confused about the sun on a flat earth

If the Earth is a flat plane and the sun circles above on it's own plane, why does the sun's path appear to have an arc- coming up over the horizon and going back down. According to the flat earth theory, wouldn't the sun appear in the morning, perhaps very small, but already fully in the sky, and remain at that height, getting smaller and smaller as evening gave way to night? I'm trying to wrap my head around this.

Perspective on a FE is somewhat different. It's the same reason you see ships seeming to sink at the horizon.

Normally, if you imagine an endless flat surface, and an object right above it, then in lieu of any other influences you'd expect that as the object above the surface (keeping at a fixed altitude) moves away from you, it will appear to shrink and get closer to closer to the surface. If you could always see the object, rather than it fading out, it would seem to eventually touch the surface at a fair distance away.
Under FET, what happens (either due to 'bendy light' or atmospheric refraction, or some such law) is that the point at which the object seems to touch the flat surface comes much sooner. It looks lower than it really is.
In models with the spotlight Sun, which I'm guessing you read from the FAQ, there's only one side that's lit so it wouldn't be a small object in the distance. It doesn't get so far away it can't be seen, it just gets so far away that the underside can't be seen. Refraction/bendy light essentially stops us noticing as it starts looking like an ellipse.

As a side note though, not all models follow the kind of outline you saw in the FAQ. There are a wide array of FE models.

Just beginning, your quest is, young Padawan. Search, you must.

I've read a lot of people post that it's due to refraction. But I can't explain it. Best to turn to the source material. Search for refraction and bendy light... That'll get you started. I'm on my mobile so searching and posting links isn't quite as practical as it would be on my computer.


Edit: wow, Jane you got in there fast!

Ok. Soo serious question. If the corryelous effect is in fact causeing bullet and or slash target to rise or drop because of rotation of the heliocentric model. Well under that understanding if i make a shot twards north or south on the quote  unquote equator then i should hypotheticaly have to compensate like 100 ft to 200 ft the left of right to make the shot on a 1 mile shot or more. I would realy like an actual fact based response with at least one reference point. Perferably not some back yard chump that could be bribbed 10 g`S to be a coconspirators. So a renoun sciencetist should not be to hard or too much to ask for._. After all you are suppost to be defending a scientific fact we teach children. 

Is this your first forum?

All threads have a specific topic, and discussion is generally held to that one topic. Posting something completely different is derailing at best and defacing at worsts especially of you post it in literally every thread. If you want it answered, create your own thread.

Is this your first forum?

All threads have a specific topic, and discussion is generally held to that one topic. Posting something completely different is derailing at best and defacing at worsts especially of you post it in literally every thread. If you want it answered, create your own thread.

Given how they mutilated Coriolis and butchered renowned I'm guessing the defacing's intentional.

Great replies. Obviously I'm a newbie and need to do more research- Now I have a starting point, something to go on. Thankyou!

The 32 mile diameter/3000 miles altitude orbiting Sun is a total, complete, utter failure.

Is this nonsense still featured in the faq/wiki?

The Sun does rise and set, we can infer that much from this photograph taken in Antarctica by the world renowned photographer, Fred Bruenjes:



http://www.moonglow.net/eclipse/2003nov23/index.html

The 32 mile diameter/3000 miles altitude orbiting Sun is a total, complete, utter failure.

Is this nonsense still featured in the faq/wiki?

The Sun does rise and set, we can infer that much from this photograph taken in Antarctica by the world renowned photographer, Fred Bruenjes:



http://www.moonglow.net/eclipse/2003nov23/index.html

A 15-20 km high, 600 meter wide sun  makes MUCH more sense.
Cool shot of the total eclipse in Antarctica. I've read his stories, he's got a really awesome hobby photographing eclipses.

The 32 mile diameter/3000 miles altitude orbiting Sun is a total, complete, utter failure.

Is this nonsense still featured in the faq/wiki?

Yes, even Ski admits it is wrong, but no-one knows what it should be, so nothing happens.

But please explain in words that even I might understand, 
just how a 600 m sun, no more than 20 km high can appear exactly the same size and have almost the same radiation intensity (apart from the sin(elevation) factor and some extra atmospheric attenuation) all the time from sunrise to sunset.

However can this sun illuminate some 628 million km² of a flat earth (half the total area of a 40,000 km diam flat earth)?

Here's something I've been thinking about.

Nighttime temperatures, at least where I live, are usually 20-30 degrees cooler than daytime (Fahrenheit).  If the earth were truly round, would the difference be greater?  On a flat earth the sun is on the same plane; round earth, on the other side of the planet (I am still undecided but I am a geocentrist--I believe the earth is stationary--whether it's flat, I'm not sure either way).

Just tossing that out there.

If you learn thermodynamics, heat doesn't just disappear, it has to be transferred to something else or radiated away. Most heat on earth is radiated into space (infrared radiation) but that heat first needs to get to the upper atmosphere. To get there, it has to get transferred through the lower atmosphere, etc. It takes lots of time for the heat transfer to happen (think of how long it takes to have a cup of hot coffee cool down in a room) so the amount of cooling that does happen is only 20 degrees or so over 12 hours, but then the sun comes back and it gets all warm again.

If you learn thermodynamics, heat doesn't just disappear, it has to be transferred to something else or radiated away. Most heat on earth is radiated into space (infrared radiation) but that heat first needs to get to the upper atmosphere. To get there, it has to get transferred through the lower atmosphere, etc. It takes lots of time for the heat transfer to happen (think of how long it takes to have a cup of hot coffee cool down in a room) so the amount of cooling that does happen is only 20 degrees or so over 12 hours, but then the sun comes back and it gets all warm again.

Has anyone noticed a cloudy night (especially after a warm day) means a much less cold night and morning. The clouds provide extra insulation and slow down the cooling.

Also inland regions usually have hotter days and colder nights. This is partly due to the ocean having a higher heat capacity than the dry inland soil (or sand in Australia's case), so the coastal areas heat and cool more slowly than inland. The dryer inland air also let's the heat escape more rapidly at night.