Why can't I see Polaris from Sydney?

  • 9 Replies
  • 1329 Views
Why can't I see Polaris from Sydney?
« on: February 13, 2018, 04:53:16 PM »
On a flat Earth, the same stars should be visible from everywhere. Yet, in Sydney, where I live, Polaris (Alpha Ursae Minoris) is never in the sky. How can that be?

Re: Why can't I see Polaris from Sydney?
« Reply #1 on: February 13, 2018, 07:13:44 PM »
On a flat Earth, the same stars should be visible from everywhere. Yet, in Sydney, where I live, Polaris (Alpha Ursae Minoris) is never in the sky. How can that be?
Why? You clearly have a model of the FE geometry in mind -- I doubt all FEers will agree with you.

Polaris is probably never in the sky because it thinks Sydney is full of Aussie wankers.

*

Shifter

  • 15544
  • Flat Earth Believer
Re: Why can't I see Polaris from Sydney?
« Reply #2 on: February 13, 2018, 07:51:49 PM »
On a flat Earth, the same stars should be visible from everywhere. Yet, in Sydney, where I live, Polaris (Alpha Ursae Minoris) is never in the sky. How can that be?
Why? You clearly have a model of the FE geometry in mind -- I doubt all FEers will agree with you.

Polaris is probably never in the sky because it thinks Sydney is full of Aussie wankers.

The further out from the centre you go, the greater the refraction of the dome above you.

A simple test

Fill up a glass bowl with water and look at an object such as a fish. When you look straight on, you can see the true position of the fish with minimal refraction. Now look at the fish from a wide angle and you will not be seeing the true location. The earth dome is similar. It is not a flat ceiling over the Earth, but 'dome' shaped. And instead of being a tiny 30cm bowl, it is stretching over tens of thousands of km. When people in Australia look up. The stars they see are not 'straight up'. It is massively refracted that we see a whole bunch of stars that would not be seen by those closer to the centre.

Need proof? On the North pole the star Polaris is almost directly above you. The further out from the pole you walk, the closer to the 'horizon' it gets. Same star. But refracted
RIP rabinoz. Forum legend

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Why can't I see Polaris from Sydney?
« Reply #3 on: February 13, 2018, 08:27:23 PM »

The further out from the centre you go, the greater the refraction of the dome above you.

A simple test

Fill up a glass bowl with water and look at an object such as a fish. When you look straight on, you can see the true position of the fish with minimal refraction. Now look at the fish from a wide angle and you will not be seeing the true location. The earth dome is similar. It is not a flat ceiling over the Earth, but 'dome' shaped. And instead of being a tiny 30cm bowl, it is stretching over tens of thousands of km. When people in Australia look up. The stars they see are not 'straight up'. It is massively refracted that we see a whole bunch of stars that would not be seen by those closer to the centre.
;D So your dome is filled with water?  ;D

Quote from: Shifter
Need proof? On the North pole the star Polaris is almost directly above you. The further out from the pole you walk, the closer to the 'horizon' it gets. Same star. But refracted
So you've never heard of perspective?
Quote from: Samuel Birley Rowbotham
DECLINATION OF THE POLE STAR.

Another phenomenon supposed to prove rotundity, is thought to be the fact that Polaris, or the north polar star sinks to the horizon as the traveler approaches the equator, on passing which it becomes invisible. This is a conclusion fully as premature and illogical as that involved in the several cases already alluded to. It is an ordinary effect of perspective for an object to appear lower and lower as the observer goes farther and farther away from it. Let any one try the experiment of looking at a light-house, church spire, monument, gas lamp, or other elevated object, from a distance of only a few yards, and notice the angle at which it is observed. On going farther away, the angle under which it is seen will diminish, and the object will appear lower and lower as the distance of the observer increases, until, at a certain point, the line of sight to the object, and the apparently uprising surface of the earth upon or over which it stands, will converge to the angle which constitutes the "vanishing point" or the horizon; beyond which it will be invisible.


From: DECLINATION OF THE POLE STAR, Zetetic Astronomy, by 'Parallax' (pseud. Samuel Birley Rowbotham), [1881]
Also in the Flat Earth Society Wiki.

Obviously,  ;D if Polaris is close to the earth  ;D perspective would make it appear closer to the horizon as one moved away.
But just as obviously, neither perspective nor refraction could ever make Polaris actually reach the horizon, let alone appear to fall below it.

*

Shifter

  • 15544
  • Flat Earth Believer
Re: Why can't I see Polaris from Sydney?
« Reply #4 on: February 13, 2018, 08:37:36 PM »
The flat earth wiki is wrong

And I know on THAT point you will agree with me LOL

rab agreeing with Shifter again
RIP rabinoz. Forum legend

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Why can't I see Polaris from Sydney?
« Reply #5 on: February 13, 2018, 09:27:33 PM »
The flat earth wiki is wrong

And I know on THAT point you will agree with me LOL

rab agreeing with Shifter again
Surely you are not suggesting that the patron saint of the neo-Flat Earthism, Samuel Birley Rowbotham, could also be wrong.

