The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Q&A => Topic started by: Lord Excalibur on February 02, 2010, 11:38:55 AM
-
I live in San Francisco. I have looked at maps and there is no land mass between me and China. So if I were to stand atop one of the coastal mountains with an extremely strong telescope I should be able to see China right?
-
(http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r36/Persistenxe/Flat_earth-1.png)
As you can see there is Canada, the North pole and Russia between you and China.
Also, the atmosphere prevents you from seeing very far.
And also, the Earth is round, so no.
-
And also, the Earth is round, so no.
No, its not, open your eyes to the overwhelming evidence. Though you are free to believe whatever you choose.
-
Most of the evidence (that doesn't involve "tEh c0sp1raNCy!" ) points to a round earth.
-
And also, the Earth is round, so no.
No, its not, open your eyes to the overwhelming evidence. Though you are free to believe whatever you choose.
Yeah, as if FE's have evidence to almost everything they say. We have evidence, but since everything is a conspiracy, you ignore it or try to counter it with some nonsense that has no evidence at all.
Still awaiting pics of the ice wall.
-
Attention newbies:
Welcome to FES! Also, there are about four, maybe five active members here who genuinely believe the Earth is flat. "Lord Excalibur" is not one of them, and the idea of pretending to be a radical FE'er to "parody" us has been done about fifty times before.
-
Attention newbies:
Welcome to FES! Also, there are about four, maybe five active members here who genuinely believe the Earth is flat. "Lord Excalibur" is not one of them, and the idea of pretending to be a radical FE'er to "parody" us has been done about fifty times before.
I remember when you did it. It was really not funny. You should do it again some time. Only funny.
-
I remember when you did it. It was really not funny. You should do it again some time. Only funny.
I don't see how you would be able to "remember" something I did years ago when you weren't here, but I agree, it wasn't very funny. Still, at least I grew out of it, unlike you.
-
Air is not transparent.
-
Air is not transparent.
I wondered why I kept bumping into things.
-
Air is not transparent.
You sir, Fail.
-
Air is not transparent.
You sir, Fail.
Johannes is correct. The atmosphere is not transparent.
The atmosphere consists of a haze of loosely spaced non-transparent particles. When you look into the distance you can see a buildup of particles, which is why mountains in the distance are often faded and indistinct.
-
Air is about as transparent as you can get Bishop. Nothing is perfectly transparent but air does a good job.
-
Yes, it does do a pretty good job, though I'm glad you can tell it is not perfectly transparent.
-
Air is not transparent.
You sir, Fail.
Johannes is correct. The atmosphere is not transparent.
The atmosphere consists of a haze of loosely spaced non-transparent particles. When you look into the distance you can see a buildup of particles, which is why mountains in the distance are often faded and indistinct.
Jesus, you love to make shit up don't you?
trans?par?ent??[trans-pair-uhnt, -par-]
–adjective
1. having the property of transmitting rays of light through its substance so that bodies situated beyond or behind can be distinctly seen.
2. admitting the passage of light through interstices.
3. so sheer as to permit light to pass through; diaphanous.
I can see my hand, therefore the air in between in and my eyes is transparent.
-
http://www.ashtonwoodswv.com/AW-DistantMountains.JPG
The mountains cannot be seen clearly. Why is this?
-
http://www.ashtonwoodswv.com/AW-DistantMountains.JPG
The mountains cannot be seen clearly. Why is this?
They CAN be distinctly seen and recognised as mountains. I appreciate the fact that clarity will decrease with distance but it is indisputable that air is transparent. It allows light to pass through therefore it fits the description.
Try not to argue for the sake of arguing please.
-
[semantics] People need to get to grips with the distinction between transparent and invisible. Johannes is wrong. Air is transparent, but not invisible. [/semantics]
-
Air particles are not transparent. The space between those particles is, however.
-
Air particles are not transparent. The space between those particles is, however.
