Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset

  • 31 Replies
  • 5817 Views
?

nate5700

  • 242
  • Round Earth. Probably.
Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« on: February 05, 2013, 06:32:26 AM »
Here's the link to my original thread in the Q/A forum:
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,57463.0.html

Since to this point nobody seems to have offered an alternative explanation of this problem, or showed me where my analysis is in error, I thought further discussion of this topic would be more appropriate for the Debate forum. Right now, it seems to me that the only explanation FE offers for the appearance of sunrise and sunset is the Electromagnetic Acceleration hypothesis, which I would consider undeveloped at best. Maybe my search-fu is weak, but the only other explanation I could find on the forums involved refraction, and if I understand refraction correctly, it bends light the wrong way to cause the sun to appear at the horizon when it is actually above it. I think refraction would cause the sun to appear higher, not lower.

I've been thinking about a way to develop an experiment to see if the bending effect from EA could be measured. This might be a good place to make a comment on the methodology I'd like to employ. It seems that some of the FEers here would describe themselves as Zetetics,  which would make sense if Wikipedia is correct about the FES's history being rooted in older Zetetic societies. I'm not going to claim I know everything about Zeteticism, but based on the article about it in the FES wiki, it would seem that it differs from the scientific method in that it wouldn't employ the hypothesis step, saying that the hypothesis biases the observer. I would disagree with this, as I think without a hypothesis to test, the observations of the experiment would be left too much to the subjective interpretation of the observer. It seems to me that it would be more unbiased to systematically eliminate the possibilities one by one, until one remains, which in my opinion is basically what the scientific method does. Therefore, I will formulate a hypothesis before I conduct an experiment. An additional benefit to this is that the hypothesis will tell me if the predicted effect would be measurable at the scale of the experiment.

However, there would also seem to be within Zetetic philosophy an attitude of "do it yourself and find out". This I think I could get behind, as long as it's done scientifically, and to the extent that it's possible. (Obviously, I'm not going to be doing my own particle accelerator experiments any time soon, or launch my own satellite)

Anyway, it seems that if I can rule out Electromagnetic Acceleration as the cause of the appearance of sunrise and sunset, I will have little alternative but to conclude that the Earth is, in fact, round. Since this is the debate forum, I'd invite the FEers to point out the flaws in my logic here.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17541
Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #1 on: February 05, 2013, 10:01:47 AM »
Seeing a perfect sunset is a rare occurrence. If you watch a typical sunset closely you will see that it is actually disappearing into an inversion layer above the earth.


?

nate5700

  • 242
  • Round Earth. Probably.
Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #2 on: February 05, 2013, 10:14:11 AM »
Seeing a perfect sunset is a rare occurrence. If you watch a typical sunset closely you will see that it is actually disappearing into an inversion layer above the earth.

You know, it seems like I've seen that effect in photographs before but I'd never given it much thought. I'll have to look more into what causes it and consider the implications to my analysis.

Still, my first impression is that if perspective was the only thing in play, the sun would never sink low enough in the sky to see that effect. So it still seems like the question remains one of Round Earth vs. Electromagnetic Acceleration.

Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #3 on: February 05, 2013, 11:06:33 AM »
Seeing a perfect sunset is a rare occurrence. If you watch a typical sunset closely you will see that it is actually disappearing into an inversion layer above the earth.



The sun is clearly sinking beneath the edge of the disc. A far simpler explanation, and one that requires none of your made up physics, Mr Bishop.
Founder member of the League Of Scientific Gentlemen and Mademoiselles des Connaissances.
I am pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.

*

RealScientist

  • 417
  • Science does not care for Earth's shape
Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #4 on: February 05, 2013, 11:41:44 AM »
Seeing a perfect sunset is a rare occurrence. If you watch a typical sunset closely you will see that it is actually disappearing into an inversion layer above the earth.


Great photographic evidence. It totally demolishes every "theory" Tom Bishop has ever claimed. There is no glare, the Sun does not reduce in apparent size until a "perspective effect" makes it disappear, the atmosphere is totally clear and does not impede watching the Sun that has to be behing several hundreds of kilometers of atmosphere, the inversion is clearly limited to a small part of the Sun's image so we can accept most of the image as unaltered by the atmosphere.

