Clouds descending to the horizon

I often go hillwalking. Quite often, when I am as high as the base of the clouds (cumulus clouds mostly), I look in every direction and the cloud base is always dropping towards the earth as it goes away into the distance. This would be consistent with a spherical earth, as I'm seeing a line of similar altitude drop away from me in every direction. How could a flat earth produce such as effect?

Note that it can't be perspective, as I'm at the same height as the cloud base.

EA theory would account for this.

EA theory would account for this.

How?

Quote from: Robosteve on July 13, 2009, 12:42:31 PM

EA theory would account for this.

How?

The light from the clouds curves upwards to meet you, and so appears to originate from lower than it actually does.

Quote from: Anorthosite on July 13, 2009, 12:57:12 PM

Quote from: Robosteve on July 13, 2009, 12:42:31 PM

EA theory would account for this.

How?

The light from the clouds curves upwards to meet you, and so appears to originate from lower than it actually does.

What is the mechanism that produces this effect?

What is the mechanism that produces this effect?

It is a hypothetical facet Dark Energy, the same force which causes the Earth to accelerate up at 9.8 m s^-2 continuously.

Quote from: Anorthosite on July 13, 2009, 01:03:39 PM

What is the mechanism that produces this effect?

It is a hypothetical facet Dark Energy, the same force which causes the Earth to accelerate up at 9.8 m s^-2 continuously.

So why does it accelerate the earth and not the clouds (or me for that matter?) And how exacty does it affect the light?

So why does it accelerate the earth and not the clouds (or me for that matter?) And how exacty does it affect the light?

The Earth shields us and the clouds from its effects. The exact mechanism for affecting the light is unknown, but this facet of its behaviour is not shielded by the Earth.

Quote from: Anorthosite on July 13, 2009, 01:17:09 PM

So why does it accelerate the earth and not the clouds (or me for that matter?) And how exacty does it affect the light?

The Earth shields us and the clouds from its effects. The exact mechanism for affecting the light is unknown, but this facet of its behaviour is not shielded by the Earth.

So a laser fired in a laboratory could replicate this effect and prove flat earth theory?

So a laser fired in a laboratory could replicate this effect and prove flat earth theory?

How would showing that light curves prove the Earth to be flat?

Quote from: Anorthosite on July 13, 2009, 01:56:07 PM

So a laser fired in a laboratory could replicate this effect and prove flat earth theory?

How would showing that light curves prove the Earth to be flat?

Because if light doesn't curve I can directly observe the curve of the earth just by looking at the clouds.

Because if light doesn't curve I can directly observe the curve of the earth just by looking at the clouds.

So how would showing that light curves prove the Earth to be flat?

Quote from: Anorthosite on July 13, 2009, 02:06:36 PM

Because if light doesn't curve I can directly observe the curve of the earth just by looking at the clouds.

So how would showing that light curves prove the Earth to be flat?

You said that I am not observing the curve of the earth because the light curves. You have not offered any evidence to back this up.

If you prove it in a lab, then either the earth is flat or our entire understanding of meteorology is wrong. Now obviously light curves because of relativity, but you're saying light bends to simulate clouds following the curve of the earth. That is quantifiable and measureable by simple experiments.

Can you prove that light curves at a rate that means that clouds look like they're curving away at a reasonable approximation of the curvature of the earth?

You said that I am not observing the curve of the earth because the light curves. You have not offered any evidence to back this up.

If you prove it in a lab, then either the earth is flat or our entire understanding of meteorology is wrong. Now obviously light curves because of relativity, but you're saying light bends to simulate clouds following the curve of the earth. That is quantifiable and measureable by simple experiments.

Of course it is. How does a positive result prove the Earth to be flat?

Can you prove that light curves at a rate that means that clouds look like they're curving away at a reasonable approximation of the curvature of the earth?

Hopefully. The theory is still under development, and experiments will be conducted where feasible to demonstrate this effect when the theory is completed.

