FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)

  • 121 Replies
  • 15720 Views
Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #90 on: June 23, 2010, 01:32:44 AM »
Parsifal sorry, you look like a stupid troll. Or maybe you are a stupid troll. Why we have to prove that the sky always exist? And why we have to prove everything, while you dont prove anything till now. Prove that the sky was not there in 2000 BC. Logic make us thoughts that the sky was there many many years before that date. So, for one time, prove what you are saying.

Logic doesn't make us think anything about the physical world. Since none of us were around in 2000 BC, we have no reason to believe that the sky existed back then.

And the light is a radiation, so it has an angle. If you dont believe me, believe in your eyes:



Exactly where in this picture does light have an angle? I am intrigued by your claim.

How do you know none of us were around in 2000 BC? I'd say that's more likely than the sun being a projection since then.

What is this story of the projection now?? I just dont understand this bullshit! Projection of what on what and in what way?

?

Thevoiceofreason

  • 1792
  • Bendy Truth specialist
Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #91 on: June 23, 2010, 02:05:54 AM »
Parsifal sorry, you look like a stupid troll. Or maybe you are a stupid troll. Why we have to prove that the sky always exist? And why we have to prove everything, while you dont prove anything till now. Prove that the sky was not there in 2000 BC. Logic make us thoughts that the sky was there many many years before that date. So, for one time, prove what you are saying.

Logic doesn't make us think anything about the physical world. Since none of us were around in 2000 BC, we have no reason to believe that the sky existed back then.

And the light is a radiation, so it has an angle. If you dont believe me, believe in your eyes:



Exactly where in this picture does light have an angle? I am intrigued by your claim.

How do you know none of us were around in 2000 BC? I'd say that's more likely than the sun being a projection since then.

What is this story of the projection now?? I just dont understand this bullshit! Projection of what on what and in what way?
he's saying that the sky didn't exist before the conspiracy. when the conspiracy came around, they built a gigantic screen way up in the air, which we now think is the sky. therefore the sun, moon, and stars are just an illusion controllable by this gigantic screen. Therefore sunlight doesn't come from the sun, which doesn't exist as we think it does.

?

Neon_Knight

Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #92 on: June 23, 2010, 02:24:17 AM »
Ref - my post about old trees existing, and shadows on the sky etc.

Pretty sure this claim has now been made redundantly false.

Also - I'm aware most of the people on these forums are trolls, I'm just playing along... hence the tongue-in-cheek reply about 3d cinema on the sky.  ;)
(I don't really think 3d cinema on the sky would be a very good idea, the clouds would get in the way and there wouldn't be any sound.  In fact, it'd be awful)

Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #93 on: June 23, 2010, 02:37:21 AM »
Parsifal sorry, you look like a stupid troll. Or maybe you are a stupid troll. Why we have to prove that the sky always exist? And why we have to prove everything, while you dont prove anything till now. Prove that the sky was not there in 2000 BC. Logic make us thoughts that the sky was there many many years before that date. So, for one time, prove what you are saying.

Logic doesn't make us think anything about the physical world. Since none of us were around in 2000 BC, we have no reason to believe that the sky existed back then.

And the light is a radiation, so it has an angle. If you dont believe me, believe in your eyes:



Exactly where in this picture does light have an angle? I am intrigued by your claim.

How do you know none of us were around in 2000 BC? I'd say that's more likely than the sun being a projection since then.

What is this story of the projection now?? I just dont understand this bullshit! Projection of what on what and in what way?
he's saying that the sky didn't exist before the conspiracy. when the conspiracy came around, they built a gigantic screen way up in the air, which we now think is the sky. therefore the sun, moon, and stars are just an illusion controllable by this gigantic screen. Therefore sunlight doesn't come from the sun, which doesn't exist as we think it does.

LOLWUT? Are you kidding me? We are here talking about a giant canvas? and the sky is projected on it? This cannot be real.

And in what way this happen? I think there is a incredibly huge and complex machine that do so, and i just dont take in account how is it possible to put a giant canvas in the middle of nowhere!!

And what this can be related with the sentence:

"How do you know none of us were around in 2000 BC? I'd say that's more likely than the sun being a projection since then."

?

Thevoiceofreason

  • 1792
  • Bendy Truth specialist
Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #94 on: June 23, 2010, 05:26:42 AM »
Parsifal sorry, you look like a stupid troll. Or maybe you are a stupid troll. Why we have to prove that the sky always exist? And why we have to prove everything, while you dont prove anything till now. Prove that the sky was not there in 2000 BC. Logic make us thoughts that the sky was there many many years before that date. So, for one time, prove what you are saying.

Logic doesn't make us think anything about the physical world. Since none of us were around in 2000 BC, we have no reason to believe that the sky existed back then.

