In the beginning

Image saved for future references. Thanks so much.
Now, maybe I am the clumsiest guy ever, but I couldn't find a good thread about Sky mirrors, would you mind to link or smth? I'm really interested on reading about it.

It's a relatively new hypothesis of mine, and I haven't yet decided how best to express it. I'll post a thread about it when I do.

Appeal to ignorance.

The properties of light are pretty well documented, and verifyable first hand. I suspect it's called optics. Reflection, diffraction, refraction are all useful words too.

Only on small scales.

Nope, there's no get out clause here. On all scales. Before you try and invoke black holes and neutron stars again, I'll remind you we're not in the midst of a black hole or a neutron star.

Show me an experiment that measures the path of a light ray over a distance of a few kilometres with sufficient accuracy to distinguish between curvature of the Earth and curvature of light. The light ray itself must not be refracted at any point, nor must it be reflected, as there is no such thing as a perfect mirror and this could affect the outcome of the experiment.

Quote from: goldstein on October 15, 2008, 03:48:05 AM

Nope, there's no get out clause here. On all scales. Before you try and invoke black holes and neutron stars again, I'll remind you we're not in the midst of a black hole or a neutron star.

Show me an experiment that measures the path of a light ray over a distance of a few kilometres with sufficient accuracy to distinguish between curvature of the Earth and curvature of light. The light ray itself must not be refracted at any point, nor must it be reflected, as there is no such thing as a perfect mirror and this could affect the outcome of the experiment.

Sunset.

Quote from: Kira-SY on October 12, 2008, 01:12:19 PM

OH MY GOD xDDDDDDDDDDD

*coughs*

Well, seriously:

- Can you give a proof that the Earth is infinite and bisects the universe? OBJECTIVE PROOF, not your visual impressions.
- Can you give proof that ANY OTHER PLANET is unable to sustain life?

I have time, so feel free. But remember this word:

OBJECTIVE.

Do you have PROOF the earth is round?

i wish i was a physicist!!! but since i'm not, i personally don't have "proof" the earth is round--according your conspiracy theory that everything, everywhere is faked. how can you argue with that? there's no argument against irrationalities like "it's all a conspiracy." everything can be explained away by that... Of course, there's no proof of any conspiracy... Or do you have some that you haven't disclosed?

Sunset.

We only measure the position of the light ray at one point at sunset. To properly measure the path of a light ray, we would have to measure its position at at least two points.

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

Conspiracy. Those reflectors were never placed on the moon according to FET, and even if they were, vertical light is unaffected by the EA.

http://www.lsainc.com/products.htm

4.5 kilometres is not enough to distinguish between the curvature of the Earth and the curvature of light.

Quote from: goldstein on October 16, 2008, 01:26:44 AM

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

Conspiracy. Those reflectors were never placed on the moon according to FET, and even if they were, vertical light is unaffected by the EA.

Umm...  Hate to tell you this, but the moon never passes directly over the McDonald Observatory, so the laser light bouncing off the moon will not be vertical.

So, in the begining, when the universe and everything was created in the Big Bang, why were some planets and stars created as spheres but the Earth as a flat disc shape with rocks underneath it?

Ok...FYI in RE fact ( IDK about FET). it wasn't...nothing --> big bang --> the universe that we've come to know and love. planets go through a process to become spheres (just pointing out that, things of a certian size can be no other shape then a sphere). It took billions of years just for simple elements like oxygen to be created. let alone planets.

Umm...  Hate to tell you this, but the moon never passes directly over the McDonald Observatory, so the laser light bouncing off the moon will not be vertical.

It doesn't have to be exactly vertical. But as long as it's close to vertical, the effect of the EA will be negligible. Of course, none of this matters, because there are no reflectors on the moon.

Quote from: markjo on October 16, 2008, 03:19:07 PM

Umm...  Hate to tell you this, but the moon never passes directly over the McDonald Observatory, so the laser light bouncing off the moon will not be vertical.

