Sinking Ship experiment Results

  • 487 Replies
  • 88905 Views
Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #30 on: August 17, 2008, 02:18:40 AM »
Yup.  If anyone ever goes to Southern California, visit Huntington Beach.  Catalina can be seen..about 28 miles away.  No matter how powerful the gear is that you use, you can't see Avalon Harbor.  Because it is below the horizon.

Yes, because the light coming from it bends upwards.

If he earth was flat there would be no need for light to bend. It would just be a straight shot.

Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #31 on: August 17, 2008, 02:21:27 AM »
The bending light light theory  (Bedford Levels Experiment) purportedly shows that in practice light curves upward from the ground at about 6 inches per mile traveled. Normally you would not notice this effect. Over long distances, light rays passing through the atmosphere bend gradually away from the earth and up into the sky, giving the appearance of a "horizon" beyond which objects are no longer visible.

So the theory goes that when looking down at the flat Earth we see what appears to be a round Earth because the light is being bent to make it appear that way.

This may actually be true. It doesn't matter because it has a negligible difference when you're looking at the earth from a satellite in geostationary orbit. GEOS satellites are around 22,000 to 25,000 miles above the Earth. The Earth's atmosphere is only about 25 miles thick. If light bends 6 inches for every mile that means the light passing from the earth to my eye will bend about 12.5 feet. I don't care which way the light is bending, 12.5 feet of offset on a 22,000 mile line of sight is going to do nothing.

Sure they say, but that is assuming you are looking straight down onto the Earth. At the edges, you are looking through more atmosphere.

Fine. So let's assume the atmosphere was 8,000 miles thick. That's the equivalent of the entire planet being made of atmosphere and this would still only calculate out to just under a mile (4,000 feet) of offset.
 
The wheels of science grind slow, but they grind exceeding fine.
 


*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #32 on: August 17, 2008, 02:40:20 AM »
If he earth was flat there would be no need for light to bend. It would just be a straight shot.

Except that the observations tell us otherwise.

My hypothesis regarding the Electromagnetic Accelerator is that light bends upwards in a parabolic arc, which over short distances for horizontal light will very closely resemble the expected secant curve in RET.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #33 on: August 17, 2008, 02:42:05 AM »
If he earth was flat there would be no need for light to bend. It would just be a straight shot.

Except that the observations tell us otherwise.

My hypothesis regarding the Electromagnetic Accelerator is that light bends upwards in a parabolic arc, which over short distances for horizontal light will very closely resemble the expected secant curve in RET.
the only problem here is that there is no observational evidence to support this
Only 2 things are infinite the universe and human stupidity, but I am not sure about the former.

Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #34 on: August 17, 2008, 02:48:04 AM »
Verticle light does a 180?

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #35 on: August 17, 2008, 02:50:29 AM »
the only problem here is that there is no observational evidence to support this

Yes there is.

Verticle light does a 180?

Vertical light is unaffected by the EA. Any light coming downwards that is almost, but not quite vertical, will indeed turn around and go back the other way.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #36 on: August 17, 2008, 02:55:27 AM »
the only problem here is that there is no observational evidence to support this

Yes there is.

Verticle light does a 180?

Vertical light is unaffected by the EA. Any light coming downwards that is almost, but not quite vertical, will indeed turn around and go back the other way.
Why is it seamless? if there are area that we can not see should they not be black areas? of an empty gap with sky in it or even water from a different part of the ocean
Only 2 things are infinite the universe and human stupidity, but I am not sure about the former.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #37 on: August 17, 2008, 02:56:33 AM »
Why is it seamless? if there are area that we can not see should they not be black areas? of an empty gap with sky in it or even water from a different part of the ocean

That is like asking why a Round Earth is seamless since we can't see the other side of it.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #38 on: August 17, 2008, 02:57:46 AM »
Why is it seamless? if there are area that we can not see should they not be black areas? of an empty gap with sky in it or even water from a different part of the ocean

That is like asking why a Round Earth is seamless since we can't see the other side of it.
???