Quote from: Anorthosite on July 13, 2009, 02:17:35 PM

You said that I am not observing the curve of the earth because the light curves. You have not offered any evidence to back this up.

If you prove it in a lab, then either the earth is flat or our entire understanding of meteorology is wrong. Now obviously light curves because of relativity, but you're saying light bends to simulate clouds following the curve of the earth. That is quantifiable and measureable by simple experiments.

Of course it is. How does a positive result prove the Earth to be flat?

Because from my observations of the clouds, either the earth is round or the path of the light is curved at a rate that exactly matches the alleged curve of the earth.

Quote from: Anorthosite on July 13, 2009, 02:17:35 PM

Can you prove that light curves at a rate that means that clouds look like they're curving away at a reasonable approximation of the curvature of the earth?

Hopefully. The theory is still under development, and experiments will be conducted where feasible to demonstrate this effect when the theory is completed.

You're constructing the theory before performing an extremely straight forward and simple experiment? Why not just do the experiment and see if the light bends at the required rate? When are you planning on doing it? You could save youself a lot of time and effort if you just did it now.

You don't need the theory. If you can observe the light bending at the required levels, you have empirical, quantifiable and falsifiable evidence of the flat earth. Why wait?

Because from my observations of the clouds, either the earth is round or the path of the light is curved at a rate that exactly matches the alleged curve of the earth.

But how can you be sure that laser light in a laboratory is behaving in the same way as natural light scattered by clouds?

You're constructing the theory before performing an extremely straight forward and simple experiment? Why not just do the experiment and see if the light bends at the required rate? When are you planning on doing it? You could save youself a lot of time and effort if you just did it now.

You don't need the theory. If you can observe the light bending at the required levels, you have empirical, quantifiable and falsifiable evidence of the flat earth. Why wait?

Well, you see, it's very difficult to come up with a reference point as to what is flat. You can't use the surface of the Earth if that is being contested, and you can't use a light ray either if that is being contested. You can't use the path of a projectile because it will follow a geodesic in spacetime, not in space. The only reasonable way to test for light bending is to develop a theory, then test for the difference between the predictions of curved light on a Flat Earth and straight light on a Round Earth.

[Well, you see, it's very difficult to come up with a reference point as to what is flat. You can't use the surface of the Earth if that is being contested, and you can't use a light ray either if that is being contested. You can't use the path of a projectile because it will follow a geodesic in spacetime, not in space. The only reasonable way to test for light bending is to develop a theory, then test for the difference between the predictions of curved light on a Flat Earth and straight light on a Round Earth.

  It's kind of difficult to do experiments when you can't trust anything to be as they are. But you can assume that earth is flat and light bends as you propose here. I guess you can detect the differences between distances when you measure some kilometer or two with laser distance measuring tool and some physical device which measures distance directly from ground. Curve is always a little bit longer than the straight line.

It's kind of difficult to do experiments when you can't trust anything to be as they are. But you can assume that earth is flat and light bends as you propose here. I guess you can detect the differences between distances when you measure some kilometer or two with laser distance measuring tool and some physical device which measures distance directly from ground. Curve is always a little bit longer than the straight line.

If you mean what I think you mean, this will not work. If, in actuality, the Earth is round, the component of displacement along the arc on the surface of the Earth being considered in the direction of the light ray will be shorter than the ray itself - and, indeed, it can be shown that the ray will always be longer than the arc it subtends when it is outside the surface of the Earth. Therefore, this test cannot distinguish between straight light on a round Earth and curved light on a flat Earth.

 I guess if this test can't distinguish between these things then it can at least rule out the model where earth is flat and light bends because in this model the results would be different.

Quote from: Anorthosite on July 13, 2009, 02:26:38 PM

Because from my observations of the clouds, either the earth is round or the path of the light is curved at a rate that exactly matches the alleged curve of the earth.

But how can you be sure that laser light in a laboratory is behaving in the same way as natural light scattered by clouds?

Because I understand the properties of light. Why would you think it wouldn't be?

