Solar eclipse of November 23, 2003

  • 75 Replies
  • 1769 Views
*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4533
Re: Solar eclipse of November 23, 2003
« Reply #60 on: September 06, 2019, 07:46:20 AM »
Both the Black Sun and the visible Sun orbit beyond the Dome. There is a certain distance between them, so in an annular eclipse the distance increases.



The object eclipsing the sun is quite proven to be the moon.

It takes a single counterexample to invalidate a theory.

It can't be the Moon, just take a look at the computations:



Dr. Maurice Allais:

In both cases, with the experiments with the anisotropic
support and with those with the isotropic support, it is found
that the amplitudes of the periodic effects are considerably
greater than those calculated according to the law of gravitation,
whether or not completed by the theory of relativity.
In the case of the anisotropic support, the amplitude of
the luni-solar component of 24h 50m is about twenty million
times greater than the amplitude calculated by the theory of
universal gravitation.

In the case of the paraconical pendulum with isotropic
support, this relation is about a hundred million.

First Allais measurements  could be inaccurate caused by poor controls,

No poor controls present in the paper I referenced.

Just perfect results.

In the other paper the biggest anomalies were  registered after the eclipse, not during the eclipse as expected and each pendulum shows different results, which is contradicting.

Of course.

The amount/flux of laevorotatory subquark emitted by the Black Sun can vary, there is also the ether drift (season, daytime/nightime).

Read the report to Nasa by Dr. Allais, he observed a most precise periodicity of the variations in the pendulum's motions.

Now, here is the paper published in the Physical Review D.






Saxl and Allen went on to note that to explain these remarkable eclipse observations, according to "conventional Newtonian/Einsteinian gravitational theory," an increase in the weight of the pendumum bob itself on the order of ~5% would be required ... amounting to (for the ~51.5-lb pendulum bob in the experiment) an increase of ~2.64 lbs!

This would be on the order of one hundred thousand (100,000) times greater than any possible "gravitational tidal effects" Saxl and Allen calculated (using Newtonian Gravitational Theory/ Relativity Theory).


*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4533
Re: Solar eclipse of November 23, 2003
« Reply #61 on: September 06, 2019, 08:01:13 AM »
Dr. Maurice Allais report to NASA:

http://www.allais.info/alltrans/nasareport.pdf

pages 35R - 43R

1. – Periodic structure of the month-long series of observations of
the asymmetrical paraconical pendulum with anisotropic support

a – The seven month-long series of observations of the
asymmetrical paraconical pendulum with anisotropic support
are characterized by a very remarkable periodic structure

c – Analysis together with 13 periods from the harmonic
analysis used in the theory of tides was particularly suggestive

The same periodicities as in the theory of tides appeared
to be significant in the movements of the paraconical pendulum,
but their coefficients of amplitude were very different.


FOR THE PARACONICAL PENDULUM WITH ISOTROPIC
SUPPORT, THE RATIO OF THE COMPONENT OF 24H 50M TO
THE COMPONENT OF 24H IS ABOUT 14 TIMES LARGER,
THAN WITH THE THEORY OF TIDES (4.12/0.294=14.01)

2. – Periodic structure of the month-long series of observations of
the paraconical pendulum with isotropic support

A remarkable periodic structure appeared here as well.

The significant periodicities which appear are the
same as those of the theory of tides, but their relative
amplitudes are quite different.

c – One may well ask oneself why, when it occurs, the near
alignment of the Moon and the Sun does not generate the same
effects as a total eclipse.


In fact, the importance of the monthly sidereal period of
27.322 days shows that these effects exist. But they can only
really be perceived over a period of several months.

Overall, it was the harmonic analysis of the various series
of observations of the paraconical pendulum with
anisotropic support and of the series of observations of the
paraconical pendulum with isotropic support which made
me absolutely certain of their periodic structure as far as
the orders of magnitude of the components of 24h 50m,
24h, 12h 25m, and 12h are concerned, and of the
impossibility of explaining them by the theory of
gravitation, whether or not completed by the theory of
relativity.


Seen overall, the harmonic analysis of the month-long
series of observations of the paraconical pendulum with
anisotropic and isotropic supports disclosed a very remarkable
underlying periodic structure.

This makes it clear why experiments for a few hours with
a Foucault pendulum have always been notable for inexplicable
anomalies.

• Particularly, my experiments with the paraconical
pendulum with isotropic support marked a fundamental stage in
my researches, and they enabled me to obtain results of
exceptional importance.

