Regarding the stars and the sun

If the Sun moves away from the observer across the flat plane and gets too far to be seen, why can we see stars in the direction where the Sun supposedly is? Aren't they farther away?

See this sketch:

http://imgur.com/a/RmlIs

The Sun moves towards the stars. Then the Sun disappears from view. But according to the flat earth notion, the sun is actually still there but too far away to see.

It gets dark.

And then we see stars in the direction where the Sun is supposed to be.

The stars are further away than the Sun. How can this be?

Maybe we can make some headway on this question by acknowledging that 'refraction' is not an answer. Any way you spin it, the stars are visible in the same direction where the sun is supposed to be. So why do we see stars there but not the sun?

How can starlight travel across the dark bit of the plane (where the sun isn't), then through the light bit (where it is day) and make it all the way to the other dark bit (where our observer is standing at night)?

Bump.

I am beginning to believe I have difinitively wrecked FE with my post. There is no response possible, except admitting that the Earth cannot be flat.

Your question makes no sense.  Let us say the stars are just a little higher than the sun.  While the sun is visible, we don't really see stars, but I think everyone would agree they are still there.  When the sun disappears and we first start to see stars, the ones we see are not as far away as the sun, and the ones that are as far away as the sun or farther are now too far to see.

I think this question made sense to you at the time, but I hope you can understand the logic and reasoning of it now. 

Your question makes no sense.  Let us say the stars are just a little higher than the sun.  While the sun is visible, we don't really see stars, but I think everyone would agree they are still there.  When the sun disappears and we first start to see stars, the ones we see are not as far away as the sun, and the ones that are as far away as the sun or farther are now too far to see.

I think this question made sense to you at the time, but I hope you can understand the logic and reasoning of it now.

What?

No.

Get a telescope. Point it in the direction you say the sun is. You will see many stars.

And if those stars *in that exact direction* are actually closer than the sun is at that point in time, THE SUN MUST HAVE FLOWN THROUGH THEM.

Which still does not answer the question:

If you look in the direction where *you say the sun is*, you will see thousands of stars!

Quote from: jroa on September 04, 2016, 03:35:35 AM

Your question makes no sense.  Let us say the stars are just a little higher than the sun.  While the sun is visible, we don't really see stars, but I think everyone would agree they are still there.  When the sun disappears and we first start to see stars, the ones we see are not as far away as the sun, and the ones that are as far away as the sun or farther are now too far to see.

I think this question made sense to you at the time, but I hope you can understand the logic and reasoning of it now.

What?

No.

Get a telescope. Point it in the direction you say the sun is. You will see many stars.

And if those stars *in that exact direction* are actually closer than the sun is at that point in time, THE SUN MUST HAVE FLOWN THROUGH THEM.

Which still does not answer the question:

If you look in the direction where *you say the sun is*, you will see thousands of stars!

There were also stars as close to or farther than the sun that you don't see.  The ones that you do see are not as far as the sun, but they are moving across the sky and eventually, they too will be as far as the sun was when it could no longer be seen.  Do you always have trouble with spacial awareness? 

Quote from: Omega on September 04, 2016, 03:43:49 AM

Quote from: jroa on September 04, 2016, 03:35:35 AM

Your question makes no sense.  Let us say the stars are just a little higher than the sun.  While the sun is visible, we don't really see stars, but I think everyone would agree they are still there.  When the sun disappears and we first start to see stars, the ones we see are not as far away as the sun, and the ones that are as far away as the sun or farther are now too far to see.

I think this question made sense to you at the time, but I hope you can understand the logic and reasoning of it now.

What?

No.

Get a telescope. Point it in the direction you say the sun is. You will see many stars.

And if those stars *in that exact direction* are actually closer than the sun is at that point in time, THE SUN MUST HAVE FLOWN THROUGH THEM.

Which still does not answer the question:

If you look in the direction where *you say the sun is*, you will see thousands of stars!

There were also stars as close to or farther than the sun that you don't see.  The ones that you do see are not as far as the sun, but they are moving across the sky and eventually, they too will be as far as the sun was when it could no longer be seen.  Do you always have trouble with spacial awareness?

