« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14   Go Down

Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?

  • 390 Replies
  • 35260 Views
*

JackBlack

  • 21780
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #330 on: February 17, 2024, 02:05:13 AM »
Quote from: turbonium2 on February 17, 2024, 12:29:37 AM
Why would you ever believe a flat surface cannot have horizons
Because that is what the math and evidence shows.
Every flat surface I have looked at only has "horizons" on the edge.
This "horizon" remains in place as long as I remain on that side of the flat surface.

Conversely, every round object I have looked at has a horizon which varies in location as I move around.

Earth matches round surfaces, not flat surfaces.

The real question is why do you think flat surfaces do produce a horizon?

And the answer is truly simple. You are desperate to pretend Earth is flat, and Earth has horizons, so you are desperate for a flat surface to have a horizon.

You can't provide an example of any other flat surface having a horizon other than the edge.
You cannot provide an explanation for why or how a flat surface magically produces a horizon.
You cannot provide an answer to why perspective should magically stop.

Instead you desperately assert that flat surfaces will magically produce a horizon, and get so incredibly dishonest that you need to pretend I have never seen a flat surface.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 16, 2024, 09:20:07 PM
you don’t believe that the surface is flat, so how could you know what they look like or don’t look like, if never seeing one?
Earth is not the only surface available to us.
Your dishonesty knows no bounds.
With this line of BS, you demonstrate just how dishonest, desperate and pathetic your position is.

How about you stop with all this dishoneset BS, and explain the magic that causes a flat surface to have a horizon.
Explain the magic that causes perspective to stop.

See if you can answer this question:
I am carefully looking towards the horizon on your hypothetical magic planet, and a carefully measure the angle to infinite precision.
I now want to know what the angle to a piece of land more distant along this magical flat surface is.
Will this angle being higher, lower or the same? And more importantly, WHY?

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 16, 2024, 09:20:07 PM
Why would the surface rise up more and more, if the surface curved down more and more at the same time?  Does that make sense to you?
Yes, this does make sense to me and has been explained to you repeatedly.
But because you are so dishonest and so desperate to pretend Earth is flat, you continually ignore this.
You cannot show a fault with the explanation and even admit that a round surface would do this.

Again, see this image you have been provided with several times:


As we can clearly see from the angle of the purple lines, if you starting looking straight down, and follow the ground, it initially goes to a higher angle (as you would say it "appears to rise", before reaching a point where it goes back down.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 16, 2024, 09:20:07 PM
You think that perspective creates opposite illusions of some sort?
No. That is what YOU believe.

I believe perspective, for an object below you, will make it appear to rise forever.
YOU claim this is not the case, and that after some magical distance it will magically stop and magically reverse, causing objects below you to appear to sink into the ground.
You cannot explain why it perspective should magically cause this magically opposite effect. Instead you just repeatedly assert it does so you can pretend Earth is flat.

Conversely, I stick to perspective making it appear higher, until the drop due to curvature becomes so significant perspective cannot counter it.

Notice the key distinction?
You believe perspective magically stops/switches. I accept reality of 2 effects at play, one making it go up which is most significant at short distances, and one making it go down which is most significant at large distances.

Again, the RE can explain it, the FE cant.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 16, 2024, 09:20:07 PM
You think the surface seems to rise up more and more on a curving down more and more surface?  What would you think would happen on a flat surface then?
The distinction is quite simple:
On a flat surface it continues FOREVER! This means the ground will ALWAYS appear to rise. It doesn't matter how far away you consider, a point a bit further away will still "appear higher".
For a round surface, eventually curvature will win and it will stop appearing to rise.

That is the distinction and why the FE cannot explain reality.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 16, 2024, 09:20:07 PM
It would rise up even more and more than this?
Why wouldn't it?
The rules of perspective is quite simple, the further away the higher it appears.
Why should it magically stop?

We also know this as it based upon simple geometry.
Again, a=atan(h/d).