And the light is a radiation, so it has an angle. If you dont believe me, believe in your eyes:



Exactly where in this picture does light have an angle? I am intrigued by your claim.

How do you know none of us were around in 2000 BC? I'd say that's more likely than the sun being a projection since then.

What is this story of the projection now?? I just dont understand this bullshit! Projection of what on what and in what way?
he's saying that the sky didn't exist before the conspiracy. when the conspiracy came around, they built a gigantic screen way up in the air, which we now think is the sky. therefore the sun, moon, and stars are just an illusion controllable by this gigantic screen. Therefore sunlight doesn't come from the sun, which doesn't exist as we think it does.

LOLWUT? Are you kidding me? We are here talking about a giant canvas? and the sky is projected on it? This cannot be real.

And in what way this happen? I think there is a incredibly huge and complex machine that do so, and i just dont take in account how is it possible to put a giant canvas in the middle of nowhere!!

And what this can be related with the sentence:

"How do you know none of us were around in 2000 BC? I'd say that's more likely than the sun being a projection since then."

He's trolling. Best to ignore him. When he's out of anything to argue, he reaches for an absurd solution. basically he can claim life is like the matrix, some imaginary force exists to make the earth appear round, but it is still flat.


*

babsinva

  • 2222
  • aka Mr. Fahrenheit
Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #95 on: June 24, 2010, 12:12:18 AM »

My response was given based on lon445's post, of which you answered as 6 hrs, but consider this - scroll to bottom.


Day length of 1/4 of a day cycle (6 hrs) according to today's time or when?

Using the lunisolar, the lunar, or solar calendar?

If I correctly understand, the flat earth model is an attempt to explain most of the observable phenomenon on the earth. All the observation from outerspace are called hoax or conspiracy.

However, even if all the explanation for phenomena as the disappearing of a boat or terrestrial gravitation are acceptable the FE model still fail to explain the primary phenomenon it is suppose to explain: day cycle.

The ancient flat earth model supposed that the far sun revolve around the flat earth in 24 hours. The days are the time when the sun is above the horizon line and night is when it is under. However this was inconsistent with the various angle the sun makes with the earth depending the on the place we are on the planet. Ancient Greek even deduce the diameter of the earth from this phenomenon.

In order to solve this problem the modern FE model suggest a small sun revolving above the earth disc around the polar axis. This explain the different angles, seasons, variation in day length but fails where the previous one succeed: explaining a 24 hrs day. If the sun act as a spotlight projecting a circular area of light on the earth, the diameter of this circle would need to be close to half of the diameter of the earth and can cover only 1/4 of the earth surface at a time (A=Pi*r^2 --> Pi*(r/2)^2=(1/4)Pi*r^2=A/4). The sun would therefore cover only one quarter of the equator line at solstice. If the sun have a constant speed (scalar) it would mean that the longest day of the year at equator would be of 6 hours. Moreover, this length would decrease toward zero as we approach zero toward the north pole and Antartica.

I don't want to underestimate the creative minds of flat earther but I think this is a tough one. Only the round earth model can explain both the annual and daily phenomena at the same time.



6hrs, as you would only receive daylight for a maximum of 6 hours the definite unit of time.
night would then be a minimum of 18hrs. this is based of of the spotlight theory that is most prominent in FE. In reality the Sun at the equinox should shine a semicircle that rotates around the center, if the world were flat

I was not just mentioning lunar as in monthly or yearly, but also daily.  A lunar day (not with respects to space exploration) is also called a "tidal day", by oceanographers.  This is the time it takes for the earth to complete one full rotation on its axis with respect to the moon, which is NOT 24 hrs at all.  It is instead 24 hrs, 50 minutes, and 28 seconds.

Additionally in lunar calendars of the Hindus, (which is not completely and truly lunar) their lunar day is the time that it takes for the longitudinal angle between the sun and the moon to increase by 12 %, which also would not be 24 hrs.

Quote from Big Giant Head:  "Considered fictitious or phantom does not quantify its non-existence."

Quote from Soze:  "We cannot escape perception, but we can't assume reality doesn't exist outside of perception."

?

Thevoiceofreason

  • 1792
  • Bendy Truth specialist
Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #96 on: June 24, 2010, 03:54:22 AM »

My response was given based on lon445's post, of which you answered as 6 hrs, but consider this - scroll to bottom.


Day length of 1/4 of a day cycle (6 hrs) according to today's time or when?

Using the lunisolar, the lunar, or solar calendar?

If I correctly understand, the flat earth model is an attempt to explain most of the observable phenomenon on the earth. All the observation from outerspace are called hoax or conspiracy.

However, even if all the explanation for phenomena as the disappearing of a boat or terrestrial gravitation are acceptable the FE model still fail to explain the primary phenomenon it is suppose to explain: day cycle.

