So how do you answer this one?

  • 17 Replies
  • 2162 Views
So how do you answer this one?
« on: June 06, 2017, 12:59:50 AM »
On youtube I continually see this animation of the sun rotating above a flat earth. Now that might explain it to someone who has never seen a light source before, but isnt it rather obvious that the sun MUST be visible over the entire surface of the earth ALL the time? It might be more distant during the supposed FE 'night' but it should be easily visible. What's more, the light at any point cannot be any less that ~25% of maximum illumination directly below the sun.

So I imagine the sun could have a kind of collar around it so that light only goes to a smallish angle, but even then, anyone who has seen a light fitting knows that you would still see the presence of the light source - and we dont.

Also, Antarctica has periods of sunlight 24 hrs a day and a circling sun simply could not produce that. The most entertaining comment Ive heard on this is that 'light doesn't travel very far' which is possibly the most idiotic thing I've heard yet.

Also, the circling sun around the equator would appear to most of us as a single light source rotating in the sky in a limited circular pattern (dependent on how high the sun is) with no sunrise and no sunset.

So.... thoughts people?  And please... no absurd mis-use of Perspective or thinking that a 'vanishing point' actually has objects literally 'vanish'.

This concept and animation always makes me chuckle as the above point seem rather obvious.

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: So how do you answer this one?
« Reply #1 on: June 06, 2017, 12:19:09 PM »
Leaving aside the visual observations of sunrise/sunsets, the reason the Sun goes out of view is rooted in the idea of a spotlight Sun. if you view a spotlight from the side, its light doesn't reach you. It just wouldn't. The collar, like you say; you say we'd still see the presence of the light source, but we wouldn't unless we could see something the light was hitting. Look at a spotlight in a theater; you don't see a solid block of light in the air, just a circle on the stage. Maybe at high altitudes you'd see light reflected off another part of the Earth's surface, but otherwise you wouldn't be able to see anything as the light wouldn't curve to head over to you.

24 hour sunlight varies. Either they deny it exists, or they hold to a bipolar model.

*

Definitely Not Swedish

  • rutabaga
  • 8168
  • Flat Earth Inspector General of High Fashion Crime
Re: So how do you answer this one?
« Reply #2 on: June 06, 2017, 01:03:16 PM »
Leaving aside the visual observations of sunrise/sunsets, the reason the Sun goes out of view is rooted in the idea of a spotlight Sun. if you view a spotlight from the side, its light doesn't reach you. It just wouldn't. The collar, like you say; you say we'd still see the presence of the light source, but we wouldn't unless we could see something the light was hitting. Look at a spotlight in a theater; you don't see a solid block of light in the air, just a circle on the stage. Maybe at high altitudes you'd see light reflected off another part of the Earth's surface, but otherwise you wouldn't be able to see anything as the light wouldn't curve to head over to you.

24 hour sunlight varies. Either they deny it exists, or they hold to a bipolar model.
Except that during sunset and sunrise we can actually see the sun rising/setting, so their spotlight "theory" is obviously wrong.
Quote from: croutons, the s.o.w.
You have received a warning for breaking the laws of mathematics.

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: So how do you answer this one?
« Reply #3 on: June 06, 2017, 01:15:44 PM »
Leaving aside the visual observations of sunrise/sunsets, the reason the Sun goes out of view is rooted in the idea of a spotlight Sun. if you view a spotlight from the side, its light doesn't reach you. It just wouldn't. The collar, like you say; you say we'd still see the presence of the light source, but we wouldn't unless we could see something the light was hitting. Look at a spotlight in a theater; you don't see a solid block of light in the air, just a circle on the stage. Maybe at high altitudes you'd see light reflected off another part of the Earth's surface, but otherwise you wouldn't be able to see anything as the light wouldn't curve to head over to you.

24 hour sunlight varies. Either they deny it exists, or they hold to a bipolar model.
Except that during sunset and sunrise we can actually see the sun rising/setting, so their spotlight "theory" is obviously wrong.
Like I said, leaving that aside. I've seen responses, they just take a while to go into and I'm not sure I understand any of them.

