Poll

Do you believe Rowbotham proved the earth is flat with his Bedford Level experiment, or do you believe light bends to create the illusion of a horizon?

Rowbotham proved earth is flat. There was no illusion.
5 (26.3%)
Light bends to create the illusion of a horizon.
14 (73.7%)

Total Members Voted: 19

Rowbotham vs Bendy Light

  • 183 Replies
  • 47908 Views
*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36019
  • +0/-0
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Rowbotham vs Bendy Light
« Reply #180 on: July 15, 2009, 12:25:26 AM »
"Bendy light" is known as refraction, and it's caused by the air. Specifically, the different temperatures of air, and different concentrations. Very simple. Remember back in kindergarden, when they put the straw in the glass and it looked broken? Same principle. Do you understand? I hope you know what I mean...

Don't patronise me. I understand perfectly what refraction is, and that is not what we are talking about.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

Maxus

  • 114
  • +0/-0
Re: Rowbotham vs Bendy Light
« Reply #181 on: July 15, 2009, 10:16:52 PM »
Despite of fact that RE (i read that as Real earth) is proved (17 "ham radio"'s pages), i'll bring back to life the mirrors experiment - why won't you use laser for measuring the distance ? the error for 50 meters will be relatively small, you just need to be sure that you are measuring distance between right parts of mirror. Furthermore - there will be exactly same error in measuring the distance between tops and bottoms of the mirrors, so they should cancel themsleves out.
Quote
If light were to travel in a curve, then it would be impossible to form a straight line in the experiment. It would keep increasing in height the further the light went. The rate at which it increases would increase with distance as well, if it were to create the illusion of a curved earth surface. You could angle the mirrors to make one segment between the mirrors straight, but you couldn't compensate for a growing height increase.
Even if there is 'bendy light' (that name makes me smile :) ), there is possibility of setting mirrors to reflect the ray within one height:

There's also one issue with bendy light - i think that image of distant objects would be distorted due to different bending of rays running at other angles. I would try to do some calculations about that, if there are any equations describing the hypotetical bendy light's path... Are they?

PS. Sorry for my english ;)

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36019
  • +0/-0
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Rowbotham vs Bendy Light
« Reply #182 on: July 15, 2009, 10:34:00 PM »
Despite of fact that RE (i read that as Real earth) is proved (17 "ham radio"'s pages), i'll bring back to life the mirrors experiment - why won't you use laser for measuring the distance ? the error for 50 meters will be relatively small, you just need to be sure that you are measuring distance between right parts of mirror. Furthermore - there will be exactly same error in measuring the distance between tops and bottoms of the mirrors, so they should cancel themsleves out.

The error will add, not cancel out, but this is a very good idea to get two mirrors to be perfectly parallel.

Even if there is 'bendy light' (that name makes me smile :) )

"Bendy light" is not its proper name. The name of the hypothesis which involves a natural curvature of all light rays is "Electromagnetic Acceleration" theory, or EA theory for short. The term "bendy light" was coined by sceptical REers and has unfortunately achieved popular usage much more successfully than the proper term.

There's also one issue with bendy light - i think that image of distant objects would be distorted due to different bending of rays running at other angles. I would try to do some calculations about that, if there are any equations describing the hypotetical bendy light's path... Are they?

There will be soon. I've run into a spot of trouble with a nasty differential equation, but once I figure it out there shouldn't be too much in the way of a publication regarding EA theory.

PS. Sorry for my english ;)

Your English is fine, don't worry about it. :)
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36019
  • +0/-0
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Rowbotham vs Bendy Light
« Reply #183 on: August 19, 2009, 06:54:57 PM »
You have identified that you think the angle of incidence would change over time, but you have not - as you claim - described why you think this. I'm not the one making the claim that the angle of incidence would change over time, so I don't deem it necessary to defend my case that fibre optics are compatible with curved light until you make a compelling argument against it.

Am I going to get a response to this?
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.