Size of the sun

  • 18 Replies
  • 2000 Views
Size of the sun
« on: September 20, 2022, 12:54:12 PM »
If the sun orbits above the earth then why doesn't it appear smallest at sunrise, constantly get larger until its overhead, then shrink until its smallest again at sunset?

Please note that I'm ruling out the glare of the sun in this situation.

The sun may look like this at times

https://eyesnow.us/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/sun-glare-2-1024x672.jpeg

But if you rule out glare by viewing the sun through a telescope with a solar filter it looks like this, and you can clearly see the defined circular shape of the sun.



This circular shape stays a fixed size through the day

Why has nobody ever observed the sun changing size of the sun through the day, as it must do if its moving closer and further away from you

Re: Size of the sun
« Reply #1 on: September 20, 2022, 06:00:57 PM »
Why has nobody ever observed the sun changing size of the sun through the day, as it must do if its moving closer and further away from you
Why would the sun appear to change in size in the Flat Earth model if it is a great distance away?

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Size of the sun
« Reply #2 on: September 20, 2022, 07:30:04 PM »
Why has nobody ever observed the sun changing size of the sun through the day, as it must do if its moving closer and further away from you
Why would the sun appear to change in size in the Flat Earth model if it is a great distance away?

My understanding of a more popular FE theory, the Sun is 3000 miles "high" as opposed to Globe Earth, 93.339 million miles.

Re: Size of the sun
« Reply #3 on: September 21, 2022, 12:14:20 AM »
Why has nobody ever observed the sun changing size of the sun through the day, as it must do if its moving closer and further away from you
Why would the sun appear to change in size in the Flat Earth model if it is a great distance away?

Because according to flat earthers its only 3000 miles away, which is incredibly close on a cosmological scale

The equator is 6200 miles from the north pole. If you're on on the equator and if we assume the sun is exactly a quarter of the circumference of the equator away from you at sunrise or sunset then the sun is around 8700 miles away by ground distance. Its then 3000 miles up, so its actually 9200 miles away from you in total.

Then at noon if the sun is directly overhead its only 3000 miles away, 3 times closer.

Flat earthers also say the sun is 32 miles in diameter. (Or at least that's the number I see most often)

If you put those numbers into an angular size calculator this is what you get.

At sunrise or sunset the sun should appear this big

0°11'57

At noon it should appear this big

0°36'40

So the numbers work out, if the sun is over 3x closer at noon than at sunrise then its angular size in the sky should be over 3x larger

It just doesn't work, small local sun debunked

Update:

Using these numbers we can also calculate how far above the horizon the sun will be.

At sunrise the sun is 3000 miles up and 8700 miles away (ground distance) so should appear to be 19 degrees above the horizon, then the same at sunset

So the flat earth explanation says that the sun should rise by suddenly appearing 19 degrees above the horizon, then set by suddenly disappearing 19 degrees above the horizon.

It should also appear 3 times larger at noon than it appears at sunrise and sunset

Do any flat earthers actually question their theory and do the math?
« Last Edit: September 21, 2022, 02:51:35 AM by Notthecurtains »

*

JackBlack

  • 23240
Re: Size of the sun
« Reply #4 on: September 21, 2022, 02:41:01 AM »
Why has nobody ever observed the sun changing size of the sun through the day, as it must do if its moving closer and further away from you
Why would the sun appear to change in size in the Flat Earth model if it is a great distance away?

This is similar to the arguments I have raised regarding the moon.

If the sun is close it should change in angular size significantly and we should observe different parts of it (the latter of which is hard with it being so bright, but a solar filter makes it easy).
If the sun is far away, such that the size of Earth is negligible compared to the distance, then it shouldn't change size, but everyone should see it in the same apparent location. i.e. if it appears overhead for one person, it should appear overhead for everyone.
The only other option is if the apparent change in apparent location is due to the reference, i.e. the surface of Earth, changing orientation.

Re: Size of the sun
« Reply #5 on: September 23, 2022, 10:04:04 PM »
Still no flat earther response.

According to FEs own numbers the sun should rise by suddenly appearing 19 degrees above the horizon, orbit around until noon when its 3x larger than it was at sunrise, then shrink until it sets by suddenly vanishing 19 degrees above the horizon

Sorry FEs, your fantasy is not reality

*

Timeisup

  • 4048
  • You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
Re: Size of the sun
« Reply #6 on: September 24, 2022, 02:23:51 AM »
The rules of the game here is you can only use information that you yourself have gathered that includes ignorant opinions with no foundation of merit.

Now let’s enter the real world.

