Everything intersects with the horizon.

Railroad tracks can receed and intersect with the horizon,

and the metal tracks can intersect with each other. Quite literally to all properties of vision.

Everything does not intersect with the horizon. I do not intersect with the horizon. So please reword your claim in a way that makes sense!

And no! railroad tracks can recede and

*appear to* meet with the horizon - note the "appear to" and the "meet" NOT "intersect"!

No! the metal tracks NEVER

*intersect with each other*. Intersect means to cross not just meet. Look it up in a dictionary!

**intersect**

*verb*- divide (something) by passing or lying across it.

"the area is intersected only by minor roads"

*synonyms: *bisect, divide, halve, cut in two, cut in half, cut across, cut through; - (of two or more things) pass or lie across each other.

*synonyms:* cross, criss-cross;

The metal tracks do

*appear* to

*meet with each other*.

You seem to have great difficulty separating reality (where railway tracks stay the same distance apart) from visual appearance (where railway tracks appear to meet).

The airy disks merge at about one sixtyth of a degree.

It all occurs a finite distance away,

The "airy disks merge at about one sixtyth of a degree" for a typical human eye but not necessarily for other optical devices!

And yes, I'm quite aware of the

*Rayleigh criterion* but that only shows when two objects appear to merge visually.

**Limits of Resolution: The Rayleigh Criterion**

The Rayleigh criterion for the diffraction limit to resolution states that two images are just resolvable when the center of the diffraction pattern of one is directly over the first minimum of the diffraction pattern of the other. See [link](b). The first minimum is at an angle of *θ*_{R} = 1.22λ/D, so that two point objects are just resolvable if they are separated by the angle

*θ*_{R} = 1.22λ/D

where *λ* is the wavelength of light (or other electromagnetic radiation) and *D* is the diameter of the aperture, lens, mirror, etc., with which the two objects are observed. In this expression, *θ*_{R} has units of radians.

It has nothing to do with when they actually meet because they do not meet anywhere as is easily shown by getting a telescope with a larger aperture than the human eye!

Do you honestly believe that a telescope moves the actual distance away that "the metal tracks can intersect with each other"? Come off it!

and not an infinite distance away as proposed by ancient geometry. You are literally invoking ancient fantasy and conjecture to support your arguments and ideas about perspective infinities.

I'm invoking no "ancient fantasy". Look at

*Euclid's fifth postulate* again:

"That, if a straight line falling on two straight lines make the interior angles on the same side less than two right angles, the two straight lines, if produced indefinitely,

*meet* on that side of which are the angles less than the two right angles."

Surely anyone would interpret "if produced indefinitely" as "if produced to

*infinity*" which means that they never physically meet.

There is nothing in that saying that parallel lines do not

*appear* to meet at some finite point.

Your argument that the tracks of railroads don't "really" merge together is a very poor argument.

If it "is a very poor argument" why did you claim that

Railroad tracks **intersect** a finite distance away.

They merge to vision and perspective. No one is claiming that the sun really crashes into the earth, and so that argument is inadequate.

Well why did you claim that "Railroad tracks

**intersect** a finite distance away?

If you read Earth Not a Globe and the tfes.org wiki the sun we see is a projection on the atmolayer. Basically a cloud in the sky. The Flat Earth perspective theory proposes that much of its descent can be caused by perspective.

I have thank you, and there is no possibolity of aby "projection on the atmolayer. Basically a cloud in the sky"! There is nothing to cause a projection and nothing to project an image onto!

Sure, "The Flat Earth perspective theory proposes that much of its descent can be caused by perspective".

But "perspective theory" can only cause the sun or moon to appear to descend to 15° to 20° os so above the horizon and would also reduce the angular size of the sun or moon to something like 1/3 of their sizes when overhead.