Regarding your FAQ, I think you need to update this statement:

Well Tom has put together an impressive collection of FE lit and links.  You gotta give him that.

Quote from: Harutsedo on June 29, 2011, 05:38:43 PM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on June 29, 2011, 05:36:47 PM

Hopeless romantics in third world countries are not ideal sources of scientific inquiry.

Not ideal, but they have never noted a discrepancy in times listed in various sources. Which says something.

I really doubt that 20 year old Miguel and Maria are looking for discrepancies in sunset times.

But even if they did, what makes you think that you would hear about it? Do you think that the first thing they'd do would be hire an English translator and jump on the phone with the an american media outlet about it, or that an american media outlet would run such an uninteresting story?

Tom Bishop, foreign policy adviser to President Palin.  I predicted it first!!!

Any the people at universities?  Sailors?  Astronomers?  The thousands (millions?) of people who can speak English in these place?

Like a lot of small-world Americans, Tom needs to get out of his armchair more.

Tom now thinks the daylight hours are in on the conspiracy too? I'm starting to think that maybe this "bad conspiracy" is actually Tom's unconscious mind telling him that he means something to the world and everyone is going out of their way in order to fool him. Tom, you're just a little too paranoid for your own good.

Because, when you put a round spotlight on a flat earth, you can't get 50% coverage of that flat earth. 

OK Markjo.  I made my own animation, inspired by yours.  In mine, the spotlight is not round, but oval.  This is quite possible with a human built spotlight, as are other shapes.  So you can see that the light of the sun could have a shape that allows for 12 hours of daylight and 12 hours of darkness.

Comments?

OK, that's a start.  Now you need to figure out what pattern the sun would need to generate at the winter and summer solstices.

Yea, I'm working on it!  Berny is already bugging me about it.

That's pretty cool, nice animation! 

Tom should adopt this over his silly "the sunrise/sunset times are wrong" argument.

Yea, I'm working on it!  Berny is already bugging me about it.

Congratulations you have no surpassed Tom on doing something.

Berny
Not being sarcastic, Noob has done more.

Thanks guys! 

(Don't forget - newbie here also went to the Bedford level and posted his results)

Thanks guys! 

(Don't forget - newbie here also went to the Bedford level and posted his results)

Vote for A.R. Wallace for Mod?

Berny
+1

OK, I made a nice animation of my "Oval Spotlight" that shows equal daylight at the equinox, more daylight in the north in June (including 24H arctic days) and more daylight in the south in December (24H ice wall days.)

Now I just gotta figure out how to embed a Flash file here.

EDIT:  No luck. The Flash tag and html tags don't seem to be turned on.  Oh well!

never heard of an oval spotlight, but i do like your animation.
more evidence against the FAQ, i am really starting to like you Wallace, you should be a mod, and be part of rewriting the FAQ with Lard Willmire and James.

OK, here is a link to the Flash animation.  Sorry I couldn't embed it here.   It works pretty well, give it a whirl.  See what mistakes you can find.
http://www.earthnotglobe.com/FE_sun.htm

OK, here is a link to the Flash animation.  Sorry I couldn't embed it here.   It works pretty well, give it a whirl.  See what mistakes you can find.
http://www.earthnotglobe.com/FE_sun.htm

That is excellent work there!

never heard of an oval spotlight, but i do like your animation.
more evidence against the FAQ, i am really starting to like you Wallace, you should be a mod, and be part of rewriting the FAQ with Lard Willmire and James.

So we're up to +2 on for you being a mod.

Now it's getting late and I have to deal with Canada festivities (I will not be festivating but working) but I would now like to know if your ovoid spotlight will coincide with the sun's actual position latitude and longitude.  I think longitude right now would be the most important because its the simplest to find if you have an accurate time piece.

Berny
Making A.R. Wallace work for it

OK, I made a nice animation of my "Oval Spotlight" that shows equal daylight at the equinox, more daylight in the north in June (including 24H arctic days) and more daylight in the south in December (24H ice wall days.)

Now I just gotta figure out how to embed a Flash file here.

EDIT:  No luck. The Flash tag and html tags don't seem to be turned on.  Oh well!

The conspiracy at work?

Just gonna leave this here...

It is impossible for the Sun to be a spotlight regardless if you can draw it out or not (which you cannot).
I refer you to this thread:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=49250.0
Specifically, "Problem 1)" and "Problem 1) (revisited)" farther down.

Please explain that.
Thanks, be cool.

OK, here is a link to the Flash animation.  Sorry I couldn't embed it here.   It works pretty well, give it a whirl.  See what mistakes you can find.
http://www.earthnotglobe.com/FE_sun.htm

That's just brilliant. 

So obviously the only real question is what might cause an obviously circular sun to produce an oval spotlight effect on the Earth.

OK, here is a link to the Flash animation.  Sorry I couldn't embed it here.   It works pretty well, give it a whirl.  See what mistakes you can find.
http://www.earthnotglobe.com/FE_sun.htm

Good try, but the equator is getting more than 12 hours of daylight at the summer solstice and less than 12 hours of daylight at the winter solstice.  It should receive 12 hours of daylight every day of the year.

I seem to remember that someone already did a very nice set of animations showing the seasonal daylight patterns projected onto a FE map, but I can't seem to find them.  I suppose that I need to lurk some more.

Markjo's right, but I definitely think it's a step in the right direction.

Good try, but the equator is getting more than 12 hours of daylight at the summer solstice and less than 12 hours of daylight at the winter solstice.  It should receive 12 hours of daylight every day of the year.

