Why "bendy light" theory is wrong...

Do you realize that bendy light is the only thing that can make FET possible besides some existential BS?

I doubt that.

Quote from: lvlastermind on January 03, 2009, 10:57:25 PM

Is there no one on the FE forum to defend their own theory?...

Tom?

ﮎingulaЯiτy?

No argument?

Once you mentioned "Light is mysterious and we do not have all the answers" all of your contentions regarding the properties and behavior of light went right out the window.

Not having all the answers is not the same as not having any answers. If we were to take this for FET, then FET is clearly false because you don't know everything about it. Using your "logic", if you don't know everything about something, then you can not know anything about it. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy as to why your reasoning is completely incorrect.

Yes, we do not know everything about light, but we know enough to rule out conclusively any form of bendy light. If you doubt us, do the experiments for yourself!

Please acknowledge before replying:  I would like to keep this discussion informative, constructive, and enlightening.  Please keep your replies in one of those three categories.

---> Golden rule... If you have nothing nice to say then please don't say anything at all.  I have not been argumentative and do not wish to be.

-You'll have to excuse my drawings ; I am not an art major so this is the best I could do.

FE "Bendy Light" theory:
Case 1:  In FE bendy light theory light bends from an unknown force and this accounts for the horizon phenomenon.  The picture with a flat earth depicts what wold happen if this were the case.  The observer standing at a distance from the triangle on the same horizon has light bending toward him/her.  This would cause a similar horizon phenomenon.

Case 2: The observer elevated above (perhaps on a tall building or mountain) cannot see the light from the triangle because it is bending back toward the source.  The reason the light bends back toward the source is exactly because it bends.  If light bends then it is traversing in an arc.  An arc is a portion of a circle.  So it is natural that the light would complete the circle and not reach the observer's eye standing on a tall object.  This is NOT the case in real life.

Case 3: Because, in space, there is no distinction between up, down, left, right, in, or out; then the light must bend "down" an equal amount as it bends up.  This is because light doesn't "know" what up is and thus bends equally in all directions in a sphere.  Because of this, then the observer standing below the ground should be able to see the object because the light is bending "down" and can reach his/her eye.  This is NOT the case.

Conclusion:  Case 2 and 3 do not happen in ordinary life and thus disprove the theory.

Please acknowledge before replying:  I would like to keep this discussion informative, constructive, and enlightening.  Please keep your replies in one of those three categories.

---> Golden rule... If you have nothing nice to say then please don't say anything at all.  I have not been argumentative and do not wish to be.

-You'll have to excuse my drawings ; I am not an art major so this is the best I could do.

FE "Bendy Light" theory:
Case 1:  In FE bendy light theory light bends from an unknown force and this accounts for the horizon phenomenon.  The picture with a flat earth depicts what wold happen if this were the case.  The observer standing at a distance from the triangle on the same horizon has light bending toward him/her.  This would cause a similar horizon phenomenon.

Case 2: The observer elevated above (perhaps on a tall building or mountain) cannot see the light from the triangle because it is bending back toward the source.  The reason the light bends back toward the source is exactly because it bends.  If light bends then it is traversing in an arc.  An arc is a portion of a circle.  So it is natural that the light would complete the circle and not reach the observer's eye standing on a tall object.  This is NOT the case in real life.

Case 3: Because, in space, there is no distinction between up, down, left, right, in, or out; then the light must bend "down" an equal amount as it bends up.  This is because light doesn't "know" what up is and thus bends equally in all directions in a sphere.  Because of this, then the observer standing below the ground should be able to see the object because the light is bending "down" and can reach his/her eye.  This is NOT the case.

Conclusion:  Case 2 and 3 do not happen in ordinary life and thus disprove the theory.

Having Read lvlastermind comments on why light has been proven not to bend. I can only agree with what he has said.

It seems the this whole FET indeed relies on something that any one who has vision can test them self and prove wrong.

Anyone who says that mirages and magnifying glasses prove bendy light are grossly ignorant to how light travels.

And any one who comments on their knowledge of this is told they are incorrect because they are bound by the laws of science .

Nothing is a fact. Just a undisproven theory.

So even people who believe FET should admit they can not be 100% correct. I dont like to to act as if we "RE believers" are sure we know everything but we do think the world is round. Because we are using logic.