You can either plot this out, or look at how it changes.
As d increases, h/d is always getting smaller, so the angle of dip is always getting smaller.
You can NEVER have it stop or reverse.

But for a round surface:
a=atan(h/d+d/2r) (approximately)
Now, while the h/d term gets smaller, the d/2r term gets larger.
The h/d term starts out massive for tiny values of d, while the d/2r term starts out as basically nothing.
So that means overall, the thing inside the brackets gets smaller so the angle of dip gets smaller, i.e. the ground appears to rise.
But eventually, with h/d getting smaller, and d/2r getting bigger, the d/2r term becomes large than the h/d and dominates the equation, and now the overall part in the brackets get large, and the angle of dip increases.

Again, the RE can explain, your delusional BS can't.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 16, 2024, 09:20:07 PM
It’s blocking out everything we see
In reality, it blocks out things which you would need to look through it to see.
For a RE, that is fine.
For a FE, every object above the surface and the surface itself is not blocked from view as the light to that does not need to pass through the surface.

What you are doing is basically this:
"Reality shows Earth is round, but I want Earth to be flat, so I will lie and say that was observed in reality on a round Earth which proves Earth is round will magically happen on a flat Earth, so this clear proof that Earth is round magically doesn't prove Earth is round."

That is the level of your dishonesty.

So how about you tell us, maybe draw a diagram to show, how does the horizon or the land before it block the view to more distant land?

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 16, 2024, 09:20:07 PM
It slows the rising up later on, you just know that it would slow way down, right?
Slow down is not stop.

And yes, I know it would slow down.
The math is easy to calculate, and I have shown it before:

For a FE, with an observer height of 2 m, the ground at 1 km is 0.115 degrees below level.
At 2 km it is 0.057.
At 3 km it is 0.038.
At 4 km it is 0.029.
At 5 km it is 0.023.
At 6 km it is 0.019.
At 7 km it is 0.016.
At 8 km it is 0.014.
At 9 km it is 0.013.
At 10 km it is 0.011.

Yes, the apparent rise is slowing down, but it is continuing to rise.
It never stops.
As the rise slows down, so does the rate at which it slows down.

Compare this to the RE, something which can explain reality.
For a RE, with an observer height of 2 m, the ground at 1 km is 0.119 degrees below level.
At 2 km it is 0.066.
At 3 km it is 0.052.
At 4 km it is 0.047.
At 5 km it is 0.045.
At 6 km it is 0.046.
At 7 km it is 0.048.
At 8 km it is 0.050.
At 9 km it is 0.053.
At 10 km it is 0.056.

Notice a key difference?
It reaches a minimum angle of dip of 0.045 degrees at 5 km.
Both closer and further away will appear lower.

Again, the RE can explain what is observed in reality. Your FE fantasy can't.
Logged
*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30061
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #331 on: February 17, 2024, 06:27:49 AM »
Quote from: JackBlack on February 17, 2024, 02:05:13 AM
Again, see this image you have been provided with several times:


As we can clearly see from the angle of the purple lines, if you starting looking straight down, and follow the ground, it initially goes to a higher angle (as you would say it "appears to rise", before reaching a point where it goes back down.
Your lines are not looking level at any time.
You are showing a view that offers only an angled descent of view on any of those lines.

Try offering up those lines from a level view. A pinpoint telescopic view from a level start and see where the lines take you.

Let's see you do that.
Logged
?

Themightykabool

  • 10491
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #332 on: February 17, 2024, 06:52:34 AM »
The lines indicate from a height what wouls be seen in a field of view.
A field ofnview that wiuld see infinite lines of sight.

The line angle increases slowly from looking at your feet and eventually seeing rhe hoirzon.
The tangent line where you see past the ground.




Amazing!
Logged
?