The truth of the matter is if I or anyone else for that matter really want to know  about the sun, as it’s a pretty tricky thing to study from the earth using the naked, soon to be blind eye! in any meaningful way, one only has to go to those who operate and use the Parker Solar Probe and Solar Orbiter which are currently  observing the sun 24/7.

The choice is either to listen to some individual who in reality can have no real valid opinion  on our nearest star as how can they? Let’s for argument sake call them Jack, OR to use information that’s straight from the horses mouth so to speak, those professional expert astronomers who have a selection of various kinds of instrumentation specifically designed to study the sun that’s currently in orbit around said star.

Who is going to have the more credible information?  those who control and operate those solar probes or Jack who says he has a really good pair of sunglasses.

This Jack person does apparently claim to have a whole host of really cool and innovative solar experiments that allegedly prove a whole lot of stuff about the sun. I for one can’t  wait to hear about them.

I’ll let you decide!
https://blogs.nasa.gov/parkersolarprobe/



"I can accept that some aspects of FE belief are true, while others are fiction."

Jack Black

Now that is a laugh!

*

Mikey T.

  • 3545
Re: Size of the sun
« Reply #7 on: September 24, 2022, 10:09:23 AM »
The rules of the game here is you can only use information that you yourself have gathered that includes ignorant opinions with no foundation of merit.

Now let’s enter the real world.

The truth of the matter is if I or anyone else for that matter really want to know  about the sun, as it’s a pretty tricky thing to study from the earth using the naked, soon to be blind eye! in any meaningful way, one only has to go to those who operate and use the Parker Solar Probe and Solar Orbiter which are currently  observing the sun 24/7.

The choice is either to listen to some individual who in reality can have no real valid opinion  on our nearest star as how can they? Let’s for argument sake call them Jack, OR to use information that’s straight from the horses mouth so to speak, those professional expert astronomers who have a selection of various kinds of instrumentation specifically designed to study the sun that’s currently in orbit around said star.

Who is going to have the more credible information?  those who control and operate those solar probes or Jack who says he has a really good pair of sunglasses.

This Jack person does apparently claim to have a whole host of really cool and innovative solar experiments that allegedly prove a whole lot of stuff about the sun. I for one can’t  wait to hear about them.

I’ll let you decide!
https://blogs.nasa.gov/parkersolarprobe/
Why, I mean I love the Timmy/Jack show and all, but why lmao.

*

Timeisup

  • 4048
  • You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
Re: Size of the sun
« Reply #8 on: September 24, 2022, 10:42:13 AM »
The rules of the game here is you can only use information that you yourself have gathered that includes ignorant opinions with no foundation of merit.

Now let’s enter the real world.

The truth of the matter is if I or anyone else for that matter really want to know  about the sun, as it’s a pretty tricky thing to study from the earth using the naked, soon to be blind eye! in any meaningful way, one only has to go to those who operate and use the Parker Solar Probe and Solar Orbiter which are currently  observing the sun 24/7.

The choice is either to listen to some individual who in reality can have no real valid opinion  on our nearest star as how can they? Let’s for argument sake call them Jack, OR to use information that’s straight from the horses mouth so to speak, those professional expert astronomers who have a selection of various kinds of instrumentation specifically designed to study the sun that’s currently in orbit around said star.

Who is going to have the more credible information?  those who control and operate those solar probes or Jack who says he has a really good pair of sunglasses.

This Jack person does apparently claim to have a whole host of really cool and innovative solar experiments that allegedly prove a whole lot of stuff about the sun. I for one can’t  wait to hear about them.

I’ll let you decide!
https://blogs.nasa.gov/parkersolarprobe/
Why, I mean I love the Timmy/Jack show and all, but why lmao.

Well if it makes you happy that is at least something!
"I can accept that some aspects of FE belief are true, while others are fiction."

Jack Black

Now that is a laugh!

Re: Size of the sun
« Reply #9 on: October 01, 2022, 12:01:59 AM »
Why would the Sun, if it was 93 million miles from Earth, and millions of degrees on its surface, get colder and colder when closer to it within air? It wouldn't. It isn't 93 million miles away, or millions of degrees on it's surface. If it were, we'd burn to a crisp when closer to it, not freeze to death.

This shows that God created the Sun, for those ON the Earth, created for life on Earth, not above it. That's why it is colder, when closer to it.
 

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Size of the sun
« Reply #10 on: October 01, 2022, 01:33:12 AM »
Why would the Sun, if it was 93 million miles from Earth, and millions of degrees on its surface, get colder and colder when closer to it within air? It wouldn't. It isn't 93 million miles away, or millions of degrees on it's surface. If it were, we'd burn to a crisp when closer to it, not freeze to death.

