FE sun distance and trigonometry.

  • 25 Replies
  • 5923 Views
?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« on: December 10, 2014, 05:44:07 AM »
Can any mathematically inclined FE'r show me a trigonometric tangent function for the suns height above the equator for any location that isn't exactly 3000 miles from the equator?

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #1 on: December 10, 2014, 09:47:23 AM »
Can any mathematically inclined FE'r [...]

Oxymoron.  Sorry.    :D

*

Lemmiwinks

  • 2161
  • President of the Non-Conformist Zetetic Council
Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #2 on: December 10, 2014, 03:08:10 PM »
Can any mathematically inclined FE'r [...]

Oxymoron.  Sorry.    :D

Looks like you are right. :P
I have 13 [academic qualifications] actually. I'll leave it up to you to guess which, or simply call me a  liar. Either is fine.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #3 on: December 11, 2014, 07:44:15 AM »
Mathematics—geometry, trigonometry, calculus etc—are the enemies of the flat earthers.    ::)


*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #4 on: December 11, 2014, 08:01:21 AM »
If you don't have a flat Earth question or answer, then please refrain from posting in the FE Q&A section.  Thanks. 

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #5 on: December 11, 2014, 09:32:14 AM »
If you don't have a flat Earth question or answer, then please refrain from posting in the FE Q&A section.  Thanks.

Do you have a flat earth answer for my flat earth question?

*

Pongo

  • Planar Moderator
  • 6753
Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #6 on: December 11, 2014, 11:49:38 AM »
Can any mathematically inclined FE'r show me a trigonometric tangent function for the suns height above the equator for any location that isn't exactly 3000 miles from the equator?

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=26936.0#.VIn0lNLF-Gc

Ahhhhh, the memories.  This was one of the first of a many step journey to the conclusion of a flat-earth.  It's easy to come here and be a round-earther when all you do is shout with your eye and ears plugged shut.  However, when you start actually doing research and learning things, your world comes crumbling down.

*

Jet Fission

  • 519
  • NASA shill
Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #7 on: December 11, 2014, 12:28:51 PM »
Can any mathematically inclined FE'r show me a trigonometric tangent function for the suns height above the equator for any location that isn't exactly 3000 miles from the equator?

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=26936.0#.VIn0lNLF-Gc

Ahhhhh, the memories.  This was one of the first of a many step journey to the conclusion of a flat-earth.  It's easy to come here and be a round-earther when all you do is shout with your eye and ears plugged shut.  However, when you start actually doing research and learning things, your world comes crumbling down.

Well, I read through the thread, and it looks like no one tried the experiment. In fact, you didn't even post your own results.
To a flat earth theorist, being a "skeptic" is to have confirmation bias.
Just because I'm a genius doesn't mean I know everything.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #8 on: December 11, 2014, 12:34:00 PM »
Can any mathematically inclined FE'r show me a trigonometric tangent function for the suns height above the equator for any location that isn't exactly 3000 miles from the equator?

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=26936.0#.VIn0lNLF-Gc

Ahhhhh, the memories.  This was one of the first of a many step journey to the conclusion of a flat-earth.  It's easy to come here and be a round-earther when all you do is shout with your eye and ears plugged shut.  However, when you start actually doing research and learning things, your world comes crumbling down.

First of all, I was talking about the sun. Second of all, I asked for a mathematically inclined flat earther, you know, someone that knows that trig functions apply to right triangles.

*

Jet Fission

  • 519
  • NASA shill
Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #9 on: December 11, 2014, 12:36:25 PM »
someone that knows that trig functions apply to right triangles.

Ouch, that too.
To a flat earth theorist, being a "skeptic" is to have confirmation bias.
Just because I'm a genius doesn't mean I know everything.

Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #10 on: December 11, 2014, 02:12:28 PM »
Ahhhhh, the memories.  This was one of the first of a many step journey to the conclusion of a flat-earth.  It's easy to come here and be a round-earther when all you do is shout with your eye and ears plugged shut.  However, when you start actually doing research and learning things, your world comes crumbling down.
What convinced you in the end?  Was it the hooker?

That hooker wasn't a woman,  by the way.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #11 on: December 11, 2014, 10:32:28 PM »
Can any mathematically inclined FE'r show me a trigonometric tangent function for the suns height above the equator for any location that isn't exactly 3000 miles from the equator?

