Latest News

Ball’s Out Physics Episode 1.1: A Spinning Atmosphere

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn

An example for the atmosphere shedding power is how an auto slows down when the gas/throttle is released. Friction between the tires and the roadway, wheel bearings as well as the centers, and so on all create warm. That loss of warm is loss of power, leading to loss of velocity. Naturally the car additionally slows down due to air resistance as well.

BOP1 Re-post:

72 Comments on Ball’s Out Physics Episode 1.1: A Spinning Atmosphere

  1. Insanity is Sanity // 30th Dec 2016 at 10:21 pm // Reply

    man im glad to see youre back, getting ready to watch now, cant wait

  2. Theresa Gordon // 30th Dec 2016 at 10:29 pm // Reply

    wow, you made physics so understandable, and I’m horrible at math. thx. I
    hope your a teacher, cause you just taught me alot

    • Coleman Adamson // 31st Dec 2016 at 8:46 pm // Reply

      +Rob S. you said ” Truth is in the eye of the beholder. “……That is
      moral and intellectual relativism and demonstrably false. No intelligent
      man who is sober would ever make that statement unless it was a comedy

    • Josh McCollum // 31st Dec 2016 at 9:34 pm // Reply

      Coleman Adamson I realized I meant to send this to Phillip so I am not sure
      what you have been saying in the chat. But I deleted my comment meant for

    • Red Sticker Blog // 31st Dec 2016 at 9:37 pm // Reply

      Hm, I find it deceptive to commit. That’s why I will never admit either
      way. I lean towards a lot of globe science being right, in the sense of
      times planets, and what not, rotations line up… To some extent, gravity
      as far as the center of the earth makes sense, at first…

      But then there are the tiny holes.

      Does gravity really work at the center of the earth? How can gravity, so
      week, hold someone to a “side of the world.”? Or is everyone always upright
      because the globe is so huge, and gravity is there? Why does Brian Cox say
      feathers and bowling balls falling at the same time proves objects are
      standing still? If objects are standing still how can electrons be keeping
      something from passing through our hand? Makes no sense that a non-falling
      object could fall through our hand anyway, why are rockets going through
      water in space? And lots of it. How come only some rockets?

      There are so many lies. On both sides.

      Then, is flat earth even real? Can we be sure the government isn’t psyoping
      us by using flat earth against us, to demonize us. I don’t trust B.O.B OR
      Niel Degrasse.

      This is why I don’t commit. If I do, and the earth is round, I’ll be a
      lair, and I’m Christian, so I can’t do that. We’ll just say I’m agnostic.

    • phillip reynolds // 31st Dec 2016 at 9:39 pm // Reply

      And still you twist and turn like a snake in a trap.
      1 – Do the experiment on the toy globe. Starting at any point – move an
      object dead ahead and keep going. Do not deviate from your course one bit.
      Now tell me where you ended up back at.
      2 – Draw a straight line in any direction across a paper plate until you
      can’t go any further and then report back to us where that line ended up.
      If you struggle with english or these instructions for two VERY simple
      experiments that any 6 year old could follow then please let me know and
      I’ll happily re-explain it for you [again]
      Kindest regards.

    • phillip reynolds // 31st Dec 2016 at 9:41 pm // Reply

      +Josh McCollum
      Do you lean towards a flat earth or a globe earth? Also – do you lean
      towards religion or atheism?

  3. Taboo Conspiracy // 30th Dec 2016 at 10:31 pm // Reply

    Just move your hand through the smoke of a campfire and you’ll never have
    the smoke at top somehow act as though it’s Velcroed and move with the
    smoke being displaced by your hand. The smoke will only swirl immediately
    around your hand and the upper smoke won’t be affected whatsoever. There’s
    no way that the upper atmosphere can keep up with the lower atmosphere due
    to the friction of the ground. The upper atmosphere will necessarily
    always drag behind the ground and create a whirlpool effect. Volcanic
    plumes can even travel against the alleged rotation of the earth. This is
    a huge proof that the earth is indeed stationary.

    • Muhammad Shah Nur // 31st Dec 2016 at 3:05 pm // Reply

      very good observation, its a shame that we are taught to ignore such
      contradictions as peoples confirmation bias kicks in

  4. MusEkobass // 30th Dec 2016 at 10:42 pm // Reply

    Finally some brains on this subject :D

    • Jason Brennaman // 31st Dec 2016 at 5:48 am // Reply

      How much literature on the subject have you read?