Wrong again...Try reading up on science...Maybe start with the First Law of Thermodynamics...

The reason it's actually colder is because, as you go up in the atmosphere, the Earth's atmosphere feels less pressure the higher up you go. So as the gas in the atmosphere rises it feels less pressure, which makes it expand. When the gas expands it does some work. And and if it's doing work, it must be losing some energy; and if it loses energy, its temperature must drop because we define temperature as the average energy of the particles. Therefore, if the energy of the particles is lower, the temperature must be lower.

This shows that God created the Sun, for those ON the Earth, created for life on Earth, not above it. That's why it is colder, when closer to it.

So now you're saying the Sun is underneath the flat earth?

Re: Size of the sun
« Reply #11 on: October 01, 2022, 03:30:15 AM »
Why would the Sun, if it was 93 million miles from Earth, and millions of degrees on its surface, get colder and colder when closer to it within air? It wouldn't. It isn't 93 million miles away, or millions of degrees on it's surface. If it were, we'd burn to a crisp when closer to it, not freeze to death.

This shows that God created the Sun, for those ON the Earth, created for life on Earth, not above it. That's why it is colder, when closer to it.
 


So?  Where is this water layer in the sky exactly located? 

Re: Size of the sun
« Reply #12 on: October 01, 2022, 10:21:03 PM »
Wrong again...Try reading up on science...Maybe start with the First Law of Thermodynamics...

The reason it's actually colder is because, as you go up in the atmosphere, the Earth's atmosphere feels less pressure the higher up you go. So as the gas in the atmosphere rises it feels less pressure, which makes it expand. When the gas expands it does some work. And and if it's doing work, it must be losing some energy; and if it loses energy, its temperature must drop because we define temperature as the average energy of the particles. Therefore, if the energy of the particles is lower, the temperature must be lower.

It's colder because there's less and less AIR when higher above Earth, of course, but why would there be ANY air above Earth, if 'gravity' is 'pulling it all down' to Earth's surface? It should pull ALL of the air down to the surface, not just SOME of it, that makes no sense at all either.

Not only that, but if 'gravity' WAS pulling down the air, from above, we'd have just as much air on top of Mt. Everest as we do on the ground below, so again, it makes no sense at all.

All the air is above Earth's surface, yet far less air is present at higher points ON the surface, than at sea level, right?

Air is based on levels of pressure, or gradients, from SEA level, having the most air, and less air, when at higher ELEVATIONS, or altitudes, within air.

Your made up force has to 'pull down' air, to Earth's surface, at equal levels, because you claim it HOLDS us down to Earth, PULLS US from above Earth, to ANY point on the surface, equally.

We only can jump higher, throw a ball further, because there is LESS AIR at higher elevations, but if 'gravity' existed, it would 'pull down air' to the ground, no matter what elevation on the ground, at the SAME level, not lesser at higher elevation.

The only change, is less air at higher elevations, which allows us to jump higher, throw a ball further up in air, because of less resistance FROM AIR.

When they made up 'gravity', it was NEVER going to hold up to scrutiny, there's countless contradictions in it, like this one here, which 'pulls down' more air to sea level, than anywhere above sea level, which is complete nonsense, as it would apply equal force to the ENTIRE surface, no matter WHAT elevation it is. That alone proves it doesn't exist, among many others beyond.

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Size of the sun
« Reply #13 on: October 01, 2022, 11:41:39 PM »
Wrong again...Try reading up on science...Maybe start with the First Law of Thermodynamics...

The reason it's actually colder is because, as you go up in the atmosphere, the Earth's atmosphere feels less pressure the higher up you go. So as the gas in the atmosphere rises it feels less pressure, which makes it expand. When the gas expands it does some work. And and if it's doing work, it must be losing some energy; and if it loses energy, its temperature must drop because we define temperature as the average energy of the particles. Therefore, if the energy of the particles is lower, the temperature must be lower.

It's colder because there's less and less AIR when higher above Earth, of course, but why would there be ANY air above Earth, if 'gravity' is 'pulling it all down' to Earth's surface? It should pull ALL of the air down to the surface, not just SOME of it, that makes no sense at all either.

Why?

Not only that, but if 'gravity' WAS pulling down the air, from above, we'd have just as much air on top of Mt. Everest as we do on the ground below, so again, it makes no sense at all.

Why?

When they made up 'gravity', it was NEVER going to hold up to scrutiny...

That's funny.

