Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light

  • 23 Replies
  • 3249 Views
?

dyno

  • 562
Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« on: September 02, 2008, 09:29:04 PM »
How do the various transmitters compensate for bendy light since it affects all EM radiation.

Since the path of waves is not deflected in a linear fashion towers would have to be situated quite close together.

How do single units supply sufficient coverage to wide areas with the inherent losses associated with beam deflection?


Re: Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« Reply #1 on: September 02, 2008, 09:30:06 PM »
How do the various transmitters compensate for bendy light since it affects all EM radiation.

Since the path of waves is not deflected in a linear fashion towers would have to be situated quite close together.

How do single units supply sufficient coverage to wide areas with the inherent losses associated with beam deflection?


i give up - how?
Let's agree to respect each others views, no matter how wrong yours may be.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« Reply #2 on: September 02, 2008, 11:44:33 PM »
This is like asking how the transmitters can work on a Round Earth, since its surface would curve away from the straight paths of light rays.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

PeopleOnBehalfOfLogic

  • 130
  • RE'er (for now)
Re: Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« Reply #3 on: September 03, 2008, 01:21:46 AM »
I know almost nothing about broadcast towers but I assume that since they are high up that compensates for the curve of the earth (which is extremely shallow). Its kinda like if you are higher up the horizon recedes.
Just noticed my name is actually pretty insulting. Apologies.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« Reply #4 on: September 03, 2008, 11:29:27 PM »
I know almost nothing about broadcast towers but I assume that since they are high up that compensates for the curve of the earth (which is extremely shallow). Its kinda like if you are higher up the horizon recedes.

Same thing happens to compensate for the bending of the light, then.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

dyno

  • 562
Re: Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« Reply #5 on: September 03, 2008, 11:37:47 PM »
With the whole subject I was thinking about all forms of broadcast. Not just towers. The stratellites etc. Wouldn't the beams would have significant divergence from their intended target.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« Reply #6 on: September 04, 2008, 12:58:49 AM »
With the whole subject I was thinking about all forms of broadcast. Not just towers. The stratellites etc. Wouldn't the beams would have significant divergence from their intended target.

No more than the effect of a Round Earth curving away from the radiation would be. In fact, the effect of the curvature of a Round Earth is more severe over long distances than that of light bending on a Flat Earth.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

Re: Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« Reply #7 on: September 04, 2008, 01:10:21 AM »
No more than the effect of a Round Earth curving away from the radiation would be. In fact, the effect of the curvature of a Round Earth is more severe over long distances than that of light bending on a Flat Earth.

They need to be equal otherwise bendy light wouldn't be equivalent to RE observations.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17738
Re: Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« Reply #8 on: September 04, 2008, 01:52:19 AM »
Quote
They need to be equal otherwise bendy light wouldn't be equivalent to RE observations.

What observations? You guys keep telling us that there are observations, but we never see any.  ???

Re: Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« Reply #9 on: September 04, 2008, 02:02:14 AM »
What observations? You guys keep telling us that there are observations, but we never see any.  ???

See this thread...

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=22317.0

The pictures in that thread support either the concept of a RE or the concept of bendy light that is equivalent to it.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« Reply #10 on: September 04, 2008, 02:05:02 AM »
No more than the effect of a Round Earth curving away from the radiation would be. In fact, the effect of the curvature of a Round Earth is more severe over long distances than that of light bending on a Flat Earth.

They need to be equal otherwise bendy light wouldn't be equivalent to RE observations.

They are very close to equal over short distances (that is, less than a thousand kilometres or so) where the light is horizontal.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17738
Re: Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« Reply #11 on: September 04, 2008, 02:18:26 AM »
What observations? You guys keep telling us that there are observations, but we never see any.  ???

See this thread...

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=22317.0

The pictures in that thread support either the concept of a RE or the concept of bendy light that is equivalent to it.

Dyno's images are exactly consistent with what Samuel Birley Rowbotham tells us we should experience.

From the chapter Perspective on the Sea from Earth Not a Globe we read the following:

"We have now to consider a very important modification of this phenomenon, namely, that whereas in the several instances illustrated by diagrams Nos. 71 to 84 inclusive, when the lower parts of the objects have entered the vanishing point, and thus disappeared to the naked eye, a telescope of considerable power will restore them to view; but in the case of a ship's hull at sea a telescope fails to restore it, however powerful it may be."

Samuel Birley Rowbotham tells us directly that a telescope will not be able to restore the hull on a sea due to the waves and swells. Dyno used his telescope to look at the sea, so his being unable to restore the hull to any significant degree is exactly what Samuel Birley Rowbotham predicts.

The Winship and Teed experiments which restored the hulls of ships when viewed through a telescope were conducted on calm bodies of water such as lakes: http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/cc/cc21.htm

Re: Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« Reply #12 on: September 04, 2008, 04:54:22 AM »
They are very close to equal over short distances (that is, less than a thousand kilometres or so) where the light is horizontal.

