Questions about our moon

in order not to emit light it should be as massive as a black hole. every other object emits light...even when it is Vantablack.

In situations with something other than the moon causing solar eclipses it's put down to the Black Sun, and that's primarily the province of Sandokhan.

Quote from: napoleon on November 09, 2017, 07:02:15 AM

in order not to emit light it should be as massive as a black hole. every other object emits light...even when it is Vantablack.
but let us say, it emits no light for some unknown reason. It's presence in the sky blocks out stars behind it...so indirectly it is still visible.

There is a tremendous difference between emitting light and reflecting light.

• does not bring the discussion further. it is just an attempt to derail it in order not having to confess you are defending a lost cause and losing too much credibility
• does not make you smart. a smartass at most

Quote

if it orbits around the sun very closely to it...it should be almost as big as the sun in order to block all the light towards the sun...otherwise the moon will still be lit by the partial blocked sun.

You are the only one expecting it to block the light of the Sun. As I've pointed out repeatedly that's not what the shadow object is used for.
In situations with something other than the moon causing solar eclipses it's put down to the Black Sun, and that's primarily the province of Sandokhan. As far as lunar eclipses go the whole point is that some light reaches the moon.

Quote

this one is weird. the original moon explains the tides with it's gravitational pull perfectly.

Under RET.

Quote

FE usually does not believe in this gravitational force....therefore they try to explain the phenomenon by introducing a new unknown object, the anti-moon.
but if this anti-moon also uses gravitational force to explain tides...then we are back to the beginning.
hope you understand what I mean.

I understand what you mean, that's just a straw man of FET. Plenty of FE models involve some form of gravity, whether it's between the stars to cause celestial gravitation/gears, or from the Earth in some infinite plane model. It's just often said to be either less than RET predicts, only caused by specific elements, or in the case of the Earth balanced by some other force keeping the Earth flat.
Not all use it, sure, but it's not that bizarre for an FE model to appeal to gravity.

I knew what you meant right away, therefore didn't bother to correct you because of reasons mentioned above.

Of course that was just a typo. I meant to say towards the moon...not towards the sun. but OK, have it your way...
with lunar eclipses also. if the shadow object orbits around the sun very closely to it...it should be almost as big as the sun in order to block all the light towards the moon...otherwise, the moon will still be lit by the partial blocked sun.

...You can't say you knew what I meant when you spent a fair bit of time talking about something that didn't reflect light needing to be a black hole.

Quote

Of course that was just a typo. I meant to say towards the moon...not towards the sun. but OK, have it your way...
with lunar eclipses also. if the shadow object orbits around the sun very closely to it...it should be almost as big as the sun in order to block all the light towards the moon...otherwise, the moon will still be lit by the partial blocked sun.

The moon is lit by a partially blocked Sun. That is the definition of a lunar eclipse.

Quote from: napoleon on November 12, 2017, 10:39:18 PM

I knew what you meant right away, therefore didn't bother to correct you because of reasons mentioned above.

...You can't say you knew what I meant when you spent a fair bit of time talking about something that didn't reflect light needing to be a black hole.

Quote

Of course that was just a typo. I meant to say towards the moon...not towards the sun. but OK, have it your way...
with lunar eclipses also. if the shadow object orbits around the sun very closely to it...it should be almost as big as the sun in order to block all the light towards the moon...otherwise, the moon will still be lit by the partial blocked sun.

The moon is lit by a partially blocked Sun. That is the definition of a lunar eclipse.

Quote from: napoleon on November 09, 2017, 07:02:15 AM

in order not to emit light it should be as massive as a black hole. every other object emits light...even when it is Vantablack.
but let us say, it emits no light for some unknown reason. It's presence in the sky blocks out stars behind it...so indirectly it is still visible.

There is a tremendous difference between emitting light and reflecting light.

Anti-Moon and Shadow Object

In some models these are the same object, while in others they are entirely distinct.

The shadow object is a celestial body that, as the name suggests, emits no light. It travels across the sky and can only be detected by the absence of light, making it very difficult to observe.

OK, with this discussion I just learnt to keep my posts as short as possible to give you less opportunity to avoid or deflect anything.

here is the quote where you accused me for not knowing the difference between emitting and reflecting.

Quote from: napoleon on November 14, 2017, 12:16:51 AM

OK, with this discussion I just learnt to keep my posts as short as possible to give you less opportunity to avoid or deflect anything.

here is the quote where you accused me for not knowing the difference between emitting and reflecting.

