>>11285216>You're completely ignoring the fact that we can calculate the speed of the earth by looking at the stars.No, my post covers that. The Earth rotates at at rate of 1 revolution-per-day. This is very slow.
>Gravity doesn't matter, it wouldn't hold us down VS the speed of the rotation.Why not? The math has shown that gravity is significantly stronger than centrifugal acceleration, and in the opposite direction. Therefore gravity in this case can easily overpower centrifugal forces.
>Take your fake ass numbers somewhere else.The size of the Earth has been well measured since the time of the ancient Greeks. The rotation rate has been previously established in this thread. None of the numbers presented are "fake".
>In the world of math, we talk about things as constructions (propositions) which are " true if and only if" (enforceable and reasonableness) To show that P and/or Q=0, one must show (as with any science) that, even in a purely logical account of the world, P and/or Q are imaginary integers we just made up because they aren't an actual numbers, but rather a LETTERS.That made no sense. What's wrong with a=r*w^2? It comes from a well understood section of dynamics. If there's something specifically wrong with using that equation, then explain it.
Maybe you should demonstrate some of your calculations that has given you the conclusion that the Earth spins "too fast" for gravity to hold back against?
>P.S. WIKIPEDIA IS NOT A SOURCEIt's good enough for this situation.
