Sunlight right now

Quote from: ThinkingMan on October 10, 2012, 12:07:36 PM

It is relevant to the discussion as you were misrepresenting facts by saying light wraps uniformly around the Earth when we all (or at least any of us with knowledge of physics) know that it doesn't. It refracts slightly around to what, without an atmosphere, would be the dark side of the planet, creating what's known as dusk and dawn.

You're misrepresenting optics here. Light doesn't refract that way. Light refracts and reflects based on medium interaction. Dusk and dawn occurs the way it does because the Earth is a disc. Such events would not occur on a round object. It would either be day or night, there would be no between state.

The atmosphere is not optics. It's a bunch of scattered particles. Depending on how the photons hit the particles, they can bounce in a number of directions. This is what causes dusk and dawn, which is similar to the "glowing" effect that you get when shining a flashlight through fog.

The atmosphere is not optics. It's a bunch of scattered particles. Depending on how the photons hit the particles, they can bounce in a number of directions.

Actually, how light behaves as it moves through various mediums is optics.

Quote from: ThinkingMan on October 10, 2012, 12:41:51 PM

The atmosphere is not optics. It's a bunch of scattered particles. Depending on how the photons hit the particles, they can bounce in a number of directions.

Actually, how light behaves as it moves through various mediums is optics.

Ah. Well he said optics and I assumed we were going to get back into the atmosphere magnifying and dimming light at the same time.

The atmosphere is not optics.

All I can say is... lol.

It's a bunch of scattered particles. Depending on how the photons hit the particles, they can bounce in a number of directions.

This happens based on the medium, not the shape of the medium. According to you, if a rectangle had an atmolayer, light would refract around the corner at just the right rate to light a portion of the other side. Doesn't that sound a bit wrong to you?

This is what causes dusk and dawn, which is similar to the "glowing" effect that you get when shining a flashlight through fog.

Dusk and dawn is caused by light penetration as the Sun arrives to a relative position about the observer. The observer must be on a relatively 2D plane for this to occur.

Quote from: ThinkingMan on October 10, 2012, 12:41:51 PM

It's a bunch of scattered particles. Depending on how the photons hit the particles, they can bounce in a number of directions.

This happens based on the medium, not the shape of the medium. According to you, if a rectangle had an atmolayer, light would refract around the corner at just the right rate to light a portion of the other side. Doesn't that sound a bit wrong to you?

If you're hiding around a corner and someone shines a flashlight past the corner, does it light your area somewhat? You're right, it has nothing to do with the shape of the medium. But light bouncing around means some of it is probably going to come down and hit the ground.

Quote from: ThinkingMan on October 10, 2012, 12:41:51 PM

This is what causes dusk and dawn, which is similar to the "glowing" effect that you get when shining a flashlight through fog.

Dusk and dawn is caused by light penetration as the Sun arrives to a relative position about the observer. The observer must be on a relatively 2D plane for this to occur.

No, one simply needs an atmosphere or medium of some sort and to be somewhat on the other side of something to get that lighting effect.

If you're hiding around a corner and someone shines a flashlight past the corner, does it light your area somewhat? You're right, it has nothing to do with the shape of the medium. But light bouncing around means some of it is probably going to come down and hit the ground.

That is due to lit hitting the ground past the corner, it isn't mysteriously wrapping around the corner. If the Earth was a ball sitting on some great cosmic floor, I'd accept your analogy. However, it is not, so a flashlight going past a corner is not apt.

No, one simply needs an atmosphere or medium of some sort and to be somewhat on the other side of something to get that lighting effect.

No, it does not work that way. The Sun's rays are parallel relative to the Earth, so what you're describing wouldn't work.

Quote from: ThinkingMan on October 10, 2012, 01:45:08 PM

If you're hiding around a corner and someone shines a flashlight past the corner, does it light your area somewhat? You're right, it has nothing to do with the shape of the medium. But light bouncing around means some of it is probably going to come down and hit the ground.

