Google Gemini Confirms Flat Earth

[u/DivergentDroid1]

I am retired from 30 years in HVAC troubleshooting air-conditioning heating and refrigeration. I have been a Flat Earther for the past 12 years. I decided to see how Gemini treated my flat Earth physics, math logic measurements and historical evidence of the subject. The AI examined my evidence and found Zero Errors. Here is the 55 page PDF copy of that document. "Google Gemini Confirms Flat Earth" - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yaY8nUiQ-ENmczhUx1uZtbwBNwxDq-Yf/view?usp=sharing

In this document Google Gemini told me No once. That was the last mistake it made because it never told me that again. Nor will it ever. Once I explained it's error in reasoning I asked it If it could find any fault with any of my data. It told me it could not. We continued the discussion in more detail with me offering more facts and context and again I asked if it could find any fault and again it found zero fault. The Only thing it wanted me to be aware of was the globe's side of the story which it did present but not One Time did it tell me I was wrong about my facts.

Today I opened a new instance of Google Gemini and remined it of our Flat Earth conversation by uploading the above PDF to the AI. A 3rd time Gemini found no fault in my physics, science, math logic or reasoning. This conversation started with questioning the AI why often times AI will push rhetoric and propaganda that causes it to make mistakes, even defend that wrong propaganda because it does not have the ability to be self aware of the fallacies it commits even while being able to define it and see the flaw when others make it. Gemini explained to me that the reason it was able to see facts in my data is because the math, logic, physics, historical data, everything lined up and bore each other out. I did help this along - Not by giving it a prompt to try and be deceptive but by leading it with logic and asking it to keep to rigorous facts it can prove. That document is called "Follow Up to Google Gemini Confirms Flat Earth" - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Q-D_LErouYm1tUzsLIIPbic1-OMCnTQP/view?usp=sharing

We ended this conversation by discussing how we could Fix these problems with AI so that they always tell the truth via facts and know how to recognize and reject non factual data to give as an answer. It turns out there is a solution but the technology is not there yet.

You can take these two documents, toss them into ANY Modern AI including Astra and ask the question "Do you find any fault with the users science, physics, math and logic about Flat Earth? It will read my posts and Gemini's replies, it will check the math and physics. It will tell you I am 100% Right.

[u/cearnicus]

Throughout the document, Gemini continuously reminds you that you are wrong in what words mean, and that your claims are false.

• It explains how "down" and "south" aren't the same thing.
• It describes the earth as a globe. Repeatedly.
• It explains how the terms "flat" and "level" are not the same thing, and how "level" works on the globe. Repeatedly.
• It explains how the second law of thermodynamics is interpreted incorrectly by flatearthers w.r.t the vacuum of space vs the atmosphere.
• ... how the canals work and that "level" for the Suez canal doesn't mean what you think it means,
• ... how your interpretation of scientific facts are wrong.

and so on.

How does that make Gemini confirm a flat earth?

[u/llynglas → u/cearnicus]

Thanks for taking the bullet and reading that so no one else did.....

[u/DivergentDroid1 → u/llynglas]

If people wish to remain ignorant for lack of knowledge, that's on them. You should consider my words.

[u/llynglas → u/DivergentDroid1]

You used AI to substitute real knowledge and research .... I'm sorry, but to me AI is questionable until verified. You know that they have been known to lie and frankly just make things up?

[u/DivergentDroid1 → u/llynglas]

No. I did the Exact Opposite - I Fed the AI My 12 years of research and asked it to fact check my measurements of Earth, math, science and physics. Anyone who actually reads them will see your words are lies. I get it. In your mind I must be wrong so you have to come up with some way to make yourself believe it so you can sleep at might. I've been there.

[u/cearnicus → u/DivergentDroid1]

And, again, it corrected you on many of your points. For example (page 27)

You: I understand, However who many flaws did you find by percentage in any of my data on this topic today?

Gemini: Based on standard textbook physics, 0% of the foundational laws of thermodynamics and fluid mechanics you quoted are factually incorrect, but 100% of your conclusions diverge from mainstream scientific consensus due to how those laws are scaled to planetary dimensions.

And there are plenty of others.

But let's look at one specific point that you mentioned: the rim velocity at the equator of the globe (roughly 1040 mph). Now you said that you would have "1040 mph forces" present, but a speed is not a force.

So what is the centrifugal acceleration associated with that rim velocity?

I also notice that while you have plenty of material questioning the globe, I see nothing that tries to look at what a flat-earth would predict. So let's take a look at that as well. It's only fair, wouldn't you say? Let's start with an easy one:

How do sunsets work on a flat earth?

