Why The Earth Appears Curved at a High Altitude.

1. Wind resistance does not curve light.
2. What about someone in a windowless helicopter?

Quote from: Thermal Detonator on June 01, 2010, 10:30:30 AM

Quote from: General Disarray on June 01, 2010, 10:20:08 AM

Quote from: Thermal Detonator on June 01, 2010, 10:19:11 AM

Quote from: General Disarray on June 01, 2010, 09:37:20 AM

Why has no one bothered to cite an analysis of what material airline windows are made of and their thickness or tolerance to pressure? Without any data to show what level of deformations would be caused by the pressures in an aircraft, this all seems pretty unfounded.

If you know what they're made of, Mr Smartypants, why didn't you?

Because I'm not the one making the claim that deformations in airplane windows cause apparent curvature on the horizon.

Yes, so by default if you take the sceptical stance to that claim you are making the counterclaim that this deformation does not happen.

I never said that I claimed such deformations did not happen, and I should not be required to prove a negative in any case.

Right, assuming your window is 12.5 inch by 9 inch, and a very pessimistic quarter inch thick.

With 7 psi acting, and a Youngs modulus of 9*10^6 lbf/in^2 (bog standard borosilicate glass) you'll get a deflection in the middle of your plate of....

0.025 inches.

0.6mm

Essentially f*ck all.

Quote from: Superstring on June 01, 2010, 01:36:56 PM

1. Wind resistance does not curve light.
2. What about someone in a windowless helicopter?

1. I didn't say it did.
2. What about them?

Quote from: d00gz on June 01, 2010, 09:55:24 AM

Right, assuming your window is 12.5 inch by 9 inch, and a very pessimistic quarter inch thick.

With 7 psi acting, and a Youngs modulus of 9*10^6 lbf/in^2 (bog standard borosilicate glass) you'll get a deflection in the middle of your plate of....

0.025 inches.

0.6mm

Essentially f*ck all.

Now times that by the 80 or so windows and tell me how far the fuselage bows out....

Now times that by the 80 or so windows and tell me how far the fuselage bows out....

I swear on all that is holy, I have never seen a curvature in all my flight hours.

A round-earth believer, or shape denier as I will call them from here on out, posts a pic from high altitude or makes the statement that in a plane you can see the curvature of the earth.  And indeed, the pictures of the shape deniers do look compelling.

Here is something that everyone has seen many times.  A round-earth believer, or shape denier as I will call them from here on out, posts a pic from high altitude or makes the statement that in a plane you can see the curvature of the earth.  And indeed, the pictures of the shape deniers do look compelling.  However, it's all an optical illusion.

At ground level, if you look out the window of a plane every round-earth believer and every shape denier can agree that the earth looks flat.  However, at extreme altitudes, it appears that there is a curvature.  This is well documented and understood.  Now, a shape denier will point to this and ignorantly proclaim, "Ah hah!  We've got you!  Another win for RET!!!"  Seems like a solid claim on the surface, lets look deeper.

The traditional response to this is that they are seeing the outline of the sun's spotlight, and at very very high altitudes or close to dawn/dusk this is true.  However, some pictures are taken at noon, or at the center of the spotlight at altitudes that shouldn't show curvature.  So what's going on?

The real reason that the earth looks curved is due to air pressure.  In order to keep passengers and personnel comfortable, and alive, a plain must maintain a certain atmospheric pressure.  Once a plain gets so high, the pressure outside the fuselage is lower than it is on the inside.  This causes the windows to bow outwards and give objects in the distance a curved look.  As the horizon is the only thing viewable that spans the length of a window, and at a sufficiently far distance, it appears to be curved. 

This optical illusion has fooled many people the world over, but it will no longer deceive you!  The next time you are on an airliner and a kid points out the window claiming to see the curvature of the earth, you can educate him or her on what is really going on and hopefully open their eyes to truth of the shape of this flat earth.

1. A curved body does not create the perception of a negative curve for other objects, ie earth. If you claim it does, prove it.
2.

Quote from: d00gz on June 01, 2010, 09:55:24 AM

Right, assuming your window is 12.5 inch by 9 inch, and a very pessimistic quarter inch thick.

With 7 psi acting, and a Youngs modulus of 9*10^6 lbf/in^2 (bog standard borosilicate glass) you'll get a deflection in the middle of your plate of....

0.025 inches.

0.6mm

Essentially f*ck all.

Now times that by the 80 or so windows and tell me how far the fuselage bows out....