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=26936.0#.VIn0lNLF-Gc

Ahhhhh, the memories.  This was one of the first of a many step journey to the conclusion of a flat-earth.  It's easy to come here and be a round-earther when all you do is shout with your eye and ears plugged shut.  However, when you start actually doing research and learning things, your world comes crumbling down.

Well, I read through the thread, and it looks like no one tried the experiment. In fact, you didn't even post your own results.
It's probably a good thing no one tried it, for reasons beyond the obvious point that steps 2 and 3 are in what is called "sub-optimal order". Why would you want to be standing still (step 2), possibly in a place frequented by hookers (step 3), with a telescope and protractor while your hooker travels for hours (step 3)? What if you have to use the bathroom or something? It ought to be easier to locate your hooker (step 3) before standing still (step 2) than after, too. But, anyway, the real problem is that the trig works to find the height of the Moon above a flat earth based on the elevation angles and distance only in the special case where the point directly below the moon is exactly on the line through points A and B (as described in the explanation). This wasn't listed as a requirement in step 4, but the math won't work at all if this condition is not met at least fairly closely.

Come to think of it, the order of all of the first three steps should be reversed. By the time you execute step 3, including the time it takes to locate and negotiate with your hooker while standing still, showing the hooker how to operate the telescope and protractor, and for the hooker to travel perhaps hundreds of miles, the Moon may have set (invalidating step 1).

So, Pongo, it seems the first step to your "revelation" was a poorly-designed experiment, that apparently was never carried out, that can't give a meaningful answer except by a miraculous coincidence of timing and geography. Are the rest of the steps as questionable as this one? Maybe you want to re-think your conclusion?
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #12 on: December 12, 2014, 04:05:03 AM »
So at least we can conclude that Pongo is not a mathematically inclined FE'r
I think, therefore I am

Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #13 on: December 12, 2014, 04:27:16 AM »
So at least we can conclude that Pongo is not a mathematically inclined FE'r
Or at least his hooker was.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #14 on: December 12, 2014, 05:57:37 AM »
So at least we can conclude that Pongo is not a mathematically inclined FE'r
Or at least his hooker was.

And his hooker too obviously.
I think, therefore I am

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #15 on: December 12, 2014, 06:07:13 AM »
So at least we can conclude that Pongo is not a mathematically inclined FE'r
Or at least his hooker was [a flat earther].

Citation needed.

Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #16 on: December 12, 2014, 06:36:59 AM »
If your money's good, then the planet can be whatever shape you want it to be, big boy.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #17 on: December 12, 2014, 06:49:42 AM »
If your Pongo's money's good, then the planet can be whatever shape you want it to be, big boy.

Citation needed.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #18 on: December 12, 2014, 06:50:37 AM »

*

Pongo

  • Planar Moderator
  • 6753
Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #19 on: December 12, 2014, 07:04:06 AM »
Can any mathematically inclined FE'r show me a trigonometric tangent function for the suns height above the equator for any location that isn't exactly 3000 miles from the equator?

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=26936.0#.VIn0lNLF-Gc

Ahhhhh, the memories.  This was one of the first of a many step journey to the conclusion of a flat-earth.  It's easy to come here and be a round-earther when all you do is shout with your eye and ears plugged shut.  However, when you start actually doing research and learning things, your world comes crumbling down.

First of all, I was talking about the sun. Second of all, I asked for a mathematically inclined flat earther, you know, someone that knows that trig functions apply to right triangles.

The maths can apply to any celestial object provided your measurements are accurate enough.  Also, everyone chose the wrong hole to poke in the experiment.  If the earth were round, then the distance would be measured to the point between the two participants; a location under the supposed round earth and therefore not give a truly accurate measurement of the distance to the moon/sun/bird/cloud/anythingYouSeeInTheSky.

It's amusing that when I first posted this, round-earthers were the ones lauding this as yet another proof against the claims of flat-earthers.  Yet, years later when I reference the same post as a flat-earther, it's suddenly a deeply flawed experiment.

I'll give you a moment to contemplate the ramifications of Confirmation Bias and how it applies to your everyday life.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #20 on: December 12, 2014, 07:14:54 AM »
Can any mathematically inclined FE'r show me a trigonometric tangent function for the suns height above the equator for any location that isn't exactly 3000 miles from the equator?