Quote from: Anorthosite on July 13, 2009, 02:26:38 PM

You're constructing the theory before performing an extremely straight forward and simple experiment? Why not just do the experiment and see if the light bends at the required rate? When are you planning on doing it? You could save youself a lot of time and effort if you just did it now.

You don't need the theory. If you can observe the light bending at the required levels, you have empirical, quantifiable and falsifiable evidence of the flat earth. Why wait?

Well, you see, it's very difficult to come up with a reference point as to what is flat. You can't use the surface of the Earth if that is being contested, and you can't use a light ray either if that is being contested. You can't use the path of a projectile because it will follow a geodesic in spacetime, not in space. The only reasonable way to test for light bending is to develop a theory, then test for the difference between the predictions of curved light on a Flat Earth and straight light on a Round Earth.

I disagree. You have the predictions of teh behaviour of light by theories consistent with a spherical earth. You have the curve of the earth as predicted by these same theories. You should be able to predict with some very simple maths what the curvature should be.

This is actually very simple physics, I think you're over complicating it. You don't need to know why the light curves, just that it does.

And until you can measure the curvature of light, I can observe the curve of the earth in the clouds.

I guess if this test can't distinguish between these things then it can at least rule out the model where earth is flat and light bends because in this model the results would be different.

Don't you mean where the Earth is flat and light doesn't bend?

Because I understand the properties of light. Why would you think it wouldn't be?

Where did I say I thought it wouldn't be?

I disagree. You have the predictions of teh behaviour of light by theories consistent with a spherical earth. You have the curve of the earth as predicted by these same theories. You should be able to predict with some very simple maths what the curvature should be.

This is actually very simple physics, I think you're over complicating it. You don't need to know why the light curves, just that it does.

And until you can measure the curvature of light, I can observe the curve of the earth in the clouds.

So what do you propose we use as a reference to determine what a straight line is?

Quote from: Anorthosite on July 14, 2009, 10:11:27 AM

Because I understand the properties of light. Why would you think it wouldn't be?

Where did I say I thought it wouldn't be?

You implied it. If you didn't mean it, then fine. Did you mean it?

Quote from: Anorthosite on July 14, 2009, 10:11:27 AM

I disagree. You have the predictions of teh behaviour of light by theories consistent with a spherical earth. You have the curve of the earth as predicted by these same theories. You should be able to predict with some very simple maths what the curvature should be.

This is actually very simple physics, I think you're over complicating it. You don't need to know why the light curves, just that it does.

And until you can measure the curvature of light, I can observe the curve of the earth in the clouds.

So what do you propose we use as a reference to determine what a straight line is?

How about a ruler? No, seriously, why not? The effect should be measurable in the lab if it bends light enough to make the clouds appear to curve at the observed rate.

You could spend an evening doing a little maths. Then a day in a lab with a laser and you'd get your answer. There you go, Nobel prize for physics if you're right. So what are you waiting for?

You implied it. If you didn't mean it, then fine. Did you mean it?

I implied nothing. No, I did not mean that.

How about a ruler? No, seriously, why not? The effect should be measurable in the lab if it bends light enough to make the clouds appear to curve at the observed rate.

You could spend an evening doing a little maths. Then a day in a lab with a laser and you'd get your answer. There you go, Nobel prize for physics if you're right. So what are you waiting for?

A ruler? Are you kidding me? Rulers are not made to be perfectly straight, only straight to within the accuracy required by their practical application. Besides which, the curvature of light along the length of a typical ruler would not be detectable due to quantum uncertainty in the position of the light ray.

Quote from: Anorthosite on July 14, 2009, 12:08:00 PM

How about a ruler? No, seriously, why not? The effect should be measurable in the lab if it bends light enough to make the clouds appear to curve at the observed rate.

You could spend an evening doing a little maths. Then a day in a lab with a laser and you'd get your answer. There you go, Nobel prize for physics if you're right. So what are you waiting for?

A ruler? Are you kidding me? Rulers are not made to be perfectly straight, only straight to within the accuracy required by their practical application. Besides which, the curvature of light along the length of a typical ruler would not be detectable due to quantum uncertainty in the position of the light ray.