In fact, the periodic structures which were brought to light
exhibited great underlying coherence, particularly as far as
their phases were concerned.

The existence of anomalies in the movement of the
paraconical pendulum has become absolutely certain.

FOR THE LUNI-SOLAR WAVE OF 24H 50M, IN THE CASE OF
THE PARACONICAL PENDULUM WITH ANISOTROPIC
SUPPORT, THE EFFECTS OBSERVED ARE ABOUT TWENTY
MILLION TIMES GREATER THAN THOSE CALCULATED.

IN THE CASE OF THE PARACONICAL PENDULUM WITH
ISOTROPIC SUPPORT, THE RATIO BETWEEN THE
OBSERVED EFFECTS AND THE CALCULATED EFFECTS IS
ABOUT A HUNDRED MILLION.

THESE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE CALCULATED
VALUES AND THE OBSERVED VALUES ARE ENORMOUS,
AND WITHOUT ANY EQUAL IN THE LITERATURE.


V –TOTALLY INEXPLICABLE OBSERVATIONS IN THE
FRAMEWORK OF CURRENT THEORY

1. – Orders of magnitude incompatible with current theory

In both cases, with the experiments with the anisotropic
support and with those with the isotropic support, it is found
that the amplitudes of the periodic effects are considerably
greater than those calculated according to the law of gravitation,
whether or not completed by the theory of relativity.

In the case of the anisotropic support, the amplitude of
the luni-solar component of 24h 50m is about twenty million
times greater than the amplitude calculated by the theory of
universal gravitation.

In the case of the paraconical pendulum with isotropic
support, this relation is about a hundred million.

The discrepancies discovered are enormous, and, as far
as I know, unmatched in the literature.

http://ether-wind.narod.ru/Allais_1997/Allais_1997_1.pdf (L'Anisotropie de L'espace, in French)


*

kopfverderber

  • 440
  • Globularist
Re: Solar eclipse of November 23, 2003
« Reply #62 on: September 06, 2019, 08:15:34 AM »
Dr. Maurice Allais report to NASA:

http://www.allais.info/alltrans/nasareport.pdf

pages 35R - 43R

1. – Periodic structure of the month-long series of observations of
the asymmetrical paraconical pendulum with anisotropic support

a – The seven month-long series of observations of the
asymmetrical paraconical pendulum with anisotropic support
are characterized by a very remarkable periodic structure

c – Analysis together with 13 periods from the harmonic
analysis used in the theory of tides was particularly suggestive

The same periodicities as in the theory of tides appeared
to be significant in the movements of the paraconical pendulum,
but their coefficients of amplitude were very different.


FOR THE PARACONICAL PENDULUM WITH ISOTROPIC
SUPPORT, THE RATIO OF THE COMPONENT OF 24H 50M TO
THE COMPONENT OF 24H IS ABOUT 14 TIMES LARGER,
THAN WITH THE THEORY OF TIDES (4.12/0.294=14.01)

2. – Periodic structure of the month-long series of observations of
the paraconical pendulum with isotropic support

A remarkable periodic structure appeared here as well.

The significant periodicities which appear are the
same as those of the theory of tides, but their relative
amplitudes are quite different.

c – One may well ask oneself why, when it occurs, the near
alignment of the Moon and the Sun does not generate the same
effects as a total eclipse.


In fact, the importance of the monthly sidereal period of
27.322 days shows that these effects exist. But they can only
really be perceived over a period of several months.

Overall, it was the harmonic analysis of the various series
of observations of the paraconical pendulum with
anisotropic support and of the series of observations of the
paraconical pendulum with isotropic support which made
me absolutely certain of their periodic structure as far as
the orders of magnitude of the components of 24h 50m,
24h, 12h 25m, and 12h are concerned, and of the
impossibility of explaining them by the theory of
gravitation, whether or not completed by the theory of
relativity.


Seen overall, the harmonic analysis of the month-long
series of observations of the paraconical pendulum with
anisotropic and isotropic supports disclosed a very remarkable
underlying periodic structure.

This makes it clear why experiments for a few hours with
a Foucault pendulum have always been notable for inexplicable
anomalies.

• Particularly, my experiments with the paraconical
pendulum with isotropic support marked a fundamental stage in
my researches, and they enabled me to obtain results of
exceptional importance.

In fact, the periodic structures which were brought to light
exhibited great underlying coherence, particularly as far as
their phases were concerned.

