Direction of the suns movement

Hi there,

I am new to this topic and do have a question. If I am in North America and look towards the sun, its moving from left to right relative so my perspective. I would call it clockwise. When I am far down in South America, its the opposite. It rises right from the point it will set in the evening. So its moving counterclockwise. And how does it appear at all, that the suns is rising, if its always somewhere above me in the dome? I can't explain this.

Hi there,

I am new to this topic and do have a question. If I am in North America and look towards the sun, its moving from left to right relative so my perspective. I would call it clockwise. When I am far down in South America, its the opposite. It rises right from the point it will set in the evening. So its moving counterclockwise. And how does it appear at all, that the suns is rising, if its always somewhere above me in the dome? I can't explain this.

The path of the sun is always between the Tropic of Cancer, south of the USA, the Tropic of Capricorn, south of Bolivia and most of Brazil.

So if you are "in North America and look towards the sun" you must look south to see the sun and since the sun moves from east to west and so it appears to be moving from your left to your right.

But if you are "far down in South America" you must look north to see the sun and since the sun still moves from east to west it appears to be moving from your right to your left.

So the sun is doing the same thing but you have moved and so have to look in the opposite direction to see the sun.

Thanks for answering. I can see that.
But how does the sunrise and sunset work when the sun really is always above me?

Thanks for answering. I can see that.
But how does the sunrise and sunset work when the sun really is always above me?

I thought that Das Sonnenkind, the sun child would know the answers to all on these things .

But you'll have to wait for an expert to explain "sunrise and sunset". The best that I can do is point you to The Flat Earth Society's "Wiki" which has these entries:

The Sun
The sun is a sphere. It has a diameter of 32 miles and is located approximately 3000 miles above the surface of the earth.

Spotlight effect
The Sun's area of light is limited to a circular area of light upon the earth much like the light of a lighthouse is limited to a finite circular area around it. The rotating light on a lighthouse does not propagate infinitely into the distance. This means that only certain portions of the Earth are lightened at a time. It also describes how night and day arise on the Flat Earth. The apparent view of rising and setting are caused by perspective, just as a flock of birds overhead will descend into the horizon as it flies into the distance.

The Setting of the Sun
Although the sun is at all times above the earth's surface, it appears in the morning to ascend from the north-east to the noonday position, and thence to descend and disappear, or set, in the north-west. This phenomenon arises from the operation of a simple and everywhere visible law of perspective. A flock of birds, when passing over a flat or marshy country, always appears to descend is it recedes; and if the flock is extensive, the first bird appears lower or nearer to the horizon than the last, although they are at the same actual altitude above the earth immediately beneath them. When a plane flies away from an observer, without increasing or decreasing its altitude, it appears to gradually approach the horizon. In a long row of lamps, the second, supposing the observer to stand at the beginning of the series, will appear lower than the first; the third lower than the second; and so on to the end of the row; the farthest away always appearing the lowest, although each one has the same altitude; and if such a straight line of lamps could be continued far enough, the lights would at length descend, apparently, to the horizon, or to a level with the eye of the observer. This explains how the sun descends into the horizon as it recedes.

<< See the link for more explanation >>

Magnification of the Sun at Sunset
Q. If the sun is disappearing to perspective, shouldn't it get smaller as it recedes?

A. The sun remains the same size as it recedes into the distance due to a known magnification effect caused by the intense rays of light passing through the strata of the atmosphere.

From Chapter 10 of the book Earth Not a Globe we read:

Quote

IT is well known that when a light of any kind shines through a dense medium it appears larger, or magnified, at a given distance than when it is seen through a lighter medium. This is more remarkable when the medium holds aqueous particles or vapour in solution, as in a damp or foggy atmosphere. Anyone may be satisfied of this by standing within a few yards of an ordinary street lamp, and noticing the size of the flame; on going away to many times the distance, the light upon the atmosphere will appear considerably larger. This phenomenon may be noticed, to a greater or less degree, at all times; but when the air is moist and vapoury it is more intense. It is evident that at sunrise, and at sunset, the sun's light must shine through a greater length of atmospheric air than at mid-day; besides which, the air near the earth is both more dense, and holds more watery particles in solution, than the higher strata through which the sun shines at noonday; and hence the light must be dilated or magnified, as well as modified in colour.

