Round earth test.

  • 45 Replies
  • 4420 Views
?

General Disarray

  • Official Member
  • 5039
  • Magic specialist
Re: Round earth test.
« Reply #30 on: May 31, 2011, 07:41:49 AM »
In my experiment where I could not see further then 16 miles on a cool day at sea level yet could see the full 50 miles at 3000着 is this not evidence for a spherical earth?

Maybe, but not necessarily.  The air you are looking thru from sea level to 3000 ft is clearer than looking thru air all at sea level.  So you should be able to see farther. That would be true on either FE or RE.

The problem or the air and perspective at the horizon is one of the mainstays of FET.  E.G. the idea (yet to be tested in recent times) that a ship that appears to have gone over the horizon can be brought back up by looking at it thru a telescope.

I don't live near the ocean, but I have tried this with the sun. Right after it disappeared under the horizon, I pointed my telescope to the spot where it was. I did not get any restoration whatsoever.
You don't want to make an enemy of me. I'm very powerful.

?

Thork

Re: Round earth test.
« Reply #31 on: May 31, 2011, 07:56:40 AM »
In my experiment where I could not see further then 16 miles on a cool day at sea level yet could see the full 50 miles at 3000着 is this not evidence for a spherical earth?

Maybe, but not necessarily.  The air you are looking thru from sea level to 3000 ft is clearer than looking thru air all at sea level.  So you should be able to see farther. That would be true on either FE or RE.

The problem or the air and perspective at the horizon is one of the mainstays of FET.  E.G. the idea (yet to be tested in recent times) that a ship that appears to have gone over the horizon can be brought back up by looking at it thru a telescope.

I don't live near the ocean, but I have tried this with the sun. Right after it disappeared under the horizon, I pointed my telescope to the spot where it was. I did not get any restoration whatsoever.
You did not do this. We both know you did not do this. I do not want to argue whether you did this or not, but I just want you to know, that I know, you did not do this. To that end, stop making low-content posts.

?

General Disarray

  • Official Member
  • 5039
  • Magic specialist
Re: Round earth test.
« Reply #32 on: May 31, 2011, 08:27:49 AM »
You did not do this. We both know you did not do this. I do not want to argue whether you did this or not, but I just want you to know, that I know, you did not do this. To that end, stop making low-content posts.

Now why would you lie like that?
You don't want to make an enemy of me. I'm very powerful.

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: Round earth test.
« Reply #33 on: May 31, 2011, 01:26:14 PM »
Indeed!  But this never occurred to LAT42, I suppose.
Get up just five or six thousand feet above the lowest layer of the "air soup" and all that changes dramatically.  Visit Colorado, sometime.

I have been to Colorado and to the Alps.  I see your argument but if you are referencing a refraction phenomenon I have a two statements and a question for you.

Obviously, the density is decreasing upward because of the decreasing pressure, we can counteract this decrease by changing the temperature. In fact, the pressure falls off by about 1 part in 8000 for every meter of increase in height above sea level. We can compensate for this by decreasing the temperature by the same 1 part in 8000 for every meter of height. So this is say in Alaska on clear day you can see further because of the temperature being cooler. Perhaps you didn't know this.


Clearly you do not understand quantum chemistry. Light travels via the photon. When a photon hits an atom, its energy is transferred to that atom. The atom then releases the energy in the form of another photon. However, this new photon contains, by necessity,  less energy. This is called quantum leap. When an atom has less kinetic energy (i.e. is cold), it requires more energy to perform a quantum leap (note: in a quantum leap, what is actually happening is the electrons moving up to a higher energy level). Going up the levels, each quantum leap requires less energy, thus each photon can give more leaps. To simplify, on a cold day, a photon might give a single, large leap, while on a hot day, it might give two smaller leaps. Thus means that when the energy is releases, on a hot day, there are two smaller photons released, which don't travel as far as the one released on a cold day. I'm not sure how clear of an explanation that was, so let me know if you need further clarification.


 I'll opt for further clarification. This doesn't really answer my question. 

K. Basically, on a cold day, there's less kinetic energy, so photon emissions happen as one, big photon, instead of two smaller ones. That means that it can travel farther.

Right, that makes sense to me, you can see further on a clear day then on a warm day.  Dense vs. less dense air etc.... In my experiment where I could not see further then 16 miles on a cool day at sea level yet could see the full 50 miles at 3000着 is this not evidence for a spherical earth?

Well, there are those who attribute this to light bending.

The more serious folks, however, attribute it to the already scientifically-accepted fact that air is much thinner higher up.

Re: Round earth test.
« Reply #34 on: May 31, 2011, 01:39:40 PM »
Indeed!  But this never occurred to LAT42, I suppose.
Get up just five or six thousand feet above the lowest layer of the "air soup" and all that changes dramatically.  Visit Colorado, sometime.