Actually I don't think it quite does.  The sun moves north and south of the equator, so there is some change in daylight hours, just not much.  We can look that up.
The main problem with my animation is that although it provides 24 hour of darkness in June down at the ice wall, it does not get anywhere near the long days in the southern summer.   I.E., it works well north of the equator, but not south of it.

Back to the drawing board.

As for a round looking sun having an oval beam, that is not all that hard.  Many PAR lights (think rock n roll lighting) have an oval beam but look round - the lens is round, the beam is not.  Also car headlights have a shaped beam bu appear round.  So the sun easily could, too.

Quote from: markjo on July 01, 2011, 11:32:11 AM

Good try, but the equator is getting more than 12 hours of daylight at the summer solstice and less than 12 hours of daylight at the winter solstice.  It should receive 12 hours of daylight every day of the year.

Actually I don't think it quite does.  The sun moves north and south of the equator, so there is some change in daylight hours, just not much.  We can look that up.

Here you go:
http://www.islandnet.com/~see/weather/whys/day_equator.htm
http://www.sci.uidaho.edu/scripter/geog100/lect/02-energy-seasons-atmosphere/02-pt-2-the-seasons.htm

EIGHT MINUTES ARE A LOT AND THE EARTH IS ROUND

lol you

Thanks Markjo.  I had already looked up sunrise/sunset times for Quito and forgot to report back.
Although the times change a bit, the length does not vary much.  Not enough to worry about, anyway.  I does change much more near the tropics.

I will see if I can get my sunlight shape to fit this.

Quote from: markjo on July 01, 2011, 09:44:10 PM

EIGHT MINUTES ARE A LOT AND THE EARTH IS ROUND

lol you

I'm sorry, but are you trying to make a point?  If so, then please do so.

I own a flashlight.  It does not illuminate my entire house at once.  I have often worked as a spotlight operator.  The spotlight does not illuminate the whole stage at once - that's the point of using it.

And don't forget, the inverse square law does not apply to light beams that have been focused via a reflector and/or a lens.  This is a point it seems hard for many people to understand, but it's one of the basic reasons to use a reflector or lens.

Every now and then somebody shows such a mind-boggling ignorance of the most basic physics that I must ask myself if they live in the same planet as I do. Apparently A.R. Wallace does not (or is just trolling).

The inverse square law applies always! Even if you use a laser to produce the light and focus the beam with the best care, light will stray from the straight line because light is a wave! If you do not want your light dissipating as the inverse square law predicts, you have to send it through an optical fiber.

If you really have been a spotlight operator in a theater you will know that everyone in the auditorium can see the spotlights from every place in the theater unless there is a curtain or something else between the spotlight and the observer. And you will see that when several spotlights are in use the whole audience is lightly illuminated.

If you want a perfect stream of something that will not disperse, try water.

I'm sorry, but are you trying to make a point?  If so, then please do so.

My point is your sources show that the difference is 8 minutes. That is not a large difference, as opposed to you claiming that there's a difference (that we should care about).

Quote from: markjo on July 02, 2011, 07:47:46 AM

I'm sorry, but are you trying to make a point?  If so, then please do so.

My point is your sources show that the difference is 8 minutes. That is not a large difference, as opposed to you claiming that there's a difference (that we should care about).

Then you completely missed my point.

My point is not that daylight at the equator is 12 hours, give or take 8 minutes.  My point is that daylight at the equator is 12 hours (give or take 8 minutes) EVERY DAY OF THE YEAR.

Trig, I understand your argument, but you're wrong.

No, I'm not trolling.  Light is my trade.  Has been since the Johnson administration.
But don't feel bad, a lot of people in the business get it wrong, too.  Once they learn the inverse square rule they think it applies to everything, everywhere because no one ever tells them different.  It does not.  It applies only to a sphere radiating into 360 degrees.  (same with sound)  If it applied to projectors, flashlights, spotlights, lighthouses and lasers, they would be of little use.  The laser is best example of this. 

Stop and think about it, don't just fall back on what you "think" you know.

EDIT: Typos

Quote from: A.R. Wallace on June 29, 2011, 07:57:02 AM

I own a flashlight.  It does not illuminate my entire house at once.  I have often worked as a spotlight operator.  The spotlight does not illuminate the whole stage at once - that's the point of using it.

And don't forget, the inverse square law does not apply to light beams that have been focused via a reflector and/or a lens.  This is a point it seems hard for many people to understand, but it's one of the basic reasons to use a reflector or lens.

Every now and then somebody shows such a mind-boggling ignorance of the most basic physics that I must ask myself if they live in the same planet as I do. Apparently A.R. Wallace does not (or is just trolling).

The inverse square law applies always! Even if you use a laser to produce the light and focus the beam with the best care, light will stray from the straight line because light is a wave! If you do not want your light dissipating as the inverse square law predicts, you have to send it through an optical fiber.

If you really have been a spotlight operator in a theater you will know that everyone in the auditorium can see the spotlights from every place in the theater unless there is a curtain or something else between the spotlight and the observer. And you will see that when several spotlights are in use the whole audience is lightly illuminated.

If you want a perfect stream of something that will not disperse, try water.

Actually, A.R. Wallace is right. The inverse square law applies to situations where the energy density of light weakens as it travels further. A spotlight would have the same energy density at every point on along the beam.
But of course, spotlights aren't perfect. As you mentioned, there is a little bit of light dispersion within the spotlight itself and dust and whatnot absorbs some of the light along its journey - but these factors don't account for an inverse square law relationship as you would expect from a spherical radiating source.

Indeed. 

 We are getting way O.T. here, but that's the facts. Inverse square does not apply to a light that been focused.  I can  cite some real world examples and show you the math, if you want.  Or you can just look it up - it's mentioned a lot.