End of the Bipolar Model

One of the FE models is that of a disk with two poles, also known as "Antarctica as a Continent" model. This better explains seasons, especially that of the areas south of the equator, but it, too, has an interesting problem.

That problem is this: during the southern summer many places north of the equator should see a very discernible backtracking of the sun. The sun has always been observed to rise in the east and make a steady westward progression until it sets (unless, of course, you're in one of those places during one of those times that the sun never sets).

The Bi-polar model clearly indicates otherwise. The to-scale diagram below is for the equinox, when the sun shifts 'gears' from the north pole to the south pole. The indicated angles around the point of observation are for bearings (away from north) for each position of the sun (except E, which is the point at which the sun 'switches gears').

From when the sun rises to Point R, the bearing of the sun is constantly increasing, as you can see. However, at Point R the sun switches direction and heads eastward until it sets. At the most it's only a few degrees, but at the very least it's unnoticeable.

However, the distance the sun travels in that time, from Point R to setting, is enough to take hours--2 hours and 47 minutes in my case--in which the sun would appear to not be moving across the sky.

I, living here a few years now, have never experienced such a thing--either the sun stopping nearly 3 hours before sunset or it backtracking for nearly 3 hours before sunset. Since this model is so far off observations, it can be safely thrown into the garbage.


P.S. Also, if sunsets and sunrises are caused, as FE claims, by distance to and from the sun, then it should be noted that the distance between me and the sunrise and the distance between me and the sunset (indicated by the red and blue dotted circles respectively) differ by 69.2% of the distance between the equator and the north pole

Will these (this and the monopolar thread) be acknowledged or ignored with cowardous? The intellectually honest response is that these models are incorrect and as Alex said, can be "safely thrown in the garbage".

Just to facilitate new readers, the bipolar map is this:

Whose observations Tom? Did you not understand the model? These are Alex's observations.

Since this model is so far off observations, it can be safely thrown into the garbage.

What observations?

Whose observations Tom? Did you not understand the model? These are Alex's observations.

What observations did he make and what evidence did he provide? The sun doesn't always follow straight lines in the sky. Sometimes it changes directions mid-stride.

What observations did [Alex] make and what evidence did he provide? The sun doesn't always follow straight lines in the sky.

That the sun has never ever backtracked. It always moves westward. I know it doesn't move in straight lines, but it is always moving west. Please at least read the OP before posting.

Seriously?

Does this diagram even indicate whether the sun is moving straight or curved. This diagram is about one day and how the bipolar would show the sun backtracking. We know that it doesn't. So this model is garbage.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on September 04, 2013, 10:37:25 AM

What observations did [Alex] make and what evidence did he provide? The sun doesn't always follow straight lines in the sky.

That the sun has never ever backtracked. It always moves westward. I know it doesn't move in straight lines, but it is always moving west. Please at least read the OP before posting.

I sure see the sun changing directions mid stride in the images above.

Quote from: Alex Tomasovich on September 04, 2013, 10:44:56 AM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on September 04, 2013, 10:37:25 AM

What observations did [Alex] make and what evidence did he provide? The sun doesn't always follow straight lines in the sky.

That the sun has never ever backtracked. It always moves westward. I know it doesn't move in straight lines, but it is always moving west. Please at least read the OP before posting.

I sure see the sun changing directions mid stride in the images above.

Does the sun move in a 2-dimensional plane in your world?  If not, you should probably provide 3-dimensional analysis of its movement.

Can you also provide a citation of the exact camera orientation for that photo.  Your coloured lines are not inspiring me with confidence about the trueness of East and West.

Quote from: Alex Tomasovich on September 04, 2013, 10:44:56 AM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on September 04, 2013, 10:37:25 AM

What observations did [Alex] make and what evidence did he provide? The sun doesn't always follow straight lines in the sky.

That the sun has never ever backtracked. It always moves westward. I know it doesn't move in straight lines, but it is always moving west. Please at least read the OP before posting.

I sure see the sun changing directions mid stride in the images above.

Tom, the sun in all of your pictures is still moving westward. "Eastward", which is the motion the bipolar model predicts, means that as time moves on it is moving farther East. Below is a representation of a bipolar sunset--something that is predicted but never observed:

Have you ever studied the path of the sun? The sun does not move in a consistent manner at all:



The above image is a capture of the sun over a period of 8 hours.

Doing a search for images of solargraphs, we see that the sun makes all sorts of odd shapes in the sky:



This shouldn't happen if the earth were a globe. How does your Round Earth model explain this?