    • Kevin Lyon // 31st Dec 2016 at 6:52 am // Reply

      I teach this…in University Physics 1….this is freshman level stuff
      right here…..I just don’t know that I believe this guy is an engineer….

    • Kevin Lyon Why don’t you teach your students how to think for themselves
      rather than brainwashing them with this rotating atmosphere crap? Thank
      goodness I wasn’t taught this in 1st year Mechanical Engineering Physics.
      Who are you to criticise Brian? I feel sorry for your students.

    • Zyphyr Garden // 31st Dec 2016 at 12:47 pm // Reply

      Please explain wheer he is wrong or missing information so I can come to my
      own conclusion

    • Barry White // 31st Dec 2016 at 7:34 pm // Reply

      The picture of the city of Chicago skyline across Lake Michigan disproved
      the globe. Proofs don’t have to be complicated to be true and equally

  5. a) You’re assuming your three chunks of atmosphere (A, B, C in your
    diagram) stay fixed like a spoke through one revolution of the Earth. In
    reality, B would trail behind C, and A behind B. If no other forces
    affected the atmosphere (pressure systems, etc.), the amount the outer
    chunks trailed the inner would decrease, but I don’t think they’d ever
    perfectly align for a full rotation. Slap a bowl of water on a turntable
    and let it go. Eventually, all the water spins, but not as a solid chunk.
    Similarly, a magnetic stir stick inside a container of water will get the
    whole thing spinning, but as a spiral vortex, not a cylinder.
    b) The rotation of the Earth is indeed slowing. But very very gradually. I
    just read a post that mentioned we’re getting a leap second to realign the
    clocks tomorrow night.
    c) I may have missed something, but how does whether the atmosphere rotates
    as one with the ground have any bearing on whether airplanes would go into
    orbit? The reasons airplanes have a ceiling altitude is due to atmospheric
    pressure. At a certain altitude, there’s not enough atmosphere for the wing
    surfaces to generate lift. So unless the aircraft is traveling at ballistic
    speeds, it will be unable to go higher.

    • Jimbo Jones // 31st Dec 2016 at 5:48 pm // Reply

      my question is pretty clear and I’ve understood the argument’s’ that you
      have put forward. Choosing to be condescending rather than clarifying your
      point says more than enough.

    • I’m not sure how to clarify it more than I already have. The bowl of water
      experiment is pretty clear and easy to understand. You asked an either-or
      question (does the atmosphere stick to the ground, or does it lag), and I
      stated it’s not quite that simple an either-or situation. The atmosphere is
      fluid, and subject to multiple forces, so different portions will show
      different motions.

    • Jimbo Jones // 31st Dec 2016 at 6:19 pm // Reply

      thats alot of tapdancing and avoiding the issue, but what I think you
      accidently let slip is that you believe “different portions will show
      different motions”. If that is the case then , no, the atmosphere is not
      rotating with the earth at a constant. It is an either, or, situation. You
      cant have it kinda sorta both ways.

    • +Jimbo Jones I wouldn’t characterize it as “let slip” as if there’s some
      big secret I’ve revealed that destroys the model… It’s obvious that the
      atmosphere isn’t fixed in place with the ground, since local weather
      phenomena (e.g., wind) exist. The overall trend planet-wide is that the
      atmosphere remains relatively stationary with respect to the ground, though.

      If I’m on an airplane, I may walk up/down the aisle at 2mph, so I’m clearly
      not stuck in place. However, no matter how I move, the plane is whisking me
      along at 500mph, so my overall motion is within 2mph of that figure.

    • Jarles Doonkin // 31st Dec 2016 at 9:11 pm // Reply

      Blargo just drop it blargo you’re not going to force this. The atmosphere
      doesn’t move with the earth the air is moving not the earth it’s been this
      way forever.