The ancient flat earth model supposed that the far sun revolve around the flat earth in 24 hours. The days are the time when the sun is above the horizon line and night is when it is under. However this was inconsistent with the various angle the sun makes with the earth depending the on the place we are on the planet. Ancient Greek even deduce the diameter of the earth from this phenomenon.

In order to solve this problem the modern FE model suggest a small sun revolving above the earth disc around the polar axis. This explain the different angles, seasons, variation in day length but fails where the previous one succeed: explaining a 24 hrs day. If the sun act as a spotlight projecting a circular area of light on the earth, the diameter of this circle would need to be close to half of the diameter of the earth and can cover only 1/4 of the earth surface at a time (A=Pi*r^2 --> Pi*(r/2)^2=(1/4)Pi*r^2=A/4). The sun would therefore cover only one quarter of the equator line at solstice. If the sun have a constant speed (scalar) it would mean that the longest day of the year at equator would be of 6 hours. Moreover, this length would decrease toward zero as we approach zero toward the north pole and Antartica.

I don't want to underestimate the creative minds of flat earther but I think this is a tough one. Only the round earth model can explain both the annual and daily phenomena at the same time.



6hrs, as you would only receive daylight for a maximum of 6 hours the definite unit of time.
night would then be a minimum of 18hrs. this is based of of the spotlight theory that is most prominent in FE. In reality the Sun at the equinox should shine a semicircle that rotates around the center, if the world were flat

I was not just mentioning lunar as in monthly or yearly, but also daily.  A lunar day (not with respects to space exploration) is also called a "tidal day", by oceanographers.  This is the time it takes for the earth to complete one full rotation on its axis with respect to the moon, which is NOT 24 hrs at all.  It is instead 24 hrs, 50 minutes, and 28 seconds.

Additionally in lunar calendars of the Hindus, (which is not completely and truly lunar) their lunar day is the time that it takes for the longitudinal angle between the sun and the moon to increase by 12 %, which also would not be 24 hrs.



oh i sort of see... It would be based on the solar day. not the sidereal or lunar. and by 6hrs, I mean daytime not length of the cycle

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36114
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #97 on: June 24, 2010, 05:27:38 AM »
Nobody has yet shown any proof of the 6 hour limit to the length of a day.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

General Disarray

  • Official Member
  • 5039
  • Magic specialist
Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #98 on: June 24, 2010, 06:46:51 AM »
Nobody has yet shown any proof of the 6 hour limit to the length of a day.

Nobody except for the OP.
You don't want to make an enemy of me. I'm very powerful.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36114
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #99 on: June 24, 2010, 07:13:32 AM »
Nobody has yet shown any proof of the 6 hour limit to the length of a day.

Nobody except for the OP.

There was no proof, only an unjustified leap of faith.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

Thevoiceofreason

  • 1792
  • Bendy Truth specialist
Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #100 on: June 24, 2010, 02:22:46 PM »
Nobody has yet shown any proof of the 6 hour limit to the length of a day.

That's because days can last up to 24, because the earth isn't flat. thanks for playing.
only 1/4th of the earth can be lit in spotlight theory

*

The Question1

  • 390
  • Your logic is inferior to my logic.
Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #101 on: June 24, 2010, 02:25:20 PM »
I am surprised to see no FE'er input.
Another topic for my sig.

?

Thevoiceofreason

  • 1792
  • Bendy Truth specialist
Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #102 on: June 24, 2010, 02:27:56 PM »
I am surprised to see no FE'er input.
Another topic for my sig.
there is no answer to this, other than Parsifal's canvas theory. the problem of the semi circle+ the Sun shining from beyond the void is insurmountable.

*

babsinva

  • 2222
  • aka Mr. Fahrenheit
Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #103 on: June 24, 2010, 07:40:23 PM »


My response was given based on lon445's post, of which you answered as 6 hrs, but consider this - scroll to bottom.


Day length of 1/4 of a day cycle (6 hrs) according to today's time or when?

Using the lunisolar, the lunar, or solar calendar?

If I correctly understand, the flat earth model is an attempt to explain most of the observable phenomenon on the earth. All the observation from outerspace are called hoax or conspiracy.

However, even if all the explanation for phenomena as the disappearing of a boat or terrestrial gravitation are acceptable the FE model still fail to explain the primary phenomenon it is suppose to explain: day cycle.

The ancient flat earth model supposed that the far sun revolve around the flat earth in 24 hours. The days are the time when the sun is above the horizon line and night is when it is under. However this was inconsistent with the various angle the sun makes with the earth depending the on the place we are on the planet. Ancient Greek even deduce the diameter of the earth from this phenomenon.