That is due to lit hitting the ground past the corner, it isn't mysteriously wrapping around the corner. If the Earth was a ball sitting on some great cosmic floor, I'd accept your analogy. However, it is not, so a flashlight going past a corner is not apt.

Quote from: ThinkingMan on October 10, 2012, 01:45:08 PM

No, one simply needs an atmosphere or medium of some sort and to be somewhat on the other side of something to get that lighting effect.

No, it does not work that way. The Sun's rays are parallel relative to the Earth, so what you're describing wouldn't work.

Yes, it would work, you can see a flashlight beam in the dark when it's not pointing at your because some of the light is refracting and going in to your eye. You have dusk and dawn because some of the light that is going through the atmosphere is refracting and going into your eye. It's really a rather simple concept that you are simply refusing to listen to because you are having to much fun trolling.

Yes, it would work, you can see a flashlight beam in the dark when it's not pointing at your because some of the light is refracting and going in to your eye. You have dusk and dawn because some of the light that is going through the atmosphere is refracting and going into your eye. It's really a rather simple concept that you are simply refusing to listen to because you are having to much fun trolling.

That is randomized particulates causing chaotic refraction, not the uniform curve you seem to think occurs. You appear to think that refraction could possibly be responsible for the Sun lighting hundreds of miles of the Earth that isn't even in its direct RET line of sight. Its ridiculous.

You accuse me of trolling and yet you demonstrate a very clear lack of understanding in the subject we're discussing. Furthermore, you think that refraction works the way you need it to work, not the way it does. In order for your light curve to work, light would have to bend uniformly across a vast distance. I'll be sure to remember this when you try to say that Electromagnetic Acceleration does not occur.

That is randomized particulates causing chaotic refraction, not the uniform curve you seem to think occurs. You appear to think that refraction could possibly be responsible for the Sun lighting hundreds of miles of the Earth that isn't even in its direct RET line of sight. Its ridiculous.

Where did I say or even imply that there was a uniform curve? I actually said at one point that it wasn't uniform.

You accuse me of trolling and yet you demonstrate a very clear lack of understanding in the subject we're discussing. Furthermore, you think that refraction works the way you need it to work, not the way it does. In order for your light curve to work, light would have to bend uniformly across a vast distance. I'll be sure to remember this when you try to say that Electromagnetic Acceleration does not occur.

I like how you insist that you're not trolling, but the only statements you've made have been jabs at what other people have said. Why would I say electromagnetic acceleration does not occur? Some fusion reactor designs rely on it.

Where did I say or even imply that there was a uniform curve? I actually said at one point that it wasn't uniform.

Ah, so only a portion of your horizon looks dusky and spotted with pitch black holes?

I like how you insist that you're not trolling, but the only statements you've made have been jabs at what other people have said. Why would I say electromagnetic acceleration does not occur? Some fusion reactor designs rely on it.

www.rif.org

I capitalized Electromagnetic Acceleration as in referring to the theory, not the act of accelerating things electromagnetically. Furthermore, it is becoming apparent that I'm not the one trolling, as you continue to bring it up, probably to hide your inability to argue the current point.

http://theflatearthsociety.org/wiki/index.php?title=Electromagnetic_Accelerator

Quote from: ThinkingMan on October 11, 2012, 06:47:51 AM

Where did I say or even imply that there was a uniform curve? I actually said at one point that it wasn't uniform.

Ah, so only a portion of your horizon looks dusky and spotted with pitch black holes?

Now you're trying to turn this around on me. Like I said, you're just attempting to stab holes in my argument instead of actually providing anything from your side. I said it's not uniform, not that there are some spots that are completely dark near the terminator line. It's dependent upon atmospheric density and composition at the time and place of sunset.

Quote from: ThinkingMan on October 11, 2012, 06:47:51 AM

I like how you insist that you're not trolling, but the only statements you've made have been jabs at what other people have said. Why would I say electromagnetic acceleration does not occur? Some fusion reactor designs rely on it.

www.rif.org

I capitalized Electromagnetic Acceleration as in referring to the theory, not the act of accelerating things electromagnetically. Furthermore, it is becoming apparent that I'm not the one trolling, as you continue to bring it up, probably to hide your inability to argue the current point.

http://theflatearthsociety.org/wiki/index.php?title=Electromagnetic_Accelerator

Well I wont tell you that it does or does not exist until I do more research on it. I know it is possible for strong electromagnetic fields to bend light, although I'm not sure how strong it has to be or which way it would bend it.