It doesn't have to be exactly vertical. But as long as it's close to vertical, the effect of the EA will be negligible. Of course, none of this matters, because there are no reflectors on the moon.

on TV there was this moon episode on national geographic or discovery or something like that, about people who think the moon landing was a hoax. And it showed you the light bouncing back from the reflectors in the laboratory

There are no reflectors on the moon.

There are no reflectors on the moon.

well have you BEEN to the moon?

About as often as NASA has, I reckon.

Quote from: Osama  bin Laden on October 16, 2008, 03:23:30 PM

Quote from: markjo on October 16, 2008, 03:19:07 PM

Umm...  Hate to tell you this, but the moon never passes directly over the McDonald Observatory, so the laser light bouncing off the moon will not be vertical.

It doesn't have to be exactly vertical. But as long as it's close to vertical, the effect of the EA will be negligible. Of course, none of this matters, because there are no reflectors on the moon.

on TV there was this moon episode on national geographic or discovery or something like that, about people who think the moon landing was a hoax. And it showed you the light bouncing back from the reflectors in the laboratory

I saw that same episode.  Very cool.

About as often as NASA has, I reckon.

There are 24 men who would beg to differ.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Astronauts

Really? Last I checked they only claimed 12 people walked on the moon. And twenty-five percent of them are too busy being dead to differ.

Yey! Conspiracy medal for me! Well done Steve!

Except that you're effectively denying what's found in evidence. Lasers are sent to the moon and they are reflected back. We don't seem to be making much progress in your treatment Steve. I think you might feel more comfortable sharing a cell with Tom. I'll have a word with the ward nurse tomorrow morning.

And to further Markjo's point, the moon orbits the earth pretty close to the earths orbit of the sun (so +/- 23 deg variation, very roughly). McDonald Observatory sits at 30 deg N. This non normal angle is not insignificant, and would most definitely show the effects of any light bending.

Have you ever personally reflected lasers off the moon, or are you blindly trusting the words of others?

Yes it is. It's about the distance to the horizon for an adult. You asked for "an experiment that measures the path of a light ray over a distance of a few kilometres with sufficient accuracy to distinguish between curvature of the Earth and curvature of light". I gave you equipment which does such a thing as a matter of routine operation.

It's pretty hard for a laser to curve one way in one direction, and then curve back the other way when reflected back. Of it's own accord.

Your also refuting Rowbothams experiment by saying that the earth is not observably flat.

Grief we're clutching at straws now aren't we?

If the transmitters and receivers were positioned to account for the curvature of a Round Earth, they would still work on a Flat Earth because the light would bend between them. I don't know what you mean by curving in a different direction on the way back; it wouldn't need to do that at all.

Really? Last I checked they only claimed 12 people walked on the moon. And twenty-five percent of them are too busy being dead to differ.

There were 9 missions of three man crews that orbited the moon, of which 6 of those had two man crews landed and walked on the moon.  Three astronauts were on two of those missions.

Have you ever personally reflected lasers off the moon, or are you blindly trusting the words of others?

I'm sure that if you asked nicely, that the McDonald Observatory would be more than happy to let you tour their facilities and let you watch them conduct an actual laser ranging observation.

Quote from: Ski on October 16, 2008, 10:20:16 PM

Really? Last I checked they only claimed 12 people walked on the moon. And twenty-five percent of them are too busy being dead to differ.

There were 9 missions of three man crews that orbited the moon, of which 6 of those had two man crews landed and walked on the moon.  Three astronauts were on two of those missions.

Yes, but the question posed to me was "Have you been to the moon and verified that there are no reflectors?"

I'm not sure how being in orbit over the moon would enable me to see these alleged mirrors.

It doesn't matter anyway -- none of the 12 people walked on the moon, nor did any of the others orbit it.

Whether NASA put reflectors on the moon or not doesn't matter.  We can bounce lasers off of the moon and tell from the time it takes for the light to get back how far away the moon is.  The distance discovered is consistent with RE, not FE.

Yes, but the question posed to me was "Have you been to the moon and verified that there are no reflectors?"

I believe that Steve was posing that question to Goldstein, not to you.