Then what is glass? It is solid and yet I can see through it. It's particles must either be non-existent or transparent. Just like air OmGzOrZ/!?
looking back on the topic at hand, do you really think getting your own way in this argument matters? The point is that I can see through air. It is transparent
-
Attention newbies:
there are about four, maybe five active members here who genuinely believe the Earth is flat. "Lord Excalibur" is not one of them, and the idea of pretending to be a radical FE'er to "parody" us has been done about fifty times before.
I am not trying parody anybody here, I do in fact believe the world is flat, hence why I signed up for this forum.
-
Air particles are not transparent. The space between those particles is, however.
The various kinds of atoms and molecules that make up the air (Nitrogen, Oxygen, CO2, etc.) are mostly transparent because they don't absorb much visible light. Light does scatter from these particles though. The light is scattered by them more at some wavelengths than others, which is why the sky appears bluish during the daytime (shorter wavelengths tend to scatter more than longer ones). The amount of scattering is small though, as the relative transmission of visible light after traveling horizontally through the atmosphere is still 50%.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Atmosph%C3%A4rische_Absorption.png
I'm not trying to prove anything with this post, I just thought I'd throw my two cents in, as atomic and molecular absorption spectroscopy is my specialty.
-
Air particles are not transparent. The space between those particles is, however.
The various kinds of atoms and molecules that make up the air (Nitrogen, Oxygen, CO2, etc.) are mostly transparent because they don't absorb much visible light. Light does scatter from these particles though. The light is scattered by them more at some wavelengths than others, which is why the sky appears bluish during the daytime (shorter wavelengths tend to scatter more than longer ones). The amount of scattering is small though, as the relative transmission of visible light after traveling horizontally through the atmosphere is still 50%.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Atmosph%C3%A4rische_Absorption.png
I'm not trying to prove anything with this post, I just thought I'd throw my two cents in, as atomic and molecular absorption spectroscopy is my specialty.
Lol, take a hit of that knowledge bong, TB.
-
The various kinds of atoms and molecules that make up the air (Nitrogen, Oxygen, CO2, etc.) are mostly transparent because they don't absorb much visible light.
Atoms aren't transparent. ::)
Not even even the atoms in a pane of glass are transparent.
-
The various kinds of atoms and molecules that make up the air (Nitrogen, Oxygen, CO2, etc.) are mostly transparent because they don't absorb much visible light.
Atoms aren't transparent. ::)
Not even even the atoms in a pane of glass are transparent.
Then how the fuck do you see through it, genius?
If glass isn't transparent, then what the hell is?
-
From http://www.glassonweb.com/articles/article/159/
Q. Glass is something we use every day, a transparent material produced by melting a mixture of sand, calcium, oxide, and other raw materials and then cooling the resulting product. But have you ever wondered what makes glass transparent? Why can we see through window and not through the frame that enclose it?
A. In general most liquids and gases like water, air, natural gas, cooking oil, or rubbing alcohol are transparent, while solid materials like wood, metal, ceramics, etc. are opaque. That is because of a difference between the molecular structure of solids, liquids and gases. When a substance is in its solid state, molecules are ordered in a regular lattice just like bricks stacked neatly on top of one another, being virtually impenetrable for light waves. The molecules of an substance in the liquid stage are disordered and are not rigidly bound. This causes the disordered stacking of the molecules, creating gaps and holes that allow portions of light waves to pass through. The greater the gaps in molecular organization the easier it is for light to pass through. As glass in neither liquid nor solid, because its molecules are motionless (like a solid) but random in configuration (like a liquid), glass exists in a solid yet transparent state
-
So glass is transparent? Good to know.
-
The atoms in glass are not transparent, as I've said.
One can only see through glass because of how the atoms are arranged. The "transparency" is open space. Just as the "transparency" in air is open space.
-
Then what is glass? It is solid and yet I can see through it.
Some people say that glass is actually a very viscous liquid.
looking back on the topic at hand, do you really think getting your own way in this argument matters? The point is that I can see through air. It is transparent
It really depends on how you define air.
If you're defining it as a collection of atoms, then no, atoms are not transparent.
However, if you define air as a collection of atoms and the space between them, then sure, you could sort of construe that air is transparent.
It's much like saying that you can see through a brick wall with a big round hole in it, and that it's transparent. Sure, you can "see" through the brick wall with a hole in it. But you're not really looking through the wall. You're looking through the hole.