If we can all agree that this photo is not faked, we can discuss how it demonstrates all models of a flat Earth totally wrong and close the forum once and for all.

*

Genius

  • 2180
  • Professor of Geniustology
Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #5 on: February 05, 2013, 11:43:51 AM »
Seeing a perfect sunset is a rare occurrence. If you watch a typical sunset closely you will see that it is actually disappearing into an inversion layer above the earth.


Great photographic evidence. It totally demolishes every "theory" Tom Bishop has ever claimed. There is no glare, the Sun does not reduce in apparent size until a "perspective effect" makes it disappear, the atmosphere is totally clear and does not impede watching the Sun that has to be behing several hundreds of kilometers of atmosphere, the inversion is clearly limited to a small part of the Sun's image so we can accept most of the image as unaltered by the atmosphere.

If we can all agree that this photo is not faked, we can discuss how it demonstrates all models of a flat Earth totally wrong and close the forum once and for all.

5 suns and not fake? YOU SIR ARE A FOOL!!!  ;D
The earth is round because the space man said so.

*

RealScientist

  • 417
  • Science does not care for Earth's shape
Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #6 on: February 05, 2013, 02:49:34 PM »
Seeing a perfect sunset is a rare occurrence. If you watch a typical sunset closely you will see that it is actually disappearing into an inversion layer above the earth.

Great photographic evidence. It totally demolishes every "theory" Tom Bishop has ever claimed. There is no glare, the Sun does not reduce in apparent size until a "perspective effect" makes it disappear, the atmosphere is totally clear and does not impede watching the Sun that has to be behing several hundreds of kilometers of atmosphere, the inversion is clearly limited to a small part of the Sun's image so we can accept most of the image as unaltered by the atmosphere.

If we can all agree that this photo is not faked, we can discuss how it demonstrates all models of a flat Earth totally wrong and close the forum once and for all.

5 suns and not fake? YOU SIR ARE A FOOL!!!  ;D
It is called multiple exposure photography, and it is used a lot in both scientific for artistic purposes. Generally its purpose is not to deceive, so it would not be considered a fake.

Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #7 on: February 05, 2013, 09:56:23 PM »
Seeing a perfect sunset is a rare occurrence. If you watch a typical sunset closely you will see that it is actually disappearing into an inversion layer above the earth.



The sun is clearly sinking beneath the edge of the disc. A far simpler explanation, and one that requires none of your made up physics, Mr Bishop.

Explain why then if the Sun sinks beneath the edge of the disc, how can we have day and night in different time?

Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #8 on: February 06, 2013, 05:16:45 AM »
There is more than one sun.
Founder member of the League Of Scientific Gentlemen and Mademoiselles des Connaissances.
I am pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.

Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #9 on: February 06, 2013, 05:21:42 AM »
There is more than one sun.

I.e. When bullshit cant be backed up, spew some more bullshit

Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #10 on: February 06, 2013, 05:23:42 AM »
There is more than one sun.

I.e. When bullshit cant be backed up, spew some more bullshit

It is a logical conclusion, as one sun can be observed going over the edge of the disc while it is known that another is visible elsewhere - therefore there must be more than one.
Founder member of the League Of Scientific Gentlemen and Mademoiselles des Connaissances.
I am pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.

Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #11 on: February 06, 2013, 05:34:47 AM »
Seeing as you making a totally outrageous claim, even for fe standards, the burden of proof is on you...

*

Genius

  • 2180
  • Professor of Geniustology
Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #12 on: February 06, 2013, 05:51:19 AM »
There is more than one sun.

I.e. When bullshit cant be backed up, spew some more bullshit

It is a logical conclusion, as one sun can be observed going over the edge of the disc while it is known that another is visible elsewhere - therefore there must be more than one.

Identical twin suns, I presume?
The earth is round because the space man said so.

Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #13 on: February 06, 2013, 05:57:12 AM »
All right then... on the this twin sun theory, if the sun is going over the edge, and another coming up elsewhere...  Explain days of sunlight in near the poles...