DataOverFlow2022

  • 4193
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #333 on: February 17, 2024, 07:20:11 AM »
Quote from: turbonium2 on February 17, 2024, 12:29:37 AM
Why would you ever believe a flat surface cannot have horizons,

Ok.  Let’s see if a flat surface can have a “horizon” to block an object physically from view.

Let’s take this object and place a paper ruler on it. We will call it a stud.



Lets use a piece of sheet metal laid flat and see if it can block our object from view.



Looking out over the “horizon” of the sheet metal laying flat.



Let’s zoom the above picture by cropping.
Looks like the whole length of the stud is visible?




Hmm.  Now let’s put curvature in the piece of sheet metal.  Like this.  Did have to weigh down the ends.



Looking out over the “horizon” of the curved metal sheet.



Let’s zoom the above picture by cropping.
Well.  The bottom is physically blocked from view.

Curved metal sheet to produce horizon.



vs the flat sheet that couldn’t produce a “horizon” to physically block the stud from view.





« Last Edit: February 17, 2024, 03:20:59 PM by DataOverFlow2022 »
Logged
*

JackBlack

  • 21780
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #334 on: February 17, 2024, 01:04:26 PM »
Quote from: sceptimatic on February 17, 2024, 06:27:49 AM
Your lines are not looking level at any time.
And that applies for both the RE and the FE.

It would take an infinite distance for the ground to be level with your eyes.

It is also a very much not to scale diagram.

Quote from: sceptimatic on February 17, 2024, 06:27:49 AM
Try offering up those lines from a level view. A pinpoint telescopic view from a level start and see where the lines take you.
Again, how big is the FOV?

Why don't you provide a picture of Earth, preferably 2 from the same location, one with a large FOV and one with a "pinpoint telescopic view", and then tell us how large this FOV is?

Because we have been over this countless times.

For an observer 2 m above a level surface, a flat fantasy has the ground 5 km away (the distance to the horizon) at 0.023 degrees below level.
A RE, with an actual horizon which doesn't need to invoke pure magic, has it at roughly 0.045 degrees below level.

If your "pinpoint telescopic view" has a FOV of 0.1 degree, you will still see the horizon on a RE.
If your alignment is off by a mere 0.045 degrees downwards, you will still the horizon on a RE.
If it is a perfectly levelled pinpoint view with a FOV less than 0.04 degrees, you wont see the ground on a FE.

Why don't you stop with all this dishonest BS, and instead try to explain what magic causes the horizon on a FE?
Logged
?

turbonium2

  • 1636
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #335 on: February 19, 2024, 12:06:46 AM »
Quote
The rules of perspective is quite simple, the further away the higher it appears.
Why should it magically stop?

We also know this as it based upon simple geometry.
Again, a=atan(h/d).

You can either plot this out, or look at how it changes.
As d increases, h/d is always getting smaller, so the angle of dip is always getting smaller.
You can NEVER have it stop or reverse.

Yet it only rises higher and higher in the distance,  until the horizon is seen.

There is no ‘magic’ to it, we do see the surface appear to rise more and more.

At that rate, the surface would keep rising higher and higher, despite it not being geometrically true, until it blocks out everything past a blanket of surface at some distance away, which might be 20 or 30 miles out from us, blocking out everything past 20 or 30 miles out.

That’s why your trying to say the surface suddenly stops rising up higher and higher, and starts rising up less and less from that point on!

Your argument doesn’t make any sense, it conflicts with your argument in fact

There is no reason that a flat surface would rise up higher and higher out the distance, and NOT continue to rise higher and higher, the further is goes out, being you think there wouldn’t be a horizon firm on it, so it would keep rising higher and higher after its 3 miles out, based on the pattern of more and more of it appearing to rise ever higher up over the first 3 miles out!

What would be the rules of perspective making flat surfaces rise more and more in the distance all the way out to a distance of 3 miles, would suddenly make it rise less and lass, beyond a 3 mile distance on a flat surface?