-
Air particles are not transparent. The space between those particles is, however.
Then what is glass? It is solid and yet I can see through it. It's particles must either be non-existent or transparent. Just like air OmGzOrZ/!?
Some people say that glass is actually a liquid.
And those people would be misinterpreting evidence based on church windows and do not take into consideration antique telescopic lenses which would have lost all their clarity if glass did indeed flow.
-
And those people would be misinterpreting evidence based on church windows and do not take into consideration antique telescopic lenses which would have lost all their clarity if glass did indeed flow.
The Victorian church window thing is likely wrong considering that ancient Egyptian glass figurines aren't puddles on the floor, but it still doesn't rule out the possibility that glass flows at an even slower imperceptible rate.
The question whether glass is truly a liquid or not is a matter still in debate in academic circles (some have even gone so far as to classify glass as a fourth state of matter which sits between solid and liquid).
However it is not doubted that glass's molecular structure is loosely connected similar to liquid, and that we see through it because of the gaps between atoms.
-
How the hell Tom makes it through daily life when he keeps changing rules, definitions and anything else to suit his immediate needs is beyond me. If air is not transparent, I would like Tom to name one thing that is.
-
How the hell Tom makes it through daily life when he keeps changing rules, definitions and anything else to suit his immediate needs is beyond me. If air is not transparent, I would like Tom to name one thing that is.
Only empty space is transparent. There is no such thing as transparent matter.
-
How the hell Tom makes it through daily life when he keeps changing rules, definitions and anything else to suit his immediate needs is beyond me. If air is not transparent, I would like Tom to name one thing that is.
Only empty space is transparent. There is no such thing as transparent matter.
Air is transparent, as it allows sunlight to passthrough it allowing plants to undergo photosynthesis. The same can be said for water and a host of other objects described as matter. Sunlight also allows plants in water to grow.
Wiki definition "Transparency and translucency, the physical property of allowing the transmission of light through a material"
-
The various kinds of atoms and molecules that make up the air (Nitrogen, Oxygen, CO2, etc.) are mostly transparent because they don't absorb much visible light.
Atoms aren't transparent. ::)
Not even even the atoms in a pane of glass are transparent.
You can only "see" something if visible light is absorbed by or reflected off of a medium. If you have a gas of atoms that have no absorption lines in the visible spectrum, light will pass right through the gas mostly undisturbed, though as I mentioned above a very small portion of the light will scatter off the atoms.
You're thinking about matter the wrong way here. Atoms aren't tiny little billiard balls of a certain color floating around in space.
-
How the hell Tom makes it through daily life when he keeps changing rules, definitions and anything else to suit his immediate needs is beyond me. If air is not transparent, I would like Tom to name one thing that is.
Only empty space is transparent. There is no such thing as transparent matter.
*sigh* Tom, if matter allows light to pass through unobstructed, then, by definition, it is transparent. You also have to realize that transparency is also a function of the wavelength of electromagnetic energy. Skin and other soft tissues are relatively transparent to certain wavelengths while bone is opaque to the same wavelength. This is how x-rays work. By the same token, air is transparent to visible wavelengths, but opaque to far ultraviolet.
-
How the hell Tom makes it through daily life when he keeps changing rules, definitions and anything else to suit his immediate needs is beyond me. If air is not transparent, I would like Tom to name one thing that is.
Only empty space is transparent. There is no such thing as transparent matter.
*sigh* Tom, if matter allows light to pass through unobstructed, then, by definition, it is transparent. You also have to realize that transparency is also a function of the wavelength of electromagnetic energy. Skin and other soft tissues are relatively transparent to certain wavelengths while bone is opaque to the same wavelength. This is how x-rays work. By the same token, air is transparent to visible wavelengths, but opaque to far ultraviolet.
It's also opaque to far-IR and mm radio radiation. I would imagine that the main evolutionary reason our eyes are sensitive to the range of wavelengths that they're sensitive to is because of the fact that it's one of the few bands of radiation short of radio that the atmosphere is transparent to.
