Flat Earth Philosophy

Well if we decude the sun is round, that kinda buggers up the whole FE theory, doesn't it. So it kinda is relevant to the shape of the earth, wouldn't you agree?

Quote from: Lord Wilmore on July 06, 2009, 11:25:50 AM

Quote from: Ragnarr on July 06, 2009, 10:21:47 AM

NEEMAN, or Lord Wilmore.  What do your senses tell you when you see the sun set?

Wilmore, if you want. I have to confess tha in my entire life I have never seen the sun set against a flat horizon- the region I live in is on the one hand very hilly (lots of glacial drumlins), but on the other hand has almost no high vantage points. I generally see the sun move across the sky before it is eventually obscured by some feature of the landscape.

Oops, you forgot to address his question:

"What do your senses tell you when you see the sun set?"

Whether or not the horizon is jagged due to mountainous skyline features shouldn't really be important. Do you think the sun stops if set against a flat horizon... ?

Quote from: With Honor on July 06, 2009, 07:28:10 PM

Whether or not the horizon is jagged due to mountainous skyline features shouldn't really be important. Do you think the sun stops if set against a flat horizon... ?

I'm not sure what you're asking here. If the sun vanishes behind a hill, then to my senses it appears to be just a question of perspective.

Quote from: Lord Wilmore on July 07, 2009, 02:38:14 AM

Quote from: With Honor on July 06, 2009, 07:28:10 PM

Whether or not the horizon is jagged due to mountainous skyline features shouldn't really be important. Do you think the sun stops if set against a flat horizon... ?

I'm not sure what you're asking here. If the sun vanishes behind a hill, then to my senses it appears to be just a question of perspective.

It can't be perspective. If you use perspective as your excuse then sun must get smaller and smaller until it just disappears. But the entire disc of the sun as large as it was above our head at noon sets behind the horizon. It doesn't get considerably smaller. And if you use only direct visual observation without telescope then the sun seems even larger than at noon when it sets behind the horizon.

And I am still interested in you opinion in my previous question. Why are you satisfied with the first glance at the flat ground near you and draw your result about the earth shape from that without bothering to research matter further from different places and different angles.

Quote from: Ragnarr on July 06, 2009, 10:21:47 AM

NEEMAN, or Lord Wilmore.  What do your senses tell you when you see the sun set?

Wilmore, if you want. I have to confess tha in my entire life I have never seen the sun set against a flat horizon- the region I live in is on the one hand very hilly (lots of glacial drumlins), but on the other hand has almost no high vantage points. I generally see the sun move across the sky before it is eventually obscured by some feature of the landscape.

What does the sun have to do with the shape of the earth?

Quote from: zork on July 07, 2009, 03:01:49 AM

It can't be perspective. If you use perspective as your excuse then sun must get smaller and smaller until it just disappears. But the entire disc of the sun as large as it was above our head at noon sets behind the horizon. It doesn't get considerably smaller. And if you use only direct visual observation without telescope then the sun seems even larger than at noon when it sets behind the horizon.

Not if it moves behind something first. If we were talking about a flat horizon line you might have a point, but we're not.

Quote from: zork on July 07, 2009, 03:01:49 AM

And I am still interested in you opinion in my previous question. Why are you satisfied with the first glance at the flat ground near you and draw your result about the earth shape from that without bothering to research matter further from different places and different angles.

I have lived in Ireland and the UK, and have been to many places across Europe- Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Belgium, France Switzerland and Italy. Due to my limited finances I haven't been able to visit any other continents, but I believe that aside from Iberia, I've observed as much of Europe as I reasonably need to. From all these locations the earth has always appeared flat.

Regarding the sun, no it is not the same. Physical features obscure it so that if it were getting noticably smaller, I wouldn't be able to observe it doing so. In any case, I am at this point speculating, as I have told you what I think of wat I have seen.

As for looking at the earth from different places, what would you suggest?