Re: So how do you answer this one?
« Reply #4 on: June 06, 2017, 05:24:23 PM »
Leaving aside the visual observations of sunrise/sunsets, the reason the Sun goes out of view is rooted in the idea of a spotlight Sun. if you view a spotlight from the side, its light doesn't reach you. It just wouldn't. The collar, like you say; you say we'd still see the presence of the light source, but we wouldn't unless we could see something the light was hitting. Look at a spotlight in a theater; you don't see a solid block of light in the air, just a circle on the stage. Maybe at high altitudes you'd see light reflected off another part of the Earth's surface, but otherwise you wouldn't be able to see anything as the light wouldn't curve to head over to you.

24 hour sunlight varies. Either they deny it exists, or they hold to a bipolar model.

But even a spotlight in a theatre for instance can be seen. there is always some light bleed around the edges and a spotlight sun would also be visible at all times although how you achieve something like a spotlight sun is beyond me (and everyone else). It also fails to explain 24hr sunlight in the antarctic

Re: So how do you answer this one?
« Reply #5 on: June 06, 2017, 05:25:35 PM »
Leaving aside the visual observations of sunrise/sunsets, the reason the Sun goes out of view is rooted in the idea of a spotlight Sun. if you view a spotlight from the side, its light doesn't reach you. It just wouldn't. The collar, like you say; you say we'd still see the presence of the light source, but we wouldn't unless we could see something the light was hitting. Look at a spotlight in a theater; you don't see a solid block of light in the air, just a circle on the stage. Maybe at high altitudes you'd see light reflected off another part of the Earth's surface, but otherwise you wouldn't be able to see anything as the light wouldn't curve to head over to you.

24 hour sunlight varies. Either they deny it exists, or they hold to a bipolar model.
Except that during sunset and sunrise we can actually see the sun rising/setting, so their spotlight "theory" is obviously wrong.

There is just so much wrong with a circling earth that it defies belief - and yet some want to embrace it.

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • Administrator
  • 45102
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: So how do you answer this one?
« Reply #6 on: June 06, 2017, 05:28:04 PM »
This isn't the debate forum. If you want to discuss this, start a thread in General or Debate.
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

Re: So how do you answer this one?
« Reply #7 on: June 06, 2017, 06:03:14 PM »
This isn't the debate forum. If you want to discuss this, start a thread in General or Debate.

It's Q&A.  I asked a Q and to date, not gotten a single A. So where are the 'A' responders?  If you want to move it then do so. But there are at least two responses in this thread that have been deleted and I'd like to know why.
« Last Edit: June 06, 2017, 06:09:19 PM by fliggs »

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • Administrator
  • 45102
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: So how do you answer this one?
« Reply #8 on: June 06, 2017, 06:18:45 PM »
Jane answered your question.  The other replies weren't deleted they were split and moved to CN or AR.
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: So how do you answer this one?
« Reply #9 on: June 07, 2017, 04:35:18 AM »
But even a spotlight in a theatre for instance can be seen. there is always some light bleed around the edges and a spotlight sun would also be visible at all times although how you achieve something like a spotlight sun is beyond me (and everyone else). It also fails to explain 24hr sunlight in the antarctic
Not always, depending how sunken-in the light is. There still has to be a straight line from light source to observer, and a sufficient 'collar' more than qualifies. As far as where a spotlight comes from, creation's a whole other topic. I think JRowe's the only one who gave an idea of what the spotlight actually looks like, and by implication its formation, though I have missed another.
I did explain 24 hour sunlight. Ultimately the issue is that Antarctica's an ice wall and there's no way for the Sun to shine to exist on just one point, but in a bipolar model there's no wall. The difficulty's in developing a path for the Sun, though there are a fair few explanations out there.

Re: So how do you answer this one?
« Reply #10 on: June 07, 2017, 06:19:42 AM »
Leaving aside the visual observations of sunrise/sunsets, the reason the Sun goes out of view is rooted in the idea of a spotlight Sun. if you view a spotlight from the side, its light doesn't reach you. It just wouldn't. The collar, like you say; you say we'd still see the presence of the light source, but we wouldn't unless we could see something the light was hitting. Look at a spotlight in a theater; you don't see a solid block of light in the air, just a circle on the stage. Maybe at high altitudes you'd see light reflected off another part of the Earth's surface, but otherwise you wouldn't be able to see anything as the light wouldn't curve to head over to you.

