Flat Earth Theory

Time to put this matter and its origins under the magnifying glass.

Apr 08, 2024

Flat Earth. How many times have we encountered it during our day and age? The promoters of this theory swear that it is the singular pillar that answers all the questions. To that extend, I have a question of my own: What is its purpose?

The Giant Flat

All right, let us entertain this for a moment. What is the size of our ‘known’ Earth? Rough answer, around 510 million square kilometers. If we are to consider the writings of the supporters of this theory, its surface expands much further to include other vast lands beyond the ‘ice wall.’ So, there is a wide ring around where we supposedly live. Due to the wider range, then the actual size of the surface of this flat construct will be a multiplication in the scale of square kilometers. Conservatively, let’s assume it’s 1.5 billion.

For context, the size of Jupiter, the largest planet in our solar system is approximately 61.4 billion square kilometers. This means that approximately 41 ‘flat Earths’ would fit in there. Why am I making this comparison? Please bear with me.

Natural Gravity Center

Let us look into the concept of electrical charges, our microcosm. Their direction is always radial. If we combine enough of them, we get flows that closely resemble a torus field. Gravity works in a similar manner. It is not parallel that would be required by the flat Earth model. Nature does not favor straight lines, which is supported by every single empirical knowledge we have.

Thus, for energy efficiency of a titanic structure like our world, its gravitational center would have to be far enough to get an approximation of almost parallel gravitational lines. So, let us consider our ‘flat Earth’ sits on the edge of an imaginary spherical surface that would support that distant gravity center.

The structure you see above is 32x16 segments, which translates to 512 polygons, the majority of which are quads. However, you will notice that this is not a perfect sphere. The image below is a better approximation.

However, in this instance, we have 128x64 segments, which translates to 8,192 polygons or, let’s call them, ‘patches of land.’ Let’s assume this is enough to form a spherical distribution of areas that resemble a flat surface.

Now, let’s go back to the comparison between the ‘flat Earth’ assumed surface size and Jupiter’s surface size. That would be 1.5bn sq.km. vs 61.4bn sq.km.. What does that tell us? It tells us that the size of Jupiter is nowhere near enough to simulate close to parallel gravitational lines. To achiever that, the surface of our hypothetical sphere would have to be 8,192/41 = 199.8 times larger than the size of Jupiter, which translates to roughly 3.989 times the range of that celestial object.

What does that mean? It means that the gravity center of the ‘flat Earth’ would have to be approximately 3.103 billion kilometers below us. That’s to simply get an approximation of parallel gravitational lines, with minuscule fluctuations around the edges.

For context, one Astral Unit (AU) equals roughly 150 million kilometers. That’s the distance between our Sun and the Earth. So, for this flat construct to have a natural source of gravity, that center would have to be roughly 20.68961 AUs away from the ‘flat Earth’s surface. Uranus is at a distance of 19.22 AUs.

Are we starting to see the massive scale of this?

The above calculations are very rough approach for the utilization of a natural gravity center.

Artificial Gravity Center

Naturally, there will be supporters of a different aspect of the gravity approach. The hypothesis would go something like this:

“The species that build the flat Earth created artificial gravity via exotic materials.”

All right, let’s entertain this as well.

How thick of this material layer would be enough to generate enough gravity?

To bring a comparison of a different kind, the seismic tests NASA run on the moon indicate that our satellite has a titanium shell of approximately 20 miles (roughly 32km)? I do not remember the exact number. That’s to hold together an object that is 25% the size of our own planet.

For the sake of argument, we will not go that far. Let’s assume that the thickness of this exotic, gravity generating material is just 1km thick. This would translate to 1.5 billion cubic kilometers of exotic material. That is a lot of mining.

Let’s bring some context here too, shall we?

Our spherical Earth’s crust is approximately 33km, with 5% of it being estimated to be our iron, a common metal, not an exotic one. The volume that our Earth has in terms of iron that can be theoretically mined is 837,250,000 cubic kilometers. That’s 55.8% of what would be required to build the ‘gravity generating layer.’ So, just to harvest enough common metal, the advanced species that supposedly constructed the ‘flat Earth’ would need two planets of our Earth’s size. If we take into account that we need an exotic material for gravity generation, how many planets would need to be harvested? A galaxy?

I will avoid entering the science of the geodetic system, something I did study in the university, or the GPS or even the GIS functionalities. I believe that, thus far, you get the idea. However, let’s check the other element.

The ‘Dome’

Let us touch this subject for a bit too, shall we?

In the beginning, we assumed the size of the ‘extended flat Earth’ is roughly 1.5 billion square kilometers. This would give us a range of its ‘circular’ surface, if we are to assume it’s circular and not a rectangle (yes, there is that narrative as well), the radius of the construct would be approximately 21,851km or 43,702km diameter, from edge to edge, crossing through the ‘center of the Arctic.’

If we consider that this ‘dome’ is a hemisphere, its surface size is approximately 3 billion square kilometers. Shall we go into the material requirements to cover such a surface or the power it requires to flood our world with intense light?

You already have an image of the requirements for the ‘artificial gravity layer,’ so let’s go into the energy demands just for the dome, shall we?