-
The various kinds of atoms and molecules that make up the air (Nitrogen, Oxygen, CO2, etc.) are mostly transparent because they don't absorb much visible light.
Atoms aren't transparent. ::)
Not even even the atoms in a pane of glass are transparent.
Where did he say they were transparent? He said they were mostly transparent. Which they are, since atoms are mostly made up of empty space.
lrn2reeeeeeeed
-
The various kinds of atoms and molecules that make up the air (Nitrogen, Oxygen, CO2, etc.) are mostly transparent because they don't absorb much visible light.
Atoms aren't transparent. ::)
Not even even the atoms in a pane of glass are transparent.
Where did he say they were transparent? He said they were mostly transparent. Which they are, since atoms are mostly made up of empty space.
lrn2reeeeeeeed
I don't think that the empty space is what makes atoms transparent. Rather it would be the way that the atoms interact with photons of different wavelengths. Certain wavelengths will be absorbed, others will be absorbed and emitted while others will have no interaction at all. This where opaque, translucent and transparent are pretty much defined.
-
The various kinds of atoms and molecules that make up the air (Nitrogen, Oxygen, CO2, etc.) are mostly transparent because they don't absorb much visible light.
Atoms aren't transparent. ::)
Not even even the atoms in a pane of glass are transparent.
Where did he say they were transparent? He said they were mostly transparent. Which they are, since atoms are mostly made up of empty space.
lrn2reeeeeeeed
I don't think that the empty space is what makes atoms transparent. Rather it would be the way that the atoms interact with photons of different wavelengths. Certain wavelengths will be absorbed, others will be absorbed and emitted while others will have no interaction at all. This where opaque, translucent and transparent are pretty much defined.
This. Thank you. Though scattering, as I've said repeatedly, does play a part (and is actually used quite extensively in spectroscopy, most notably in Raman scattering), albeit a small part.
-
I remember when you did it. It was really not funny. You should do it again some time. Only funny.
I don't see how you would be able to "remember" something I did years ago when you weren't here, but I agree, it wasn't very funny. Still, at least I grew out of it, unlike you.
Newsflash for the thick: I'm not pretending to be a flat earther.
Nor is Lord Excalibur. He is a well known flat earther who holds meetings with like minded people every month. I believe he has also organised a flat earth parade to bring to attention the plight of the opressed FE community. Just because he is not active online does not mean he is not a flat earth believer.
-
I remember when you did it. It was really not funny. You should do it again some time. Only funny.
I don't see how you would be able to "remember" something I did years ago when you weren't here, but I agree, it wasn't very funny. Still, at least I grew out of it, unlike you.
Newsflash for the thick: I'm not pretending to be a flat earther.
I was referring to being a troll in general.
Nor is Lord Excalibur. He is a well known flat earther who holds meetings with like minded people every month. I believe he has also organised a flat earth parade to bring to attention the plight of the opressed FE community. Just because he is not active online does not mean he is not a flat earth believer.
Like this.
-
How the hell Tom makes it through daily life when he keeps changing rules, definitions and anything else to suit his immediate needs is beyond me. If air is not transparent, I would like Tom to name one thing that is.
Only empty space is transparent. There is no such thing as transparent matter.
[semantics] Bishop needs to get to grips with the distinction between transparent and invisible. Bishop is wrong. Air is transparent, but not invisible. Empty space is invisible.[/semantics]
-
Certain parts of the light spectrum make it through the upper levels of the earth. Sensors placed beneath the surface can detect these spectrums.
-
Certain parts of the light spectrum make it through the upper levels of the earth. Sensors placed beneath the surface can detect these spectrums.
haha, so even earth is transparent to invisible-to-human-eye wavelengths? I think you lose, Bishop.
-
I remember when you did it. It was really not funny. You should do it again some time. Only funny.
I don't see how you would be able to "remember" something I did years ago when you weren't here, but I agree, it wasn't very funny. Still, at least I grew out of it, unlike you.
Newsflash for the thick: I'm not pretending to be a flat earther.