...there's countless contradictions in it, like this one here, which 'pulls down' more air to sea level, than anywhere above sea level, which is complete nonsense, as it would apply equal force to the ENTIRE surface, no matter WHAT elevation it is. That alone proves it doesn't exist, among many others beyond.

Apparently, you don't know much about that which you are arguing against. You're getting warmer though. Do a little research around levels of pressure, or gradients.

*

Mikey T.

  • 3545
Re: Size of the sun
« Reply #14 on: October 02, 2022, 02:39:25 AM »
Wrong again...Try reading up on science...Maybe start with the First Law of Thermodynamics...

The reason it's actually colder is because, as you go up in the atmosphere, the Earth's atmosphere feels less pressure the higher up you go. So as the gas in the atmosphere rises it feels less pressure, which makes it expand. When the gas expands it does some work. And and if it's doing work, it must be losing some energy; and if it loses energy, its temperature must drop because we define temperature as the average energy of the particles. Therefore, if the energy of the particles is lower, the temperature must be lower.

It's colder because there's less and less AIR when higher above Earth, of course, but why would there be ANY air above Earth, if 'gravity' is 'pulling it all down' to Earth's surface? It should pull ALL of the air down to the surface, not just SOME of it, that makes no sense at all either.

Not only that, but if 'gravity' WAS pulling down the air, from above, we'd have just as much air on top of Mt. Everest as we do on the ground below, so again, it makes no sense at all.

All the air is above Earth's surface, yet far less air is present at higher points ON the surface, than at sea level, right?

Air is based on levels of pressure, or gradients, from SEA level, having the most air, and less air, when at higher ELEVATIONS, or altitudes, within air.

Your made up force has to 'pull down' air, to Earth's surface, at equal levels, because you claim it HOLDS us down to Earth, PULLS US from above Earth, to ANY point on the surface, equally.

We only can jump higher, throw a ball further, because there is LESS AIR at higher elevations, but if 'gravity' existed, it would 'pull down air' to the ground, no matter what elevation on the ground, at the SAME level, not lesser at higher elevation.

The only change, is less air at higher elevations, which allows us to jump higher, throw a ball further up in air, because of less resistance FROM AIR.

When they made up 'gravity', it was NEVER going to hold up to scrutiny, there's countless contradictions in it, like this one here, which 'pulls down' more air to sea level, than anywhere above sea level, which is complete nonsense, as it would apply equal force to the ENTIRE surface, no matter WHAT elevation it is. That alone proves it doesn't exist, among many others beyond.
Why, don't just claim foolish things, explain why. 
I claim you are an insane person that only gets internet time on the weekends at the "home".  I'm going to use your tactics and not explain why, but anyone disagreeing with me is spouting nonsense.  See how this works, nut job?

*

JackBlack

  • 23240
Re: Size of the sun
« Reply #15 on: October 02, 2022, 06:26:57 PM »
Why would the Sun, if it was 93 million miles from Earth, and millions of degrees on its surface, get colder and colder when closer to it within air? It wouldn't. It isn't 93 million miles away, or millions of degrees on it's surface. If it were, we'd burn to a crisp when closer to it, not freeze to death.
Do you mean why does it get colder when you get higher up?

If so, the distance is basically irrelevant.
If it is 93 million archaic units away, why should a few thousand archaic units (a different archaic unit) make any significant difference at all?
It wouldn't.

So clearly something else is going to be playing a role.
And the simpler answer for that is to pay attention to the topography of Earth.

You have the ground or ocean, which absorbs that light and warms up.
When you are close to that, you are nice and warm.
But as you ascend a mountain, you are no longer so nice and close and warm.

This shows that God created the Sun, for those ON the Earth, created for life on Earth, not above it. That's why it is colder, when closer to it.
Pure garbage.
There is no logical connection there at all.

It's colder because there's less and less AIR when higher above Earth, of course, but why would there be ANY air above Earth, if 'gravity' is 'pulling it all down' to Earth's surface? It should pull ALL of the air down to the surface, not just SOME of it, that makes no sense at all either.
It only appears to not make sense because you are so desperate to pretend it doesn't.

We know gravity (or some pathetic substitute) is playing a role due to the pressure gradient.
This pressure gradient shows there must be something acting trying to force the air down. If there wasn't, then the pressure gradient would push the air up to remove the gradient.

And this pressure gradient is just a representation of the balance between gravity pulling the air down, and the pressurised air below pushing it up.

So the air doesn't just sit on the surface, because the pressurised air is pushing it up.

Not only that, but if 'gravity' WAS pulling down the air, from above, we'd have just as much air on top of Mt. Everest as we do on the ground below, so again, it makes no sense at all.
Why?
Why should the air stack up above Everest, rather than flow down the side?