24 hour sunlight varies. Either they deny it exists, or they hold to a bipolar model.

But even a spotlight in a theatre for instance can be seen. there is always some light bleed around the edges and a spotlight sun would also be visible at all times although how you achieve something like a spotlight sun is beyond me (and everyone else). It also fails to explain 24hr sunlight in the antarctic
Take a look at how a carbon arc search light works and think about where the real sun is and where the light you see from it actually is.
Just think about it for your own amusement. No need to debate it with me or even answer me.
I'll say this to each and every person who wants to think.

Light as a wave will ALWAYS bleed around corners. It doesnt matter how you design it, you cannot create a spotlight that will not give off a small amount of light around the edge. Not that it matters because as we all know, light in the atmosphere even at night leves a bit of a trail due to clouds, atmospheric particles or whatever.   it is IMPOSSIBLE for a light source to exist circling above  a flat earth that is not partially visible from any location at any time of the day or night.

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: So how do you answer this one?
« Reply #11 on: June 07, 2017, 08:56:55 AM »
Light as a wave will ALWAYS bleed around corners. It doesnt matter how you design it, you cannot create a spotlight that will not give off a small amount of light around the edge. Not that it matters because as we all know, light in the atmosphere even at night leves a bit of a trail due to clouds, atmospheric particles or whatever.   it is IMPOSSIBLE for a light source to exist circling above  a flat earth that is not partially visible from any location at any time of the day or night.
I've never understood this argument; you can't see a light through a wall. It's not going to curve out around the spotlight, it can only in travel in straight lines from the spotlight. It's easy to design a spotlight that doesn't bleed out around the corners in any meaningful capacity.
I like to imagine it like a cannon. if you put a light bulb within the barrel of a cannon, you're only going to be able to see it from directly underneath; head to the side, all the light from it will still be blotted out. But if you shorten the barrel, sooner or later the light will be visible from more locations than just underneath it.
One thing I'll say is that you do need an obscene amount of delicacy to create a spotlight at the exact level where the collar/barrel blocks enough light that it isn't visible everywhere, but is still visible for long periods of time without distortion. But, honestly, just go with 'God did it' as a placeholder for how the whole system came about, wait for them to get a complete model rather than expecting it to be fully formed.

Whatever light that, say, gets reflected off the air/clouds/whatever is going to be so minimal you wouldn't be able to identify it as the Sun. You'd just get a faint haze, at best, more than likely just not easily visible up against the light caused by stars and the moon.
But to actually be able to see the light source itself supposes a straight-line view from your location on the Earth's surface to the source of the light. A collar or barrel around the light source easily prevents that.

*

Definitely Not Swedish

  • rutabaga
  • 8168
  • Flat Earth Inspector General of High Fashion Crime
Re: So how do you answer this one?
« Reply #12 on: June 07, 2017, 09:04:36 AM »
Light as a wave will ALWAYS bleed around corners. It doesnt matter how you design it, you cannot create a spotlight that will not give off a small amount of light around the edge. Not that it matters because as we all know, light in the atmosphere even at night leves a bit of a trail due to clouds, atmospheric particles or whatever.   it is IMPOSSIBLE for a light source to exist circling above  a flat earth that is not partially visible from any location at any time of the day or night.
I've never understood this argument; you can't see a light through a wall. It's not going to curve out around the spotlight, it can only in travel in straight lines from the spotlight. It's easy to design a spotlight that doesn't bleed out around the corners in any meaningful capacity.
I like to imagine it like a cannon. if you put a light bulb within the barrel of a cannon, you're only going to be able to see it from directly underneath; head to the side, all the light from it will still be blotted out. But if you shorten the barrel, sooner or later the light will be visible from more locations than just underneath it.
One thing I'll say is that you do need an obscene amount of delicacy to create a spotlight at the exact level where the collar/barrel blocks enough light that it isn't visible everywhere, but is still visible for long periods of time without distortion. But, honestly, just go with 'God did it' as a placeholder for how the whole system came about, wait for them to get a complete model rather than expecting it to be fully formed.