In order to solve this problem the modern FE model suggest a small sun revolving above the earth disc around the polar axis. This explain the different angles, seasons, variation in day length but fails where the previous one succeed: explaining a 24 hrs day. If the sun act as a spotlight projecting a circular area of light on the earth, the diameter of this circle would need to be close to half of the diameter of the earth and can cover only 1/4 of the earth surface at a time (A=Pi*r^2 --> Pi*(r/2)^2=(1/4)Pi*r^2=A/4). The sun would therefore cover only one quarter of the equator line at solstice. If the sun have a constant speed (scalar) it would mean that the longest day of the year at equator would be of 6 hours. Moreover, this length would decrease toward zero as we approach zero toward the north pole and Antartica.

I don't want to underestimate the creative minds of flat earther but I think this is a tough one. Only the round earth model can explain both the annual and daily phenomena at the same time.



6hrs, as you would only receive daylight for a maximum of 6 hours the definite unit of time.
night would then be a minimum of 18hrs. this is based of of the spotlight theory that is most prominent in FE. In reality the Sun at the equinox should shine a semicircle that rotates around the center, if the world were flat

I was not just mentioning lunar as in monthly or yearly, but also daily.  A lunar day (not with respects to space exploration) is also called a "tidal day", by oceanographers.  This is the time it takes for the earth to complete one full rotation on its axis with respect to the moon, which is NOT 24 hrs at all.  It is instead 24 hrs, 50 minutes, and 28 seconds.

Additionally in lunar calendars of the Hindus, (which is not completely and truly lunar) their lunar day is the time that it takes for the longitudinal angle between the sun and the moon to increase by 12 %, which also would not be 24 hrs.

oh i sort of see... It would be based on the solar day. not the sidereal or lunar. and by 6hrs, I mean daytime not length of the cycle

Nobody has yet shown any proof of the 6 hour limit to the length of a day.

I am with Parsifal on this one.

And VoiceofReason, perhaps you are not understanding my post.  I know you said you were NOT talking about the entire cycle or length of it, but that measurement of time has to be taken into account in order to come up with 1/4 of one day.  Based on your thought, 1/4 of 24 hrs is 6 hrs, however 1/4 of 24 Hrs, 50 min, and 28 seconds, which is a "tidal day" nets a different result.  Now doesn't it?


Quote from Big Giant Head:  "Considered fictitious or phantom does not quantify its non-existence."

Quote from Soze:  "We cannot escape perception, but we can't assume reality doesn't exist outside of perception."

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36114
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #104 on: June 24, 2010, 09:17:19 PM »
Nobody has yet shown any proof of the 6 hour limit to the length of a day.

That's because days can last up to 24, because the earth isn't flat. thanks for playing.
only 1/4th of the earth can be lit in spotlight theory

I meant in the FE model, obviously.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

Thevoiceofreason

  • 1792
  • Bendy Truth specialist
Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #105 on: June 25, 2010, 01:15:51 AM »


My response was given based on lon445's post, of which you answered as 6 hrs, but consider this - scroll to bottom.


Day length of 1/4 of a day cycle (6 hrs) according to today's time or when?

Using the lunisolar, the lunar, or solar calendar?

If I correctly understand, the flat earth model is an attempt to explain most of the observable phenomenon on the earth. All the observation from outerspace are called hoax or conspiracy.

However, even if all the explanation for phenomena as the disappearing of a boat or terrestrial gravitation are acceptable the FE model still fail to explain the primary phenomenon it is suppose to explain: day cycle.

The ancient flat earth model supposed that the far sun revolve around the flat earth in 24 hours. The days are the time when the sun is above the horizon line and night is when it is under. However this was inconsistent with the various angle the sun makes with the earth depending the on the place we are on the planet. Ancient Greek even deduce the diameter of the earth from this phenomenon.

In order to solve this problem the modern FE model suggest a small sun revolving above the earth disc around the polar axis. This explain the different angles, seasons, variation in day length but fails where the previous one succeed: explaining a 24 hrs day. If the sun act as a spotlight projecting a circular area of light on the earth, the diameter of this circle would need to be close to half of the diameter of the earth and can cover only 1/4 of the earth surface at a time (A=Pi*r^2 --> Pi*(r/2)^2=(1/4)Pi*r^2=A/4). The sun would therefore cover only one quarter of the equator line at solstice. If the sun have a constant speed (scalar) it would mean that the longest day of the year at equator would be of 6 hours. Moreover, this length would decrease toward zero as we approach zero toward the north pole and Antartica.

I don't want to underestimate the creative minds of flat earther but I think this is a tough one. Only the round earth model can explain both the annual and daily phenomena at the same time.



6hrs, as you would only receive daylight for a maximum of 6 hours the definite unit of time.
night would then be a minimum of 18hrs. this is based of of the spotlight theory that is most prominent in FE. In reality the Sun at the equinox should shine a semicircle that rotates around the center, if the world were flat

I was not just mentioning lunar as in monthly or yearly, but also daily.  A lunar day (not with respects to space exploration) is also called a "tidal day", by oceanographers.  This is the time it takes for the earth to complete one full rotation on its axis with respect to the moon, which is NOT 24 hrs at all.  It is instead 24 hrs, 50 minutes, and 28 seconds.