It doesn’t make any sense it would suddenly change after 3,miles out, and rise less and less afterwards
Logged
?

turbonium2

  • 1636
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #336 on: February 19, 2024, 01:01:49 AM »
Quote from: turbonium2 on February 19, 2024, 12:06:46 AM
Quote
The rules of perspective is quite simple, the further away the higher it appears.
Why should it magically stop?

We also know this as it based upon simple geometry.
Again, a=atan(h/d).

You can either plot this out, or look at how it changes.
As d increases, h/d is always getting smaller, so the angle of dip is always getting smaller.
You can NEVER have it stop or reverse.

Yet it only rises higher and higher in the distance,  until the horizon is seen.

There is no ‘magic’ to it, we do see the surface appear to rise more and more.

At that rate, you’d have the surface always rising higher and higher, despite it not being geometrically true, until it blocks out everything past a blanket of surface at some distance away, which might be 20 or 30 miles out from us, blocking out everything past 20 or 30 miles out.

That’s why your trying to say the surface suddenly stops rising up higher and higher, and starts rising up less and less from that point on!

Your argument doesn’t make any sense, it conflicts with your argument in fact

There is no reason that a flat surface would rise up higher and higher out the distance, and NOT continue to rise higher and higher, the further is goes out, being you think there wouldn’t be a horizon firm on it, so it would keep rising higher and higher after its 3 miles out, based on the pattern of more and more of it appearing to rise ever higher up over the first 3 miles out!

What would be the rules of perspective making flat surfaces rise more and more in the distance all the way out to a distance of 3 miles, would suddenly make it rise less and lass, beyond a 3 mile distance on a flat surface?

It doesn’t make any sense it would suddenly change after 3,miles out, and rise less and less afterwards

You try changing the reality, as two examples show.:

The first is saying the surface, which is always seen flat over a distance, will rise higher and higher over a more and more downward curving surface, which is absurd. You cannot rise higher on a lower curved surface, that is utter nonsense.

A greater downward curving surface would lessen the effects of perspective, which acts on large flat surfaces seen outward, that’s why we see them rise upward as a fat slope or angle upward, a fkat surface is entirely seen over 3 miles of it, rising up as flat, no curves going downward at all.

Why would the entire surface rise up and seen flat, if it’s supposed to curve over it?

And if you don’t believe this is a flat surface rising, how much flatter would it look if it WAS flat?  You can’t see a flatter surface than we see it as, so a flat surface would not look any different than what we see today?
Logged
*

JackBlack

  • 21780
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #337 on: February 19, 2024, 02:43:03 AM »
Quote from: turbonium2 on February 19, 2024, 12:06:46 AM
Yet it only rises higher and higher in the distance,  until the horizon is seen.
No, not until the horizon is seen, FOREVER!
Because you have no way to make a horizon.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 19, 2024, 12:06:46 AM
There is no ‘magic’ to it, we do see the surface appear to rise more and more.
There quite clearly is magic, as you need magic to produce the horizon and block the view to more distant objects.

Again, from the other thread:
Again, simple geometry. Try addressing it:
Again, this is the RE:


Initially the angle of elevation to the ground will increase (i.e. the angle gets higher) until you reach a line which goes tangent to Earth, and then it drops back down.
Your line of sight to the object beyond the horizon needs to pass through Earth, which means Earth blocks the view.

No magic needed.

Conversely, this is for a FE:

There is NOTHING to produce the horizon.
There is no mechanism for it. There is no reason for it.
Instead, the ground beyond is still at a HIGHER angle, meaning it should continue to "appear to rise" rather than produce a horizon.
The more distant object still has a clear path from it to your eyes, with nothing blocking the view.

So instead, you need this:

The magical horizon magically forms when the magic kicks in to magically start hiding things and magically making them appear magically lower (the latter not shown in this).
This magic then magically blocks the view to objects beyond the magical horizon to magically make them appear to sink, and this magically includes magically blocking the view to the land beyond magical horizon causing the magical horizon to form.

