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

Bump in the hope of more FE failure.

Don't bother with bumping or trying to get FE responses.  There's two kinds of FEers here: Insane Devotees and Fakers.  The Fakers won't admit anything because they want a reaction, not humility.  And the insane devotees are self explanatory.

Quote from: Lorddave on June 04, 2010, 01:58:33 PM

Don't bother with bumping or trying to get FE responses.  There's two kinds of FEers here: Insane Devotees and Fakers.  The Fakers won't admit anything because they want a reaction, not humility.  And the insane devotees are self explanatory.

Actually, there are 3 kinds of FE'ers here.  There are the true believer, devil's advocates and angry noobs posing as FE'ers.  The angry noobs are usually pretty obvious, but sometimes it's hard to tell a dedicated devil's advocate from a true believer.

Don't bother with bumping or trying to get FE responses.  There's two kinds of FEers here: Insane Devotees and Fakers.  The Fakers won't admit anything because they want a reaction, not humility.  And the insane devotees are self explanatory.

I brought something like this up b4, but you have brought up a very good point, its impossible to match the shining radius (one half that of disc world) with the area of shinning (if the radius is half, the area is 1/4th not 1/2). the only way to fix this given that light goes in a straight path (save for gravity pulls) is if the earth's shape is 3 dimensional and uniform aka a sphere

Quote from: Thevoiceofreason on June 04, 2010, 04:21:04 PM

I brought something like this up b4, but you have brought up a very good point, its impossible to match the shining radius (one half that of disc world) with the area of shinning (if the radius is half, the area is 1/4th not 1/2). the only way to fix this given that light goes in a straight path (save for gravity pulls) is if the earth's shape is 3 dimensional and uniform aka a sphere

But since no FEer will EVER admit that they're wrong about anything related to FET then it's a hopeless cause.

Quote from: markjo on June 04, 2010, 02:36:19 PM

Quote from: Lorddave on June 04, 2010, 01:58:33 PM

Don't bother with bumping or trying to get FE responses.  There's two kinds of FEers here: Insane Devotees and Fakers.  The Fakers won't admit anything because they want a reaction, not humility.  And the insane devotees are self explanatory.

Actually, there are 3 kinds of FE'ers here.  There are the true believer, devil's advocates and angry noobs posing as FE'ers.  The angry noobs are usually pretty obvious, but sometimes it's hard to tell a dedicated devil's advocate from a true believer.

I know I try to make it as hard as possible... while simultaneously almost never coming out and saying that I believe in FE.

why is this ever so winful thread quiet as a ghost???
Does anyone have any arguement against this, or the fact that the spotlight would have to shine on a semi circle?

Don't bump a thread in the serious forums if you're not adding to the discussion.

Perhaps it would be nice to get some people who could add to the discussion. 

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.

Quote from: lon445 on June 02, 2010, 02:15:13 PM

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.

This is incorrect.

Please, by all means, post the correct math.

Quote from: Sliver on June 11, 2010, 06:51:47 PM

Please, by all means, post the correct math.

I'm not here to teach you basic geometry.

Quote from: lon445 on June 02, 2010, 02:15:13 PM

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.

This is incorrect.

I see what part you think is incorrect. but, without bendy light, it is undeniably true that a circular projection that has the top reaching the north pole, and bottom reaching the ice wall would only be illuminating 1/4th of the earth at a time. furthermore, at equinox, the earth should have a semi circle illuminated, which is impossible to achieve with a circular spotlight (again without bendy light).

Even though you are not here to teach us math and geometry, it is common courtesy to tell someone why they are wrong in an argument, if you wish to actually argue, as "this is incorrect" is not an actual argument, but you already knew that, and decided to be rude regardless.

Making blatantly false mathematical statements without showing working is rude.

Quote from: Thevoiceofreason on June 11, 2010, 11:24:35 PM

I see what part you think is incorrect. but, without bendy light, it is undeniably true that a circular projection that has the top reaching the north pole, and bottom reaching the ice wall would only be illuminating 1/4th of the earth at a time. furthermore, at equinox, the earth should have a semi circle illuminated, which is impossible to achieve with a circular spotlight (again without bendy light).

Even though you are not here to teach us math and geometry, it is common courtesy to tell someone why they are wrong in an argument, if you wish to actually argue, as "this is incorrect" is not an actual argument, but you already knew that, and decided to be rude regardless.

Making blatantly false mathematical statements without showing working is rude. I cannot respond to the OP with anything other than "this is incorrect."

Quote from: lon445 on June 02, 2010, 02:15:13 PM

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.

This is incorrect.

Quote from: Thevoiceofreason on June 11, 2010, 11:24:35 PM

I see what part you think is incorrect. but, without bendy light, it is undeniably true that a circular projection that has the top reaching the north pole, and bottom reaching the ice wall would only be illuminating 1/4th of the earth at a time. furthermore, at equinox, the earth should have a semi circle illuminated, which is impossible to achieve with a circular spotlight (again without bendy light).

Even though you are not here to teach us math and geometry, it is common courtesy to tell someone why they are wrong in an argument, if you wish to actually argue, as "this is incorrect" is not an actual argument, but you already knew that, and decided to be rude regardless.

Making blatantly false mathematical statements without showing working is rude. I cannot respond to the OP with anything other than "this is incorrect."

I cannot respond to the OP with anything other than "this is incorrect."