Additionally in lunar calendars of the Hindus, (which is not completely and truly lunar) their lunar day is the time that it takes for the longitudinal angle between the sun and the moon to increase by 12 %, which also would not be 24 hrs.

oh i sort of see... It would be based on the solar day. not the sidereal or lunar. and by 6hrs, I mean daytime not length of the cycle

Nobody has yet shown any proof of the 6 hour limit to the length of a day.

I am with Parsifal on this one.

And VoiceofReason, perhaps you are not understanding my post.  I know you said you were NOT talking about the entire cycle or length of it, but that measurement of time has to be taken into account in order to come up with 1/4 of one day.  Based on your thought, 1/4 of 24 hrs is 6 hrs, however 1/4 of 24 Hrs, 50 min, and 28 seconds, which is a "tidal day" nets a different result.  Now doesn't it?

total day is still solar... we take 1/4th of the solar day, because all of this is based on the sun's movement. this isn't about the moon at all, its based on the geometry of the FE model. also I don't get Parsifal's point. ok I see, it would be better to say an average day length of 6hrs. The following observations regard when the earth is at equinox.
RE model
You'd get 12 hours everywhere

FE Model
Near the pole, you'd get 12hrs of daylight
at 45N you'd get about 10 hours
at the equator you would get 8 hours
at 45S you'd get about 5.5 hours
Near the Icewall you'd get almost none

We know the average length of day is the size of the projection/size of earth which is 1/4of a day

?

Crustinator

  • 7813
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #106 on: June 25, 2010, 02:42:31 AM »
I meant in the FE model, obviously.

Read the OP.

*

babsinva

  • 2222
  • aka Mr. Fahrenheit
Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #107 on: June 30, 2010, 02:05:54 PM »

Read the OP.




I was not just mentioning lunar as in monthly or yearly, but also daily.  A lunar day (not with respects to space exploration) is also called a "tidal day", by oceanographers.  This is the time it takes for the earth to complete one full rotation on its axis with respect to the moon, which is NOT 24 hrs at all.  It is instead 24 hrs, 50 minutes, and 28 seconds.

Additionally in lunar calendars of the Hindus, (which is not completely and truly lunar) their lunar day is the time that it takes for the longitudinal angle between the sun and the moon to increase by 12 %, which also would not be 24 hrs.

oh i sort of see... It would be based on the solar day. not the sidereal or lunar. and by 6hrs, I mean daytime not length of the cycle

Nobody has yet shown any proof of the 6 hour limit to the length of a day.

I am with Parsifal on this one.

And VoiceofReason, perhaps you are not understanding my post.  I know you said you were NOT talking about the entire cycle or length of it, but that measurement of time has to be taken into account in order to come up with 1/4 of one day.  Based on your thought, 1/4 of 24 hrs is 6 hrs, however 1/4 of 24 Hrs, 50 min, and 28 seconds, which is a "tidal day" nets a different result.  Now doesn't it?


total day is still solar... we take 1/4th of the solar day, because all of this is based on the sun's movement. this isn't about the moon at all, its based on the geometry of the FE model. also I don't get Parsifal's point. ok I see, it would be better to say an average day length of 6hrs. The following observations regard when the earth is at equinox.
RE model
You'd get 12 hours everywhere


FE Model
Near the pole, you'd get 12hrs of daylight
at 45N you'd get about 10 hours
at the equator you would get 8 hours
at 45S you'd get about 5.5 hours
Near the Icewall you'd get almost none

We know the average length of day is the size of the projection/size of earth which is 1/4of a day

I will address the part I highlighted in blue >>>

1)  Only at the 2 equinoxes does the 12 hour daylight hold up everywhere but that's only twice a year, and you never mentioned that in your original post "at equinox only."  Additionally you are basing the solar day on 24 hours with 1/4 of that being 6 hrs, with 12 of those 24 hours as daylight hours, - solely on what happens at equinox AND only as it relates to the solar day, and not the lunar day, which is more, or sidereal day which is less.  Quite a stretch if you are basing it on that small pinpointed criteria.

2)  Also on the days near or surrounding the equinoxes, both poles experience 24 hours of daylight (or daytime) hours.

Quote from Big Giant Head:  "Considered fictitious or phantom does not quantify its non-existence."

Quote from Soze:  "We cannot escape perception, but we can't assume reality doesn't exist outside of perception."

?

Thevoiceofreason

  • 1792
  • Bendy Truth specialist
Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #108 on: July 03, 2010, 08:38:51 AM »

Read the OP.