So FE needs magic. RE needs basic geometry.

Why should anyone accept your delusional claims that a flat surface should produce a horizon?
Especially when a round surface explains it so well, with you needing to contradict yourself and assert pure BS to pretend it doesn't; while also contradicting yourself to pretend a flat surface should?


Why should a flat surface produce a horizon?
What MAGIC is causing this?
What MAGIC causes perspective to stop, so a more distant point on the ground (or object above it) magically doesn't appear at a greater angle of elevation as basic geometry and perspective demand?
What MAGIC causes the bottom of objects to be magically hidden when there is NOTHING to block the view? And what MAGIC causes them to appear to sink?

Until you can explain this magic, the horizon and the behaviour of objects near it, is clear proof that Earth is round.

See the magic shown in red? That is what your BS needs.
The RE doesn't need magic, your dishonest, delusional BS does.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 19, 2024, 12:06:46 AM
At that rate, the surface would keep rising higher and higher, despite it not being geometrically true, until it blocks out everything past a blanket of surface at some distance away, which might be 20 or 30 miles out from us, blocking out everything past 20 or 30 miles out.
No, it wouldn't
It would continue to follow basic geometry, rising at an ever decreasing rate.
This will NEVER stop.
This will NEVER block the view to more distant objects.
And it will NEVER go above 0 degrees.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 19, 2024, 12:06:46 AM
That’s why your trying to say the surface suddenly stops rising up higher and higher, and starts rising up less and less from that point on!
No, I say that because that is what all the evidence shows.
The fact we have a horizon shows there are 2 competing effects.
One effect makes the ground go to a higher angle of elevation.
The other makes it go to a lower angle of elevation.
And the dominant effect changes.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 19, 2024, 12:06:46 AM
There is no reason that a flat surface would rise up higher and higher out the distance, and NOT continue to rise higher and higher, the further is goes out
That is my argument, not a conflict with it.
And that is the truth. Simple facts based upon simple geometry.
Facts which demonstrate you are spouting pure BS.
On a flat surface, it continues rising and never stops.
There is no reason for it to stop.
There is no reason for it to magically block the view.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 19, 2024, 12:06:46 AM
What would be the rules of perspective making flat surfaces rise more and more in the distance all the way out to a distance of 3 miles, would suddenly make it rise less and lass, beyond a 3 mile distance on a flat surface?
There are none, which is why your fantasy is wrong.

Again, for a FE, the angle is atan(h/d).
This continues to rise forever.
For a RE, the angle is atan(h/d+d/2r) (approximately).
This initially rises, but stops and goes back down.

It isn't perspective magically creating a horizon and magically making it go back down.
It is the curvature of Earth that makes it go down.

So no, there is no contradiction in my argument.

Instead, all you are doing is reiterating the fact that my argument proves that the horizon proves that Earth is not flat.

The contradiction is in yours.
Where you claim perspective makes it appear higher, but then claim it magically stops and produces a horizon.

It doesn’t make any sense it would suddenly change after 3,miles out, and rise less and less afterwards
Yet that is exactly what you are claiming. That perspective magically stops for no reason.
Again, for the FE, the formula is atan(h/d).
This does not change at 3 miles out. It still results in a smaller angle below 0, so it is still appearing higher.

But again, for the RE it makes perfect sense.
Again, for the RE the formula is (approximately) atan(h/d+d/2r).
At small distances, h/d is large, approaching infinity as d approaches 0; while d/2r is tiny, approaching 0 as d approaches 0.

But at large distances, h/d is small, approaching 0 as d approaches infinity; while d/2r is large, approaching infinity as d approaches infinity.

We can even directly compare their sizes, and find the value of d such that the 2 are equal.
i.e. when does h/d=d/2r?