You ignore the main question:

If 'refraction' causes the sun to only appear to sink below the horizon, why can I see stars in that exact same direction? Should not all stars that are in the same line as the sun be affected by the same refraction? Should there not be total darkness in that direction, if all light is refracted downwards?

If your idea of refraction is true, there should be a black border above the horizon, devoid of all stars.

You seem to be saying that we must look past stars in order to see the sun. What part about the stars being higher than the sun do you not understad? 

Picture or draw Dome, with Sun at one point on it.
If horizon hides Sun, it also hides all of the stars below the Sun.
At that moment you see only the stars that are above the Sun,
and that part of the Dome is closer.

But the question is, why Sun and stars below it went to the west?
Why they didn't follow the Dome to the northwest?

What do you people not understand about some of the stars being closer to you than the sun?  Is it because it would make your bull shit non-mathemetal theories to rest? 

You seem to be saying that we must look past stars in order to see the sun. What part about the stars being higher than the sun do you not understad?

What part of 'there are stars visible in the direction where the sun is' do you not understaNd?

You can't explain why we can't see the sun but can see the stars.

Well you can, nut then you have to admit the sun moved below the horizon.

Which means that the Earth is...

Those stars you see are closer than the sun. What part of being closer and therefore visible are you having so much trouble understanding?

Those stars you see are closer than the sun. What part of being closer and therefore visible are you having so much trouble understanding?

So the sun moved through those stars?

Quote from: jroa on September 04, 2016, 07:36:43 AM

Those stars you see are closer than the sun. What part of being closer and therefore visible are you having so much trouble understanding?

So the sun moved through those stars?

No, the stars that were farther than the sun are still farther than the sun and the ones that are closer will still be closer, even if they are beyond the limit of sight. 

Quote from: Omega on September 04, 2016, 07:39:02 AM

Quote from: jroa on September 04, 2016, 07:36:43 AM

Those stars you see are closer than the sun. What part of being closer and therefore visible are you having so much trouble understanding?

So the sun moved through those stars?

No, the stars that were farther than the sun are still farther than the sun and the ones that are closer will still be closer, even if they are beyond the limit of sight.

Do you dispute that my sketch is a correct representation of the situation as outlined by the flat earth notion?

@Omega:

Same error Flat Earthers make when try to explain how different stars behave on north and south hemisphere.

Today from North Carolina we will "see" constellations Hydra, Sextans, Cancer, Gemini, ... below the Sun (but masked by sunlight).
We will also "see" constellations Virgo, Libra, Coma Berenices, Canes Venatici, Serpens, ... above the Sun (also masked by sunlight).

As Earth rotates, first to set behind horizon are those below the Sun (Hydra, Sextans, Cancer, Gemini),
then the Sun, making it possible now to see those that are above the Sun (Virgo, Libra, Coma Berenices, Canes Venatici, Serpens).

They will also soon set behind horizon, but:
If you picture the Dome with "stars below", the Sun, and "stars above" all as stickers on it, you will see that
"stars above" are in the part of Dome that is closer to us than the Sun and "stars below".

Meanwhile we still don't know why they all together didn't go northwest with the Dome.

So... all the stars are in fact stuck in a flat plane that is moving across the sky the same way the Sun is? The stars are affixed to a flat 'sky disk'?

Either flat sky disc, or sky disc with edges curved downward to the ground, like inverted salad bowl.

With number of "wandering stars" (planets, commets, asteroids, moons of other planets, ...)
that are not fixed to it, but fly around like fireflies.

Quote from: jroa on September 04, 2016, 07:43:17 AM

Quote from: Omega on September 04, 2016, 07:39:02 AM

Quote from: jroa on September 04, 2016, 07:36:43 AM

Those stars you see are closer than the sun. What part of being closer and therefore visible are you having so much trouble understanding?

So the sun moved through those stars?

No, the stars that were farther than the sun are still farther than the sun and the ones that are closer will still be closer, even if they are beyond the limit of sight.

Do you dispute that my sketch is a correct representation of the situation as outlined by the flat earth notion?

Only dispute is that the stars are a little above the path of the sun. 