  6. It works essentially like a torque converter in an automatic transmission.
    There is a reason torque converters have been equipped with lockup clutches
    for decades, relying on friction between a spinning solid and a fluid is
    always going to result in a loss. You will loose some of the velocity to
    slip, which results in heat.
    If the earth were a spinning ball, and you somehow magically contained an
    atmosphere to it, you would never be able to have the atmosphere spinning
    at the same velocity even right at this surface, and the further away you
    get, the slower the atmosphere would spin, not faster as they would have us
    to believe…
    Think about it, the denser the fluid, the more friction, the less slip will
    occur, yet the edge of the atmosphere that has almost 0 density is somehow
    supposed to be “locked” in with the solid surface 100+ miles below it?

    • Agreed. The higher up you go, the more the atmosphere would be “lagging
      behind” the rotation of the earth underneath.

    • Zyphyr Garden // 31st Dec 2016 at 12:40 pm // Reply

      But with less density, wouldnt that also mean less force is required to
      keep it moving. Also why does it have to me locked. There is air currents
      moving in every direction caused buy temperature changes as well as surface
      features acting on the air. With all of that extra movement it causes even
      less energy need to keep in moving. Less friction is needed on a moving
      object because it already is moving. Newtons law an object in motion stay
      in motion untill acted upon my an outside force
      That is my understanding. Please correct me if I am wrong

    • Coleman Adamson // 31st Dec 2016 at 2:06 pm // Reply

      +Zyphyr Garden…..With all the “extra” movement it would require MORE
      energy. Think if you have a toddler in your arms and he is sleeping. It
      takes less energy to turn your body and maneuver than it does if he is
      awake and flailing all over the place.

  7. G.G.Gorrell // 30th Dec 2016 at 11:10 pm // Reply

    Brian, that southern celestial pole hasn’t gone anywhere.

  8. turbotimthree // 30th Dec 2016 at 11:17 pm // Reply

    Mass hitting density because of vacuum. Enough said.

  9. When a plane takes off at the equator globe believers say it is moving with
    the earth at 1,034mph. Now take that motion and fly the plane over the
    North Pole. It will now be moving with its initial 1034mph in the wrong
    direction. It doesn’t make any sense because the earth is not a globe and
    does not spin. ( I know you know that :)

    • TruthAlwaysWins // 31st Dec 2016 at 5:30 pm // Reply

      +Flat Earth Math May you please answer the question I posted in this thread
      since you’re good at math?

    • TruthAlwaysWins You don’t need to take the speed of the atmosphere into
      account or the altitude. Answer = 500π/300=5.2 hrs= 5 hrs 12 min.

    • Flat Earth Math // 31st Dec 2016 at 6:14 pm // Reply

      +TruthAlwaysWins What +JohnnyM said, exactly. 🙂

    • TruthAlwaysWins // 31st Dec 2016 at 6:22 pm // Reply

      +JohnnyM Oh okay cool. Wow it’s so easy when you just imagine that the
      atmosphere is moving so slowly. Lol

    • Squirrel Sniper // 31st Dec 2016 at 9:01 pm // Reply

      DITRH I knew that you knew he knows… Happy new year to you Dirth…

  10. Aussie Gamer // 31st Dec 2016 at 12:11 am // Reply

    Great video mate. You really need to watch Flat Earth Maths Videos and have
    a discussion with him. He supports the heliocentric model and spends his
    time debunking flat earth. I would love to see you two talking about the
    nature of this place.

    • I hope flat earth math is a shill. i hope he is one of those worming “i am
      your friend” shills, because at this point if he still believes in the ball
      that would mean that some people just flat out can’t think outside of the
      rules they have been taught and that would be sad.

    • Peter Galbraith // 31st Dec 2016 at 8:52 pm // Reply

      wtf vids

      No, he is simply smarter than you. You can’t figure out the bix therefore
      assume you must think outside the box.

  11. Randolph Cain // 31st Dec 2016 at 12:17 am // Reply

    Good to see you again. So glad flat Earth led you to Jesus Christ. He is
    the way the truth and the life.

    • Jesus and christianity is just another jailsystem from the same tribe that
      brought you the globe.

    • Barry White // 31st Dec 2016 at 7:12 pm // Reply

      Another person who knows nothing about the bible telling us there is
      another explanation better than than the bible….uh what is it? Sudden
      creation is obvious. Go from there.

    • Randolph Cain // 31st Dec 2016 at 7:15 pm // Reply

      +wtf vids Says you. Some who claim to be Jews are the synagogue of Satan
      according to Jesus own words. So you got it partly right.