Because I tend to expect the people that read my posts to actually put in a little thought. If I say an object's black I don't mean it absorbs 100% of the light that hits it, I mean it looks black. If you want to overthink the slightest semantic quirk you can object to pretty much everything, and it's a ridiculous way of acting.
Are you seriously going to accuse me of deflecting when that's your argument?

There is a tremendous difference between emitting light and reflecting light.

Quote

Not me. So you are accusing me for not knowing the difference, but you make that mistake yourself.
I was merely using your words in my post because it was convenient...not because I was overthinking the slightest semantic quirk.

Besides, I totally agree with nightsky about you being a very unpleasant person to debate with. every discussion with you gets derailed and boiles down to a discussion about semantic quirks.

Because I tend to expect the people that read my posts to actually put in a little thought. If I say an object's black I don't mean it absorbs 100% of the light that hits it, I mean it looks black. If you want to overthink the slightest semantic quirk you can object to pretty much everything, and it's a ridiculous way of acting.
Are you seriously going to accuse me of deflecting when that's your argument?

Quote from: Jane on November 14, 2017, 06:19:35 AM

Because I tend to expect the people that read my posts to actually put in a little thought. If I say an object's black I don't mean it absorbs 100% of the light that hits it, I mean it looks black. If you want to overthink the slightest semantic quirk you can object to pretty much everything, and it's a ridiculous way of acting.
Are you seriously going to accuse me of deflecting when that's your argument?

Quote from: Jane on November 14, 2017, 07:18:49 AM

Quote from: Jane on November 14, 2017, 06:19:35 AM

Because I tend to expect the people that read my posts to actually put in a little thought. If I say an object's black I don't mean it absorbs 100% of the light that hits it, I mean it looks black. If you want to overthink the slightest semantic quirk you can object to pretty much everything, and it's a ridiculous way of acting.
Are you seriously going to accuse me of deflecting when that's your argument?

you really don't have to repeat your posts.

If the moon was emitting its own light, it would not have shadows on its surface.

If the moon was emitting its own light, it would not have shadows on its surface.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Quote from: Jane on November 13, 2017, 05:40:15 AM

. . . . . .
The moon is lit by a partially blocked Sun. That is the definition of a lunar eclipse.

That would be a partial lunar eclipse. In order for it to be a total lunar eclipse you need to block all the light from the sun that reaches the moon. If the shadow object is right next to the sun, it needs to be roughly as big as the sun.
If it is right next to the moon, it needs to be roughly as big as the moon.
If it is somewhere in between, then it can be an intermediate size.

If the shadow object is right next to the sun, it needs to be roughly as big as the sun.
If it is right next to the moon, it needs to be roughly as big as the moon.

The Lunar Eclipse

A Lunar Eclipse occurs about twice a year when a satellite of the sun passes between the sun and moon.

This satellite is called the Shadow Object. Its orbital plane is tilted at an angle of about 5°10' to the sun's orbital plane, making eclipses possible only when the three bodies (Sun, Object, and Moon) are aligned and when the moon is crossing the sun's orbital plane (at a point called the node). Within a given year, considering the orbitals of these celestial bodies, a maximum of three lunar eclipses can occur. Despite the fact that there are more solar than lunar eclipses each year, over time many more lunar eclipses are seen at any single location on earth than solar eclipses. This occurs because a lunar eclipse can be seen from the entire half of the earth beneath the moon at that time, while a solar eclipse is visible only along a narrow path on the earth's surface.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The shadow object is never seen because it orbits close to the sun. As the sun's powerful vertical rays hit the atmosphere during the day they will scatter and blot out nearly every single star and celestial body in the sky.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
It is estimated that the Shadow Object is around five to ten miles in diameter. Since it is somewhat close to the sun the manifestation of its penumbra upon the moon appears as a magnified projection. This is similar to how during a shadow puppet show your hand's shadow can make a large magnified projection upon your bedroom wall as you move it closer to the flashlight.

From: The Flat Earth Society Wiki, The Lunar Eclipse

Quote from: Denspressure on November 14, 2017, 11:00:12 AM

If the moon was emitting its own light, it would not have shadows on its surface.

This is correct, which is why the flatties claim the shadows are Areas Without Moonshramps that just happen to be the exact shape that would match a shadow cast by a peaked Area With Moonshramps. Apparently, this is simple coincidence.

I thought you were making the opposite argument to the one that's now clear, my mistake.

If you're asking about FEers, the shadow object doesn't seem to be used for solar eclipses, at least not most of the time. It's primarily the explanation for lunar.

Superman doesn't exist??  So it's come to this

Screw you all then. I'm hanging up my spandex undies and any problem you have you can deal with it yourself!

What a hide to call me fictional! I made wearing undies on the outside popular FFS!