Maybe another sketch will help jroa.  He does not seem to understand that stars near the horizon should be further away in the direction the sun is at.

If not that means the Sun moves through those stars.

First you say:

There were also stars as close to or farther than the sun that you don't see.  The ones that you do see are not as far as the sun, but they are moving across the sky and eventually, they too will be as far as the sun was when it could no longer be seen.  Do you always have trouble with spacial awareness?

What are these "stars" that "are not as far as the sun"? There is no evidence of any stars being closer to us than the sun!
Some planets (Mercury, Venus and Mars) are sometimes closer to us than the sun, the next closet, Jupiter, is at its closest approach over 3 times the distance to the sun.

You seem to be saying that we must look past stars in order to see the sun. What part about the stars being higher than the sun do you not understad?

Now we are asked, "What part about the stars being higher than the sun do you not understad?" But I thought some of these stars were closer than the sun!

So please tell us, are the stars higher or lower than the sun and are they closer or further away?

Really, I don't think you know the difference between "stars" and "planets". They really are quite different you know.

But then you say "and eventually, they too will be as far as the sun was when it could no longer be seen". Really don't you think that the sun should seen a tremendous distance further away than these stars.

As well as that. The planets Venus, Mars and Jupiter show as a disc that can easily be measured in angular size and that size does not change as they "get further away", why not?

Maybe you should leave this stuff to your expert Flat Earth Astronomers.
Would you please pass a message to someone who knows a bit about it, or at least give us a reference in "the Wiki" where we can look it up.

Either flat sky disc, or sky disc with edges curved downward to the ground, like inverted salad bowl.

With number of "wandering stars" (planets, commets, asteroids, moons of other planets, ...)
that are not fixed to it, but fly around like fireflies.

Real well-trained fireflies!

Now I think you (and I) are taking the mickey out of the flat earth model, and we shouldn't do that!

First you say:

Quote from: jroa on September 04, 2016, 03:48:11 AM

There were also stars as close to or farther than the sun that you don't see.  The ones that you do see are not as far as the sun, but they are moving across the sky and eventually, they too will be as far as the sun was when it could no longer be seen.  Do you always have trouble with spacial awareness?

What are these "stars" that "are not as far as the sun"? There is no evidence of any stars being closer to us than the sun!
Some planets (Mercury, Venus and Mars) are sometimes closer to us than the sun, the next closet, Jupiter, is at its closest approach over 3 times the distance to the sun.

Quote from: jroa on September 04, 2016, 06:51:22 AM

You seem to be saying that we must look past stars in order to see the sun. What part about the stars being higher than the sun do you not understad?

Now we are asked, "What part about the stars being higher than the sun do you not understad?" But I thought some of these stars were closer than the sun!

So please tell us, are the stars higher or lower than the sun and are they closer or further away?

Really, I don't think you know the difference between "stars" and "planets". They really are quite different you know.

But then you say "and eventually, they too will be as far as the sun was when it could no longer be seen". Really don't you think that the sun should seen a tremendous distance further away than these stars.

As well as that. The planets Venus, Mars and Jupiter show as a disc that can easily be measured in angular size and that size does not change as they "get further away", why not?

Are you going to claim that this too is due to "a known magnification effect caused by the intense rays of light passing through the strata of the atmosphere"?

Maybe you should leave this stuff to your expert Flat Earth Astronomers.
Would you please pass a message to someone who knows a bit about it, or at least give us a reference in "the Wiki" where we can look it up.

You clearly haven't the slightest idea, and should stick to your "Custodial Engineering".

What part of vertically higher makes you so confused that you think something must be farther from you?  Do you think that a plane flying higher in New Zealand makes it farther away from you than a plane flying lower in New York, Mr. Oz?  Like is said, round or flat, you have no sense of spacial awareness. 

Quote from: rabinoz on September 04, 2016, 06:33:13 PM

First you say:

Quote from: jroa on September 04, 2016, 03:48:11 AM

There were also stars as close to or farther than the sun that you don't see.  The ones that you do see are not as far as the sun, but they are moving across the sky and eventually, they too will be as far as the sun was when it could no longer be seen.  Do you always have trouble with spacial awareness?