Now you're trying to turn this around on me. Like I said, you're just attempting to stab holes in my argument instead of actually providing anything from your side. I said it's not uniform, not that there are some spots that are completely dark near the terminator line. It's dependent upon atmospheric density and composition at the time and place of sunset.

RET is not an invulnerable thesis, I can attack it as much as I like. I would assume that you have picture evidence of this spotty sunset you speak of? If it is uniformly dark or uniformly light then that disagrees with your current argument.

Quote from: ThinkingMan on October 11, 2012, 07:15:33 AM

Now you're trying to turn this around on me. Like I said, you're just attempting to stab holes in my argument instead of actually providing anything from your side. I said it's not uniform, not that there are some spots that are completely dark near the terminator line. It's dependent upon atmospheric density and composition at the time and place of sunset.

RET is not an invulnerable thesis, I can attack it as much as I like. I would assume that you have picture evidence of this spotty sunset you speak of? If it is uniformly dark or uniformly light then that disagrees with your current argument.

I never said anything was invulnerable. If I got a picture of the terminator line from space, it would look rather uniform due to the size of the earth and the comparatively small size of the variable lighting levels in different areas. As we all know, it's harder to see small detail from a longer distance. It would be very hard to me to get a picture with the correct scaling on it, and even if I did, it would probably be from space and it would be claimed to be fake anyway, am I right? Plus, picture evidence is not valid on this forum.

Pictures are valid unless obviously shopped (space pictures) or have no trusting internet source. I surmise that you can't produce one of these mystical spotty sunsets or sunrises because they don't exist. It is all quite uniform because the Earth is a disc.

Pictures are valid unless obviously shopped (space pictures) or have no trusting internet source. I surmise that you can't produce one of these mystical spotty sunsets or sunrises because they don't exist. It is all quite uniform because the Earth is a disc.

So you're saying weather conditions have nothing to do with the propagation of light through the atmosphere?

Dusk and dawn occurs the way it does because the Earth is a disc. Such events would not occur on a round object. It would either be day or night, there would be no between state.

I don't see how this is so difficult for you to understand.  Light from the Sun is scattered in all directions by the atoms and molecules in the Earth's atmosphere.  These rays are also refracted as they pass from the vacuum through the atmosphere, and they continue to be refracted and scattered as they pass through different temperature and density gradients.  The ones that intersect your eyes form an image on your retina or whatever.

Quote from: Irushwithscvs on October 10, 2012, 12:30:06 PM

Dusk and dawn occurs the way it does because the Earth is a disc. Such events would not occur on a round object. It would either be day or night, there would be no between state.

I don't see how this is so difficult for you to understand.  Light from the Sun is scattered in all directions by the atoms and molecules in the Earth's atmosphere.  These rays are also refracted as they pass from the vacuum through the atmosphere, and they continue to be refracted and scattered as they pass through different temperature and density gradients.  The ones that intersect your eyes form an image on your retina or whatever.

That's what I've been trying to tell him. You're diagram is a bit extreme, but it's good for it's purposes. He's just trolling. He understands perfectly well. He used to argue physics for round earth.

I don't see how this is so difficult for you to understand.  Light from the Sun is scattered in all directions by the atoms and molecules in the Earth's atmosphere.  These rays are also refracted as they pass from the vacuum through the atmosphere, and they continue to be refracted and scattered as they pass through different temperature and density gradients.  The ones that intersect your eyes form an image on your retina or whatever.

If what you described actually occurred, light of different wavelengths would refract at different angles and the Earth would have a terminator rainbow. I don't see rainbows at every dusk and dawn, so you must be incorrect. Dusk and dawn light still contains all wavelengths that are uniformly distributed.