I was not just mentioning lunar as in monthly or yearly, but also daily.  A lunar day (not with respects to space exploration) is also called a "tidal day", by oceanographers.  This is the time it takes for the earth to complete one full rotation on its axis with respect to the moon, which is NOT 24 hrs at all.  It is instead 24 hrs, 50 minutes, and 28 seconds.

Additionally in lunar calendars of the Hindus, (which is not completely and truly lunar) their lunar day is the time that it takes for the longitudinal angle between the sun and the moon to increase by 12 %, which also would not be 24 hrs.

oh i sort of see... It would be based on the solar day. not the sidereal or lunar. and by 6hrs, I mean daytime not length of the cycle

Nobody has yet shown any proof of the 6 hour limit to the length of a day.

I am with Parsifal on this one.

And VoiceofReason, perhaps you are not understanding my post.  I know you said you were NOT talking about the entire cycle or length of it, but that measurement of time has to be taken into account in order to come up with 1/4 of one day.  Based on your thought, 1/4 of 24 hrs is 6 hrs, however 1/4 of 24 Hrs, 50 min, and 28 seconds, which is a "tidal day" nets a different result.  Now doesn't it?


total day is still solar... we take 1/4th of the solar day, because all of this is based on the sun's movement. this isn't about the moon at all, its based on the geometry of the FE model. also I don't get Parsifal's point. ok I see, it would be better to say an average day length of 6hrs. The following observations regard when the earth is at equinox.
RE model
You'd get 12 hours everywhere


FE Model
Near the pole, you'd get 12hrs of daylight
at 45N you'd get about 10 hours
at the equator you would get 8 hours
at 45S you'd get about 5.5 hours
Near the Icewall you'd get almost none

We know the average length of day is the size of the projection/size of earth which is 1/4of a day

I will address the part I highlighted in blue >>>

1)  Only at the 2 equinoxes does the 12 hour daylight hold up everywhere but that's only twice a year, and you never mentioned that in your original post "at equinox only."  Additionally you are basing the solar day on 24 hours with 1/4 of that being 6 hrs, with 12 of those 24 hours as daylight hours, - solely on what happens at equinox AND only as it relates to the solar day, and not the lunar day, which is more, or sidereal day which is less.  Quite a stretch if you are basing it on that small pinpointed criteria.

2)  Also on the days near or surrounding the equinoxes, both poles experience 24 hours of daylight (or daytime) hours.


Who cares about the lunar or sidereal days? we are talking about the sun and the earth ITT.
The other day types are irrelevant to daylight. and I'm talking about equinox, because if it fails at equinox, the theory fails. the equinox is the easiest one to calculate, I don't see why you have a problem with this idea or why you are talking about time according to the moon, tides, or stars. The only important thing about the day is the sun. The other days are only time keeping methods. They have nothing to do with the physical day i.e. sun rise, noon, sundown, night.

and for your second point, that is even worse for FE, because explain how parts of the south pole could possibly get 24 hours of daylight. ever.

Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #109 on: July 13, 2010, 10:52:40 PM »
Big clue:

Regardless where the sun is visible rising east, setting west, or from the North and South pole, or directly at high noon over head, all the observers in relation to this prove the spotlight disk Sun an utter laughable joke.. Why? Because you can call all these places and ask them the shape of the sun, what time of day it is, where in the sky is the sun, what angle the Sun is in according to the horizon and their point of perspective.. And guess what shape the sun is to all of these observers is... That's right, a 360 degree circle LOL, and worse yet if you do the angular calculations for each observer.. you establish the following facts:

A: the Sun is not a spotlight shining down over a flat plane LMAO
B: the angular math actually proves that the Earth is a sphere, and that the Sun can not be a flat disk and is also a Sphere..


And in regards to the Sun's distance.. Any moron that knows how to measure distance via redshift will understand why the Sun isn't 33,000 miles away.
FE T-shirts = Profit = conspiracy = ideological cult in the making = teaching stupid = paranoia = nut case. Any questions?

Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #110 on: July 13, 2010, 11:16:49 PM »
And in regards to the Sun's distance.. Any moron that knows how to measure distance via redshift will understand why the Sun isn't 33,000 miles away.
I think you mean by parallax, and it's actually hard to due without a total solar eclipse. Though any one with an open mind can repeat the parallax measurements of satellites and even the Moon. So, yes, we do know that the FAQ has those distances wrong.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #111 on: July 14, 2010, 01:03:22 AM »
And in regards to the Sun's distance.. Any moron that knows how to measure distance via redshift will understand why the Sun isn't 33,000 miles away.
I think you mean by parallax, and it's actually hard to due without a total solar eclipse. Though any one with an open mind can repeat the parallax measurements of satellites and even the Moon. So, yes, we do know that the FAQ has those distances wrong.