- Samuel Birley Rowbotham

<< See the link for more much explanation >>

Constant Speed of the Sun
Q. If the sun is disappearing to perspective, shouldn't it slow down as it approaches the horizon?

A. The sun moves constant speed into the horizon at sunset because it is at such a height that already beyond the apex of perspective lines. It has maximized the possible broadness of the lines of perspective in relation to the earth. It is intersecting the earth at a near 45 degree angle.

It's widely observable that overhead receding bodies move at a more constant pace into the horizon the higher they are.

For example, a flock of birds receding from the observer will reach the horizon line sooner than a jet airplane flying at 40,000 feet. Due to its height the jet airplane moves through the sky slower than the flock of birds close to the ground and will touch the horizon line later.

Or, to make a slightly better comparison, a flock of birds at 300 feet will appear to reach the horizon line sooner than a flock of birds at 10,000 feet, despite the two moving at the same speed.

When a body increases its altitude it broadens its perspective lines in relation to the earth and the observer, and thus appears to move slower and at a more constant pace into the horizon.

The sun and stars are at such a great height that they have maximized the perspective lines, moving into the earth at a 45 degree angle in relation to the observer, at a constant or near constant pace.

Sun child seems not around. 

Thanks for answering. I can see that.
But how does the sunrise and sunset work when the sun really is always above me?

refraction index of light in dense air.



Air near the earth acts like a light water, because of being heavy than above air. So that, follow the following image. Right here:

I'm new to FE so I have a question about sunrise and sunset. If I'm understanding it correctly, the diagram about refraction is used to explain that the air near the surface of the Earth is heavier than the air higher up in the sky, so the heavier air bends the light rays and creates like an optical illusion of where the sun is. (The diagram seems kind of like the ones in science books that show how a straw looks bent in a glass of water.)

So my question is, if there is no gravity but instead it's just the Earth accelerating, then why would the air near the surface of the Earth be heavier than the air higher up? Why wouldn't all air weigh the same? Doesn't any oxygen atom always weigh the same as any other oxygen atom?

I'm new to FE so I have a question about sunrise and sunset. If I'm understanding it correctly, the diagram about refraction is used to explain that the air near the surface of the Earth is heavier than the air higher up in the sky, so the heavier air bends the light rays and creates like an optical illusion of where the sun is. (The diagram seems kind of like the ones in science books that show how a straw looks bent in a glass of water.)

So my question is, if there is no gravity but instead it's just the Earth accelerating, then why would the air near the surface of the Earth be heavier than the air higher up? Why wouldn't all air weigh the same? Doesn't any oxygen atom always weigh the same as any other oxygen atom?

I did not mention earth's geting accelerate or not. In my opinion the earth is stationary. There is some small groups still defend it and when faq has created, it was explaining the gravity. But we are not using this model nowadays.

So my question is, if there is no gravity but instead it's just the Earth accelerating, then why would the air near the surface of the Earth be heavier than the air higher up? Why wouldn't all air weigh the same? Doesn't any oxygen atom always weigh the same as any other oxygen atom?

Even with upward acceleration of 9.8ms^2, air molecules still have mass, and would still be more compressed lower in the column.

Atoms still have mass, and gasses are still compressible. And the force something gives in return for equal and opposite force is still related to the mass times acceleration.
If you're in an elevator with a kid on your shoulders and the elevator goes up you may feel double your weight briefly, and the kid will feel double his weight briefly.
But because the kid weighs less than you, his increase in weight won't be as great as yours on a pound basis.

Same thing with air, the air at the bottom of the column has all the mass of all the air above it piling up, while the air on the top of the column has less mass on top of it.

Gravity and linear acceleration are in all aspects indistinguishable from each other in the experience of the subject.  We have no way to measure the difference between them.

So I was thinking maybe the sun needs a lampshade otherwise a slightly higher incident ray would still be visible at all times.

Or does total external reflection prevent the light from entering the air layer beyond a certain angle?

However I have a hard time understanding how a total internal reflection scenario would be so effective in the gradient of the thin upper air layer. So there has to be a hard dome above that.

