trigonometry

  • 100 Replies
  • 15688 Views
*

Nightsky

  • 900
  • Know the implications of what you believe.
Re: trigonometry
« Reply #90 on: January 01, 2018, 05:47:57 AM »
It happened again today! I measured the azimuth and elevation of the Sun just after sunrise, found the distance to the Sun's zenith point on Earth and calculate the Sun's height. It's either recklessly low, or there is a significant flaw with the flat earth model.

Possibly the later if I were to make a guess!
You can call me Gwyneth
I said that
Oh for the love of- Logical formulation:
FET is wrong, unsupported by evidence, and most models are refuted on multiple fronts; those that aren't tend not to make enough predictions to be realistically falsifiable
Jane said these

Re: trigonometry
« Reply #91 on: January 01, 2018, 10:32:50 AM »
Just fyi...Here's a guy who shines a spotlight on a flat table but creates calculations that show it to be a globe.




Re: trigonometry
« Reply #92 on: January 01, 2018, 12:40:36 PM »
Just fyi...Here's a guy who shines a spotlight on a flat table but creates calculations that show it to be a globe.



Your video has some logic to it. However, it really works best for the Sun at zenith. What about the Sun at sunrise? Here’s a picture of the Sun rising in Japan (taken from Mt. Fuji). Notice that the Sun is illuminating the bottom of the clouds. How does that work?



Here’s a link to the full source:

http://simplyunbound.com/night-hiking-mount-fuji/
"Science is real."
--They Might Be Giants

*

JackBlack

  • 18085
Re: trigonometry
« Reply #93 on: January 01, 2018, 01:24:12 PM »
Just fyi...Here's a guy who shines a spotlight on a flat table but creates calculations that show it to be a globe.
No, he fabricates calculations with incorrect numbers and incorrect math.
He also limits it to small angles.

What he actually ends up with is a model which poorly matches (i.e. has large error) with both a flat and round table.

He also blatantly lies about what the flat table model would produce, claiming it would be 30 cm for one nail and 40 cm for another, when in reality the range is more like 28-30 cm.

It still completely ignore the measurements where a FE massively fails, that near sunrise and sunset, where the angle of elevation of the sun is close to 0, sometimes being negative as seen with clouds being illuminated from below and objects casting shadows upwards.
If you were doing that with a lens, you would need the lens at a similar height as you, being below you in the case of a negative angle of elevation.

And of course it needs to use a completely invalid model.
Refractive index varies monotonically with density for air. That means the lower the density of the air, the lower the refractive index.
As more dense air will sink, this creates a gradient across the atmosphere where the density drops the higher you go and thus the refractive index drops the higher you go.
This means refraction will result in light bending downwards, not up as you need it to to make your FE fantasies work.

*

EvolvedMantisShrimp

  • 927
  • Physical Comedian
Re: trigonometry
« Reply #94 on: January 01, 2018, 01:39:53 PM »
I just did another one near sunset. Elevation 2°(1.74), Azimuth 257.59. Distance to zenith: 6294 miles.

Result: sun's altitude 220 miles. Alarming.
Nullius in Verba

*

Nightsky

  • 900
  • Know the implications of what you believe.
Re: trigonometry
« Reply #95 on: January 01, 2018, 02:00:21 PM »
I just did another one near sunset. Elevation 2°(1.74), Azimuth 257.59. Distance to zenith: 6294 miles.

Result: sun's altitude 220 miles. Alarming.

should I break out my armoured tin foil coated bathing suit resplendent with Farraday caged nipple protectors?
You can call me Gwyneth
I said that
Oh for the love of- Logical formulation:
FET is wrong, unsupported by evidence, and most models are refuted on multiple fronts; those that aren't tend not to make enough predictions to be realistically falsifiable
Jane said these

*

EvolvedMantisShrimp

  • 927
  • Physical Comedian
Re: trigonometry
« Reply #96 on: January 01, 2018, 02:29:05 PM »
I just did another one near sunset. Elevation 2°(1.74), Azimuth 257.59. Distance to zenith: 6294 miles.

Result: sun's altitude 220 miles. Alarming.

should I break out my armoured tin foil coated bathing suit resplendent with Farraday caged nipple protectors?

Couldn't hurt.
Nullius in Verba

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: trigonometry
« Reply #97 on: January 01, 2018, 03:07:25 PM »
Just fyi...Here's a guy who shines a spotlight on a flat table but creates calculations that show it to be a globe.


Oh come off it! Where is this magic magnifying glass in the sky?

That's the only way you can make measurements fit your model:
claim that light bends in some remarkable way to fit your hypothesis even if it means adding a ;D magic magnifying glass in the sky ;D.

As for me I prefer the Zetetic approach, proceeding by inquiry as in
Zetetic means proceeding by inquiry.

So look at this video, with real measurements and real results that fit the real Globe


<<:D I really screwed up the first time and looked at the wrong video :D >>
« Last Edit: January 02, 2018, 01:42:28 AM by rabinoz »

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: trigonometry
« Reply #98 on: January 02, 2018, 12:51:41 AM »

John’s demonstration of his alarming ignorance on the properties of light should act as a warning before swallowing any of his other offerings.

https://www.hindawi.com/journals/ijp/2013/610173/
You ain't seen nuttin' yet. Take a peek at EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY PROVES THE EARTH IS FLAT, May 23, 2016 John Davis .

*

Nightsky

  • 900
  • Know the implications of what you believe.
Re: trigonometry
« Reply #99 on: January 02, 2018, 04:23:27 PM »

John’s demonstration of his alarming ignorance on the properties of light should act as a warning before swallowing any of his other offerings.

https://www.hindawi.com/journals/ijp/2013/610173/
You ain't seen nuttin' yet. Take a peek at EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY PROVES THE EARTH IS FLAT, May 23, 2016 John Davis[/rurl] .

Hilarious!
You can call me Gwyneth
I said that
Oh for the love of- Logical formulation:
FET is wrong, unsupported by evidence, and most models are refuted on multiple fronts; those that aren't tend not to make enough predictions to be realistically falsifiable
Jane said these

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: trigonometry
« Reply #100 on: January 02, 2018, 04:51:29 PM »

John’s demonstration of his alarming ignorance on the properties of light should act as a warning before swallowing any of his other offerings.

https://www.hindawi.com/journals/ijp/2013/610173/
You ain't seen nuttin' yet. Take a peek at EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY PROVES THE EARTH IS FLAT, May 23, 2016 John Davis .

Hilarious!
John Davis has a "little bottom drawer" full of flat earth models. He just drags out the the one that best fits the occasion.
See Infinite Flat Earth, etc

And you'll have to  ;D ;D ;D study up on the Ferrari Effect  ;D ;D ;D that John Davis seems to base some of his dreams on.
Flat Earth General / Re: Some questions about FE theory - from Q&A « Message by rabinoz on November 20, 2017, 08:32:20 AM ».
Leo Ferrari was a pseudo flat-earther (Leo Ferrari) who
;) ;) proposed that the curvature of space causes the flat earth to look like a globe when viewed from space.  ;) ;)
and an Australian to boot and you do realise how you must be very careful of what Australians get up to!

More than enough said!