What are these "stars" that "are not as far as the sun"? There is no evidence of any stars being closer to us than the sun!
Some planets (Mercury, Venus and Mars) are sometimes closer to us than the sun, the next closest, Jupiter, is at its closest approach over 3 times the distance to the sun.

Quote from: jroa on September 04, 2016, 06:51:22 AM

You seem to be saying that we must look past stars in order to see the sun. What part about the stars being higher than the sun do you not understad?

Now we are asked, "What part about the stars being higher than the sun do you not understad?" But I thought some of these stars were closer than the sun!

So please tell us, are the stars higher or lower than the sun and are they closer or further away?

Really, I don't think you know the difference between "stars" and "planets". They really are quite different you know.

But then you say "and eventually, they too will be as far as the sun was when it could no longer be seen". Really don't you think that the sun should seen a tremendous distance further away than these stars.

As well as that. The planets Venus, Mars and Jupiter show as a disc that can easily be measured in angular size and that size does not change as they "get further away", why not?

Are you going to claim that this too is due to "a known magnification effect caused by the intense rays of light passing through the strata of the atmosphere"?

Maybe you should leave this stuff to your expert Flat Earth Astronomers.
Would you please pass a message to someone who knows a bit about it, or at least give us a reference in "the Wiki" where we can look it up.

You clearly haven't the slightest idea, and should stick to your "Custodial Engineering".

What part of vertically higher makes you so confused that you think something must be farther from you?  Do you think that a plane flying higher in New Zealand makes it farther away from you than a plane flying lower in New York, Mr. Oz?  Like is said, round or flat, you have no sense of spacial awareness.

I asked a LOT more than that!

I also asked

What are these "stars" that "are not as far as the sun"? There is no evidence of any stars being closer to us than the sun!
Some planets (Mercury, Venus and Mars) are sometimes closer to us than the sun, the next closest, Jupiter, is at its closest approach over 3 times the distance to the sun.
. . . . . . . . . . . .
I don't think you know the difference between "stars" and "planets". They are quite different you know.

But then you say "and eventually, they too will be as far as the sun was when it could no longer be seen". Really don't you think that the sun should be seen a tremendous distance further away than these stars.
. . . . . . . . . . .
As well as that. The planets Venus, Mars and Jupiter show as a disc that can easily be measured in angular size and that size does not change as they "get further away", why not?

Are you going to claim that this too is due to "a known magnification effect caused by the intense rays of light passing through the strata of the atmosphere"?

But there are NO STARS closer to us than the sun, not ever!

I thought you wanted a flat Earth answer, not a roundy answer.  Why did you not ask your question at the round Earth society, if you wanted round Earth answers? 

Flat Earth model doesn't put stars in the same places as Globe Earth model.

They are all, including Sun, fixed as stickers on Dome. (Except fireflies.)
Those we see below Sun are further away, because Dome wall is not vertical.
Same reason why those we see above are closer.

Out of FE model it is not like that, but that is not the question here, in this thread.

~~~~~

To know if something is really wrong, you must understand it first.
To rely on knowledge of others is not enough, because in that case
you act from what you believe, not from what you know.

Sounds familiar?

Quote from: rabinoz on September 04, 2016, 07:15:55 PM

But there are NO STARS closer to us than the sun, not ever!

I thought you wanted a flat Earth answer, not a roundy answer.  Why did you not ask your question at the round Earth society, if you wanted round Earth answers?

That's weak even for you.

Quote from: rabinoz on September 04, 2016, 07:15:55 PM

But there are NO STARS closer to us than the sun, not ever!

I thought you wanted a flat Earth answer, not a roundy answer.  Why did you not ask your question at the round Earth society, if you wanted round Earth answers?

Since when did measured distances depend flat or globe earth?

Actually I wanted a plausible answer. Claiming that the sun, the moon, planets and stars fade out at a similar distance due "the imperfect clarity of the atmoplane" (Do I have the right words?) seems ridiculous to me.

That is like claiming a searchlight and a candle would fade out at a similar distance.

Yes, I guess you had to give a "flat earth" answer, even though it is quite unbelievable.