We don't have to measure the Sun, We can measure the orbiting planets that pass behind the sun and the ones that are closer to the sun, or planets passing in front of the sun.. Such as Mercury and Venus.. You can also off angle measure the Sun's red shift on all four sides including the center to get an accurate estimated distance.. We don't get the distance from the sun so accurately because we are stupid. the redshift of an object can be measured by examining atomic absorption or emission lines in its spectrum. Redshifts can be caused by the motion of a source away from an observer such as our own sun, and the planets around it. The other method we can use other than using Parallax, or by red shifting is via Radar. And Radar is far more accurate than Parallax (a mathematical equation your site epically failed at to start with) We can know for example what Venus's distance from Earth is by measuring it directly and extremely accurately with radar. A beam of radiation is aimed at the planet and the time it takes to receive the echo is measured using the atomic clock. Because the speed of light is known exactly, the distance to Venus is half the time (the signal travels there and back) divided by the speed of light. And since we know that Venus is closer to us than the Sun is, we can establish that FE's numbers are actually pretty pathetic. If The sun was only 33,000 miles it's red shift and radar signature would confirm it, and unfortunately for FE, it doesn't even come close.. FE really fails at checking it's data much less it's false mathematics according to visual interpretation. The Faq isn't even remotely in the same ball park.. And I can't even consider it worthy of my attention.

Rounded Radar distances from the Sun:
And I round these numbers due to elliptical orbits.

Mercury   58,000,000 km
Venus   108,000,000 km
Earth           150,000,000 km
Mars           228,000,000 km
Jupiter   779,000,000 km
Saturn   1,433,000,000 km

We can verify this by triangulating the the sun between the other known planets that orbit it just on the radar data alone.. It doesn't matter if we use Venus or Mars.. Radar is microwave electromagnetic radiation and it travels at the speed of light. So we can get the distance of the Sun as follows:



And this is how an Astronomical Unit is determined..
« Last Edit: July 14, 2010, 01:10:23 AM by TheJackel »
FE T-shirts = Profit = conspiracy = ideological cult in the making = teaching stupid = paranoia = nut case. Any questions?

Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #112 on: July 14, 2010, 01:12:37 AM »
And in regards to the Sun's distance.. Any moron that knows how to measure distance via redshift will understand why the Sun isn't 33,000 miles away.
I think you mean by parallax, and it's actually hard to due without a total solar eclipse. Though any one with an open mind can repeat the parallax measurements of satellites and even the Moon. So, yes, we do know that the FAQ has those distances wrong.

We don't have to measure the Sun, We can measure the orbiting planets that pass behind the sun and the ones that are closer to the sun, or planets passing in front of the sun.. Such as Mercury and Venus.. You can also off angle measure the Sun's red shift on all four sides including the center to get an accurate estimated distance.. We don't get the distance from the sun so accurately because we are stupid. the redshift of an object can be measured by examining atomic absorption or emission lines in its spectrum. Redshifts can be caused by the motion of a source away from an observer such as our own sun, and the planets around it. The other method we can use other than using Parallax is Radar.
Please note that I'm a REer, so telling me about the problems in the FAQ's answers is "preaching to the choir". I do have to point out that there are several errors in your post, though. Again, redshift while useful in determining the distance to extra-galactic bodies doesn't help with the Sun. Measuring the redshift at five locations would help us understand its rotation, though. Radar distancing does not, to my knowledge, rely on parallax. It relies only on the speed of light and the time between signal and its return.

Otherwise, you are correct. FET's "opinion" about the distance and size of various objects can be readily determined by any open-minded person willing to spend a day's effort to set and then later execute an experiment.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #113 on: July 14, 2010, 01:18:07 AM »
Sorry, it's wicked late and when I hear "FAQ" when tired, my brain auto argues as if you were an FE'R :) My apologies :P

FE T-shirts = Profit = conspiracy = ideological cult in the making = teaching stupid = paranoia = nut case. Any questions?

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17266
Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #114 on: July 14, 2010, 01:19:04 AM »
Otherwise, you are correct. FET's "opinion" about the distance and size of various objects can be readily determined by any open-minded person willing to spend a day's effort to set and then later execute an experiment.

Under the interpretation of a Flat Earth the Eratosthenes parallax experiment can calculate the sun to several thousand miles away from the earth's surface.

Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #115 on: July 14, 2010, 01:31:46 AM »
Otherwise, you are correct. FET's "opinion" about the distance and size of various objects can be readily determined by any open-minded person willing to spend a day's effort to set and then later execute an experiment.

