Unexpected Assumption in NASA Documents: Flat Earth?

in #nasa10 days ago


The Oblate Spheroid Assumption

For most, the assumption is that the earth is spherical (or an oblate spheroid) that spins around like a top. This assumption is taught in all schools and universities and is accepted almost universally in all nations.

The earth is a spinning oblate spheroid rotating around the sun in the empty vacuum of space.


The Non-Rotating, Flat Earth Assumption

Something funny happens when it comes to real-world calculations. In order for any accurate study of flight and aircraft models, the assumption must be that the craft is flying above a "flat, non-rotating earth". These are their words, not mine.


If this assumption is not consistent with reality, why wouldn't they assume a spherical (oblate spheroid) rotating earth? The math should work with a spherical assumption... right?

Why assume a non-rotating flat earth? It is perhaps because the math doesn't work on a globe? It should work, right? The globe (oblate spheroid) is consistent with the reality we are presented with. The reality of the world that most have accepted.


From the NASA Website

There is a seriously inconvenient assumption made when it comes to mathematical calculations concerning airplanes, rockets and ballistics. In order to accurately calculate their trajectory or movement, they have to assume a flat, non-rotating earth.

They assume this. Most people would never accept this as an assumption. Why would NASA assume this of all organizations?

No Need To Explain this Assumption?

The multiple data analysts felt no need to explain or defend their "ridiculous" assumption. Why?

These documents can be found on the NASA website:












Re-Evaluating Assumptions

If the non-rotating flat earth assumption is not consistent with reality, shouldn't these documents be destroyed and replaced with new calculations using a rotating spherical (oblate spheroid) earth assumption? Why does NASA seem to be fine with an assumed non-rotating flat earth?

Should we change the math? Or maybe there is a better option: Perhaps we should re-evaluate our assumptions, so we can be consistent with mathmatical reality.

Something to consider.



Benjamin Turner: God fearer. Rooted in Messiah. Husband of @lturner. Father of FIVE wonderful children. The guy behind the camera. Blockchain enthusiast.

Bless the Most High!


Teach Your Children Liberty from Sin

We encourage parents to teach their children principles of Godliness, beginning with the Word and an understanding who God is and what His Son has done to form a relationship with us.

No one can lay a foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. If anyone builds on this foundation using gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, or straw, his workmanship will be evident, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will prove the quality of each man’s work. 1 Corinthians 3:11-13

Teach Your children Liberty from Tyranny

Second to this is the principle of self-determination and freedom, lest we loose the ability to teach our children the first principle in future generations. Our children read the Tuttle Twin books, specifically to learn libertarian principles, which most people learn later in life. These books are useful for our family, and yours, to teach children concepts that seem complicated, but are made simple in these books. I am an affiliate for Libertas Publishing, your purchase will help our family grow financially.

Use coupon code FORTY for 40% off your purchase! Check out the books here.



"Politicians like problems because they can claim to have solutions... but their solutions often create even more problems."


If you like my content, please consider a generous upvote and SHARE

I appreciate my readers and do my best to read and respond to your comments. Thank you for your support, it's what keeps the lights on!

sir, i upvote you for your upvote i thank you dear


I think if you read these papers more fully you'll see that this assumption is made in order to simplify the mathematics, not because it is more accurate.

I advise everyone to read the papers more fully for context. False assumptions rarely lead to a true conclusion.


Hmmmmmm.....how much more do we have in common @lturner and @ironshield???????

Congratulations @ironshield! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

You distributed more than 56000 upvotes.
Your next target is to reach 57000 upvotes.

You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

Let highjack @ironshield 's post ok...

Dude all we know is that earth is flat, we dont know if there is a dome or not or an infinite plane... if there can be infinite space, when why not infinite plane?

Also dude, it seems like you made a lot of money on your coercive bots ??? Are you planning to continue to use all that money for evil???

How many of the downvotes I got the last lets say 2-3 weeks, are from your sock puppet coercive bots?? And how many are other people that you brainwashed into do the same as you???

Even ballheads that are highly respected in this blockchain space, hate you Marty!! you are a special kind of evil... now let me go shed some truth on your latest post on "proof of brain"....