This causes the windows to bow and give objects in the distance a curved look.

Now times that by the 80 or so windows and tell me how far the fuselage bows out....

Quote from: Superstring on June 01, 2010, 02:47:09 PM

1. A curved body does not create the perception of a negative curve for other objects, ie earth. If you claim it does, prove it.
2.

1. The apparent curvature of the horizon in your image is sufficient evidence.
2. The edge of the helicopter also appears curved. Is the helicopter round?

Quote from: Pongo on June 01, 2010, 01:22:10 AM

This causes the windows to bow and give objects in the distance a curved look.

Wouldn't that cause the horizon to slope up at the edges instead of down?  For further experimentation: look at your reflection on either side of that cereal spoon, Mr. Wizard.  The lens you're pretending it would form would only curve the edges down if the horizon were above the vanishing point when viewed straight out.  Even if I try to help you and we presume that's the case and the plane is tilted, it still doesn't account for the people looking from the other side who would view just the opposite curvature.  Good day, sir.

2. The edge of the helicopter also appears curved. Is the helicopter round?

I figured the reflection of spoons would be a more readily available demonstration of different kinds of visual warping due to light reflecting off (or traveling through) bent materials.

Now that I think about it: what kind of lensing is this even supposed to be?  Unless the thickness of the window somehow seriously changes between the middle and edges, you're not going to get much of a warped image at all.

Remember that picture I showed you from a balloon?

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39375.0

Ladies and gentlemen, please direct your attention to the FE fail above.

Quote from: jackofhearts on June 02, 2010, 02:57:11 AM

Remember that picture I showed you from a balloon?

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39375.0

Ladies and gentlemen, please direct your attention to the FE fail above.

That is sufficient evidence that the FEH is false until I can prove that it was digitally altered, because it is in no way "clearly digitally altered."

Quote from: jackofhearts on June 02, 2010, 02:57:11 AM

Remember that picture I showed you from a balloon?

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39375.0

Ladies and gentlemen, please direct your attention to the FE fail above.

That might be sufficient evidence if the photo had not clearly been digitally altered.

Quote from: f(x) on June 02, 2010, 07:25:57 PM

Quote from: jackofhearts on June 02, 2010, 02:57:11 AM

Remember that picture I showed you from a balloon?

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39375.0

Ladies and gentlemen, please direct your attention to the FE fail above.

That might be sufficient evidence if the photo had not clearly been digitally altered.

Explain how it was "Clearly" digitally altered.

ITT (and every other created by Pongo): He poorly understands scientific principles, makes broad and incorrect assumptions, and ignores any posts which prove him wrong.

Quote from: General Disarray on June 02, 2010, 09:42:16 PM

ITT (and every other created by Pongo): He poorly understands scientific principles, makes broad and incorrect assumptions, and ignores any posts which prove him wrong.

Yea, but he does it on purpose, he's trolling.

Quote from: Tech on June 03, 2010, 02:53:34 AM

Quote from: General Disarray on June 02, 2010, 09:42:16 PM

ITT (and every other created by Pongo): He poorly understands scientific principles, makes broad and incorrect assumptions, and ignores any posts which prove him wrong.

Yea, but he does it on purpose, he's trolling.

I'm not trolling.  In general, I ignore posts that have been answered over and over again by other flat earthers.  I almost always ignore posts that I have already answered, especially if I've answered them in the same thread. 

Ignoring asinine questions does not mean I am trolling.

You have a preconceived notion that I am trolling.  If I say I'm not trolling, then you say I'm just trolling and that's what a troll would say.  If I say I am trolling then you conciser your accusations vindicated.

It's not I that's can't prove I'm not trolling, it's you that cannot accept I'm not trolling.

You have a preconceived notion that I am trolling.  If I say I'm not trolling, then you say I'm just trolling and that's what a troll would say.  If I say I am trolling then you conciser your accusations vindicated.

It's not I that's can't prove I'm not trolling, it's you that cannot accept I'm not trolling.

I am a Round-Earth Believer. I have read your posts, and the "curved window" claim is very convincing. But, if you were to take this argument to the extremes, let's say space, pictures and videos taken specifically show that (A) the Earth is most definitely globe-shaped, and (B) that it isn't flat with rough pillar bottoms.

Take this picture as an example:

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:hAaAtwkVKvYmUM:http://spiritualoasis.files.wordpress.com/2006/10/earth-from-space-western.jpg