But what I don't understand about this is the refraction would make the sun look higher on the horizon than it really is.
And yet it appears to literally set into the horizon, bottom half first.

Could you draw that in your diagram?

Quote from: wise on February 26, 2019, 12:15:04 AM

So I was thinking maybe the sun needs a lampshade otherwise a slightly higher incident ray would still be visible at all times.

Or does total external reflection prevent the light from entering the air layer beyond a certain angle?

However I have a hard time understanding how a total internal reflection scenario would be so effective in the gradient of the thin upper air layer. So there has to be a hard dome above that.

But what I don't understand about this is the refraction would make the sun look higher on the horizon than it really is.
And yet it appears to literally set into the horizon, bottom half first.

Could you draw that in your diagram?

It is not as you think, but opposite of it. Sorry I've forgot to add the atmosphere there. It is just sun and water doom relationship. It has to be somewhere here.

Yes we have.

But i'm not sure you have a way to understand it.

I posted it somewhere here. ANyways. I've sortified it for you.

Thanks Wise.

I'm still confused, just trying to understand the answer.

I think I would need to see a diagram that showed the light path for the dome and the air all in one diagram.

If you get a chance, I would really appreciate if you might throw something together. I don't care if it's not all pretty, I'm just trying to understand the answer.

Thanks Wise.

I'm still confused, just trying to understand the answer.

I think I would need to see a diagram that showed the light path for the dome and the air all in one diagram.

If you get a chance, I would really appreciate if you might throw something together. I don't care if it's not all pretty, I'm just trying to understand the answer.

There is another problem about angular size and angular distance, causes you see flat objects round.

What all these mean:



The object on second or third point generally prevents you see the remained ones.

.

Thanks for trying to explain but I guess I'm just not smart enough to understand.
I'll keep thinking about it though, maybe it'll sink in.

I think you are so. But you just need time to research and get some mechanisms. You are quite new and the flat earth theory really has too much disciplines. When you look at a straight road, I mean, if an engineer produced him exactly straight, but you would never see him as flat. the reason for this is the angular problem. I've been researching all the subjects about the flat world for maybe more than 10 years and even I've noticed this problem in recent months. I mean, we're all learning new things all the time and we've never been able to know exactly. you can be an expert on any subject you choose. it depends entirely on your interest and research.

Best regards. wise.

I think you are so. But you just need time to research and get some mechanisms. You are quite new and the flat earth theory really has too much disciplines. When you look at a straight road, I mean, if an engineer produced him exactly straight, but you would never see him as flat. the reason for this is the angular problem. I've been researching all the subjects about the flat world for maybe more than 10 years and even I've noticed this problem in recent months. I mean, we're all learning new things all the time and we've never been able to know exactly. you can be an expert on any subject you choose. it depends entirely on your interest and research.

Best regards. wise.

Thank you for your kind words.

But I just don't know if I can comprehend the situation without an overall diagram.

I mean it's not like I haven't put in the effort. I did the Cavendish experiment: It showed some odd weak attraction between my lead weights. I built a Michelson–Morley laser interferometer with very textbook results: Lovely light/dark bands pattern. I even built a laser ring interferometer with a beam splitter and got a surprisingly good results with the beam nearly canceling itself.
I've been playing with lenses, mirrors, cameras, telescopes, and prisms for years, and I understand reflection, refraction, Chromatic aberration and Spherical aberration, optical coherence, standing waves, interference, and polarization.

It's all just a hobby for me, but I do really enjoy it.

Right now I have built a pendulum gravity sensor that swings a tungsten weight in a vacuum and measures the swing time. An electronic circuit keeps it gently moving at it's natural frequency, and it records the time of every swing. The idea is to measure the number of microseconds it takes to do a million swings (About a week) then put 23 pounds of lead weights directly under it and do the test again, and see if gravity changes.

I tell you all this to help you understand how I do try to understand things.

I really would love to understand how the sun can appear on the horizon, and then a few minutes later be just gone from sight.

If you get a chance, I would be very grateful if you might perchance draw up a diagram that depicts the sun, the dome, the air, the earth, the observer, and the rays of light, and day and night - the overall picture.

Maybe seeing it all together would help me understand. I think I can understand the component aspects of it, I just can't wrap my mind around the whole picture.

Thanks!