But, you were claiming refraction can cause the sun could appear to rise and set.
Would you care to sketch out some diagrams with the required layers and refractive indices to bring the sun down like:

Sun near setting at Weipa
               

Sunset at Weipa
And how does YOUR refraction allow the sun to illuminate the clouds from below at sunrise and sunset?

Clouds lit on the underside before sunrise
       
Sun's rays shining up on clouds before sunrise
       
Clouds lit from underneath near Toogoolawah at Sunset

Or have you backed away from the refraction explanation.

*

Shifter

  • 15544
  • Flat Earth Believer
Re: Why can't I see Polaris from Sydney?
« Reply #6 on: February 13, 2018, 09:37:31 PM »
The flat earth wiki is wrong

And I know on THAT point you will agree with me LOL

rab agreeing with Shifter again
Surely you are not suggesting that the patron saint of the neo-Flat Earthism, Samuel Birley Rowbotham, could also be wrong.
That's exactly what I am suggesting

But, you were claiming refraction can cause the sun could appear to rise and set.
Would you care to sketch out some diagrams with the required layers and refractive indices to bring the sun down like:

Sun near setting at Weipa
               

Sunset at Weipa
And how does YOUR refraction allow the sun to illuminate the clouds from below at sunrise and sunset?

Clouds lit on the underside before sunrise
       
Sun's rays shining up on clouds before sunrise
       
Clouds lit from underneath near Toogoolawah at Sunset

Or have you backed away from the refraction explanation.

refraction explanation withdrawn  :P I was trying to be cautious, it sounded like a flat earth Q&A  :P

On the work computer I cant see your pictures but suffice to say, my actual belief on this 'dome' is that it is simply our atmosphere. The 'thin blue line' is the dome. We may think of a solid object when we think of 'dome' but I see no reason why it cant be gaseous. Definition of words evolve. A man with no clue thousands of years ago could have looked up at the sky, see it was 'blue' and believe it was an actual thing. Not scattered sunlight through a gaseous atmosphere.
RIP rabinoz. Forum legend

Re: Why can't I see Polaris from Sydney?
« Reply #7 on: February 13, 2018, 09:57:00 PM »
I should also ask why the Southern Cross is visible to the south, from every southern place, including the sea. How can it be towards the south for all observers?

Re: Why can't I see Polaris from Sydney?
« Reply #8 on: February 13, 2018, 10:02:38 PM »
Why? You clearly have a model of the FE geometry in mind -- I doubt all FEers will agree with you.
It is a fairly simple idea.
Earth is flat, the star is above it.
Should be visible from all over.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Why can't I see Polaris from Sydney?
« Reply #9 on: February 13, 2018, 10:27:44 PM »
refraction explanation withdrawn  :P I was trying to be cautious, it sounded like a flat earth Q&A  :P

On the work computer I cant see your pictures but suffice to say, my actual belief on this 'dome' is that it is simply our atmosphere. The 'thin blue line' is the dome. We may think of a solid object when we think of 'dome' but I see no reason why it cant be gaseous. Definition of words evolve. A man with no clue thousands of years ago could have looked up at the sky, see it was 'blue' and believe it was an actual thing. Not scattered sunlight through a gaseous atmosphere.
Then got the ;) shock of his life ;) when he saw the moon, planets and stars shining quite unimpeded.
One thing that is very relevant is that these ancient people got the message very quickly that the celestial objects were an extremely great distance from earth.

Flat-earthers accuse Eratosthenes of "assuming" that the suns rays arrived from the same direction everywhere on earth - but back there, they "knew" that.
One of the earliest detailed descriptions of the early cosmos is Ptolemy's Almagest:
Quote
In his Almagest, the astronomer Ptolemy (fl. ca. 150 AD) developed geometrical predictive models of the motions of the stars and planets and extended them to a unified physical model of the cosmos in his Planetary hypotheses. By using eccentrics and epicycles, his geometrical model achieved greater mathematical detail and predictive accuracy than had been exhibited by earlier concentric spherical models of the cosmos. In Ptolemy's physical model, each planet is contained in two or more spheres, but in Book 2 of his Planetary Hypotheses Ptolemy depicted thick circular slices rather than spheres as in its Book 1. One sphere/slice is the deferent, with a centre offset somewhat from the Earth; the other sphere/slice is an epicycle embedded in the deferent, with the planet embedded in the epicyclical sphere/slice. Ptolemy's model of nesting spheres provided the general dimensions of the cosmos, the greatest distance of Saturn being 19,865 times the radius of the Earth and the distance of the fixed stars being at least 20,000 Earth radii.
Nothing like as large as modern distances to the stars (including Polaris), but huge compared to the size of the earth.
 
 ;) Strangely enough ;) I seem to agree with you once again - Dome or firmament call it what you will.