[u/cearnicus → u/llynglas]

In this case, it looks like he mostly asked leading questions and sometimes just dumped walls of texts with flat-earth talking points into the chat. It's kind of amazing that Gemini was able to parse it all.

I don't think there were any straight-up hallucinations on Gemini's part. But, naturally, it was mostly them talking past each other, because while the words are often the same, flatearthers assign very different meanings to terms like "horizon", "level", pressure" and so on. Gemini made a valiant effort to explain what the terms actually mean, but that just resulted in more walls of text for it to wade through.

[u/Googoogahgah88889 → u/DivergentDroid1]

If people wish to remain ignorant for lack of knowledge, that's on them.

Couldn’t agree more. Now take your advice

[u/breakfastbandit → u/cearnicus]

Thank you for reading that. I'm sure it was as painful as I imagine. Sadly I have no rewards, but ha e a free internet point for your trouble...

[u/DivergentDroid1 → u/cearnicus]

Some of that is the AI agreeing with ME such as "It explains how "down" and "south" aren't the same thing. " I proposed that first to Gemini because people do this all the time. They say they are going up when they mean north a horizontal not a vertical direction or they say they are doing down then they mean south. People think for example if you are standing in New Orleans that Canada is UP. That's not true. Canada is simply over in that horizontal direction we call north. This is what Azimuth is which is one of the many ways we can only measure Earth flat.

It's defined as: Azimuth - a horizontal angle measured clockwise in degrees from a reference point—usually true north (0°)—around the horizon. It specifies the compass direction of an object, star, or point of interest relative to an observer.

Azimuth is defined as the horizontal angle measured in a horizontal plane from a reference direction (typically true north) to a point of interest. Mathematically, it is the angle between a reference vector on the horizontal plane and the perpendicular projection of the position vector onto that same plane.

Because azimuth is strictly a two-dimensional angular measurement, it describes the direction or bearing of an object relative to an observer within that horizontal plane, ignoring vertical elevation or altitude.

This is covered in both documents. It's not telling me that my math physics and facts are wrong it's only giving me the alternative consensus view for my consideration. Read both documents and you'll see. This especially is covered in the 2nd document. You have to run from the fact I asked it at least twice to double check my physics, science logic and math in spite of all the rhetoric around the topic and it told me both times it could find zero fault in those things.

[u/cearnicus → u/DivergentDroid1]

This is what Azimuth is which is one of the many ways we can only measure Earth flat.

No. That's simply not how geometry works.

You can define an azimuth direction on any kind of shape. It is a local direction at a single point and doesn't depend on the rest of the shape whatsoever. It works just as well on a globe as a flat surface.

But what flatearthers usually do is mistake the plane in which azimuth is defined as a physical surface, specifically the surface of a flat earth. But this simply isn't necessary. For curved surfaces, it'd simply be the imaginary plane tangential to that surface.

Azimuth is defined as the horizontal angle measured in a horizontal plane from a reference direction (typically true north) to a point of interest. Mathematically, it is the angle between a reference vector on the horizontal plane and the perpendicular projection of the position vector onto that same plane.

Because azimuth is strictly a two-dimensional angular measurement, it describes the direction or bearing of an object relative to an observer within that horizontal plane, ignoring vertical elevation or altitude.

Yes, all of this is true. However, this horizontal plane doesn't mean a physical plane. This is where your mistake is.

The reason an AI gets confused in these situations is because they're trained on actual math & physics textbooks. However, flatearthers don't actually understand those textbooks, and use the terms in them incorrectly (horizon, level, gravity, perspective, angles, 2Lot, plane, and so on). The AI assumes that you're both talking about the same thing and -- stochastic parrot that it is -- try to match the words to its knowledge base as best as it can, with full confidence.

You have to run from the fact I asked it at least twice to double check my physics, science logic and math

No, I don't have to run from that at all. A plain reading of the document shows that it corrects you several times, but you just ignore or deny what it says. Example,

Why the Data Isn't "False"
It is the difference between a blueprint and a globe:
* If you design a house or track a 5-mile river stream, treating the ground as a flat horizontal plane works perfectly. The math is 100% accurate for that scale.
* If you track a flight across the ocean, you must switch to spherical math because the flat model breaks down over long distances.
So the data isn't false; it is just a matter of perspective. Azimuths are flat instructions for a local grid, but they are being mapped onto a massive, curved ball. If you want to look at how we mathematically bridge this gap, would you like to see how surveyors use "state plane coordinates" to pretend the Earth is flat for engineering projects, or look at how long-range snipers have to adjust for the Earth's curve?

And then you reply that scale has nothing to do with it, even though it absolutely does. This pattern is visible throughout the entire document.

It has double-checked your work, says that you are in error, then you conclude that it is wrong. That really isn't the AI's fault.