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=26936.0#.VIn0lNLF-Gc

Ahhhhh, the memories.  This was one of the first of a many step journey to the conclusion of a flat-earth.  It's easy to come here and be a round-earther when all you do is shout with your eye and ears plugged shut.  However, when you start actually doing research and learning things, your world comes crumbling down.

First of all, I was talking about the sun. Second of all, I asked for a mathematically inclined flat earther, you know, someone that knows that trig functions apply to right triangles.

The maths can apply to any celestial object provided your measurements are accurate enough.  Also, everyone chose the wrong hole to poke in the experiment.  If the earth were round, then the distance would be measured to the point between the two participants; a location under the supposed round earth and therefore not give a truly accurate measurement of the distance to the moon/sun/bird/cloud/anythingYouSeeInTheSky.

It's amusing that when I first posted this, round-earthers were the ones lauding this as yet another proof against the claims of flat-earthers.  Yet, years later when I reference the same post as a flat-earther, it's suddenly a deeply flawed experiment.

I'll give you a moment to contemplate the ramifications of Confirmation Bias and how it applies to your everyday life.

I wasn't there to point out the glaring problem the first time so don't blame me for other round earthers. You didn't mention at all in the experiment that the moon needed to be somewhere specific, it's not even implied. You also didn't finish the experiment so there's that. Basically, the experiment is highly unlikely to be done faithfully (since the chances of the moon appearing directly above a spot between you and your hooker is slim). By the way, you can do this experiment on a round earth but instead of using the arc distance between observers you would use the chord distance.

Anyways back to the op.

Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #21 on: December 12, 2014, 08:15:27 AM »
Can any mathematically inclined FE'r show me a trigonometric tangent function for the suns height above the equator for any location that isn't exactly 3000 miles from the equator?

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=26936.0#.VIn0lNLF-Gc

Ahhhhh, the memories.  This was one of the first of a many step journey to the conclusion of a flat-earth.  It's easy to come here and be a round-earther when all you do is shout with your eye and ears plugged shut.  However, when you start actually doing research and learning things, your world comes crumbling down.

First of all, I was talking about the sun. Second of all, I asked for a mathematically inclined flat earther, you know, someone that knows that trig functions apply to right triangles.

The maths can apply to any celestial object provided your measurements are accurate enough.  Also, everyone chose the wrong hole to poke in the experiment.  If the earth were round, then the distance would be measured to the point between the two participants; a location under the supposed round earth and therefore not give a truly accurate measurement of the distance to the moon/sun/bird/cloud/anythingYouSeeInTheSky.

It's amusing that when I first posted this, round-earthers were the ones lauding this as yet another proof against the claims of flat-earthers.  Yet, years later when I reference the same post as a flat-earther, it's suddenly a deeply flawed experiment.

I'll give you a moment to contemplate the ramifications of Confirmation Bias and how it applies to your everyday life.

For your formula to work you need the Moon to be aligned with the line between you and the hooker.
I think, therefore I am

Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #22 on: December 12, 2014, 04:55:12 PM »
Can any mathematically inclined FE'r show me a trigonometric tangent function for the suns height above the equator for any location that isn't exactly 3000 miles from the equator?

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=26936.0#.VIn0lNLF-Gc

Ahhhhh, the memories.  This was one of the first of a many step journey to the conclusion of a flat-earth.  It's easy to come here and be a round-earther when all you do is shout with your eye and ears plugged shut.  However, when you start actually doing research and learning things, your world comes crumbling down.

First of all, I was talking about the sun. Second of all, I asked for a mathematically inclined flat earther, you know, someone that knows that trig functions apply to right triangles.

The maths can apply to any celestial object provided your measurements are accurate enough.  Also, everyone chose the wrong hole to poke in the experiment.  If the earth were round, then the distance would be measured to the point between the two participants; a location under the supposed round earth and therefore not give a truly accurate measurement of the distance to the moon/sun/bird/cloud/anythingYouSeeInTheSky.

It's amusing that when I first posted this, round-earthers were the ones lauding this as yet another proof against the claims of flat-earthers.  Yet, years later when I reference the same post as a flat-earther, it's suddenly a deeply flawed experiment.

I'll give you a moment to contemplate the ramifications of Confirmation Bias and how it applies to your everyday life.

I wasn't there to point out the glaring problem the first time so don't blame me for other round earthers. You didn't mention at all in the experiment that the moon needed to be somewhere specific, it's not even implied. You also didn't finish the experiment so there's that. Basically, the experiment is highly unlikely to be done faithfully (since the chances of the moon appearing directly above a spot between you and your hooker is slim). By the way, you can do this experiment on a round earth but instead of using the arc distance between observers you would use the chord distance.