Before this h/d is dominant, After this d/2r is dominant.
So to solve:
h/d=d/2r
2*r*h = d^2.
d=sqrt(2*r*h).
Now, we put in r=6371 km and h=2 m.
This gives us d=sqrt(25.484 km^2) = 5.05 km
That is 3.14 miles.
So the RE directly provides a reason for why it changes at roughly 3 miles for an observer height of 2 m.

And if you want it more technically, you need to find the derivative w.r.t. d of h/d+d/2r;
which is 1/2r - h/d^2
Which tells you how that inner part changes.
Then find when that hits 0:
1/2r - h/d^2 = 0
d^2-2*r*h=0
d^2=2*r*h,
just like before, and then see which side is positive and which side is negative.

But the FE has no reason at all. You just contradict yourself.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2024, 02:51:34 AM by JackBlack »
Logged
*

JackBlack

  • 21780
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #338 on: February 19, 2024, 02:44:08 AM »
Quote from: turbonium2 on February 19, 2024, 01:01:49 AM
You try changing the reality, as two examples show.:
No, that would be you.
Were you dishonestly claim the surface is always seen as flat, in a thread clearly demonstrating that it is NOT seen as flat.
If it was seen as flat, then like all other flat objects, it would continue to rise forever, never stopping.

Likewise, you are trying to change reality, when you pretend that perspective, which makes things below you appear higher (i.e. at a greater angle of elevation) the further away they are, will magically stop to produce a horizon.
Why do you say this? Not because you can justify it in any way, but to pretend Earth is flat, because this observation clearly demonstrates it isn't.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 19, 2024, 12:06:46 AM
You cannot rise higher on a lower curved surface, that is utter nonsense.
No more absurd than rising higher on a flat surface.
Again, in both cases the surface is not physically rising higher. Instead, it is seen at a higher angle.

And as simple geometry and plenty of observations from reality show (and even you admitted), both a flat surface and a curved surface will at least initially go to a higher angle of elevation.
The distinction is that a flat surface continues to forever, while a curved surface eventually stops.

Again, if your dishonest BS was true, any time you look at a ball you would see nothing more than a single point.
So a simple observation of looking at a ball shows that you are lying, that you are trying to change reality to pretend your delusional fantasy is true.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 19, 2024, 12:06:46 AM
Why would the entire surface rise up and seen flat, if it’s supposed to curve over it?
It isn't seen rising up as flat.
A PORTION of the surface is seen rising up before it reaches the horizon and is obstructed from view by the curve.
This shows it is NOT flat.

If it was flat, the entire surface would be seen rising up, without a horizon until the edge.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 19, 2024, 12:06:46 AM
And if you don’t believe this is a flat surface rising, how much flatter would it look if it WAS flat?
Much flatter, with the horizon infinitely far away.
The distance to the horizon is quite simple to calculate on a RE, as is the angle of dip of the horizon.
The angle of dip is given by acos(r/(r+h)).
The distance, along the surface, is given by r*acos(r/(r+h)); which is approximately equal to sqrt(2*r*h).

If it was flatter, r would be bigger, with a flat surface having r as infinity.
As r approaches infinity, r/r+h approaches 1, so the angle of dip approaches 0 degrees, and the distance to the horizon approaches infinity.

So the distance to the horizon, and the angle of dip, from a given elevation, is a simple way to determine the curve.
If Earth was flatter, the horizon would be further away and closer to 0 degrees.
If Earth was flat, the horizon would be infinitely far away, i.e. there would be no horizon.
If Earth had a smaller radius, the horizon would be closer to the observer, and further from 0 degrees.

Again, this is basic geometry.


If it was curved, just how much less flat would it appear?
Try being specific about exactly what would look different.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 19, 2024, 12:06:46 AM
You can’t see a flatter surface than we see it as, so a flat surface would not look any different than what we see today?
Sure we can, by seeing a surface without a horizon, except the edge.
Matching the countless observations of flat surfaces like tables.

Again, this is you trying to change reality.