*

Tintagel

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 190
  • Full of Tinier Tintagels!
Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #14 on: February 06, 2013, 08:53:12 AM »
Oh my. 

I do not know of a flat earth model where there are two suns (unless you count Levee's black sun model).  There appears to be a single sun above us, as far as I can tell (meaning only that I've never seen more than one sun in the sky).  The reason it seems to defy known trigonometry is because you are assuming light travels only in straight lines.  An optical effect of some sort (coloquially referred to as 'bendy light') gives us what we perceive as sunrises and sunsets. 

Defining the nature of the optical effects of the heavens in an elegant way is the focus of much study on my part, but it requires me to make some assumptions as well, so the research isn't perfect.

?

nate5700

  • 242
  • Round Earth. Probably.
Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #15 on: February 06, 2013, 09:03:23 AM »
Oh my. 

I do not know of a flat earth model where there are two suns (unless you count Levee's black sun model).  There appears to be a single sun above us, as far as I can tell (meaning only that I've never seen more than one sun in the sky).  The reason it seems to defy known trigonometry is because you are assuming light travels only in straight lines.  An optical effect of some sort (coloquially referred to as 'bendy light') gives us what we perceive as sunrises and sunsets. 

Defining the nature of the optical effects of the heavens in an elegant way is the focus of much study on my part, but it requires me to make some assumptions as well, so the research isn't perfect.

I'd be interested in hearing more about what you've done in this area. Like I said in my first post in the thread, I'd like to develop an experiment to see if the bendy light effect can be measured. Of course I'm on the RE side so my expectation is that experiment should rule out this effect, so you might be hesitant to help me out, but think of it this way: If I do find something it definitely gives a boost to your model.

?

nate5700

  • 242
  • Round Earth. Probably.
Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #16 on: February 06, 2013, 09:05:09 AM »
Oh, and before this thread goes totally off the rails talking about two suns, I'm fairly sure Dinosaur Neil is being facetious.

Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #17 on: February 06, 2013, 10:38:17 AM »
Oh my. 

I do not know of a flat earth model where there are two suns (unless you count Levee's black sun model).  There appears to be a single sun above us, as far as I can tell (meaning only that I've never seen more than one sun in the sky).  The reason it seems to defy known trigonometry is because you are assuming light travels only in straight lines.  An optical effect of some sort (coloquially referred to as 'bendy light') gives us what we perceive as sunrises and sunsets. 

Defining the nature of the optical effects of the heavens in an elegant way is the focus of much study on my part, but it requires me to make some assumptions as well, so the research isn't perfect.

I am in no way being facetious. Regular refraction caused by the atmosphere prevents us from seeing more than one sun at once, as they are widely spaced over the plane of the earth. The multiple sun theory is both simpler and more in keeping with conventional physics than your tortuous explanation of bendable light, for which many disproofs have already been shown on these fooras.
You assume there is only one sun, because you never stopped to question it. The same criticism that I often see levelled at RE'ers. Shame on you.
Founder member of the League Of Scientific Gentlemen and Mademoiselles des Connaissances.
I am pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.

?

nate5700

  • 242
  • Round Earth. Probably.
Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #18 on: February 06, 2013, 10:55:12 AM »
I am in no way being facetious.

If that's true, then I just can't figure you out. For example:

I agree. I'm sick of seeing it and I'm on the RE side.

There are some FE'ers who do not support the idea of a conspiracy, such as myself.

So, I'm really not sure what you're trying to do. But, supposing you are serious, wouldn't sunrise and sunset only be visible near the edges of the disc where the sun sinks below it (or rises above it)? In other areas it would seem the same criticisms I've made about the perspective effect would apply.

Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #19 on: February 06, 2013, 11:56:13 AM »
I am in no way being facetious.

If that's true, then I just can't figure you out. For example:

I agree. I'm sick of seeing it and I'm on the RE side.

There are some FE'ers who do not support the idea of a conspiracy, such as myself.