The existence of anomalies in the movement of the
paraconical pendulum has become absolutely certain.

FOR THE LUNI-SOLAR WAVE OF 24H 50M, IN THE CASE OF
THE PARACONICAL PENDULUM WITH ANISOTROPIC
SUPPORT, THE EFFECTS OBSERVED ARE ABOUT TWENTY
MILLION TIMES GREATER THAN THOSE CALCULATED.

IN THE CASE OF THE PARACONICAL PENDULUM WITH
ISOTROPIC SUPPORT, THE RATIO BETWEEN THE
OBSERVED EFFECTS AND THE CALCULATED EFFECTS IS
ABOUT A HUNDRED MILLION.

THESE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE CALCULATED
VALUES AND THE OBSERVED VALUES ARE ENORMOUS,
AND WITHOUT ANY EQUAL IN THE LITERATURE.


V –TOTALLY INEXPLICABLE OBSERVATIONS IN THE
FRAMEWORK OF CURRENT THEORY

1. – Orders of magnitude incompatible with current theory

In both cases, with the experiments with the anisotropic
support and with those with the isotropic support, it is found
that the amplitudes of the periodic effects are considerably
greater than those calculated according to the law of gravitation,
whether or not completed by the theory of relativity.

In the case of the anisotropic support, the amplitude of
the luni-solar component of 24h 50m is about twenty million
times greater than the amplitude calculated by the theory of
universal gravitation.

In the case of the paraconical pendulum with isotropic
support, this relation is about a hundred million.

The discrepancies discovered are enormous, and, as far
as I know, unmatched in the literature.

http://ether-wind.narod.ru/Allais_1997/Allais_1997_1.pdf (L'Anisotropie de L'espace, in French)

You keep with text wall copy pasta as if that proved any of your fantasies. When you finally find the invisible black sun please let me know.
You must gather your party before venturing forth

*

EvolvedMantisShrimp

  • 851
  • Physical Comedian
Re: Solar eclipse of November 23, 2003
« Reply #63 on: September 06, 2019, 09:35:37 AM »
Both the Black Sun and the visible Sun orbit beyond the Dome. There is a certain distance between them, so in an annular eclipse the distance increases.

If the black sun is the same size as the real Sun, then how will being closer to us make it cover LESS of the Sun?
Nullius in Verba

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 38460
Re: Solar eclipse of November 23, 2003
« Reply #64 on: September 06, 2019, 10:24:02 AM »
If the moon doesn't cause the eclipse, then where is the moon during the eclipse and why do eclipses only ever happen when the moon is predicted to be in front of the sun?

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1628430#msg1628430
Any chance that you could just give me a simple answer to my question rather than giving me a link and making me wade through all sorts of irrelevant nonsense?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

kopfverderber

  • 440
  • Globularist
Re: Solar eclipse of November 23, 2003
« Reply #65 on: September 06, 2019, 10:33:54 AM »
The black sun is invisible apparently, nobody can see it. It can't be proved nor disproved.

However eclipses can be predicted accurately without knowing the whereabouts of the black sun, therefore the blacksun is not needed for eclipses, it's irrelevant.  The result is nobody cares about the black sun, apart from a few cultist.

You must gather your party before venturing forth

*

Heavenly Breeze

  • 364
  • Weather Pegasus
Re: Solar eclipse of November 23, 2003
« Reply #66 on: September 06, 2019, 11:02:08 AM »
The Black Sun is Fenrir in nordic mythology.

It has the same diameter as that of the Sun.

No artistic imagery: the color of the Black Sun was not modified in any way, the author clearly describes everything, that is why I included the link from the very start.

It cannot be the Moon.

Yes, the image shows a heavenly body which is very close, geographically, from the photographer, a total confirmation of the 636 meter height, but more basically YOU, THE RE, have to explain the Allais effect.

Unless you can explain the Allais effect, I win.

Here are the calculations published by Dr. Allais, sent to Nasa (Dr. Maurice Allais, a Nobel prize winner):



Dr. Maurice Allais:

In both cases, with the experiments with the anisotropic
support and with those with the isotropic support, it is found
that the amplitudes of the periodic effects are considerably
greater than those calculated according to the law of gravitation,
whether or not completed by the theory of relativity.
In the case of the anisotropic support, the amplitude of
the luni-solar component of 24h 50m is about twenty million
times greater than the amplitude calculated by the theory of
universal gravitation.

