Except I don't have "bendy light" to account for with light reflecting off of the sheet of paper. The light reflects off of the paper and proceeds in a straight line to my eyes.

With your "bendy light" the light has curved from the source to the surface of the Moon by missing the Earth. There is no geometry that will allow that reflected light to reach observers standing on the surface of the Earth.

Apparently I'm going to need another analogy. Okay then, here goes:

Consider the "sinking ship" effect. According to FET+EA, light bends up to allow light with an initial downward trajectory reflecting off the ship to reach the eye of the observer. Thus, bendy light has caused light to bend away from the Earth. Are you telling me that there is no orientation at which a mirror may be held that will reflect this light to meet the ground?

I wouldn't describe distance of meters as "small scale" when we are talking about quantum effects. What distance would you say is required to see a noticeable effect of your "electromagnetic acceleration?" I don't see any part of your formula that implies that there is a minimum size for the effect.

The distance of metres isn't the small scale, what is small scale is the change in position and momentum of the photon perpendicular to its initial momentum vector. That equation only applies over large distances; I will see if I can come up with some mathematics based on the uncertainty principle to illustrate why the uncertainty in position and momentum is always greater than the effect of bendy light - and therefore unobservable - over short distances.

Again, your pulling figures and equations out of your ass.

Bravo.

Except... hold on... light could bend in any direction in 3d space. Which direction does it bend in and why? Does the Wonko Force have anything to do with it? (Hint: Yes)

Dark Energy always acts upward.

Also, the equation you gave contradicts your statement that

Light doesn't bend on small scales, only large ones.

Using the equation given would produce detectable changes over a small distance (few metres)

It would, if that equation were valid over short distances. In much the same way that General Relativity becomes useless over short distances and Quantum Mechanics over large ones, that equation is only valid when the quantum uncertainty in the position and momentum of photons is significantly less than the change in position and momentum caused by the bending of light.

I can see how you've simply picked the distance the the horizon, the average height of an adult, and pulled out a square law (cos it kinda fits, right?). This is classic Rowbotham style failure.

No, I chose a square law because a parabola is the simplest symmetrical function that is not a straight line, and things in nature tend to be as simple as possible.

Oh and ...

In this thread you promised Matrix an experiment to quantify the effects of bendy light. Got anything yet?

No. The recent emergence of the quantum effects in the bendy light theory have made it substantially more difficult to come up with something.

How does FE explain "Earth Shine" if the Moon is not a Retro Reflector?

The Moon is a retroreflector in RET now? Can you please provide a source?