I'm looking into it Tom but it appears that these solargraph images you have found are taken in such a way that the image becomes skewed.



There is some obvious curvy effects happening to the image.

Like I said, I'm looking into it.

"from the window is a very sharp photograph with blue sky and the tracks
of the sunrise. The curving street comes from the negative that has been
curved inside the can. If you print out the image and turn the image in
the same way you will see the straight street in the image. "



Here is an image search on Google where you can see many examples of this.

Anything else?

Have you ever studied the path of the sun? The sun does not move in a consistent manner at all:



The above image is a capture of the sun over a period of 8 hours.

Doing a search for images of solargraphs, we see that the sun makes all sorts of odd shapes in the sky:



This shouldn't happen if the earth were a globe. How does your Round Earth model explain this?

Once again, Tom, your images all show the sun continuing westward. It never wraps back against itself. All your pictures are further confirming this fact.

His pictures also confirm that he didn't even check to see what a solargraph was before deciding to use it in an argument. Surely, if he would have known why this particular curve happens then he wouldn't have bothered with this.

I sure see the sun changing directions mid stride in the images above.

Have you ever studied the path of the sun? The sun does not move in a consistent manner at all:



The above image is a capture of the sun over a period of 8 hours.

Doing a search for images of solargraphs, we see that the sun makes all sorts of odd shapes in the sky:



This shouldn't happen if the earth were a globe. How does your Round Earth model explain this?

Here we see a perfect example of what the second portion of my signature refers to.

Even if the solargraph images can be discounted on the account of warped media, I've provided other images of the sun curving as it sets. The OP has provided no evidence that the sun does not curve as it sets, aside from some this does not match observation' hand waving.

Tom, the sun in all of your pictures is still moving westward. "Eastward", which is the motion the bipolar model predicts, means that as time moves on it is moving farther East. Below is a representation of a bipolar sunset--something that is predicted but never observed:

That would depend on how long one can observe the sun before it disappears. When the sun is in the South, it is winter in the North and days are much shorter. Your model does not account for this.

Quote from: Alex Tomasovich on September 04, 2013, 12:21:28 PM

Tom, the sun in all of your pictures is still moving westward. "Eastward", which is the motion the bipolar model predicts, means that as time moves on it is moving farther East. Below is a representation of a bipolar sunset--something that is predicted but never observed:

That would depend on how long one can observe the sun before it disappears. When the sun is in the South, it is winter in the North and days are much shorter. Your model does not account for this.

Tom, see the diagram in the OP. I can observe the sun for 12 hours on the equinox (the day the diagram represents), and my western horizon is devoid of tall features to obscure the sun a full three hours (the duration of it's backtracking) before it sets on an ideal horizon.

Tom, see the diagram in the OP. I can observe the sun for 12 hours on the equinox (the day the diagram represents), and my western horizon is devoid of tall features to obscure the sun a full three hours (the duration of it's backtracking) before it sets on an ideal horizon.

You mentioned nothing about equinox in your model, and there is no evidence that the sun behaves in the manner you are assuming.

Where is the evidence? Should we just assume that the sun behaves as if the earth were a globe?

Quote from: Alex Tomasovich on September 04, 2013, 04:01:49 PM

Tom, see the diagram in the OP. I can observe the sun for 12 hours on the equinox (the day the diagram represents), and my western horizon is devoid of tall features to obscure the sun a full three hours (the duration of it's backtracking) before it sets on an ideal horizon.

You mentioned nothing about equinox in your model, and there is no evidence that the sun behaves in the manner you are assuming.

Where is the evidence? Should we just assume that the sun behaves as if the earth were a globe?

Tom, please read the OP before posting. The outline of the sun's path is clearly labeled "equinox" twice, and the text setting up the diagram clearly states "The to-scale diagram below is for the equinox, when the sun shifts 'gears' from the north pole to the south pole."

The evidence is in the maths (see the to-scale diagram). For three hours before sunset the sun should appear to be moving east. Nobody--not I, not you, not anybody--has ever observed this.

For this model I'm actually assuming the sun is behaving as if the Earth were flat, and had two poles as the Bipolar Model does.

I don't see any evidence that all places on earth receive exactly 12 hours of daylight on the equinox. Please prove this "fact" before continuing.

I don't see any evidence that all places on earth receive exactly 12 hours of daylight on the equinox. Please prove this "fact" before continuing.