    • Barry White // 31st Dec 2016 at 7:26 pm // Reply

      That’s funny I was just reading that in the Revelation. When he talks of
      the synagogue of satan – He says you will be poor, But in reality you will
      made rich in what really matters. But they, the synagogue of satan will
      make you poor. Think a professor could be a flat earth realist in the last
      100 years? What would happen to him?

  12. Extremely thought provoking. Maybe, just maybe the earth isn’t spinning.

    • James Mighty // 31st Dec 2016 at 4:02 pm // Reply

      Its not spinning my friend. The Heliocentric lied to us about everything.
      The earth is stationary and planer in nature. The sun, moon ans starts
      revolve around ice.. Antarctica is a ring around the earth that prevents
      the water from moving off the edge…

    • Squirrel Sniper // 31st Dec 2016 at 9:06 pm // Reply

      AZMATIK maybe research Epistemology… Realise our programming….

  13. Matt shell // 31st Dec 2016 at 1:27 am // Reply

    Thanks Brian , you really do add real credibility to the FE debate.

  14. Jason Brat Parker // 31st Dec 2016 at 1:34 am // Reply

    Imagine the following thought experiment:
    First remove ALL celestial bodies from the entire universe (there is
    nothing left, just empty space and the earth) and next look at the earth
    from above.

    Consider 2 scenarios:
    -1- you are in a fixed point, relative to earth, as if in a very tall
    building, but in space, above atmosphere
    -2-you are free floating in space, your velocity/speed is independent from
    Ask yourself, in those 2 scenarios, would you still be able to tell if the
    earth is moving or spinning?

    Therefore, as a starting point I think it is important to first establish
    if the earth is rotating/spinning or not. Otherwise, the speed/velocity of
    the earth (1030 mph) and its rotation are all relative motions. For us here
    on the earth surface we could say the earth is stationary and not
    moving/spinning unless in relation to something.

    • Jason Brat Parker // 31st Dec 2016 at 10:54 am // Reply

      +Rob S. No, you still don’t get it.
      1. Imagine you are in space
      2. Everything disappeared, the entire universe is gone, only the earth is
      3. You are outside of the earth – away from it, let’s say where the moon is

      Once any object is in motion/rotating – IT IS ONLY ROTATING in relation to
      something else. Since there is nothing else, it is impossible to say/detect
      if the earth moves or spins.

      Maybe, instead of you being outside in space, imagine you are on earth –
      can you now see?That once there is nothing outside of earth, you cannot say
      earth is spinning or moving?

      If you still don’t understand, I am sorry I cannot help you – perhaps ask
      some friend for help.

    • Squirrel Sniper // 31st Dec 2016 at 9:12 pm // Reply

      Rob S. Take a look at the polaris and time lap footage of the Rotation of
      the stars lights….. We are told Earth is traveling in 3 different
      directions…. We only see one and it’s the slowest of all the
      directions….. We see only one….. Earth is stationery and the centre of
      the Universe…. We are very special unlike nasa claiming we are a mere
      pebble on the beach and very insignificant

    • Jarles Doonkin // 31st Dec 2016 at 9:18 pm // Reply

      Squirrel Sniper completely agree all globallists talk about the one ration
      of earth they always leave out the others. We don’t ever detect a 66,000mph
      movement? Because the stars are so far away is the dumbest answer and it’s
      their only answer

    • Jason Brat Parker u don’t get it, you can’t imagine evidence of something.
      You’re trying to show me something, show me, ill look. But im not wasting
      time with imaginary universes…

    • Squirrel Sniper yea, thanks for the refresher on that.

  15. Das Kässpätzle // 31st Dec 2016 at 1:48 am // Reply

    If there was really friction in the atmosphere on a globe earth, it would
    be most on the equator and get less to the poles?

  16. Welcome back. A question for Globalists and Flatists alike. If the Earth
    spins at +1040 mph around the equator and travels at vastly greater speeds
    throughout the solar system, galaxy and universe. Given all of these so
    called facts regarding a globed system being held by a ludicrous force
    called ‘gravity’. It allows insects, birds and aircraft of differing
    designs to fly, despite being held down by 14.7 psi, which is quite a load
    on the aforementioned. You need to consider their total wing and body area
    with the gravitational load, to fly under those conditions, they would fail
    My question or topic, whichever people want, is how can the ‘Globed’ Earth
    manage to retain it’s atmosphere given the extremely lacking force of the
    Earth’s ‘gravity’ doing the extreme speeds and the alleged powerful
    ‘gravity’ of other bodies in space. These powerful gravitational forces
    keep the Earth in the same position year, after year, after year. I just
    fail to see how our atmosphere is not stripped away from the Earth.
    If you wish to call me silly names and question my parentage and IQ, don’t
    bother it is nothing to which my wife calls me everyday.