So, I'm really not sure what you're trying to do. But, supposing you are serious, wouldn't sunrise and sunset only be visible near the edges of the disc where the sun sinks below it (or rises above it)? In other areas it would seem the same criticisms I've made about the perspective effect would apply.

The evidence presented by FE'ers has changed my opinion, as I have an open mind. However, many of their existing theories have no scientific credibility, so I have formulated my own concept.
You are indeed correct regarding the visibility of sunrises and sunsets, however you do not know how close you are to the edge, do you?
Founder member of the League Of Scientific Gentlemen and Mademoiselles des Connaissances.
I am pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.

?

nate5700

  • 242
  • Round Earth. Probably.
Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #20 on: February 06, 2013, 01:35:18 PM »
The evidence presented by FE'ers has changed my opinion, as I have an open mind. However, many of their existing theories have no scientific credibility, so I have formulated my own concept.

If so, that's remarkable. I try to keep an open mind about things, but as you might have guessed I'm not convinced yet. I'd ask you what convinced you, but that may be a topic for another thread.

Anyway, so long as you're trying to be scientific about it I won't question your motivation. Of course, nobody's logic and methods are immune to question, so I shall question. Nothing personal.  :D

You are indeed correct regarding the visibility of sunrises and sunsets, however you do not know how close you are to the edge, do you?

Well no, I don't know how close I would be to the edge. But I still see a problem with it. Here's a Paint sketch of how I'm imagining your hypothesis. (So if this isn't right, say so.)



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

So, suppose the two stick people pictured are near the edge of the disc. The person on the left is observing a sunrise, while the person on the right has recently observed a sunset.

*But*, as the sun that's currently above the earth crosses the sky, the person on the right will not observe a typical sunrise. He'll see the sun gradually appear in the sky at an angle, due to perspective. Meanwhile the person on the left won't observe a typical sunset either. So, if I'm understanding correctly, you would be able to observe sunrises on the east side of the disc, and sunsets at the west side of the disc, but there would be nowhere that you'd witness both.

And I'm fairly sure that where I'm located both sunrises and sunsets can be observed. I do have trouble getting up early enough to see a sunrise though.

Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #21 on: February 06, 2013, 02:23:52 PM »
The evidence presented by FE'ers has changed my opinion, as I have an open mind. However, many of their existing theories have no scientific credibility, so I have formulated my own concept.

If so, that's remarkable. I try to keep an open mind about things, but as you might have guessed I'm not convinced yet. I'd ask you what convinced you, but that may be a topic for another thread.

Anyway, so long as you're trying to be scientific about it I won't question your motivation. Of course, nobody's logic and methods are immune to question, so I shall question. Nothing personal.  :D

You are indeed correct regarding the visibility of sunrises and sunsets, however you do not know how close you are to the edge, do you?

Well no, I don't know how close I would be to the edge. But I still see a problem with it. Here's a Paint sketch of how I'm imagining your hypothesis. (So if this isn't right, say so.)



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

So, suppose the two stick people pictured are near the edge of the disc. The person on the left is observing a sunrise, while the person on the right has recently observed a sunset.

*But*, as the sun that's currently above the earth crosses the sky, the person on the right will not observe a typical sunrise. He'll see the sun gradually appear in the sky at an angle, due to perspective. Meanwhile the person on the left won't observe a typical sunset either. So, if I'm understanding correctly, you would be able to observe sunrises on the east side of the disc, and sunsets at the west side of the disc, but there would be nowhere that you'd witness both.

And I'm fairly sure that where I'm located both sunrises and sunsets can be observed. I do have trouble getting up early enough to see a sunrise though.

The earth disc swivels to bring the observer nearer and farther from the sun.
Founder member of the League Of Scientific Gentlemen and Mademoiselles des Connaissances.
I am pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.

?

nate5700

  • 242
  • Round Earth. Probably.
Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #22 on: February 06, 2013, 02:48:58 PM »
The earth disc swivels to bring the observer nearer and farther from the sun.

I'm afraid I'm going to have to ask for a diagram since it isn't immediately clear to me how this would account for the observations.

Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #23 on: February 06, 2013, 04:40:35 PM »
only salvador dali could do justice to neil's metamorphosis.

true wisdom is always concise

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39563
Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #24 on: February 06, 2013, 08:01:22 PM »
only salvador dali could do justice to neil's metamorphosis.
Or Franz Kafka.
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.

?

nate5700

  • 242
  • Round Earth. Probably.
Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #25 on: February 07, 2013, 12:15:13 PM »
I got around to reading the "Should I support FET" thread so I *think* I know what Neil's up to here.

So yes, I would like to see a diagram of this "swiveling disc" hypothesis. I'm haven't figured out yet where the axis of swiveling would have to be to account for the observations. Is it through the pole such that the disc always remains parallel to some line of reference (in other words does the disc's horizontal angle stay the same)? Or does the swiveling also tilt the disc in some way (such that the swiveling axis would be at an angle)?

Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #26 on: February 07, 2013, 12:59:57 PM »
I got around to reading the "Should I support FET" thread so I *think* I know what Neil's up to here.

So yes, I would like to see a diagram of this "swiveling disc" hypothesis. I'm haven't figured out yet where the axis of swiveling would have to be to account for the observations. Is it through the pole such that the disc always remains parallel to some line of reference (in other words does the disc's horizontal angle stay the same)? Or does the swiveling also tilt the disc in some way (such that the swiveling axis would be at an angle)?

The swivelling occurs on more than one axis, similar to the nutation of the moon. The combined non-resonant movements are complex and the driving forces not fully understood, as we cannot see beneath the disc.
Founder member of the League Of Scientific Gentlemen and Mademoiselles des Connaissances.
I am pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.

?

nate5700

  • 242
  • Round Earth. Probably.
Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #27 on: February 07, 2013, 01:10:45 PM »
The swivelling occurs on more than one axis, similar to the nutation of the moon. The combined non-resonant movements are complex and the driving forces not fully understood, as we cannot see beneath the disc.

This might be arguing semantics, but an axis of rotation is basically a vector, so more than one axis would sum to a single resultant axis. I think.

Anyway, I don't understand the hypothesis and therefore can't argue it. Can we go back to talking about bendy light now?

Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #28 on: February 07, 2013, 01:36:49 PM »
The swivelling occurs on more than one axis, similar to the nutation of the moon. The combined non-resonant movements are complex and the driving forces not fully understood, as we cannot see beneath the disc.

This might be arguing semantics, but an axis of rotation is basically a vector, so more than one axis would sum to a single resultant axis. I think.

Anyway, I don't understand the hypothesis and therefore can't argue it. Can we go back to talking about bendy light now?

No, more than one axis results in precessional effects.
And we can't go back to discussion of bendable light as it has been disproved many times. It is not a valid hypothesis.
Founder member of the League Of Scientific Gentlemen and Mademoiselles des Connaissances.
I am pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.

?

Nolhekh

  • 1669
  • Animator
Re: Geometry of Sunrise and Sunset
« Reply #29 on: February 07, 2013, 01:52:11 PM »
The swivelling occurs on more than one axis, similar to the nutation of the moon. The combined non-resonant movements are complex and the driving forces not fully understood, as we cannot see beneath the disc.

This might be arguing semantics, but an axis of rotation is basically a vector, so more than one axis would sum to a single resultant axis. I think.

Anyway, I don't understand the hypothesis and therefore can't argue it. Can we go back to talking about bendy light now?

No, more than one axis results in precessional effects.
And we can't go back to discussion of bendable light as it has been disproved many times. It is not a valid hypothesis.
If you discount bendy light, and there is no detectable evidence of perspective distortion, how do you propose that a swivelling earth can account for sunrise and sunset?  The sun is always visible somewhere on earth.  If it ever went below the disk, there'd be no day anywhere on the earth until it came up again, or until the earth swiveled back to facing it.  The sun's angular position throughout the day encounters similar problems to the stars.  For example, it's apparent speed never changes from any vantage point.  It always moves 15 degrees in its arc every hour.  If perspective where involved, this arc measurement would change, and it's apparent motion would follow an arc of ellipse, rather than the arc of circle that we observe.