Whatever light that, say, gets reflected off the air/clouds/whatever is going to be so minimal you wouldn't be able to identify it as the Sun. You'd just get a faint haze, at best, more than likely just not easily visible up against the light caused by stars and the moon.
But to actually be able to see the light source itself supposes a straight-line view from your location on the Earth's surface to the source of the light. A collar or barrel around the light source easily prevents that.
Yeah, I don't think anyone would doubt that. Only problems here are like, we don't see the sun as a spotlight (sun doesn't change shape when moving "away"), and we can clearly see the sun sinking behind the horizon without getting smaller, plus a spotlight would require some magic energy. And I'm very sure the sun's path during the year is not possible with a spotlight above the flat earth, because the spotlight has to do a circular motion.

Well, if you like fatasy, this might be interesting, but definitely not even close to be a pro-flat-earth argument.
Quote from: croutons, the s.o.w.
You have received a warning for breaking the laws of mathematics.

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • Administrator
  • 45102
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: So how do you answer this one?
« Reply #13 on: June 07, 2017, 09:07:14 AM »
User324, this is not the debate section of the forum. If you have a question about FET or one of the models, you can ask, if you know the FE answer to a question you can give it.
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: So how do you answer this one?
« Reply #14 on: June 07, 2017, 09:08:20 AM »
Yeah, I don't think anyone would doubt that. Only problems here are like, we don't see the sun as a spotlight (sun doesn't change shape when moving "away"), and we can clearly see the sun sinking behind the horizon without getting smaller, plus a spotlight would require some magic energy. And I'm very sure the sun's path during the year is not possible with a spotlight above the flat earth, because the spotlight has to do a circular motion.

Well, if you like fatasy, this might be interesting, but definitely not even close to be a pro-flat-earth argument.
Sunrise/sunsets are typically answered with varying laws of perspective, a lot of the time it seems similar to the sinking ship over the horizon situation. There are multiple possible energy sources (friction and an arc lamp are two I've seen mentioned), and there's no reason a spotlight would need to do circular motion. It just needs to move while facing in one particular direction.
I just find problem solving more interesting than "It's impossible. Let's just repeat that over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over..."

*

Definitely Not Swedish

  • rutabaga
  • 8168
  • Flat Earth Inspector General of High Fashion Crime
Re: So how do you answer this one?
« Reply #15 on: June 07, 2017, 09:15:30 AM »
I just find problem solving more interesting than "It's impossible. Let's just repeat that over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over..."
I just find that this is not a real problem, but pure stupidity that's not really worthy of any time. It's not even a good thought experiment, it beeing wrong is way too obvious.
I do think there are thousands and thousands of problems out there in the real world, which - if solved - can actually provide scientific progress and make human life better.

I'm sure that you could use your ressources in many better ways (as far as I know you have studied math), but of course it's up to you what you do with your time.
Quote from: croutons, the s.o.w.
You have received a warning for breaking the laws of mathematics.

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: So how do you answer this one?
« Reply #16 on: June 07, 2017, 09:33:02 AM »
I just find problem solving more interesting than "It's impossible. Let's just repeat that over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over..."
I just find that this is not a real problem, but pure stupidity that's not really worthy of any time. It's not even a good thought experiment, it beeing wrong is way too obvious.
I do think there are thousands and thousands of problems out there in the real world, which - if solved - can actually provide scientific progress and make human life better.

I'm sure that you could use your ressources in many better ways (as far as I know you have studied math), but of course it's up to you what you do with your time.

Everyone's allowed a hobby. It's just more fun to figure things out than to repeat how it can't work a hundred times.

Re: So how do you answer this one?
« Reply #17 on: July 21, 2017, 11:09:16 AM »
have you ever used After Effects?

When you place a light source that is a spotlight on one part of a composition, does it light up the entire composition or just that portions of it?

The same applies toe Cinema 4D and all rendering programs.

This is the same principle with the sun and moon
To simply dismiss the concept of God as being unscientific is to violate the very objectivity of science itself.

My experiences with science led me to God.

The Truth Will Set You Free

Werner Von Braun