I don't know how far in it would be or exactly how big it all is in the centre. It would be covered with crystal/diamond and such like.
That's fine, I didn't want exact figures, just trying to get a basic image. So, we'd have the light source inside the Earth at the pole, and it shines through the crystal above it casting various images.
So, currently I'm thinking of it as an electrode that gives off light in all direction, and constantly moves up and down (which, by the reel-illusion effect would make the Sun seem to slowly move to and from the centre) underneath a layer of crystal.
Is it the crystal that rotates, to project the various aspects of the light, or am I completely misunderstanding this?
When north is mentioned, it really is UP but it isn't the north pole that people assume.
The north pole that people assume does not exist and is in fact what they believe is the south pole. It's just an inner ring of ice.
The so called outer ring cannot be reached.
I'm babbling again.
I'm slightly lost here. I understand that we can't reach the very 'edge' of the Earth under your model, due to how cold it would get, so we're surrounded by a separate ring of ice.
Is that separate ring the North or South pole. And similar, which is in the centre? (And which one is the Sun at?)
I assumed the centre was the North where the Sun was, but I'm a bit confused now.
The light is always after the fact. there's no light without heat.
We are light and we don't see it unless we use special cameras.
We are just glowing heat sources to some organisms just like a fire-fly glows to us.
The issue is, everything is a heat source. Everything is a light source.
That's all we are and all everything is.
It's just wavelengths and frequencies that determine what we see and what we feel and what we hear.
It's all the same thing.
I understand the connection between heat and light, as far as being able to 'see' heat goes with the right equipment, I just don't understand how the same principle can be applied.
It might just be that I'm assuming science you don't accept, in which case let me know.
My understanding of the reel-illusion can probably be illustrated by analogy: if you have a gear that rotates clockwise, and takes 4 seconds to complete a rotation, and above it there's a camera that only takes a photo every 3 seconds, then the film you'd get by putting the camera's photos together would show the gear rotation anti-clockwise (270 degrees, then 180, then 90, then 0, then...). That wouldn't mean the gear wasn't rotating clockwise, just that you couldn't see it.
To extend the analogy, let's say that when the gear is at certain orientations, it emits heat. So, whenever the gear isn't at exactly 0 degrees, 90 degrees, 180 degrees and 270 degrees, it will be causing a heat source to send out heat.
Now, according to the camera, it's never at any of those positions. If you put a heat sensor next to the camera, it will detect the heat even if the camera can't see it.
This seems to be similar to how night works: technically the light is spinning past quickly, but it goes unseen, and so we can never see it at the place we'd expect it to cause heat, but the heat has to still be there. The way we see light isn't the same as the way we sense heat.
I hope that's clearer, at least.