I have been to Colorado and to the Alps.  I see your argument but if you are referencing a refraction phenomenon I have a two statements and a question for you.

Obviously, the density is decreasing upward because of the decreasing pressure, we can counteract this decrease by changing the temperature. In fact, the pressure falls off by about 1 part in 8000 for every meter of increase in height above sea level. We can compensate for this by decreasing the temperature by the same 1 part in 8000 for every meter of height. So this is say in Alaska on clear day you can see further because of the temperature being cooler. Perhaps you didn't know this.


Clearly you do not understand quantum chemistry. Light travels via the photon. When a photon hits an atom, its energy is transferred to that atom. The atom then releases the energy in the form of another photon. However, this new photon contains, by necessity,  less energy. This is called quantum leap. When an atom has less kinetic energy (i.e. is cold), it requires more energy to perform a quantum leap (note: in a quantum leap, what is actually happening is the electrons moving up to a higher energy level). Going up the levels, each quantum leap requires less energy, thus each photon can give more leaps. To simplify, on a cold day, a photon might give a single, large leap, while on a hot day, it might give two smaller leaps. Thus means that when the energy is releases, on a hot day, there are two smaller photons released, which don't travel as far as the one released on a cold day. I'm not sure how clear of an explanation that was, so let me know if you need further clarification.


 I'll opt for further clarification. This doesn't really answer my question. 

K. Basically, on a cold day, there's less kinetic energy, so photon emissions happen as one, big photon, instead of two smaller ones. That means that it can travel farther.

Right, that makes sense to me, you can see further on a clear day then on a warm day.  Dense vs. less dense air etc.... In my experiment where I could not see further then 16 miles on a cool day at sea level yet could see the full 50 miles at 3000着 is this not evidence for a spherical earth?

Well, there are those who attribute this to light bending.  You'll find that nobody has exactly the same theory; it's all a clash between Wilmore's model, Davs's model, TB's model, and stuff that people randomly think up.

I appreciate the honesty.

Re: Round earth test.
« Reply #35 on: May 31, 2011, 01:43:22 PM »
In my experiment where I could not see further then 16 miles on a cool day at sea level yet could see the full 50 miles at 3000着 is this not evidence for a spherical earth?

Maybe, but not necessarily.  The air you are looking thru from sea level to 3000 ft is clearer than looking thru air all at sea level.  So you should be able to see farther. That would be true on either FE or RE.

The problem or the air and perspective at the horizon is one of the mainstays of FET.  E.G. the idea (yet to be tested in recent times) that a ship that appears to have gone over the horizon can be brought back up by looking at it thru a telescope.

Very interesting, I currently live near a port town, with many ships coming and going, everything from tall ships to barges to day sailors.  I would love to do this experiment.

Re: Round earth test.
« Reply #36 on: May 31, 2011, 01:52:56 PM »
Indeed!  But this never occurred to LAT42, I suppose.
Get up just five or six thousand feet above the lowest layer of the "air soup" and all that changes dramatically.  Visit Colorado, sometime.

I have been to Colorado and to the Alps.  I see your argument but if you are referencing a refraction phenomenon I have a two statements and a question for you.

Obviously, the density is decreasing upward because of the decreasing pressure, we can counteract this decrease by changing the temperature. In fact, the pressure falls off by about 1 part in 8000 for every meter of increase in height above sea level. We can compensate for this by decreasing the temperature by the same 1 part in 8000 for every meter of height. So this is say in Alaska on clear day you can see further because of the temperature being cooler. Perhaps you didn't know this.


Clearly you do not understand quantum chemistry. Light travels via the photon. When a photon hits an atom, its energy is transferred to that atom. The atom then releases the energy in the form of another photon. However, this new photon contains, by necessity,  less energy. This is called quantum leap. When an atom has less kinetic energy (i.e. is cold), it requires more energy to perform a quantum leap (note: in a quantum leap, what is actually happening is the electrons moving up to a higher energy level). Going up the levels, each quantum leap requires less energy, thus each photon can give more leaps. To simplify, on a cold day, a photon might give a single, large leap, while on a hot day, it might give two smaller leaps. Thus means that when the energy is releases, on a hot day, there are two smaller photons released, which don't travel as far as the one released on a cold day. I'm not sure how clear of an explanation that was, so let me know if you need further clarification.


 I'll opt for further clarification. This doesn't really answer my question. 

K. Basically, on a cold day, there's less kinetic energy, so photon emissions happen as one, big photon, instead of two smaller ones. That means that it can travel farther.