Then why can't I see all of the hull of a ship that is "only" 14 nautical miles away?  It isn't swell or seas because I can observe the height of those and it doesn't account for the loss.  If light is going to bend, it has to have bent tens of feet over that distance.

Re: Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« Reply #13 on: September 04, 2008, 04:58:47 AM »
The Winship and Teed experiments which restored the hulls of ships when viewed through a telescope were conducted on calm bodies of water such as lakes: http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/cc/cc21.htm

Winship made his observations of ships at sea.  (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=22317.msg464129#msg464129 or http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=22317.msg464992#msg464992)

How was he able to "bring back the hull" when Rowbotham wasn't?

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« Reply #14 on: September 04, 2008, 05:36:39 AM »
They are very close to equal over short distances (that is, less than a thousand kilometres or so) where the light is horizontal.

Then why can't I see all of the hull of a ship that is "only" 14 nautical miles away?  It isn't swell or seas because I can observe the height of those and it doesn't account for the loss.  If light is going to bend, it has to have bent tens of feet over that distance.

Because the effect of the EA is nearly the same as what would happen on a RE, perhaps?
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

Re: Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« Reply #15 on: September 04, 2008, 06:20:35 AM »
Because the effect of the EA is nearly the same as what would happen on a RE, perhaps?

But that require dismissing all of the Rowbotham observations that were quoted above.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« Reply #16 on: September 04, 2008, 08:15:53 AM »
But that require dismissing all of the Rowbotham observations that were quoted above.

Why can't Rowbotham have been wrong?
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 41860
Re: Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« Reply #17 on: September 04, 2008, 08:28:14 AM »
But that require dismissing all of the Rowbotham observations that were quoted above.

Why can't Rowbotham have been wrong?

Blasphemy!!  :o
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.

Re: Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« Reply #18 on: September 04, 2008, 08:45:53 AM »
Why can't Rowbotham have been wrong?

But if he was wrong, that brings us down to proving that either light bends, or the observations are caused by RE.  That makes the list of tests significantly shorter.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« Reply #19 on: September 04, 2008, 08:50:43 AM »
But if he was wrong, that brings us down to proving that either light bends, or the observations are caused by RE.  That makes the list of tests significantly shorter.

Actually, it makes it longer. We don't know whether or not he was wrong, therefore we have three possible theories, not two.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

Re: Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« Reply #20 on: September 04, 2008, 09:04:51 AM »
Actually, it makes it longer. We don't know whether or not he was wrong, therefore we have three possible theories, not two.

Well, we can link EA and RE for these observations against Rowbotham.  If Rowbotham is right, then the observations that were made show that both EA and RE are wrong.  If we believe the observations that show the disappearance of the hull, then Rowbotham would be wrong.  We can eliminate one of the two options.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« Reply #21 on: September 04, 2008, 09:05:58 AM »
Well, we can link EA and RE for these observations against Rowbotham.  If Rowbotham is right, then the observations that were made show that both EA and RE are wrong.  If we believe the observations that show the disappearance of the hull, then Rowbotham would be wrong.  We can eliminate one of the two options.

Obviously.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

dyno

  • 562
Re: Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« Reply #22 on: September 04, 2008, 05:47:23 PM »
What observations? You guys keep telling us that there are observations, but we never see any.  ???

See this thread...

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=22317.0

The pictures in that thread support either the concept of a RE or the concept of bendy light that is equivalent to it.

Dyno's images are exactly consistent with what Samuel Birley Rowbotham tells us we should experience.

From the chapter Perspective on the Sea from Earth Not a Globe we read the following:

"We have now to consider a very important modification of this phenomenon, namely, that whereas in the several instances illustrated by diagrams Nos. 71 to 84 inclusive, when the lower parts of the objects have entered the vanishing point, and thus disappeared to the naked eye, a telescope of considerable power will restore them to view; but in the case of a ship's hull at sea a telescope fails to restore it, however powerful it may be."

Samuel Birley Rowbotham tells us directly that a telescope will not be able to restore the hull on a sea due to the waves and swells. Dyno used his telescope to look at the sea, so his being unable to restore the hull to any significant degree is exactly what Samuel Birley Rowbotham predicts.

The Winship and Teed experiments which restored the hulls of ships when viewed through a telescope were conducted on calm bodies of water such as lakes: http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/cc/cc21.htm


What more is there to restore in my images?

You can see the waterline in the elevated shots. Do you want to see below the water? The waterline is the most you can see? What are you talking about? DO you think things through before you post them?

Re: Broadcast towers, Radio, TV etc compensate for bendy light
« Reply #23 on: September 08, 2008, 04:46:39 AM »
What more is there to restore in my images?

There isn't anything else.  You can clearly see the wetted area of the hull at the waterline.


Quote
You can see the waterline in the elevated shots. Do you want to see below the water? The waterline is the most you can see? What are you talking about? DO you think things through before you post them?

No they don't.  That is part of the point.  If they actually thought about things, it would make it difficult to believe.  Of course, very few of them believe and are just spewing out shit, so you can treat most of it as such.