I didn't say that all places on Earth receive exactly 12 hours of daylight on the equinox. I said I do. This comes from multiple observations of equinoxes here. If you wish I can use a stopwatch on this next pass and update the diagram accordingly.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on September 04, 2013, 04:12:46 PM

I don't see any evidence that all places on earth receive exactly 12 hours of daylight on the equinox. Please prove this "fact" before continuing.

I didn't say that all places on Earth receive exactly 12 hours of daylight on the equinox. I said I do. This comes from multiple observations of equinoxes here. If you wish I can use a stopwatch on this next pass and update the diagram accordingly.

I would appreciate it if you did that.

Alex, where does the sun rise and set for you on the equinox? For me, it rises due East, and sets due West (checked and confirmed at the last equinox, along with it's highest elevation being 60° above the horizon at midday). FYI, I am at 30° South latitude.

Alex, where does the sun rise and set for you on the equinox? For me, it rises due East, and sets due West (checked and confirmed at the last equinox, along with it's highest elevation being 60° above the horizon at midday). FYI, I am at 30° South latitude.

I'll check this equiox, but judging by the trend of sunrises and sunsets currently, it certainly looks like it's going to be due east and due west. 45 north, by the way.

It is not just a "path of the sun" problem with the bipolar map. There are times of day when both eastern Asia and the United States are in daylight, and Europe and Africa are in their nighttime. How do I know? I speak with clients all over the world and so am very familiar with time zones and when I can and cannot reach a client from here in the US. For example, right now in March, when it is 3:00 pm in NYC, then it is 4:00 pm in Buenos Aires, 6:00 am in Sydney, 7:00 am on the Kamachatka peninsula in Eastern Siberia, 8:00 am in Auckland, 9:00 pm in Madrid and Cape Town, 10:00 pm in Moscow, 3:00 am in Beijing, and 12:30 am in New Delhi.

In order for that to work on the bipolar map, the darkness of the night would be located in the middle of the map slicing diagonally across Africa and Europe and much of Asia (but not all of Asia), while the left and right sides including North and South America, Hawaii, Australia, New Zealand, and far eastern Russia would be in daylight. Japan and China would be in darkness while Australia and Eastern Siberia would be in daylight. That would be quite a trick with just one Sun. Really, how do Australia and Eastern Siberia manage to be in daylight when China and Japan are between them on the map and yet would be in darkness?

Maybe there are two suns...and the reason we can't ever see both at the same time....is.....because.....?

Actually, the more I look at the map, I see that the area of daylight forms a very large circle that encloses the area of darkness on the map....how the heck would that work?

At least the unipolar map does not have this problem of a circle of sunlight enclosing an area of darkness.

PS: It is also daylight on Wake Island, but I am not sure where that appears on the bipolar map. It is located south and east of Japan. But if it is on the right side of the bipolar map, then it clearly completes the circle of daylight surrounding the areas of darkness on the bipolar map.

PPS: Here is a thread with the bipolar flat earth map: https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=59778.90

Perhaps the biggest issue with the bi-polar model is the direction to each pole.
In some places, both poles are due north, in others, it is due south, in most it is some other bearing, but only along 1 line, the line connecting the poles, does it match what is observed, that the poles are 180 degrees apart.

Perhaps the biggest issue with the bi-polar model is the direction to each pole.
In some places, both poles are due north, in others, it is due south, in most it is some other bearing, but only along 1 line, the line connecting the poles, does it match what is observed, that the poles are 180 degrees apart.

Don't let on to the flat earthers that the  Bipolar Map  is quite ridiculous! I like it on their "might be possible list" to attack the South Pole deniers with.

Calculating accurate distances on the usual NP AEP map from Lat/Long is comparatively easy, but is quite a bit more difficult on the  the Bipolar Map.
So I hope that they don't adopt it.

The "bipolar flat-earth map" is none other than our old friend the azimuthal equidistant projection. The difference between this projection and the "unipolar flat earth map" is that this one is centered on the equator instead of the north pole. Which meridian to place at the center becomes the next decision. Using the Greenwich meridian as the "prime meridian" of the projection, the "rim" is an uninhabited part of the Pacific Ocean, so there's no ridiculously distorted land mass to find an excuse for. Any meridian would work, however, but might be tough to explain if it places a highly-populated location near the "rim".

In fact, any point on earth could be the center of an azimuthal equidistant projection, and maps of this type are useful for certain tasks, like easily determining distance and azimuth to any location from the point at the center.