We see Earth as round, as clearly demonstrated by the horizon.
You don't like that, so you lie and claim we see it as flat, yet you cannot explain how, and need to continually flee from the horizon which shows it as round.
Logged
?

turbonium2

  • 1636
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #339 on: February 23, 2024, 09:53:44 PM »
The surface appears to rise up more and more, the very opposite of a more and more curved downward surface, that’s amazing, it’s a magical surface, indeed!

It would stop rising up, or at least not rise up more and more, if there were a curved surface, going down more and more at the same time
Logged
*

JackBlack

  • 21780
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #340 on: February 23, 2024, 09:59:51 PM »
Quote from: turbonium2 on February 23, 2024, 09:53:44 PM
The surface appears to rise up more and more
Only until a point.
i.e. THE VERY THING YOU WOULD EXPECT FOR A ROUND SURFACE.

Something that has been shown to be true countless times.

Again, for a flat surface it should continue forever.

So again, we have a round surface which matches reality, or a flat surface which does not.

Again, what is expected for a RE:

We see Earth appear to rise until a point (the horizon) after which it would appear to go down if you could see through Earth, but instead Earth blocks the view, including to both the ground and more distant objects.

Again, what is expected for a FE:

We would see Earth continue to rise forever, without end, with Earth incapable of blocking the view and forming a horizon.

What you need for your delusional BS to work:

Where you have pure magic, magically causing a magical horizon and magically blocking the view to distant objects even though there is no obstruction at all.

Again, the round Earth matches reality, your flat fantasy doesn't.

If you want to change this, you need to stop with the pathetic BS and explain what magic causes perspective to stop; and what magic causes Earth to magically block the view to distant objects which are above it.
Logged
*

Smoke Machine

  • 3165
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #341 on: February 23, 2024, 10:05:31 PM »
Quote from: turbonium2 on February 23, 2024, 09:53:44 PM
The surface appears to rise up more and more, the very opposite of a more and more curved downward surface, that’s amazing, it’s a magical surface, indeed!

It would stop rising up, or at least not rise up more and more, if there were a curved surface, going down more and more at the same time

Will you step outside of your mother's basement and do some sight seeing??????

Nothing you say aligns with reality. Please get outside and immerse yourself in reality and quit this stupid shit of yours.

Climb some mountains near you and look at the horizon, for fuck sake. The horizon never ever slopes up like it does in your dopey imagination.
Logged
?

turbonium2

  • 1636
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #342 on: February 23, 2024, 11:59:42 PM »
Horizons show the real surface is flat.

A sphere always curves over its surface, never is flat, nor looks flat, only less of a curve shown on it at best.

You’ve got no curving at all, and can’t say where the curve first appears on Earth, as it’s never been seen at all!

Horizons would not keep on rising up as we rise up, if it were a ball Earth. 

When on a ball, no matter how large it is, you are always on top of it, from your position on it.

When going above a ball, it curves downward, with more distance outward from your position on or above it.

The horizon of a sphere wouldn’t be seen out the window of a plane at 30000 feet altitude.

A sphere has lesser and lesser visible surface when higher above it. The horizons go downward when higher above a sphere. They don’t rise upward as a ball curves more and more downward over more distance over it, and higher up above it, only more so.

Horizons have never been seen on a massive sphere, we only know what they look like on a massive flat surface.

We can draw them, and make simulations of them, with perspective included, as it appears to us on Earth.

On a flat surface, we have straight lines that appear to rise upward in the distance, on two sides of it, which appear to be converging as they rise upward in the distance.

But on a sphere, there are no straight lines or a flat surface, so how is distance outward shown in a drawing or simulated?

What proves a horizon doesn’t have a curve, proves it is a flat surface up to and beyond a horizon, is so easy, so obvious to do, we could settle this whole terrible mess, is why your side tries to ignore it all the time, and won’t address it at all.


Do you realize that a horizon isn’t seen from only one viewpoint, outward to it?