It is seamless beacause the rest of the ship is below the horizon. there was not a chunk of light taken out of it
Only 2 things are infinite the universe and human stupidity, but I am not sure about the former.

Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #39 on: August 17, 2008, 03:03:52 AM »
I'm confused..possibly in syntax.  As far as I am able to tell, an EA is a construct.  where did it come from before we built it?

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #40 on: August 17, 2008, 03:10:15 AM »
That is like asking why a Round Earth is seamless since we can't see the other side of it.
???

It is seamless beacause the rest of the ship is below the horizon. there was not a chunk of light taken out of it

Chunks of light are not being taken out of anything in either model.

I'm confused..possibly in syntax.  As far as I am able to tell, an EA is a construct.  where did it come from before we built it?

It was created to explain observations such as those documented in this thread.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #41 on: August 17, 2008, 03:19:22 AM »
For the ones having FE arguing as hobby, the more complicated far-fetched explanations are preffered before the simpler one.

If the closer simpler answer would be chosen, it wouldn't be fun or time consuming.
Ooompa ooompa

Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #42 on: August 17, 2008, 03:27:19 AM »
By the way, I've read your post about EA...have you had it checked out by a nuteral party yet, or is it still a work in progress?

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #43 on: August 17, 2008, 04:07:51 AM »
By the way, I've read your post about EA...have you had it checked out by a nuteral party yet, or is it still a work in progress?

It's still very much a work in progress.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #44 on: August 17, 2008, 04:34:11 AM »
By the way, I've read your post about EA...have you had it checked out by a nuteral party yet, or is it still a work in progress?

There have been numerous experiments that rely on the ability for light to move in a straight line (no deflection by this concept of EA), that have failed to detect this effect.

Here is a link to just one of them...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIGO

The shortest arm of this detector is 2.5 km (over one mile), so this effect should have been noticeable.  As the article points out, a beam of light is split, makes 75 trips through the 4 km of the apparatus and then are recombined.

Since this effect is supposed to be measurable over a much shorter distance than the 300 km that each segment of this beam of light travels, I would say that this "EA effect" does not exist.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #45 on: August 17, 2008, 04:39:09 AM »
There have been numerous experiments that rely on the ability for light to move in a straight line (no deflection by this concept of EA), that have failed to detect this effect.

Here is a link to just one of them...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIGO

The shortest arm of this detector is 2.5 km (over one mile), so this effect should have been noticeable.  As the article points out, a beam of light is split, makes 75 trips through the 4 km of the apparatus and then are recombined.

Since this effect is supposed to be measurable over a much shorter distance than the 300 km that each segment of this beam of light travels, I would say that this "EA effect" does not exist.

Of course, that structure would have been built assuming the surface on which it stands is curved.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #46 on: August 17, 2008, 04:45:05 AM »
Its funny how the FE'ers now quote Steves EA theory as if its fact when its something he literally thought of of a few days ago and no science or experimentation has been done to verify it.
yet so many FE'ers use it as a refrence/

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #47 on: August 17, 2008, 04:48:12 AM »
Its funny how the FE'ers now quote Steves EA theory as if its fact when its something he literally thought of of a few days ago and no science or experimentation has been done to verify it.
yet so many FE'ers use it as a refrence/

And you say you know for a fact that the Earth is round. I think we're even.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #48 on: August 17, 2008, 04:51:44 AM »
Its funny how the FE'ers now quote Steves EA theory as if its fact when its something he literally thought of of a few days ago and no science or experimentation has been done to verify it.
yet so many FE'ers use it as a refrence/

And you say you know for a fact that the Earth is round. I think we're even.

Earth's spherical shape has been proven but when ever you FE'ers see evidence of a round Earth you just dismiss it all as a conspiracy without any proof what so ever of a conpiracy.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #49 on: August 17, 2008, 04:55:59 AM »
Earth's spherical shape has been proven

Repeating it won't make it true.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #50 on: August 17, 2008, 04:57:59 AM »
Of course, that structure would have been built assuming the surface on which it stands is curved.