  17. The International Cheese Eater // 31st Dec 2016 at 3:02 am // Reply

    Brian, ask yourself this: Where does the atmosphere come from? I mean every
    molecule of gas. Where was it before it joined the atmosphere?

    • The International Cheese Eater // 31st Dec 2016 at 3:30 am // Reply

      As for your query about the movement of molecules of air in the upper
      atmosphere, have a look at the large scale atmospheric circulation
      patterns. Air rising up at the equator diverts north and south into areas
      of lower rotational speed.

    • The International Cheese Eater // 31st Dec 2016 at 3:36 am // Reply

      Whoever told you the atmosphere spins with the Earth primarily due to
      friction was mistaken (as far as I know). You actually gave the real answer
      in the first couple of minutes of this video.

    • Jason Brennaman // 31st Dec 2016 at 5:48 am // Reply

      Keep those questions coming!

    • seems you’ve assumed that there was some sort of conglomerate of separated
      gas molecules at some point before it ?joined? the ‘atmosplane’, and became
      the medium that we think of as ‘atmosphere’. quite an assumption. maybe
      someone will chase you down this hypothetical rabbit hole…. gl

  18. Flat Earth Math // 31st Dec 2016 at 3:57 pm // Reply

    I was with you right up to the point where you at 9:24 said that heat was
    essentially kinetic energy. At an atomic level, yes, not at a macro level.
    Thus you’re confusing the velocity of individual atoms in one molecule
    which may be vibrating rapidly, while the parcel of air in which that
    molecule resides may be moving at a different speed.

    Then you mention the heat radiated into space, so the entire Earth system
    is losing energy, but you neglect the prodigious energy absorption from the
    Sun’s radiation, so you can’t say in this particular analysis whether the
    Earth is gaining or losing energy (there is a net loss, yes).

    Then at 10:30 you couple the loss of energy due to radiation into space
    with what you say you assume is a loss of kinetic energy. You’re mixing
    apple and oranges. The entire Earth system is losing energy, not any
    particular layer of atmosphere. And as I mentioned before the velocity of
    the atmosphere 1000+mph is not the same as the vibrational velocity of
    atoms inside molecules, as these are two different form of kinetic energy.

    Lastly, there’s the matter of scale. While it is true that the upper
    atmosphere is moving faster than the ground, the question is how much
    faster? The Karman Line, an arbitrary designation for where space begins
    (there really is no line), is 62 miles up. If the Equator is 24,874 miles
    long, the circumference of the edge of space is only 390 miles more, a
    difference of about 1.5%, the velocity of which decreases to zero as one
    approaches the poles.

    • Jarles Doonkin // 31st Dec 2016 at 9:14 pm // Reply

      Flat Earth Math should be called the Karman Curve In your mind. Although
      you have your mind wrapped around the sphere the atmosphere rotating with
      the earth has been the biggest problem. In the 1850’s they thought balloons
      could hover above the spinning earth. It’s still a new concept and forced
      idea of a constant atmosphere. This alone is going to stop the globe.
      You’re diligently stubborn in a humble way but too much is coming out
      against the globe. A 13 trillion ton 25,000 mile circumferenced sphere
      can’t be moving 2 ways because of a Big Bang and a hydrogen sun.

    • Flat Earth Math // 31st Dec 2016 at 9:22 pm // Reply

      +Jarles Doonkin You don’t need hovering balloons, Big Bang, or a hydrogen
      sun to determine the shape of the Earth. All you need is careful,
      meticulous observations, as detailed in my channel. Make your own
      observations, and decide for yourself. 🙂

  19. Barry White // 31st Dec 2016 at 7:04 pm // Reply

    Thanks for exposing more of our brainwashing.

  20. Brilliant. You are a treasure to the Flat Earth community.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


Share This