Again, by estimation, on a sunny day, a square kilometer receives 120MW of energy. A dome of 3 billion square kilometers would need the capability to produce 360 billion megawatts, that’s 3.6x10^17 Watts that would be reaching the ground. Would that be uniform? No.

Now, consider that the ‘flat Earth’ theory assumes that the ‘dome’ is one giant screen, which simulates the Sun. That 3.6x10^17 Watts would have to hit our ground, originating from a fraction of that screen. For context, that’s roughly 360 million nuclear power plants of energy required for that spot on the dome alone. With that being said, how much power would the entire dome screen require?

Conclusively, I reiterate my initial question. What would be the purpose of such construct? Simulation? If yes, that’s a pretty resource consuming project and I doubt many other planets and/or their inhabitants would not be too happy about it.

Some may answer that ‘it’s because the Bible says it.’

Guess who else said it before the Bible. The Chinese in their own mythology. They actually have the Earth as a flat plane, with the dome around it. The following image is what you will see more often online.

“Ancient Chinese believed that heaven was like a dome covering the square earth. This comes from traditional Chinese philosophy named 天圆地方(Tian Yuan Di Fang, literally meaning that the heaven is round and the earth is square).” — China Daily

Speaking of mythology, let’s have a look from the Western side.

The Western Approach

Allow me to begin with the following picture:

‘What is the above?’ — many of you will ask.

It is the mythological entrance to Hades, the Underworld, situated underground, near the river Acheron in North-West Greece. I personally visited that place three times.

The gate you see in the distance is a massive circular stone, approximately 12 feet in height, that needs to be rolled aside in order to open. Due to the seismic activity in the area, its path to opening has been blocked, so no one has been able or willing to go past it. That gate is the first out of the three that lead into the depths of this mythical world. Are the descriptions in the myths literal? No. They are allegorical.

What else was once part of mythology, believed to have been fiction until it too was discovered to exist by the archeologist until Heinrich Schliemann in 1871? Troy.

From the ancient times, Greeks believed and proved that the Earth was round, and also had a heliocentric model of our solar system. That was not part of mythology. More specifically, you can look at Pythagoras and Aristarchus. Also, there are references in Aristotle as well.

However, what was indeed part of mythology was the flat disk of their ‘extended’ world. Let’s move a bit further outside from the confines of our atmosphere and look at our entire solar system.

“Our solar system is actually pretty flat, with most of its planets orbiting within three degrees of the plane of the Earth’s orbit around the sun, called the ecliptic.” —PennState University

Olympus was mentioned to always be ‘above the clouds’ and the Pantheon, or even the people before them, were named ‘Uranides’ meaning people from Uranus/Ouranos. This is where the sky got its name from. Snarky comments and smirks aside.

In Homer’s Iliad, the ‘chariots of the gods’ created torrents of smoke before taking off toward the heavens, on their way to Olympus. That’s the result of propulsion as regular horses, even ‘winged’ ones to not raise such dust in order to lift off.

Ever wondered how come and the Ancient Greeks named the planets after members of their Pantheon? To be honest, these names preceded their ‘rediscovery’ prior to the great disasters, and they were areas of responsibility, titles, not actual individual names. However, I will not expand on this here, as it is a grand chapter on its own.

Now, why did I mention the Entrance to the Underworld earlier? Because of its gates. They were circular, depicting — in miniature view — the structure of our extended world. and there were three for the three key identities of our universe. Masculine, feminine, neutral (point of symmetry). The Western approach did not have only the ‘Yin and the Yang’ - it included the third key cosmic element.

Left: The Eastern Flor of Cosmic Energy | Right: The Western Flow of Cosmic Energy

From the above tiny example, you can see how the Western approach is more expansive and more cosmic in its concept. The Eastern, is focused more on the aspects of ‘Heaven and Earth.’

Thus, when we hear that the ‘Ancient Greeks believed the world was flat’ it was not our Earth, it was our solar system. A version of their ‘Great Dark Sea’ was the sailing through the ether, the component that exists in the void of space, allowing the transference of energy, including light. Ever wondered why we still use the word ‘ship’ for space travel? Spaceship, starship, and so on. Even solar sailing is still common. All of these descriptions have their origins. We just haven’t questioned them much.

Conclusively

The conclusion of this entire article is a kind reminder to take mythology for what it truly is, regardless of where it comes from. In most cases, it’s encoded knowledge, but in every single case, it’s allegorical, even if it includes elements that seem realistic. People who had lost their technology and past knowledge from the disasters prior, would pass on their stories using terms the people would understand.

Imagine going back to the dark ages and try to talk about Quantum Mechanics. Most likely, you’d be burnt at the stake. Or in an even funnier example, go there and show them an iPhone, telling them you’re holding the world in your hands. The result would be the same. In primitive worlds, you’d probably be worshiped as a deity, unless you landed in a cannibal village.

In any scenario, the following clip from Star Trek: Into Darkness describes the idea.

Thus, the ‘flat Earth’ theory is not the monolithic approach that solves all questions. It is a theory that has been ‘attached’ to the community that researches the phenomena beyond our mundane, as a way to brand the people ‘crazy’ and discredit them.

Since you are reading this SubStack, you are part of an open minded community, with an intellect that is highly unlikely to fall into this trap. For that, I am thankful.