Nor is Lord Excalibur. He is a well known flat earther who holds meetings with like minded people every month. I believe he has also organised a flat earth parade to bring to attention the plight of the opressed FE community. Just because he is not active online does not mean he is not a flat earth believer.
Thank you for the support my friend
-
How the hell Tom makes it through daily life when he keeps changing rules, definitions and anything else to suit his immediate needs is beyond me. If air is not transparent, I would like Tom to name one thing that is.
Only empty space is transparent. There is no such thing as transparent matter.
Tom,
From your explanation, how come some types of glass are transparent to visible light, but not to infra red or UV?
Are we saying here that glass atoms reach out into empty space and grab light of the wrong frequency ?
-
Tom,
From your explanation, how come some types of glass are transparent to visible light, but not to infra red or UV?
Are we saying here that glass atoms reach out into empty space and grab light of the wrong frequency ?
Some wavelengths are physically bigger than others and are unable to pass through the cracks.
For example, the screen on your microwave is built so that the spacing of the metal dots (or spacing of the embedded screen) is close enough to each other that the microwave screen allows visible light in and out for viewing pleasure, while at the same time preventing dangerous microwaves from getting out.
-
Some wavelengths are physically bigger than others and are unable to pass through the cracks.
For example, the screen on your microwave is built so that the spacing of the metal dots (or spacing of the embedded screen) is close enough to each other that the microwave screen allows visible light in and out for viewing pleasure, while at the same time preventing dangerous microwaves from getting out.
But how does some glass allow visible light through but not UV light? In principal it should, because UV has a shorter length.
-
But how does some glass allow visible light through but not UV light? In principal it should, because UV has a shorter length.
What glass doesn't allow UV light to pass through?
-
But how does some glass allow visible light through but not UV light? In principal it should, because UV has a shorter length.
What glass doesn't allow UV light to pass through?
Sunglasses. Camera filters. Some types of glass used in conservatories.
-
But how does some glass allow visible light through but not UV light? In principal it should, because UV has a shorter length.
What glass doesn't allow UV light to pass through?
All glass?
http://www.pgo-online.com/intl/katalog/curves/whitefl_kurve.html
http://www.spacewx.com/Docs/ISO_PRF_21348_e.pdf
See 6.5.5- 6.5.8
Note that the above does not involve the use of coatings.........
Also his glasses, though worn at night, they would (should) block the transmission of UV.
Though I should warn you; dont masquerade with the guy in shades... Oh No!
(http://therog.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/jc_coreyhart.jpg)
Also, don't switch the blade on the guy in shades, Oh no!
-
But how does some glass allow visible light through but not UV light? In principal it should, because UV has a shorter length.
What glass doesn't allow UV light to pass through?
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultraviolet.
"Ordinary window glass passes about 90% of the light above 350 nm, but blocks over 90% of the light below 300 nm"
Please can you explain how this is possible.
-
Some wavelengths are physically bigger than others and are unable to pass through the cracks.
For example, the screen on your microwave is built so that the spacing of the metal dots (or spacing of the embedded screen) is close enough to each other that the microwave screen allows visible light in and out for viewing pleasure, while at the same time preventing dangerous microwaves from getting out.
Exactly right well put bishop
-
Some wavelengths are physically bigger than others and are unable to pass through the cracks.
For example, the screen on your microwave is built so that the spacing of the metal dots (or spacing of the embedded screen) is close enough to each other that the microwave screen allows visible light in and out for viewing pleasure, while at the same time preventing dangerous microwaves from getting out.
Exactly right well put bishop
Except that he has it backwards (big surprise). Those aren't metallic dots, they're holes in a metallic grid.
-
what ever, its still how the things work. It's a wonder how you people can stand to be around each other for so many years with out occasionally patting people on the other sides back and saying yes you where right about something and I was misinformed. Insted you just resort to bitching about the other person some more. How is this stuff inline with the questioning?
-
what ever, its still how the things work. It's a wonder how you people can stand to be around each other for so many years with out occasionally patting people on the other sides back and saying yes you where right about something and I was misinformed. Insted you just resort to bitching about the other person some more. How is this stuff inline with the questioning?
because FETs are never right and REers are never [within reason] wrong.