The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Q&A => Topic started by: confroom on January 30, 2007, 01:04:46 PM
-
Why do all the other planets look round when I have seen them through a telescope?
-
Because the other planets are round.
-
Why do all the other planets look round when I have seen them through a telescope?
Really? I thought a telescope was only capable of two-dimensional representations ...
-
Because the other planets are round.
Why would the other planets be round and the earth be flat.
Makes no sense to me.
-
Earth is not a planet.
-
Earth is not a planet.
So, what is it? A cow? An umbrella? A big ball of life floating about?
-
It is the center of the universe. And the only place we know of that supports life.
-
Earth is not a planet.
So, what is it? A cow? An umbrella? A big ball of life floating about?
A place full of idiots
-
Why do all the other planets look round when I have seen them through a telescope?
Really? I thought a telescope was only capable of two-dimensional representations ...
No...a telescope creates a magnified picture of what we are seeing.
-
Why do all the other planets look round when I have seen them through a telescope?
Really? I thought a telescope was only capable of two-dimensional representations ...
No...a telescope creates a magnified picture of what we are seeing.
Which is still a 2D representation.
-
Which is still a 2D representation.
Wrong.
-
Why don't you start making your posts more useful instead of just being vague, Tom?
How am I wrong? I'm using your arguments.
When I look into a telescope, because of it fitting one eyepiece, I only have one vantage point of the object. Therefore it's a 2D representation, depite a slight curved shadow.
Plus, I only see two dimensions: Height and Width. I see no "depth" with the exception of said shadow, but even you FE's have made it seem like an illusion.
-
Using just your eyes, without a telescope, light is being projected onto the back of your retina. Wouldn't you consider that to be a "2D image" too? The image your retina sees only has a hight and width after all.
By using your logic it's impossible to see in three dimensions.
-
Using just your eyes, without a telescope, light is being projected onto the back of your retina. Wouldn't you consider that to be a "2D image" too? The image your retina sees only has a hight and width after all.
By using your logic it's impossible to see in three dimensions.
Uh, it is ...
-
I agree with BOG, it is impossible to see 3 dimensions.
But he forgot to add a vital point.
We have two eyes, which helps see depth.
Thats why in my telescope model, I clearly mentioned a single, not dual, eye piece.
-
Uh, it is ...
Are you telling me that it's impossible to see in three dimensions?
I agree with BOG, it is impossible to see 3 dimensions.
But he forgot to add a vita point.
We have two eyes, which helps see depth.
Thats why in my telescope model, I clearly mentioned a single, not dual, eye piece.
That's funny. I'm still able to see objects in three dimensions with one eye closed.
-
Uh, it is ...
Are you telling me that it's impossible to see in three dimensions?
Somewhat; it is impossible to see a three-dimensional object via a two-dimensional representation.
Draw a cube on a piece of paper. Does it have three dimensions or two dimensions?
Three-dimensional sight is all about perspective and light. I once "ran down" a hallway that didn't exist. It was a painting, and I was all (http://forums.shatteredenigma.com/images/smiles/dizzy.gif) on the floor.
-
Uh, it is ...
Are you telling me that it's impossible to see in three dimensions?
I agree with BOG, it is impossible to see 3 dimensions.
But he forgot to add a vita point.
We have two eyes, which helps see depth.
Thats why in my telescope model, I clearly mentioned a single, not dual, eye piece.
That's funny. I'm still able to see objects in three dimensions with one eye closed.
If someone throws a ball at you when you have your eye closed, it'll hit you, for you have minute depth perception. Trust me, it hit me (ironically) in the eye.
-
all matter is 3d.... alllllllll of it lol
-
Uh, it is ...
Are you telling me that it's impossible to see in three dimensions?
Somewhat; it is impossible to see a three-dimensional object via a two-dimensional representation.
Draw a cube on a piece of paper. Does it have three dimensions or two dimensions?
Three-dimensional sight is all about perspective and light. I once "ran down" a hallway that didn't exist. It was a painting, and I was all (http://forums.shatteredenigma.com/images/smiles/dizzy.gif) on the floor.
Wow, I'm going to have to actually AGREE with BOG on this.
wow...
-
Uh, it is ...
Are you telling me that it's impossible to see in three dimensions?
Somewhat; it is impossible to see a three-dimensional object via a two-dimensional representation.
Draw a cube on a piece of paper. Does it have three dimensions or two dimensions?
Three-dimensional sight is all about perspective and light. I once "ran down" a hallway that didn't exist. It was a painting, and I was all (http://forums.shatteredenigma.com/images/smiles/dizzy.gif) on the floor.
Wow, I'm going to have to actually AGREE with BOG on this.
wow...
And I still have no idea why my high school has a "fake" hallway anyway. Maybe they wanted it to look expensive (http://forums.shatteredenigma.com/images/smiles/laugh.gif).
-
And I am even more surprised that you fell for it.
-
And I am even more surprised that you fell for it.
Well, I was running away from someone ... it was the time for quick, irrational decisions.
Plus, I'm the only person that ever did it, too ... and people found that to be ironic, considering a) how often they told me that, and b) how much more intelligent they think I am.
-
Reason "B" was why I was surprised.
-
Reason "B" was why I was surprised.
(http://forums.shatteredenigma.com/images/smiles/dot.gif)
-
Uh, it is ...
Are you telling me that it's impossible to see in three dimensions?
I agree with BOG, it is impossible to see 3 dimensions.
But he forgot to add a vita point.
We have two eyes, which helps see depth.
Thats why in my telescope model, I clearly mentioned a single, not dual, eye piece.
That's funny. I'm still able to see objects in three dimensions with one eye closed.
That's impossible, and I can absolutely prove it, if you take the time to run 1 of 2 tests. test 1, get color glasses and look at one of those 3-d images. test 2, look at a good, professional hologram. with artificial 3-d objects, closing one eye ruins the image. In the real world, you have 2 eyes open most of the time, so when yo close one eye, your brain more or less makes up the rest. This is coming, of course, from me, who, ironically, can't see in 3-d anyhow...
-
Uh, it is ...
Are you telling me that it's impossible to see in three dimensions?
I agree with BOG, it is impossible to see 3 dimensions.
But he forgot to add a vita point.
We have two eyes, which helps see depth.
Thats why in my telescope model, I clearly mentioned a single, not dual, eye piece.
That's funny. I'm still able to see objects in three dimensions with one eye closed.
Seeing in three dimensions is not possible over about ten feet. After that, the left eye and the right eye percieve the same image, and the brain sees a 2D world. You can demonstrate this easily, sit in a rolling chair and stair at a nearby object. Now, start alternating closing of the left and right eye. You will see the image of the nearby object shift, from left to right. Now, start rolling backwards. After a certain distance, the object will appear the same with both eyes.
Dual eyepieces will help depth perception. To quantify this, perform the same experiment. You may need a rolling car and a friend instead of a chair.
-
Okay, so the planets look 2 dimensional through a telescope but we can observe them rotating on an axis. Logical conclusion is that they are spherical.
My question is this: If the Sun really worked the way you say it does here, then how can we even see the other planets? :roll:
-
Has anyone else noticed that RE'ers and FE'ers seem to have switched sides for a second?
-
Shhhhh...