Under the interpretation of a Flat Earth the Eratosthenes parallax experiment can calculate the sun to several thousand miles away from the earth's surface.
False. Show your work. According to Eratosthenes, the parallax experiment calculated the circumference of the Earth. If you're going to argue that it shows that height of the Sun over an FE,then you're force to give up on your contention that the Sun's true position in the sky can't be determined.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

John Davis

  • Secretary Of The Society
  • Administrator
  • 15663
  • Most Prolific Scientist, 2019
Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #116 on: July 14, 2010, 01:34:14 AM »
Otherwise, you are correct. FET's "opinion" about the distance and size of various objects can be readily determined by any open-minded person willing to spend a day's effort to set and then later execute an experiment.

Under the interpretation of a Flat Earth the Eratosthenes parallax experiment can calculate the sun to several thousand miles away from the earth's surface.
False. Show your work. According to Eratosthenes, the parallax experiment calculated the circumference of the Earth. If you're going to argue that it shows that height of the Sun over an FE,then you're force to give up on your contention that the Sun's true position in the sky can't be determined.
Howdy crustinator
Quantum Ab Hoc

Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #117 on: July 14, 2010, 02:23:55 AM »
Otherwise, you are correct. FET's "opinion" about the distance and size of various objects can be readily determined by any open-minded person willing to spend a day's effort to set and then later execute an experiment.

Under the interpretation of a Flat Earth the Eratosthenes parallax experiment can calculate the sun to several thousand miles away from the earth's surface.

I already have, Your mathematics is like as retarded as a preschooler trying to do calculus. You might want to go back to school before you post false mathematical conclusions. And sorry son, Radar triangulation is the most accurate way to measure or to determine the distance of the sun. Please, I love a denier that can't even properly do math. Your Math has a severe smell of Parrallax Error manipulation.. I would love to compare your calculations to that of others including my own, but i doubt you are going to release that data to me ;) And it's surely not Posted in your FAQ. .. Accurate calculations of distance based on stellar parallax require a measurement of the distance from the Earth to the Sun are based on radar reflection off the surfaces of planets. This to which means you Epically Fail in honest mathematics..
« Last Edit: July 14, 2010, 03:02:21 AM by TheJackel »
FE T-shirts = Profit = conspiracy = ideological cult in the making = teaching stupid = paranoia = nut case. Any questions?

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 38478
Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #118 on: July 14, 2010, 07:18:07 AM »
Otherwise, you are correct. FET's "opinion" about the distance and size of various objects can be readily determined by any open-minded person willing to spend a day's effort to set and then later execute an experiment.

Under the interpretation of a Flat Earth the Eratosthenes parallax experiment can calculate the sun to several thousand miles away from the earth's surface.

And Rowbotham's interpretation put the distance of the sun at less than 800 miles.  Such inconsistent results suggest that the FE interpretation of parallax is flawed.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: FE predict a maximum day length of 1/4 of day cycle (6 hrs)
« Reply #119 on: July 14, 2010, 02:32:26 PM »
Otherwise, you are correct. FET's "opinion" about the distance and size of various objects can be readily determined by any open-minded person willing to spend a day's effort to set and then later execute an experiment.

Under the interpretation of a Flat Earth the Eratosthenes parallax experiment can calculate the sun to several thousand miles away from the earth's surface.

And Rowbotham's interpretation put the distance of the sun at less than 800 miles.  Such inconsistent results suggest that the FE interpretation of parallax is flawed.

It's more than Flawed lol..  Lets review their FAQ lol

Quote
A: The sun and moon, each 32 miles in diameter, rotate at a height of 3,000 miles above sea level

These people are either mathematically retarded (as in too dumb to do the math), or they are completely just randomly tossing up figures just to mold to their fanatical ideology.. They wouldn't pass first grade mathematics because it is really that bad.. 

And someone should have told them WTF Radar is LOL.. Yeah we measured the distance to the moon for example using Radar.. And guess what ;) It's not 3 thousand miles from the Earth. These FE people are complete morons..  The distance to the moon was measured by radar from October 1959 to July 1960 with a basic resolution of =150m. The measured distance from the observing station to the nearest point of the moon was corrected for the earth's rotation and the motion of the moon. In addition, the libration of the moon changes the nearest point of reflection with time. As observations were made over many months, several returns from the same lunar area were obtained. The monthly variations in distance due to lunar topography were used to derive an equivalent radar topographical map around the central region of the moon. This map provided the necessary corrections to account for lunar topographical variations. All the measured distance after applying the above corrections were used in a least square solution with the best known constants.

The Distance was measured at 384,400 km (again rounded off), and that is  238,855.086 miles

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1965IAUS...21...81Y


Reading FE mathematics is like watching a MIT Professor get 0+0 wrong LOL. Talk about Epic FAIL in the IQ department :/ 
« Last Edit: July 14, 2010, 02:39:42 PM by TheJackel »
FE T-shirts = Profit = conspiracy = ideological cult in the making = teaching stupid = paranoia = nut case. Any questions?