Oh come on, you can try harder. This is an experiment that could prove you right. You seem to be going out of your way to avoid doing it. If you're smart enough to see through all the lies that spherical earth (I refuse to say round earth) believers fall for, why can't you work out how to do this simple experiment?

Oh come on, you can try harder. This is an experiment that could prove you right. You seem to be going out of your way to avoid doing it. If you're smart enough to see through all the lies that spherical earth (I refuse to say round earth) believers fall for, why can't you work out how to do this simple experiment?

Believe me, I would love to perform this experiment. The fact remains that there is no sensible measure of what constitutes a straight line.

Quote from: Anorthosite on July 14, 2009, 12:29:46 PM

Oh come on, you can try harder. This is an experiment that could prove you right. You seem to be going out of your way to avoid doing it. If you're smart enough to see through all the lies that spherical earth (I refuse to say round earth) believers fall for, why can't you work out how to do this simple experiment?

Believe me, I would love to perform this experiment. The fact remains that there is no sensible measure of what constitutes a straight line.

Have you considered measuring relative displacement over distance as opposed to absolute? Then you wouldn't need a reference.

As an aside, what implications do you think your curved light theory would have for devices such as ring laser gyroscopes that depend on established theories of light to function properly?

Quote from: zork on July 14, 2009, 02:48:14 AM

I guess if this test can't distinguish between these things then it can at least rule out the model where earth is flat and light bends because in this model the results would be different.

Don't you mean where the Earth is flat and light doesn't bend?

 No, I didn't mean that but I guess I give up in that. The light and it's bending actually raised another question. Suppose that earth is flat and light bends upward. If we put two mirrors perpendicular to the ground and at same height from ground with distance of couple or more kilometers and put laser beside the first and aim it to the second then how light comes back from second mirror to the first and light is still at same height as it went out from laser. If light bends upward then it should bend more up if it travels back to the first mirror.  Or does it bend upward in one direction and downward in other?

Have you considered measuring relative displacement over distance as opposed to absolute? Then you wouldn't need a reference.

Relative to what?

As an aside, what implications do you think your curved light theory would have for devices such as ring laser gyroscopes that depend on established theories of light to function properly?

Very little. Due to quantum effects, the curvature is not detectable over short distances.

No, I didn't mean that but I guess I give up in that. The light and it's bending actually raised another question. Suppose that earth is flat and light bends upward. If we put two mirrors perpendicular to the ground and at same height from ground with distance of couple or more kilometers and put laser beside the first and aim it to the second then how light comes back from second mirror to the first and light is still at same height as it went out from laser. If light bends upward then it should bend more up if it travels back to the first mirror.  Or does it bend upward in one direction and downward in other?

That would work, but it could still not distinguish between a Flat Earth with curved light and a Round Earth with straight light, because we are assuming the Earth to be flat when setting up the mirrors.

A ruler? Are you kidding me? Rulers are not made to be perfectly straight, only straight to within the accuracy required by their practical application. Besides which, the curvature of light along the length of a typical ruler would not be detectable due to quantum uncertainty in the position of the light ray.

I am sorry to break it to you, but Quantum Uncertainty principle has nothing to do with the curvature of light.

Also I would like to add that there is no theory which states that light cannot be curved with a curved earth theory using current quantum mechanics and hyperphysics.

Quote from: Anorthosite on July 14, 2009, 12:57:52 PM

Have you considered measuring relative displacement over distance as opposed to absolute? Then you wouldn't need a reference.

Relative to what?

Relative to something else.

Quote from: Anorthosite on July 14, 2009, 12:57:52 PM

As an aside, what implications do you think your curved light theory would have for devices such as ring laser gyroscopes that depend on established theories of light to function properly?

Very little. Due to quantum effects, the curvature is not detectable over short distances.

How do you know? Without quantifying it, you can't say. But "very little" isn't none, yet these remain very accurate devices.

Do you have any evidence to support curved light that doesn't assume the earth is flat?