Right, that makes sense to me, you can see further on a clear day then on a warm day.  Dense vs. less dense air etc.... In my experiment where I could not see further then 16 miles on a cool day at sea level yet could see the full 50 miles at 3000着 is this not evidence for a spherical earth?

Well, there are those who attribute this to light bending.

The more serious folks, however, attribute it to the already scientifically-accepted fact that air is much thinner higher up.

Correct this is a fact, for evidence see Boyles law (as pressure decreases volume increases), Daltons law (as pressure decreases the partial pressure of 02 also deceases = Hypoxia), Henrys Law (which causes the "bends") And Charles Law (the reason temperature changes at altitude). 

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: Round earth test.
« Reply #37 on: May 31, 2011, 01:56:23 PM »
Yes, we're all familiar with the gas laws.

Re: Round earth test.
« Reply #38 on: May 31, 2011, 04:26:39 PM »
Very interesting, I currently live near a port town, with many ships coming and going, everything from tall ships to barges to day sailors.  I would love to do this experiment.

Then you're in a good position to check it out.  Some strong binoculars, or better yet a spotting scope, would do the trick.  Please let us know what you find.
I've done a bit of this across a lake, but the distance wasn't far enough to tell.

Re: Round earth test.
« Reply #39 on: May 31, 2011, 04:58:15 PM »
Yes, we're all familiar with the gas laws.

Perhaps you are, but to be honest I doubt you "all" are.

Re: Round earth test.
« Reply #40 on: May 31, 2011, 06:38:43 PM »
Very interesting, I currently live near a port town, with many ships coming and going, everything from tall ships to barges to day sailors.  I would love to do this experiment.

Then you're in a good position to check it out.  Some strong binoculars, or better yet a spotting scope, would do the trick.  Please let us know what you find.
I've done a bit of this across a lake, but the distance wasn't far enough to tell.

Hey A.R. I was hoping to ask you a question directly.  It is a little off topic, so I apologize but I was curious how the flat earth model would account for the changing of the seasons? I have looked through the FAQ and I have searched through different threads.  None of which really seem to have a satisfactory answer.  Seeing how only you and 典ausami have been able or willing to give intelligent responses I address this to you two specifically.    
« Last Edit: May 31, 2011, 06:40:18 PM by Lat42 »

Re: Round earth test.
« Reply #41 on: May 31, 2011, 06:39:42 PM »
Yes, we're all familiar with the gas laws.

"Tausami" I was hoping to ask you a question directly.  It is a little off topic, so I apologize but I was curious how the flat earth model would account for the changing of the seasons? I have looked through the FAQ and I have searched through different threads.  None of which really seem to have a satisfactory answer.  Seeing how only you and 鄭.R. have been able or willing to give intelligent responses I address this to you two specifically.   

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: Round earth test.
« Reply #42 on: May 31, 2011, 07:40:55 PM »
Yes, we're all familiar with the gas laws.

"Tausami" I was hoping to ask you a question directly.  It is a little off topic, so I apologize but I was curious how the flat earth model would account for the changing of the seasons? I have looked through the FAQ and I have searched through different threads.  None of which really seem to have a satisfactory answer.  Seeing how only you and 鄭.R. have been able or willing to give intelligent responses I address this to you two specifically.   

Quote from: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=11211.0
The radius of the sun's orbit around the Earth's axis symmetry varies throughout the year, being smallest when summer is in the northern annulus and largest when it is summer in the southern annulus.

Here are some diagrams of seasons. The first is by Nomad:


and the second is by Erasmus:



Re: Round earth test.
« Reply #43 on: May 31, 2011, 07:44:01 PM »
Edit:  Tausami posted much better while I was typing.

AFAIK, the FE seasons are caused by the sun moving toward or away from the North pole.  I.E. the sun is not in a fixed orbit above the earth, but one that changes over the course of the year.

Thus the path of the sun is not a circle, but a spiral.  This is also true in RET, but the cause is slightly different.

?

Thork

Re: Round earth test.
« Reply #44 on: June 07, 2011, 06:15:30 PM »
This might help.

Re: Round earth test.
« Reply #45 on: June 07, 2011, 06:56:05 PM »
Very interesting, I currently live near a port town, with many ships coming and going, everything from tall ships to barges to day sailors.  I would love to do this experiment.

Then you're in a good position to check it out.  Some strong binoculars, or better yet a spotting scope, would do the trick.  Please let us know what you find.
I've done a bit of this across a lake, but the distance wasn't far enough to tell.
I'll be at the coast in July for a few days.  I'll keep my binoculars on me at least.  If I happen to see a ship disappearing over the horizon, I'll watch it and report my findings.  Perhaps the sun setting too.  I already know the outcome though.