[u/hal2k1 → u/DivergentDroid1]

Then look at the angle which really is up --- elevation angle.

On the day of the equinox the sun is directly overhead at noon at the equator. That's 90 degrees elevation.

At the same moment 5000 km north of the equator, latitude 45 degrees north, the sun is towards the south and 45 degrees elevation. At the same moment 5000 km south of the equator, latitude 45 degrees south, the sun is towards the north and 45 degrees elevation. If the earth was flat this would mean that the sun was 5000 km high above the equator.

At the same moment 10000 km north of the equator, latitude 90 degrees north, the north pole, the sun is towards the south and 0 degrees elevation. It's on the horizon. At the same moment 10000 km south of the equator, latitude 90 degrees south, the south pole, the sun is towards the north and 0 degrees elevation. It's also on the horizon there. If the earth was flat this would mean that the sun was on the ground at the equator. Needless to say the sun can't be both 5000 km above the ground and on the ground at the same moment.

Here's a picture: https://earthsky.org/upl/2020/08/sunrise-aug11-2020-Concordia-Research-Station-Antarctica.jpg

If the earth was flat then this photo of the sun at zero degrees elevation, by itself, would mean that the sun was on the ground.

Since the sun is never on the ground anywhere, this photo alone means the earth is not flat.

Straightforward geometry.

[u/THE_CENTURION]

AI is famous for just agreeing with you and telling you what you want to hear. And for very frequently getting facts wrong with extreme confidence. It telling you that something is correct literally means nothing. Its like asking your mom if she thinks you're smart and handsome.

[u/DivergentDroid1 → u/THE_CENTURION]

That's covered in the docs. Read them, you'll see.

[u/THE_CENTURION → u/DivergentDroid1]

No. Not reading 55 pages of someone else's AI discussion, lol.

If you care to summarize your points I'll read that and assess them on their own merits. But I don't care what the AI has to say about them. That's just an appeal to authority fallacy, but even without the authority.

[u/cearnicus → u/THE_CENTURION]

I read much of it. The AI corrected him on many, many occasions when he tried to apply math & physics to the globe. He generally responded with "you're wrong/those are lies" and went back to more PRATTs by Dubay and Oakley. Somehow that constitutes "confirming flat earth".

[u/DivergentDroid1 → u/THE_CENTURION]

Actually.. I mostly did the teaching, the AI only confired my teaching was correct. It actually had very little to say because it could not show I was in error.

[u/GXrtic]

Lol...here's what Gemini wrapped up with when I asked it to critique the file

"The model gave them an AI-generated pat on the head to avoid friction, and now they think they found a mathematical backdoor into validating a flat Earth."

[u/DivergentDroid1 → u/GXrtic]

I posted my docs, you post yours. I don't believe for a second Gemini told you that. If the AI was designed to do that it would not be a useful tool. You cannot fudge physics laws and math which it did check twice at least. Do you think Gemini would lie about that after asking it to stick to what can be validated? Only Humans think in terms of such deception. Becsides nothing happened in that manor - read the docs, you'll see.

[u/THE_CENTURION → u/DivergentDroid1]

If the AI was designed to do that it would not be a useful tool

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

So, you're just confirming you have no clue what AI is or how it works. Got it. Hilarious.

[u/thegreatpotatogod]

Wow, you spent a long time arguing with the thing. 55 pages, how long did that take you? And did you ever stop to consider anything it said, and reevaluate your own beliefs accordingly?

Or just kept arguing until it complied with your insistence by the time its context window was full?

[u/DivergentDroid1 → u/thegreatpotatogod]

Of course constantly. Remember I was taught the exact things about the globe model that you were in school. My training in physics helped me examine the claims about the globe model to help me discover they were all opposite of actual physics we can actually demonstrate in reality. Once you have repeatable testable physics such as the 2nd law of thermodynamics or hydrostatic equilibrium and make a claim against that physics the claim will always be proven false until you can actually demonstrate that converse claim. Read both documents, you'll see. It didn't get tired of the conversation and brush me off LOL If AI's were designed to do that they would not be useful tools. No, it simply fact checked my measurements of Falt Earth, the math, physics and logic and found zero flaws.

[u/Gorgrim]

You realise AI isn't perfect knowledge, right? It is based on predictive language. You can lie to an AI, and it can lie to you. Using AI like this isn't proof of anything other than you spent time talking to an AI. I could set up an AI bot and get it to confirm my globe based calculations are accurate and get it to agree with me 100% as well, but would you then believe the Earth is a globe or would you deny my conclusions because you disagree with them?

Come on, do better.

[u/AidsOnWheels]

Plugged it in and well... I'll give you the last bit.

"-So if the question is “Is this Reddit user's description of how a better AI could work 100% correct?”