Quote from: Lord Wilmore on July 07, 2009, 03:36:17 AM

Regarding the sun, no it is not the same. Physical features obscure it so that if it were getting noticably smaller, I wouldn't be able to observe it doing so. In any case, I am at this point speculating, as I have told you what I think of wat I have seen.

As for looking at the earth from different places, what would you suggest?

As a person who has traveled so much you really must take your time sometimes and spend the evening or morning at sea and observe sunset or sunrise. It can't be so difficult.
 As for looking the earth from different places then suggestion to sign up for space tourism is out of question, I think. But even then, there are people who have done something. As David K. Lynch.
Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth - http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf
Turbulent ship wakes: further evidence that the Earth is round - http://www.thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf

Also I am playing with idea to get three really distinctive and high landmarks on my near vicinity which are quite far apart from each other and trying to get the angles between them. As triangle on spherical surface has sum of its vertex angles always larger than 180 degree. There is always something you can do if you only want to. But you seem to be person who is satisfied with the impression of first glance.

That second paper with the turbulent ship wakes raises some good points.  I'd be interested in seeing Tom Bishop's spin on the data.

The author is assuming that he would be able to see an infinite distance away. He cannot.

Who said anything about the atmosphere? One cannot see an infinite distance away because of limits to the human eye.

If it were a limit of the human eye, the wake would come to a point before you can no longer see it.

Quote from: cdenley on July 07, 2009, 07:07:29 PM

If it were a limit of the human eye, the wake would come to a point before you can no longer see it.

It does come t a point before you can no longer see it. It's called the Vanishing Point.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on July 07, 2009, 07:29:01 PM

Quote from: cdenley on July 07, 2009, 07:07:29 PM

If it were a limit of the human eye, the wake would come to a point before you can no longer see it.

It does come t a point before you can no longer see it. It's called the Vanishing Point.

Nope, it disappears before it comes to a point.  It's called the horizon.

Quote from: cdenley on July 07, 2009, 07:07:29 PM

If it were a limit of the human eye, the wake would come to a point before you can no longer see it.

It does come to a point before you can no longer see it. It's called the Vanishing Point.

You can read all about it in Earth Not a Globe by Samuel Birley Rowbotham You can find an online version in the resources in my signature link.

Can you point me to the part where he explains how something the size of a mast head can be seen but the hull can't?

The vanishing point is a finite distance from the observer, which means that the hull will intersect with the vanishing point before the mast. Please read the literature.

You can read all about it in Earth Not a Globe by Samuel Birley Rowbotham You can find an online version in the resources in my signature link.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on July 07, 2009, 07:29:01 PM

Quote from: cdenley on July 07, 2009, 07:07:29 PM

If it were a limit of the human eye, the wake would come to a point before you can no longer see it.

It does come to a point before you can no longer see it. It's called the Vanishing Point.

How does the vanishing point allow you to see a narrow mast head of a boat but not the wider hull?

That's not a vanishing point or perspective effect - it must be something else.

Like a horizon on a spherical earth or perhaps light bends .  . .  for mast heads.

• It works nicely only when the drawn object is close to the observer and far away from the horizon.
• When the drawn object is not aligned with the observer, two or even three vanishing points must be used.
• The placement of the vanishing points is not a question of physics, it is a question of aesthetics. Too close and objects seem distorted, too far away and objects do not seem three-dimensional.
• To draw several objects that cover a wide area of the observer's vision, many vanishing points have to be used in creative ways to get an approximate feeling of being surrounded by big objects.

In the case of a mast head it would disappear because of it's size before the hull intersects with the vanishing point. If you can see the hull of a ship at ten miles with the naked eye, will you be able to see the head of a crewman on board that ship?

Also, the Vanishing Point is a drawing technique, not a physical phenomenon. You are right when you show that the hull and the masts should disappear at the same time if the vanishing point were a physical phenomenon.