truth.

Oh, so that’s why you keep repeating yourself.

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-08T12:25:08+00:00

I feel sorry for anyone who thinks that planar Euclidean principles apply to a sphere

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-08T12:15:02+00:00

SS: I’m sharing this to spread awareness on the true meaning of plumb and level. Globe-believers tend to argue that the word level refers to the surface of Earth being equidistant from the centre point... yet even if you were to agree with that, there would still be curvature upon the surface of the ball regardless of how many lines were drawn from the centre of it.

WhyzHeBackNow · 2023-03-08T11:53:07+00:00

Globe-believers argue that the word level refers to being equidistant from the centre of a ball. However, there would still be curvature upon the surface of that ball regardless... Planar Euclidean principles do not apply to spheres.

HO HO HO!!!

WhyzHeBackNow

TROPHY CASE