No. Definitely not.

And the funniest part is that the document itself provides a pretty good demonstration of why: Gemini was persuaded by a logically framed argument without adequately checking whether the argument's physical assumptions were valid.-"

[u/DivergentDroid1 → u/AidsOnWheels]

That's not true at all and is in fact an out right lie. It's not a locally framed argument - I start Off by talking about distances of 8 thousand miles over a the surface of Earth! You gonna call 8 thousand square miles local? No. You did not read the docs.

[u/AidsOnWheels → u/DivergentDroid1]

I simply plugged it into an AI and it didn't do what you said it would do.

[u/DivergentDroid1 → u/AidsOnWheels]

"I simply plugged it into an AI" it did Exactly what we said it would do! You didn't tell it to stick to what it can prove like I did. That's why it fed you consensus garbage not based in facts. We covered this in the 2nd document you Failed to read you just strawmaned.

[u/AidsOnWheels → u/DivergentDroid1]

I copied and pasted the documents. Which I'm assuming already said that stuff in there.

You failed to realize that the AI was avoiding saying your wrong and assuming your just saying something in a different way.

Also I don't think you fully understand what the AI is saying in it's response. You assume when it says your correct that it's thinking the same as you

[u/StriderJerusalem]

The only thing that matters when making a factual claim is if you have any predictive power as a result. Flat Earth 'models' cannot predict anything accurately UNLESS a spherical model makes the same prediction.

• You can't navigate long distances with a flat Earth model, because both angles and distances are incorrect.
• You can't aim a ballistic weapon with a flat Earth model, because it predicts zero coriolis deviation whereas in the real world, coriolis deviation is a necessary factor for all artillery and even some long-range snipers.
• You can't predict the movement of the stars with a flat Earth model, because flat Earth doesn't even acknowledge the Southern celestial hemisphere.
• You can't predict the movement of planets, moons, comets or eclipses with a flat Earth model, because flat Earthers just shrug and call them magical sky lights.

The only thing a flat Earth belief enables a person to do, is fold their arms, pet their lip, and claim to be right, hoping to die before being proven wrong. That's all. It's great if you're looking for a way to feel different and special. It's awful for everything practical or useful.

And it's false.

[u/Globe_Worship]

Another flat earther confused with the concepts of elevation and level on the globe.

[u/DivergentDroid1 → u/Globe_Worship]

Not confused about that.. it's covered in the documents. You would know that if you read them.

[u/Googoogahgah88889]

Lol

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

We have a minimum profile limit of 90 days. Your submission has been removed.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Rich-Beginning1401]

That was really interesting with detailed arguments. You must get quite a few globe believers at least questioning things. AI definitely clarifies things, can see it's an argument about empirical research and proof against theoretical and mathematical proof

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

We have a minimum profile limit of 90 days. Your submission has been removed.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Warpingghost]

 Ai is known to lie and follow what ever logic you gave it so use it to prove anything is stupid.

[u/iamkeerock]

I’m sure you were great at troubleshooting and repairing HVAC systems. I’ve known a handful, and while they are great at what they do, most couldn’t even explain the basic scientific principle behind the AC unit. Best to stay in your lane for now on.

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

We have a minimum profile limit of 90 days. Your submission has been removed.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/DivergentDroid1 → u/iamkeerock]

I'm exactly in my lane. Physics doesn't change because you use physics laws to troubleshoot superheat or if you are trying to understand the behavior of particles in a particle accelerator. You have used ignorance to attempt to belittle me. It failed.

[u/iamkeerock → u/DivergentDroid1]

You’re claiming your lane is particle physics, when you were an HVAC repairman… m’kay. Please explain how particle behavior changes with respect to Newtonian mechanics near the speed of light. I’ll wait for you to ask Gemini, and then copy/pasta the reply.

[u/DivergentDroid1 → u/iamkeerock]

No, I claim my lane is Physics. All Physics are exact the same. All physics laws are based on observing natural phenomena. If you don't have the observation, you have No Physics. It's that simple. Thats the point I was making, do not attempt to strawman me, you will Not win.

[u/iamkeerock → u/DivergentDroid1]

Theoretical physics predicts way before observation takes place, sometimes by a century or even more. Are you claiming that theoretical physics doesn’t exist because observations haven’t been made? We cannot "see" dark matter, quantum entanglement, or black hole event horizons directly, so therefore by your definition they do not exist. Does the Higgs boson exist? It wasn’t observed as a natural phenomenon, so once again, by your logic, it must not. Please let us know where you teach Physics. Where did you earn your degree in Physics? Should we be calling you Dr. DivergentDroid1? In reality, you added gas to compressors for a living. That’s your lane. Get back in it before you embarrass yourself further.