Anyways back to the op.
Apparently no one in either camp noticed the glaring error in your experiment when first proposed; maybe they were willing to accept your assertion that this was a valid test under your stated conditions (this was a bad assumption on their part), or maybe they were just too busy thinking of better - and cheaper(!) - ways to employ a hooker. It turns out there's another basic error in it: even if we add the constraint that both observers and the sub-lunar point must be in a straight line so the math is valid, if the sub-lunar point is not between the two observers, the the one nearer the Moon must use the supplement of their measured elevation angle instead of the angle directly, otherwise, the trig gives the wrong answer. Again. Oops.

The most interesting result is that you will arrive at different values for h (height to the Moon) depending on where your observations are taken. If you're both farther from directly under the Moon, the value for h will be lower than if you're both looking nearly straight up. This won't surprise you if you think about it; if  the Moon were right on the horizon for the observer at A,then tan(a) will be zero, so, regardless of the value of d or tan(b) in the formula

h = d * (  ( tan(a) * tan(b) ) / ( tan(a) + tan(b) )  )

the value for h will always be zero[nb]For any finite d and finite, non-zero tan(b), otherwise the result is undefined.[/nb]!

It turns out that the calculated value for the height of the Moon converges on the radius of the Earth as you both get closer to looking straight up. If anyone actually carried out this experiment properly and with multiple geometries, it would provide strong evidence not only that the Earth was indeed spherical, but could give a reasonable estimate of its radius!

Oh, yes... there's a typo in the equation that says

(d * h/tan(a)) tan(b) = h

It should be

(d - h/tan(a)) tan(b) = h

This error wasn't carried through to the solution for h, so it's probably a simple transcription error when typing the post. I'm surprised no one noticed this - the units don't work even if you don't follow the details of the algebra; too busy thinking about hookers, I guess.
 
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

Lemmiwinks

  • 2161
  • President of the Non-Conformist Zetetic Council
Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #23 on: December 12, 2014, 05:05:17 PM »
I cant be assed to look at the original post, mostly because I wont necro it and I dont particularly care to battle pongo on bad maths. BUT, I also cannot stop laughing at the image of pongo going up to a hooker, and saying "Excuse me Mistress of the Night, can I please pay you to prove the earth is flat?"
I have 13 [academic qualifications] actually. I'll leave it up to you to guess which, or simply call me a  liar. Either is fine.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #24 on: December 12, 2014, 05:15:26 PM »
And "this is going to take all night."
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

Jet Fission

  • 519
  • NASA shill
Re: FE sun distance and trigonometry.
« Reply #25 on: December 12, 2014, 06:29:05 PM »
Can any mathematically inclined FE'r show me a trigonometric tangent function for the suns height above the equator for any location that isn't exactly 3000 miles from the equator?

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=26936.0#.VIn0lNLF-Gc

Ahhhhh, the memories.  This was one of the first of a many step journey to the conclusion of a flat-earth.  It's easy to come here and be a round-earther when all you do is shout with your eye and ears plugged shut.  However, when you start actually doing research and learning things, your world comes crumbling down.

First of all, I was talking about the sun. Second of all, I asked for a mathematically inclined flat earther, you know, someone that knows that trig functions apply to right triangles.

The maths can apply to any celestial object provided your measurements are accurate enough.  Also, everyone chose the wrong hole to poke in the experiment.  If the earth were round, then the distance would be measured to the point between the two participants; a location under the supposed round earth and therefore not give a truly accurate measurement of the distance to the moon/sun/bird/cloud/anythingYouSeeInTheSky.

It's amusing that when I first posted this, round-earthers were the ones lauding this as yet another proof against the claims of flat-earthers.  Yet, years later when I reference the same post as a flat-earther, it's suddenly a deeply flawed experiment.

I'll give you a moment to contemplate the ramifications of Confirmation Bias and how it applies to your everyday life.

For your formula to work you need the Moon to be aligned with the line between you and the hooker.

Yes, but only after you align your own perpendicular line parallel with the hookers body. Unless you're drunk, then that line might become more acute relative to your body.



Sorry. I had to.
To a flat earth theorist, being a "skeptic" is to have confirmation bias.
Just because I'm a genius doesn't mean I know everything.