Restricted

Restricted

restricted_list's profile on Threads as of September 2026

Real name	unknown
Main platform	Threads
Papa flerf	unknown
Flerfzi?	not yet confirmed
Religiflerf?	unknown
Incel?	not yet confirmed
Drinks urine?	not yet confirmed
Adopted by	not adopted yet
Teeth	slightly less than full set

V • T • E

restricted_list is a United States-based flerf who posts on Threads. He regularly argues with globers on the platform, and seems to rely excessively on AI to refute their arguments, and a result, he talks with an AI-generated tone quite often. If it wasn't for his sheer persistence in spreading flat Earth bullshit, there would be no reason to doubt him being a Poe.

Arguments and tactics

He has pushed truly some of the dumbest flat-earth arguments on the planet.

He posts out-of-context memes as "evidence", then refuses to provide sources.

He maintains that gravity is unfalsifiable because "you can't remove gravity from mass" and "you can't shield gravity".

He thinks being able to see faces in photos of Earth means they're fake (because NASA is intentionally hiding faces for people to find).

He consistently demonstrates all three laws of flerf to an exceptional standard.

"Gravity-free" calculator

Recently, restricted_list has claimed to have developed a fully functioning calculator for predicting rates of fall without using gravity.

Of course, his "gravity-free" calculator uses gravity; g has just been substituted out for the atmosphere's pressure gradient, which is calculated using g because it relies on gravity existing. Whatever AI he asked to make the calculator likely interpreted his prompt as "a calculator that does not directly use g or G".

Link to the calculator on Google Sheets

Equations used in the calculator

The calculator outputs two acceleration values; one due to "density/pressure" and one due to "electrostatics". The two accelerations are then added together to get the net acceleration.

"Density/pressure acceleration"

This equation is actually all that is needed to fully account for 9.8 m/s², but this is because its mathematically identical to gravity plus buoyancy. (Note that in its current configuration, the calculator is outputting ~9.5 m/s² due to its use of incorrect values for medium density and pressure gradient. restricted_list seems perfectly happy with this error though, despite having asserted gravity was falsified after Newton's law was off by 43 arcseconds per century).

The equation is

$a=(\frac{1}{{\rho }_{\mathrm{f}\mathrm{l}\mathrm{u}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{d}}}-\frac{1}{{\rho }_{\mathrm{o}\mathrm{b}\mathrm{j}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{c}\mathrm{t}}})\times \frac{dP}{dz}$

Where

• $\frac{dP}{dz}$ is the atmosphere's pressure gradient.

$\frac{dP}{dz}$ of a fluid is calculated using gravitational field strength, g, in the hydrostatic equilibrium formula:

$\frac{dP}{dz}=-\rho g$

An attentive observer will note that this is the same as restricted_list's formula but without $1/{\rho }_{\mathrm{o}\mathrm{b}\mathrm{j}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{c}\mathrm{t}}$. This is because his formula is not explaining where the acceleration comes from, its using the fact that a downward acceleration is already acting on the fluid to cause a pressure gradient. As ${\rho }_{\mathrm{o}\mathrm{b}\mathrm{j}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{c}\mathrm{t}}$ approaches infinity, the buoyant force approaches zero, causing the value of a to approach the value of g (because it approaches the hydrostatic equilibrium formula).

The $1/{\rho }_{\mathrm{o}\mathrm{b}\mathrm{j}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{c}\mathrm{t}}$ is simply adding the effect of buoyancy, resulting in a slightly lower acceleration than g. In fact, his equation can be directly derived from the formulae for gravity and buoyancy:

Gravity	Buoyancy	Net force
$F_g=-mg$	$F_B=V{\rho }_{\mathrm{f}\mathrm{l}\mathrm{u}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{d}}g$	$F=F_g+F_B$

$a_B=\frac{V{\rho }_{\mathrm{f}\mathrm{l}\mathrm{u}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{d}}g}{m}=\frac{V{\rho }_{\mathrm{f}\mathrm{l}\mathrm{u}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{d}}g}{V{\rho }_{\mathrm{o}\mathrm{b}\mathrm{j}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{c}\mathrm{t}}}=\frac{{\rho }_{\mathrm{f}\mathrm{l}\mathrm{u}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{d}}g}{{\rho }_{\mathrm{o}\mathrm{b}\mathrm{j}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{c}\mathrm{t}}}$

$a=a_B+a_g=\frac{{\rho }_{\mathrm{f}\mathrm{l}\mathrm{u}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{d}}g}{{\rho }_{\mathrm{o}\mathrm{b}\mathrm{j}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{c}\mathrm{t}}}-g$

$a=g(\frac{{\rho }_{\mathrm{f}\mathrm{l}\mathrm{u}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{d}}}{{\rho }_{\mathrm{o}\mathrm{b}\mathrm{j}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{c}\mathrm{t}}}-1)$

$a=-\frac{1}{{\rho }_{\mathrm{f}\mathrm{l}\mathrm{u}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{d}}}\frac{dP}{dz}(\frac{{\rho }_{\mathrm{f}\mathrm{l}\mathrm{u}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{d}}}{{\rho }_{\mathrm{o}\mathrm{b}\mathrm{j}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{c}\mathrm{t}}}-1)$

This simplifies to restrictedd_list's equation. In the last step, g is substituted using the hydrostatic equilibrium formula (shown earlier).

"Electrostatic acceleration"

This relies on object polarisability and a non-uniform electric field. The Earth's atmosphere does indeed have a non-uniform electric field (starting at around 100 V/m then decreasing with height), but ∇ E is nowhere near great enough to noticeably accelerate a macroscopic object.

Use of AI

He has convinced chatbots like Gemini to agree with him on his flat Earth talking points. Because real research involves listening to AI's opinions, especially when AI's opinions are designed to be aligned with your own.

Screenshot of Gemini restricted_list posted to support the idea that the heliocentric model is "unflasifiable".

Other info

• Thinks the Sun is in the clouds
• Adheres to flerfspective