Ckljamas, please explain your zig zag argument in words again. The video wasn't helpful to me.
Explanation No 1:If the Earth rotated, first half of a Polar Day you would see the Sun apparently moving from LEFT TO RIGHT, and when you reached the Turning Point (that is the moment of SUNSET (in lower latitudes)), the Sun would suddenly start to go back in opposite direction, that is to say, second half of a Polar Day you would see the Sun apparently moving from RIGHT TO LEFT, then when you reached the next Turning Point (that is the moment of SUNRISE (in lower latitudes)), the Sun would suddenly change direction of it's path in the sky in opposite direction and start to move again from LEFT TO RIGHT beginning new Polar Day...
Imagine that you are able to see through the Earth, what would you see from your latitude (wherever it is) during the second part of a day (while there is a NIGHT) if you observed the Sun through the Earth from the other side of the Earth?
In which direction would the Sun apparently move?
From LEFT TO RIGHT (as it is the case during the day) or from RIGHT TO LEFT?
@ Hoppy, would you be so kind to answer to the question above?
Explanation No 2:If the Sun circles around and above you, then
you are within a circle which Sun draws traveling above and around you.
This is the only way how traveling-Sun (not traveling-Earth) can continually draw (without changing it's "apparent direction of journey") it's path (above and around you) as an unbroken - 24 hours a day - circle, which you could continually - 24 hours a day - observe (during northern summer) if you were placed within the "arctic circle".
On the other hand, if you are on a spinning globe, and the Sun is many millions of miles far away from you,
you are completely out of a circle which i have described above. In this hypothetical case you are on merry go round. Now, all you have to do is to imagine yourself on merry go round, observing some immovable light which is placed, let's say 100 meters away from you.
What kind of a phenomena you will have to notice (by necessity) by continually observing immovable light in front of you while you are on merry go round?
You will witness exactly what i have described in my ZIGZAG argument!
Explanation No 3:When our observer within arctic circle passes turning point,
he begins to move in opposite direction, his motion in opposite direction lasts one half of a day (12 hours), so the point is this that whenever our observer reaches a turning point,
he begins to move in opposite direction, and that motion lasts one half of a day.
So, during first half of a day our observer goes from left to right, what he sees? - He sees apparent motion of the sun which apparently goes in opposite direction (right to left)!
After he pass turning point, that is, during second half of a day our observer goes from right to left, what he sees now? - He sees apparent motion of the sun which apparently goes in opposite direction (left to right).
Once our observer in arctic circle changes his direction of motion, he keeps going in that direction for next 12 hours, all the way up until he reaches his next turning point.On top of that:What Mikeman's video animation actually depicts is what i was trying to point out to, in my
argument No 1, here:
http://72.52.145.132/257076-post83.htmlHowever, i have to make one little correction concerning my
argument No 1:
Our northern house (placed directly on Potato's axis) would make ONE VERY SLOW rotation per day, although we could loosen the camera on the roof of our northern house, so that it is always directed towards the sun, that is how absolute orientation of our camera would never change, and what our northern camera would record, if the Earth were a globe (better to say : a Potato) and spun on it's axis, would be something very similar to what Mikeman's video animation shows.
Now, we have to put this question:
If the Earth rotated on it's axis, and if Earth-Sun dimensions-ratio and Earth-Sun distances-ratio were in accordance with HC theory, how far away from the North Pole we should have to go, in order to notice ZIGZAG phenomena, and stop to notice phenomena
"NO 1" (about which i am talking in my argument NO 1)
You will better understand the meaning of the question above after watching this video: "ZIGZAG demonstration" :
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">This problem raises misunderstandings and questions like this:
@ Mikeman, according to you, people who live in Greenland can not see any apparent motion of the Sun across the sky? The Sun is immovable spot in the sky not only for the hypothetical observer who stands directly at the North Pole (which scenario nobody ever saw, and never will be able to see in the future), but, according to you, the Sun should be immovable spot in the sky even for people who live thousands of miles away from the North Pole, also???This is the so called
"small effect" problem that
Alpha2Omega and
Rottingroom have talked about.
They didn't even deny ZIGZAG phenomena, they just have pointed out that because of that "small effect" our observer in Arctic wouldn't be able to notice it. Do you sense now, what all the wonders (wonderful flaws) HC pandora's box hides???
The point is this:If the Earth rotates there is a parallax (the Sun's apparent daily motion across the sky in two different directions) which is a consequence of Earth's independent rotational motion, and even if we can not notice it at a very close distance from the North Pole, we should be able to measure it with advanced instruments. But at enough great distances from the North Pole we should be able to notice this parallax easily with naked eyes.
If the Earth is at rest, there is no such parallax (as a consequence of Earth's independent rotational motion), which means that
there aren't two different directions of the Sun's apparent daily motion across the sky because there aren't two directions of Earth's rotational daily motion. In another words, the Sun's apparent daily motion across the sky is one directional closed loop below which is placed our hypothetical observer within Arctic circle.
Should i be more clear?