Sunrise/Sunsets.. mm..

  • 35 Replies
  • 7719 Views
?

lived_eht_asan

  • 1057
  • +0/-0
Re: Sunrise/Sunsets.. mm..
« Reply #30 on: June 01, 2008, 09:57:22 PM »
Also, the flat earth model has some complicated refraction effects.  Once you measure the Earth's surface directly and find it to be flat, that necessitates a deeper understanding of the true celestial world above us.

The celestial spheres are likely not vacuum, but a lumiferous aether which refracts at a higher index rate proportional to the degree of angle one views the sun and other objects.

As one moves away from the sun, for example, it will lower in apparent position exactly proportional to the distance one moves away.  This makes distance calculations rather difficult. 3000 miles is a good approximation, however.


?

d_maj7th

  • 4
  • +0/-0
Re: Sunrise/Sunsets.. mm..
« Reply #31 on: June 23, 2008, 12:39:27 AM »
Hi all, I'm new here and have found this place rather fun.

I've read the original text and this post on sunrise/sunset, and will like to pose this question:

Perspectives can explain the ascending/descending position of the sun. However, perspectives also affect perceived size. If it was because of perspectives, then the sun would be a tiny dot at sunrise/sunset (when in real life we can see it's not):



How will FE explain this?

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 18029
  • +2/-4
Re: Sunrise/Sunsets.. mm..
« Reply #32 on: June 23, 2008, 12:52:49 AM »
Quote
How will FE explain this?

Please read Chapter 10 of Earth Not a Globe. How the sun maintains its angular size of .5 degrees or 30 arc minutes over the course of the day was described over 150 years ago by the late Dr. Samuel Birley Rowbotham. It's a known magnification effect. As the sun recedes and shrinks its magnification is caused by the intense rays of light passing through the strata of the atmosphere.

From Chapter 10 of Earth Not a Globe we read:

    "IT is well known that when a light of any kind shines through a dense medium it appears larger, or rather gives a greater magnification of its image at a given distance than when it is seen through a lighter medium. This is more remarkable when the medium holds aqueous particles or vapour in solution, as in a damp or foggy atmosphere. Anyone may be satisfied of this by standing within a few yards of an ordinary street lamp, and noticing the size of the flame; on going away to many times the distance, the light upon the atmosphere will appear considerably larger. This phenomenon may be noticed, to a greater or less degree, at all times; but when the air is moist and vapoury it is more intense. It is evident that at sunrise, and at sunset, the sun's light must shine through a greater length of atmospheric air than at mid-day; besides which, the air near the earth is both more dense, and holds more watery particles in solution, than the higher strata through which the sun shines at noonday; and hence the light must be dilated or magnified, as well as modified in colour."

The next time you observe the sunset notice how the sun is much hazier, diluted, and less intense than it is overhead at noonday. This is a telltale sign that its rays are passing through a thick atmosphere, much like the light rays from a distant street lamp.

If you've ever seen a city at night you would know that distant light sources appear magnified from afar because they are shining though a dense medium. The farther you get from the source the more magnified they appear. As you move towards the source the magnified lights shrink in appearance. As you move away the lights grow in diameter again.

For example, here is a picture of an average bustling city at night. You will immediately notice upon looking at the image that the distant lights in the scene appear magnified and intense, particularly the white ones in the upper left of the image. You should note that most of the the orange lights in the background are about as big as the orange lights in the foreground. This is entirely contradictory to what one would expect. The background lights are much farther away and the distant bulbs are all smaller than a single pixel of the screen. The orange lights maintaining their size is a great example of the magnification effect of the atmosphere balancing out the natural shrinking to perspective.

As an analogy for the enlarging of the sun at sunset, lets imagine that we are in a dark room with a flashlight. We shine the light upon the wall, creating a distinct circle of light. If we walk backwards and recede away from the wall the spot of light grows in diameter. When we walk towards the wall the spot of light becomes smaller again. The same effect happens with the distant sun at sunset. Instead of a solid surface, however, the rays of light are shining upon the semi-transparent fog of the atmosphere between the observer and the sun. The natural shrinking of the sun due to perspective is counteracted by the enlarging effect of its light upon the horizontal strata of the atmosphere. This is how the sun's diameter is maintained throughout the day.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2008, 01:00:22 AM by Tom Bishop »

?

d_maj7th

  • 4
  • +0/-0
Re: Sunrise/Sunsets.. mm..
« Reply #33 on: June 23, 2008, 01:37:01 AM »
Thanks for the reply. I've looked up sunrise photos and found many of them still very sharp with a defined curve, e.g. these

http://www.jmcwd.com/redirected-images/sunrise-autumn-trees.jpg
http://www.freefoto.com/images/45/01/45_01_29---Sunrise_web.jpg

Even when you hold a torch light against a solid wall and walk back a few meters, the curve gets significantly more blurry. We're talking thin air instead of the wall, and thousands of miles instead of a few meters. I'm curious how the sun outline is still that sharp in those photos.

*

Moon squirter

  • 1405
  • +0/-0
  • Ding dong!
Re: Sunrise/Sunsets.. mm..
« Reply #34 on: June 25, 2008, 05:01:03 AM »
For example, here is a picture of an average bustling city at night. You will immediately notice upon looking at the image that the distant lights in the scene appear magnified and intense, particularly the white ones in the upper left of the image. You should note that most of the the orange lights in the background are about as big as the orange lights in the foreground. This is entirely contradictory to what one would expect. The background lights are much farther away and the distant bulbs are all smaller than a single pixel of the screen. The orange lights maintaining their size is a great example of the magnification effect of the atmosphere balancing out the natural shrinking to perspective.

Or.... Could it be (and it's a long shot) that the camera/lens/file cannot distinguish the size of objects once they go beyond the limits of resolution?

"The orange lights maintaining their size is a great example of" ... the limits of resolution and lens flare !!

Another great piece of FE misdirection.


I haven't performed it and I've never claimed to. I've have trouble being in two places at the same time.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 43251
  • +10/-10
Re: Sunrise/Sunsets.. mm..
« Reply #35 on: June 25, 2008, 05:11:07 AM »
For example, here is a picture of an average bustling city at night. You will immediately notice upon looking at the image that the distant lights in the scene appear magnified and intense, particularly the white ones in the upper left of the image. You should note that most of the the orange lights in the background are about as big as the orange lights in the foreground. This is entirely contradictory to what one would expect. The background lights are much farther away and the distant bulbs are all smaller than a single pixel of the screen. The orange lights maintaining their size is a great example of the magnification effect of the atmosphere balancing out the natural shrinking to perspective.

Or.... Could it be (and it's a long shot) that the camera/lens/file cannot distinguish the size of objects once they go beyond the limits of resolution?

"The orange lights maintaining their size is a great example of" ... the limits of resolution and lens flare !!

Another great piece of FE misdirection.

There is also the phenomenon of burn-in (very common in long exposure photography).
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.