In the case of the paraconical pendulum with isotropic
support, this relation is about a hundred million.


I already explained everything about the new Moon:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1628430#msg1628430


I could not resist and laugh. Ha ha ha Wise - you are very wise! This is the second moon Fata closes the sun ... The moon that recently fell ... Sorry - English does not convey the fullness of my thoughts, but I hope you laugh with me ...

Are you sure that the earth is not such?

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4533
Re: Solar eclipse of November 23, 2003
« Reply #67 on: September 06, 2019, 11:04:17 AM »


Here is how the total solar eclipse is being described in the Vedic cosmology.

Now, according to the Vedic understanding, what causes the solar and lunar eclipses is a dark planet by the name of Rahu and that planet has the ability to occult or to cover the sun and the moon. Now according to this Vedic model it is completely different from our Western model. The earth is here, in the Vedic model, then the nearest planet is Rahu, then beyond Rahu there is the Sun, and beyond the sun there is the Moon. So we have like this: Earth, Rahu, Sun, Moon. So it is not actually possible, according to the Vedas, for the Moon to come in front of the Sun, because the Moon is beyond the Sun. I’m just telling you the model.

Now, according to the Vedic understanding, what happens at the time of a solar eclipse is that this planet, Rahu, comes in front of the Sun, and behind the Sun there is the Moon. So we think actually it’s the Moon coming in front of the Sun whereas in reality it’s Rahu, which we don’t even know exists, coming in front of the Sun which causes the solar eclipse.

It could be that the Black Sun, Rahu, has a diameter which is smaller than the Sun's by some 50 meters, and an annular eclipse is caused when it orbits farthest from the Earth.

This is something which yet has to be worked out.

Now, here is another way, a very impressive argument, to prove that the Black Sun is causing the solar eclipses: Newtonium.



Modern science cannot explain the enormous temperatures of the solar corona required to justify the presence of Fe X.

When there is no solar eclipse, the Sun emits Koronium.

Only during the total solar eclipses do we also observe Newtonium.

Newtonium is the first element of Mendeleev's original periodic table of elements, the subquark.

Thule and Vril society scientists discovered that the Black Sun emits a very deep red radiation, with antigravitational properties (they called it Vril).



Group 0, line 0: NEWTONIUM

Group 0, line 1: CORONIUM


Koronium

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2057945#msg2057945

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2058259#msg2058259

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2064256#msg2064256


Newtonium

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2064764#msg2064764

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2065771#msg2065771



*

Heavenly Breeze

  • 364
  • Weather Pegasus
Re: Solar eclipse of November 23, 2003
« Reply #68 on: September 06, 2019, 11:13:02 AM »
Quote
The Black Sun is Fenrir in nordic mythology.

Sorry sandokhan ... But before you say anything about mythology, learn to read !! And do not powder here everyone’s head. I am Russian and I can tell you a lot about your failure in mythology and other things. I know the story well and say that there has never been a dome above the earth, but there was a water layer around the earth. When the moon - Lelya fell to the ground, water poured down and caused a flood. And be kind first think what you write. And you didn’t tell me how the gyrocompass can work on flat earth - even theoretically!

Are you sure that the earth is not such?

*

Heavenly Breeze

  • 364
  • Weather Pegasus
Re: Solar eclipse of November 23, 2003
« Reply #69 on: September 06, 2019, 11:18:39 AM »


Here is how the total solar eclipse is being described in the Vedic cosmology.

Now, according to the Vedic understanding, what causes the solar and lunar eclipses is a dark planet by the name of Rahu and that planet has the ability to occult or to cover the sun and the moon. Now according to this Vedic model it is completely different from our Western model. The earth is here, in the Vedic model, then the nearest planet is Rahu, then beyond Rahu there is the Sun, and beyond the sun there is the Moon. So we have like this: Earth, Rahu, Sun, Moon. So it is not actually possible, according to the Vedas, for the Moon to come in front of the Sun, because the Moon is beyond the Sun. I’m just telling you the model.

Now, according to the Vedic understanding, what happens at the time of a solar eclipse is that this planet, Rahu, comes in front of the Sun, and behind the Sun there is the Moon. So we think actually it’s the Moon coming in front of the Sun whereas in reality it’s Rahu, which we don’t even know exists, coming in front of the Sun which causes the solar eclipse.

It could be that the Black Sun, Rahu, has a diameter which is smaller than the Sun's by some 50 meters, and an annular eclipse is caused when it orbits farthest from the Earth.