The structure being built to account for the curved shape of the surface of the Earth is easy.  That is simple engineering.

How do you make the experiment compensate for "bendy" light?

How do you make light being continually deflected in a constant direction repeatedly bounce between two fixed points?  The amount of deflection would be in the order of thousands of feet over the path of 300 km travel.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #51 on: August 17, 2008, 04:59:47 AM »
The structure being built to account for the curved shape of the surface of the Earth is easy.  That is simple engineering.

How do you make the experiment compensate for "bendy" light?

How do you make light being continually deflected in a constant direction repeatedly bounce between two fixed points?  The amount of deflection would be in the order of thousands of feet over the path of 300 km travel.

If the Earth's curvature has been accounted for and the Earth is really flat, then the structure itself will be in the shape of a secant curve with upwards concavity. The parabolic path the light takes will be such a close approximation to this curve that any discrepancy will be immeasurable.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #52 on: August 17, 2008, 05:57:00 AM »
Its funny how the FE'ers now quote Steves EA theory as if its fact when its something he literally thought of of a few days ago and no science or experimentation has been done to verify it.
yet so many FE'ers use it as a refrence/

There is another theory to explain the phenomena: the earth is spherical.

But that one is more boring...
;)
« Last Edit: August 17, 2008, 06:19:40 AM by Josef »
Ooompa ooompa

Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #53 on: August 17, 2008, 06:11:46 AM »
If the Earth's curvature has been accounted for and the Earth is really flat, then the structure itself will be in the shape of a secant curve with upwards concavity. The parabolic path the light takes will be such a close approximation to this curve that any discrepancy will be immeasurable.

But this doesn't account for being able to recombine two curved light sources into a single coherent light source.  Because the two apparatus are offset by 90°, you would see a phase difference.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #54 on: August 17, 2008, 06:19:27 AM »
But this doesn't account for being able to recombine two curved light sources into a single coherent light source.  Because the two apparatus are offset by 90°, you would see a phase difference.

Not if the curvature is only vertical.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #55 on: August 17, 2008, 06:34:18 AM »
Have we come to the conclusion that the FE explanation to the outcome of this experiment is that light is being bent?

Can someone explain in very simple terms how?

Add to FAQ even?
Ooompa ooompa

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #56 on: August 17, 2008, 06:50:17 AM »
Have we come to the conclusion that the FE explanation to the outcome of this experiment is that light is being bent?

Can someone explain in very simple terms how?

Add to FAQ even?

Dark energy. It affects light in a different way to ordinary matter, accelerating it faster. In addition, light is not shielded from it by the Earth in the same way that matter is.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #57 on: August 17, 2008, 06:58:04 AM »
Have we come to the conclusion that the FE explanation to the outcome of this experiment is that light is being bent?

That is their assertion, but it is wrong.

Even a simple set-up, something that will fit on a table, would demonstrate the presence of "bendy" light.



As you rotated the experiment in the vertical axis, the interference pattern would be changed by the "bend" of the light waves.  Since this is not observed, there is no bend in light waves.

Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #58 on: August 17, 2008, 06:58:56 AM »
Have we come to the conclusion that the FE explanation to the outcome of this experiment is that light is being bent?

Can someone explain in very simple terms how?

Add to FAQ even?

Dark energy. It affects light in a different way to ordinary matter, accelerating it faster. In addition, light is not shielded from it by the Earth in the same way that matter is.

Ok. Got it.
[/quote]
Ooompa ooompa

*

sokarul

  • 18799
  • Extra Racist
Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« Reply #59 on: August 17, 2008, 08:25:36 AM »
To end that stupid bending light theory I made a crappy ms paint.


As you can see, panel 3 would disappear followed by 2 and then 1.  This would lead a boat to disappear sail first. This is not observed in the pictures. 
So give up on the stupid bending light theory already. 

Thank you dyno for taking it upon yourself to do an experiment.
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.