For the SE - Can an object cast a shadow smaller than its cross section area?

Ever tried to think how others might perceive you? Like, who do you think they might consider as the one they would listen to, and discuss with? Is this how you conduct your business outside this forum?

Your FE theory and all your attemps to prove it have the staying power of a (poorly built) sand castle, at best.

And you try hide this fact with asinine behaviour.

The rare moments of lucidity even Papa Legba is capable of showing every now and then make what he says actually worth reading, to some extent. It is when he regresses back to bot mode no one cares one iota what he says.

So, be more like productive members of society, and less like a demented animal. You might win at least some respect of others. You know, "agree to disagree" instead of "shut the fuck up, idiot".

Quote from: InFlatEarth on January 31, 2018, 12:24:20 PM

NO, the only shadow that NASA showed us was the 70 mile diameter, which you call umbra, not me.
Do you ever get tired moving those goal posts around so much and so far?

You claim that "the only shadow that NASA showed us was the 70 mile diameter, which" everybody else calls the umbra, even if you don't.

But your claim is totally refuted by the NASA map that you posted here:

Quote from: InFlatEarth on January 31, 2018, 12:33:58 PM

In official graphics before the event, their was no penumbra shown as from the below photo which was taken from NASA websites https://eclipse2017.nasa.gov/eclipse-maps

Look at an enlarged bit!

Open your eyes so that you can see the lines parallel to the path of totality with little pictures of partially eclipsed suns on them.
Those define the paths of different degrees of partiality.

Now Mr InFlatEarth, if you have a shred of decency, a lot of apologies from you would be in order, thank you!

Quote from: EvolvedMantisShrimp on January 30, 2018, 02:58:09 PM

Quote from: rabinoz on January 30, 2018, 02:44:39 PM

Still, even though there are bright clouds around, I'll give it a go.

It would be easiest to check at a zenith: a place and a time when the Sun is directly overhead. Currently, the Sun's zenith is at a latitude of 17° 26' S.

Yes, the clouds cleared and I made a better "shadow objects" (a 127 mm coarse carbide sanding disc) and mounted it about 2.2 m high.

Here are the results of the shadow cast by the disc in direct sunlight:

Shadow Disc Size = 127 mm

Shadow, Umbra Size = 108 mm

The rabbibot absolutely refuses to address the many problems I pointed out in it's alleged experiment.

Here they are again:

Quote from: rabinoz on January 30, 2018, 06:10:53 PM

Quote from: EvolvedMantisShrimp on January 30, 2018, 02:58:09 PM

Quote from: rabinoz on January 30, 2018, 02:44:39 PM

Still, even though there are bright clouds around, I'll give it a go.

It would be easiest to check at a zenith: a place and a time when the Sun is directly overhead. Currently, the Sun's zenith is at a latitude of 17° 26' S.

Yes, the clouds cleared and I made a better "shadow objects" (a 127 mm coarse carbide sanding disc) and mounted it about 2.2 m high.

Here are the results of the shadow cast by the disc in direct sunlight:

Shadow Disc Size = 127 mm

Shadow, Umbra Size = 108 mm

You didn't show proof that the object casting the shadow was the same object used as a reference, i.e. the sanding disc.

Anyone can cut a piece of card into a circle using a compass and scissors, rabbibot.

Also, changing the reference point on the ruler from ten cm to nine cm was sloppy and potentially deceptive.

You also do not show that the ruler on the shadow photo is laying flat upon the shadow.

If the ruler were raised even a couple of cm above the shadow it would reduce the apparent measurement significantly.

Your experiment is thus completely invalid.

Only an unedited, uncut video of this kind of experiment would be valid, where the apparatus can be shown in full, before moving to close-ups of the disc then the shadow respectively, with measurements shown starting from Zero cm as a base.

Please address these issues or I will be forced to conclude your experiment is deliberately fraudulent.

Quote from: rabinoz on January 30, 2018, 06:10:53 PM

Quote from: EvolvedMantisShrimp on January 30, 2018, 02:58:09 PM

Quote from: rabinoz on January 30, 2018, 02:44:39 PM

Still, even though there are bright clouds around, I'll give it a go.

It would be easiest to check at a zenith: a place and a time when the Sun is directly overhead. Currently, the Sun's zenith is at a latitude of 17° 26' S.

Yes, the clouds cleared and I made a better "shadow objects" (a 127 mm coarse carbide sanding disc) and mounted it about 2.2 m high.

Here are the results of the shadow cast by the disc in direct sunlight:

Shadow Disc Size = 127 mm

Shadow, Umbra Size = 108 mm

WTF kinda crap you trying to pull Geoff?

You think we cannot read the ruler?

You start at 10 mm for the photo on the left, 9mm for the photo on the right, who knows if the ruler is level in your hands for both photos (could be tilted left or right for all we know)...

Obvious you and all the other bots cannot read the ruler either...

Honest bots would bring that shit down in an instant...

WHAT A MASSIVE FAIL!!!

LMMFAO!!!

Shadow same size as object!!!

NEXT!!!

If the object is smaller than 45 kilometers in diameter, it will have shadow smaller than itself, as described in mu post at the previous page.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=74067.msg2017165#msg2017165

Disc shown in the picture looks smaller to me.

Quote from: totallackey on February 01, 2018, 05:03:50 AM

Quote from: Macarios on February 01, 2018, 05:00:33 AM

If the object is smaller than 45 kilometers in diameter, it will have shadow smaller than itself, as described in mu post at the previous page.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=74067.msg2017165#msg2017165

Disc shown in the picture looks smaller to me.

You are claiming an object less than 45 km in diameter will cast a shadow smaller than itself?

Such as a hot air balloon, or even me?

Average hot air balloon is 50 feet in diameter.
Altitude record is 50 000 ft, but on average they fly at 1000 - 1500 ft, or even lower.

At 1000 ft high, the angular diameter of such balloon is ARCTAN(50 / 1000) = 0.05 degrees.

Do you think it can cover Sun's angular diameter of 0.5 degrees?

About you: are you smaller than hot air balloon?

Quote from: Macarios on February 01, 2018, 05:16:27 AM

Quote from: totallackey on February 01, 2018, 05:03:50 AM

Quote from: Macarios on February 01, 2018, 05:00:33 AM

If the object is smaller than 45 kilometers in diameter, it will have shadow smaller than itself, as described in mu post at the previous page.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=74067.msg2017165#msg2017165

Disc shown in the picture looks smaller to me.

You are claiming an object less than 45 km in diameter will cast a shadow smaller than itself?

Such as a hot air balloon, or even me?

Average hot air balloon is 50 feet in diameter.
Altitude record is 50 000 ft, but on average they fly at 1000 - 1500 ft, or even lower.

At 1000 ft high, the angular diameter of such balloon is ARCTAN(50 / 1000) = 0.05 degrees.

Do you think it can cover Sun's angular diameter of 0.5 degrees?

About you: are you smaller than hot air balloon?

So, my shadow is smaller than myself?


Maybe at 12 noon...