This is something which yet has to be worked out.

Now, here is another way, a very impressive argument, to prove that the Black Sun is causing the solar eclipses: Newtonium.



Modern science cannot explain the enormous temperatures of the solar corona required to justify the presence of Fe X.

When there is no solar eclipse, the Sun emits Koronium.

Only during the total solar eclipses do we also observe Newtonium.

Newtonium is the first element of Mendeleev's original periodic table of elements, the subquark.

Thule and Vril society scientists discovered that the Black Sun emits a very deep red radiation, with antigravitational properties (they called it Vril).



Group 0, line 0: NEWTONIUM

Group 0, line 1: CORONIUM


Koronium

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2057945#msg2057945

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2058259#msg2058259

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2064256#msg2064256


Newtonium

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2064764#msg2064764

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2065771#msg2065771

Listen you are sandokhan! I am Russian! I know what the Vedas are - which are real! Since I'm reading them. Stop talking nonsense here and tell everyone about the invented Vedas! You can’t even imagine what is written in them! And those tales that you can read from the Internet - stop referring to them.

Are you sure that the earth is not such?

*

Yes

  • 219
Re: Solar eclipse of November 23, 2003
« Reply #70 on: September 06, 2019, 12:03:20 PM »
I don't have a clear understanding of why a rejection of the black sun model requires an explanation of the Allais effect, if it exists.

Furthermore, even if a black sun model could explain the Allais effect, wouldn't it also need to explain other things?  For example, where does the black sun come from and go to before and after the eclipse?  Why you can predict eclipses with 100% reliability by just assuming it's caused by the moon?

And if the moon is physically behind the sun, shouldn't it look like a full moon before and after the eclipse, rather than a new moon?  This I would really like to know.
You are asking me to defend flat earth by providing non religious, non conspiratorial and non alternative sources, and you know damn well that I can't do that

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 38460
Re: Solar eclipse of November 23, 2003
« Reply #71 on: September 06, 2019, 02:01:20 PM »
And if the moon is physically behind the sun, shouldn't it look like a full moon before and after the eclipse, rather than a new moon?  This I would really like to know.
I could be wrong (and probably am), but if the moon was behind the sun, wouldn't it look like a full moon all of the time rather than go through its phases?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

kopfverderber

  • 440
  • Globularist
Re: Solar eclipse of November 23, 2003
« Reply #72 on: September 06, 2019, 02:08:29 PM »
To be fair no FE model can explain lunar phases.
You must gather your party before venturing forth

*

Heavenly Breeze

  • 364
  • Weather Pegasus
Re: Solar eclipse of November 23, 2003
« Reply #73 on: September 07, 2019, 10:37:46 AM »
To be fair no FE model can explain lunar phases.
Only one model of flat earth can explain everything, even lunar eclipses. But it is even more unusual than the black sun. This is the structure of merkaba when the sun and moon are in another dimension - relative to the earth. And they spin in an inner whirlwind coming from the center of the earth ... And their light passes at an angle to us, then the moon lowers or rises - which is why everything happens. The mathematical model works, it’s only a pity that it is only mathematics, in fact, none of the official models of flat earth can explain solar eclipses. Not lunar eclipses ...

Are you sure that the earth is not such?

*

Yes

  • 219
Re: Solar eclipse of November 23, 2003
« Reply #74 on: September 11, 2019, 05:24:34 AM »
And if the moon is physically behind the sun, shouldn't it look like a full moon before and after the eclipse, rather than a new moon?  This I would really like to know.
I would still like to know this.  I guess Sandokhan doesn't understand what's going on in his theory either.
You are asking me to defend flat earth by providing non religious, non conspiratorial and non alternative sources, and you know damn well that I can't do that

Re: Solar eclipse of November 23, 2003
« Reply #75 on: September 11, 2019, 06:38:31 AM »
To be fair no FE model can explain lunar phases.
Only one model of flat earth can explain everything, even lunar eclipses. But it is even more unusual than the black sun. This is the structure of merkaba when the sun and moon are in another dimension - relative to the earth. And they spin in an inner whirlwind coming from the center of the earth ... And their light passes at an angle to us, then the moon lowers or rises - which is why everything happens. The mathematical model works, it’s only a pity that it is only mathematics, in fact, none of the official models of flat earth can explain solar eclipses. Not lunar eclipses ...

Really...
Thanks for admitting the whole fe is BS