Quote from: garygreen on October 11, 2012, 09:12:15 AM

I don't see how this is so difficult for you to understand.  Light from the Sun is scattered in all directions by the atoms and molecules in the Earth's atmosphere.  These rays are also refracted as they pass from the vacuum through the atmosphere, and they continue to be refracted and scattered as they pass through different temperature and density gradients.  The ones that intersect your eyes form an image on your retina or whatever.

If what you described actually occurred, light of different wavelengths would refract at different angles and the Earth would have a terminator rainbow. I don't see rainbows at every dusk and dawn, so you must be incorrect. Dusk and dawn light still contains all wavelengths that are uniformly distributed.

Why would it be rainbows? There would have to be something to separate the wavelengths like during/after a rainstorm passes, and this is only if the light is coming in at the correct angle from your point of view.

Quote from: Irushwithscvs on October 11, 2012, 12:25:14 PM

Quote from: garygreen on October 11, 2012, 09:12:15 AM

I don't see how this is so difficult for you to understand.  Light from the Sun is scattered in all directions by the atoms and molecules in the Earth's atmosphere.  These rays are also refracted as they pass from the vacuum through the atmosphere, and they continue to be refracted and scattered as they pass through different temperature and density gradients.  The ones that intersect your eyes form an image on your retina or whatever.

If what you described actually occurred, light of different wavelengths would refract at different angles and the Earth would have a terminator rainbow. I don't see rainbows at every dusk and dawn, so you must be incorrect. Dusk and dawn light still contains all wavelengths that are uniformly distributed.

Why would it be rainbows? There would have to be something to separate the wavelengths like during/after a rainstorm passes, and this is only if the light is coming in at the correct angle from your point of view.

Refraction separates wavelengths. This is why, for example, refractive telescopes experience chromatic aberration.

If what you described actually occurred, light of different wavelengths would refract at different angles and the Earth would have a terminator rainbow. I don't see rainbows at every dusk and dawn, so you must be incorrect. Dusk and dawn light still contains all wavelengths that are uniformly distributed.

Are you saying that the sun and/or sky do not change colors during sunrise or sunset? 

The Round Earthers only believe in bendy light when it suits them.

Are you saying that the sun and/or sky do not change colors during sunrise or sunset? 
[IMG]

What Garygreen describes would cause a full blown rainbow. What your picture is showing is simple light fade.  This would cause the gradual lack of color. What you're seeing is the color of the sky fading away as less and less light reaches your eye.

Also, Markjo, you know that is not what I said, as I used the term rainbow, not colors. Please do learn to read my posts before you respond to them.

Also, Markjo, you know that is not what I said, as I used the term rainbow, not colors. Please do learn to read my posts before you respond to them.

Are the colors of sunrise/sunset not part of a rainbow? In fact, do the colors of a sunset not go from yellow to orange to red?  Perhaps the rainbow is simply too large to be seen all at once.

Refraction is the phenomena of a ray of light's direction being changed. That's it. A material can have a variable refractive index that changes depending on the frequency of the light. But it doesn't have to. The phenomena of frequency dependent refraction is specifically referred to as dispersion.

The problem with RE'ers concept of bendy light is that they would have you believe that the light only bends at the point of interface between two different mediums. In fact, light is always bending.

I'm sure most mildly educated REers will admit that light in a vacuum bends due to gravity as well, but that the effect is too minor to be noticed in our day to day experiences.

Yeah, if you consider the horizon effect too minor to be noticed.

Yeah, if you consider the horizon effect too minor to be noticed.

No, I consider the expected results by using the equations of general relativity to be too minor to be noticed. I consider the horizon effect to be due to the earth being a globe, but you already knew this.

Are the colors of sunrise/sunset not part of a rainbow?

That logic only works when you're being specific and I'm making the generalization, but you're doing the opposite.

In fact, do the colors of a sunset not go from yellow to orange to red?  Perhaps the rainbow is simply too large to be seen all at once.

No, it goes from purple and then jumps to red. Rainbows don't do that.