The key thing to consider here is the pressure of the air just above Mt Everest, and a location to the side, at the same altitude.
If your fantasy was true and Mt Everest had the same amount of air above as a spot near sea level to the side, then that would make the air pressure at the top of Mt Everest much higher than the locations directly beside it at the same altitude.
This will cause the air to push sideways to remove that pressure gradient as there is nothing to act against that sideways gradient.
That will mean the air above Mt Everest will fall until the pressure equalises.

Your made up force has to 'pull down' air, to Earth's surface, at equal levels, because you claim it HOLDS us down to Earth, PULLS US from above Earth, to ANY point on the surface, equally.
No, that is not our claim.
That is your strawman. Similar to other pathetic strawmen you make.

When they made up 'gravity', it was NEVER going to hold up to scrutiny
Except it does. You are yet to point out a single flaw.
Instead all you have been able to do is repeatedly lie about it to pretend there are problems.

If you wish to claim there is a problem, trying making a coherent argument which doesn't require you to ignore so much.

That means don't just baselessly assert that Mt Everest needs to have the same amount of air above it as a point on the ocean. Instead actually explain why. And that means starting from first principles about why there is air pressure at all.

Re: Size of the sun
« Reply #16 on: October 03, 2022, 02:04:19 AM »
Why would the Sun, if it was 93 million miles from Earth, and millions of degrees on its surface, get colder and colder when closer to it within air? It wouldn't. It isn't 93 million miles away, or millions of degrees on it's surface. If it were, we'd burn to a crisp when closer to it, not freeze to death.

This shows that God created the Sun, for those ON the Earth, created for life on Earth, not above it. That's why it is colder, when closer to it.
 

Do you actually have an answer to the flaw I've pointed out with the flat earth sun or are you just going to deflect and change the topic to distract from your lack of response?

*

Timeisup

  • 4048
  • You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
Re: Size of the sun
« Reply #17 on: October 05, 2022, 08:34:45 AM »
Wrong again...Try reading up on science...Maybe start with the First Law of Thermodynamics...

The reason it's actually colder is because, as you go up in the atmosphere, the Earth's atmosphere feels less pressure the higher up you go. So as the gas in the atmosphere rises it feels less pressure, which makes it expand. When the gas expands it does some work. And and if it's doing work, it must be losing some energy; and if it loses energy, its temperature must drop because we define temperature as the average energy of the particles. Therefore, if the energy of the particles is lower, the temperature must be lower.

It's colder because there's less and less AIR when higher above Earth, of course, but why would there be ANY air above Earth, if 'gravity' is 'pulling it all down' to Earth's surface? It should pull ALL of the air down to the surface, not just SOME of it, that makes no sense at all either.

Not only that, but if 'gravity' WAS pulling down the air, from above, we'd have just as much air on top of Mt. Everest as we do on the ground below, so again, it makes no sense at all.

All the air is above Earth's surface, yet far less air is present at higher points ON the surface, than at sea level, right?

Air is based on levels of pressure, or gradients, from SEA level, having the most air, and less air, when at higher ELEVATIONS, or altitudes, within air.

Your made up force has to 'pull down' air, to Earth's surface, at equal levels, because you claim it HOLDS us down to Earth, PULLS US from above Earth, to ANY point on the surface, equally.

We only can jump higher, throw a ball further, because there is LESS AIR at higher elevations, but if 'gravity' existed, it would 'pull down air' to the ground, no matter what elevation on the ground, at the SAME level, not lesser at higher elevation.

The only change, is less air at higher elevations, which allows us to jump higher, throw a ball further up in air, because of less resistance FROM AIR.

When they made up 'gravity', it was NEVER going to hold up to scrutiny, there's countless contradictions in it, like this one here, which 'pulls down' more air to sea level, than anywhere above sea level, which is complete nonsense, as it would apply equal force to the ENTIRE surface, no matter WHAT elevation it is. That alone proves it doesn't exist, among many others beyond.

You really are a buffoon. There are probes in orbit around the sun sending back data 24/7 while at the same time earth based solar telescopes record even more data and publish freely available solar weather reports. All this while you chose to wallow in sublime ignorance.

https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/specialist-forecasts/space-weather
"I can accept that some aspects of FE belief are true, while others are fiction."

Jack Black

Now that is a laugh!

*

Timeisup

  • 4048
  • You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
Re: Size of the sun
« Reply #18 on: October 19, 2022, 12:17:40 AM »
"I can accept that some aspects of FE belief are true, while others are fiction."

Jack Black

Now that is a laugh!