Unanswered FE questions

Something else to consider: at sunrise, clouds are clearly illuminated from the east, before the surface of the earth receives direct sunlight. This is because the sun is shining over the horizon at an indirect angle, as such:


A spotlight that was shining "down" onto the Earth, such as the one in the FE model, would actually cause the land to be illuminated before the clouds overhead, because spotlights create a cone of light that expands as it shines downwards. This is easily observed by standing near a spotlight in the street that is pointing straight down. The light would project a cone, like so:


Raise your hand directly above your head and it will be out of direct light, while your feet will be illuminated. This phenomenon does not occur on Earth. That is - a cloud is never outside of direct sunlight while the ground below is in direct sunlight.

1. The sun is too small to have fusion that had to have lasted for the past 4.5 billion years.

2. Gravity is the 'force' containing the enormous pressure in stars. Without it stars would not form and existing ones would supernova.

3. The sun's radiation, as measured in Spectroscopy, is way too high to be that close (3,000 miles) without the Earth being uninhabitable.

4. The sun would appear to be an oval from an angle if it were in fact flat. Fusion can't take place in a flat star. If not flat (make up your minds), why does it act like a spotlight?

5. The sun would have to accelerate exponentially to appear to set from one view point yet other view points on the globe would contradict this view.

6. As the distance of the sun gets larger, the angle of sight for the sun decreases asymptotically to zero degrees. Since the human eye is not absolutely perfect, we will be overly generous in our experiment and say that a one degree angle over this vast difference wouldn't be seen. Suppose we also generously let the suns distance reach its maximum of the diameter of the Earth continuing to favor your side. 24,900 miles long 3,000 miles high makes the angle to see the sun as 6.86999 degrees. This would make the sun seem to approach the horizon but not get close enough to mistake it for setting. Keep in mind, that this also used a distance much greater than your theory allows with timezones.

Oog the caveman gave this point:

7.Illuminated clouds appear before sunrise over the curvature of the Earth.

Nacrberry we want the right answers.  We arnt looking for the made up answers.  

A message to all:
Please refrain from regressing in your behavior. It makes serious topics harder to discuss.

Quote from: L0gic on April 25, 2007, 04:41:02 PM

1. The sun is too small to have fusion that had to have lasted for the past 4.5 billion years.

*answered*

Quote from: L0gic on April 25, 2007, 04:41:02 PM

2. Gravity is the 'force' containing the enormous pressure in stars. Without it stars would not form and existing ones would supernova.

opinion.

Quote from: L0gic on April 25, 2007, 04:41:02 PM

3. The sun's radiation, as measured in Spectroscopy, is way too high to be that close (3,000 miles) without the Earth being uninhabitable.

Why?

Quote from: L0gic on April 25, 2007, 04:41:02 PM

4. The sun would appear to be an oval from an angle if it were in fact flat. Fusion can't take place in a flat star. If not flat (make up your minds), why does it act like a spotlight?

*answered*

Quote from: L0gic on April 25, 2007, 04:41:02 PM

5. The sun would have to accelerate exponentially to appear to set from one view point yet other view points on the globe would contradict this view.

Explain.

Quote from: L0gic on April 25, 2007, 04:41:02 PM

6. As the distance of the sun gets larger, the angle of sight for the sun decreases asymptotically to zero degrees. Since the human eye is not absolutely perfect, we will be overly generous in our experiment and say that a one degree angle over this vast difference wouldn't be seen. Suppose we also generously let the suns distance reach its maximum of the diameter of the Earth continuing to favor your side. 24,900 miles long 3,000 miles high makes the angle to see the sun as 6.86999 degrees. This would make the sun seem to approach the horizon but not get close enough to mistake it for setting. Keep in mind, that this also used a distance much greater than your theory allows with timezones.

*answered*

Quote from: L0gic on April 25, 2007, 04:41:02 PM

Oog the caveman gave this point:

7.Illuminated clouds appear before sunrise over the curvature of the Earth.

This is the same answer as number 6. (*answered*)

The same horizon illusion due to the earths acceleration also explains the cloud effect.

Quote from: L0gic on April 25, 2007, 04:51:30 PM

A message to all:
Please refrain from regressing in your behavior. It makes serious topics harder to discuss.

(I think he's talking to you sokurle)

The same horizon illusion due to the earths acceleration also explains the cloud effect.

Here is a point I posted in another thread, which might also be a good point to discuss:

There is a major flaw in your argument which I would like to point out, and here seems a perfectly good place to discuss it.

You claim (as I read in your FAQ) that the earth does not have a gravitational pull (and therefore all downward force otherwise explianed by gravity is caused by an unexplained and perpetual upward movement), and that the stars and other celestial bodies DO have a gravitational pull. The ludicrous nature of this argument aside, how do you explain the lateral gravitational pull of material taken from the earth?

For example, I set up a torsion balance, remove a rock from the eath and use it to demonstrate gravitational pull. The rock (removed from the earth - therefore a material that according to your theory should have no gravitational pull whatsoever), has pulled my torsion balance towards itself. The only logical explanation for this is gravity. If I were to accept your theory that gravity is caused by upward motion, then what force is acting horizontally? Clearly no downward motion. Perhaps a sidewards motion? No, because my torsion balance will move either way towards a rock (taking the shortest path). Therefore, this movement cannot be explained by any movement of the supposedly flat earth. If gravity is the only reasonable explanation for this effect, and the earth consists largely of this material, therefore the earth has gravitational pull. If the earth has gravitational pull, it would have pulled itself into a round shape by now. Therefore, a flat earth cannot exist.

I have conducted it.

If a subatomic particle is responsible for gravity, I can show you my major problem with that. Lets say the world is round and all celestial bodies orbit each other due to a force called gravity. Well the earth and sun send gravitons back and forth that will cause a certain amount of attraction towards one another dependent on the quantity of gravitons and in what direction they came from or what message they might contain.

Heres my problem: There is a potential energy in the sun and earth due to their distance. Meaning that they have the energy to fall to each other and collide with massive energy. Now if a graviton exists, what if something interferes with its path or message? What if the sun is told to be attracted to the earth in a different direction? That would violate the whole principals of Newtonian physics. It would mean, by creating gravitons, you could create energy from nothing.

This is due to the fact that the idea of gravitons implies that the sun has the ability to accelerate itself in any direction. All it is doing is waiting to find out what vector of acceleration to apply. This is inconsistent with many theories. The force of attraction on the sun, must be a direct cause of the earth and visa versa.

Additionally, gravity is a pulling force. In physics, a very basic lesson is there is no such thing as a pulling force, only a pushing one. These can be complicated, so as to seem like a pulling force when it is actually a series of pushing ones. This makes me inclined to believe in gravity (and magnetic and electric) forces that are a series of pushing ones. But that is off topic. If you want to know more I will explain elsewhere.