There are many other viewpoints of horizons, and they are most important to this issue, because you try and try, to make this issue what is only seen from that one and only viewpoint, that’s just bs, of course.

Horizons aren’t some mysterious line out in the distance, and things vanish beyond it, and that’s it!!

When we see the same horizon from other viewpoints, at every other angle, at that same horizon, the mystery is solved, there’s no more excuses, no curve claims told anymore….

Seeing the horizon from these viewpoints, proves it is not a ball Earth, when there is no curve seen anywhere at all.
Logged
*

JackBlack

  • 21780
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #343 on: February 24, 2024, 01:06:56 AM »
Quote from: turbonium2 on February 23, 2024, 11:59:42 PM
Horizons show the real surface is flat.
No. They show the exact opposite.
The fact we have a horizon shows it is curved.
If it was flat, there would be no horizon.

This is what you keep on ignoring.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 23, 2024, 11:59:42 PM
A sphere always curves over its surface, never is flat, nor looks flat, only less of a curve shown on it at best.
And you cannot demonstrate how the surface appears flat rather than round.

Again, the way to tell is the horizon.
A round surface has a horizon. The only horizon for a flat surface is the edge.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 23, 2024, 11:59:42 PM
You’ve got no curving at all, and can’t say where the curve first appears on Earth, as it’s never been seen at all!
Repeatedly lying wont save you.
There is curving, as clearly shown by the horizon.
There is no point the curve first appears, as it is a curve, which is everywhere. It is a question of ability to measure it.
And it is repeatedly seen, such as by observations of the horizon.
Do you know what hasn't been seen? Any circumstance where you are able to distinguish between flat and round and it appearing flat.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 23, 2024, 11:59:42 PM
Horizons would not keep on rising up as we rise up, if it were a ball Earth.
It isn't the horizon which is "rising up".
It is the ground.
And that is where the distinction is.
For a flat surface, the ground continues to rise without end, never producing a horizon.
But for a round surface, eventually the curve becomes significant enough to make it stop.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 23, 2024, 11:59:42 PM
When going above a ball, it curves downward, with more distance outward from your position on or above it.
And perspective makes it appear at a higher angle of elevation.
Again, FE:
a=atan(h/d).
Always rising.
RE:
a=atan(h/d+d/2r) (approximately).
Rising at first, then going back down.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 23, 2024, 11:59:42 PM
The horizon of a sphere wouldn’t be seen out the window of a plane at 30000 feet altitude.
Why?
Because you are desperate to pretend Earth is flat?
Have you done the math?
I assume not.
Here it is for you:
The horizon for a RE is formed from a line from your eye to a point on the surface where that line is tangent to the surface.
This allows us to create a right angle triangle, as shown below:

We can also see the angle marked as dip, plus the angle shown as b must add to 90 degrees.
And by basic geometry, a and b must also add to 90 degrees.
That means a is the angle of dip.

And a is given as:
a=acos(r/(r+h))

This allows us to easily plug it in for any height.
30 000 ft is roughly 10 km (it is actually closer to 9, but I'm just going to use 10 so you can't then later complain that planes actually go above that.
That gives an angle of 3.2 degrees.

So the horizon would be easily visible out of a plane window.

Again, lying wont save you.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 23, 2024, 11:59:42 PM
A sphere has lesser and lesser visible surface when higher above it.
Pure BS.
The further you are from a sphere, the MORE you can see of it, up to the limit of being able to see half.
e.g.:


But this is also shown by basic geometry.
i.e. using the image above for the angle of dip of the horizon, that is the same as the angle of Earth subtended from the point below you to the horizon.
And as h increases, a increases, so you can see more and more of a sphere, the higher you are above it. But it takes up a smaller portion of your FOV.

If you are directly against the surface, you only see that point. If you are infinitely far away, you see half of it.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 23, 2024, 11:59:42 PM
The horizons go downward when higher above a sphere.
Yes, as shown above, the angle of dip to the horizon does go down.
And guess what? That happens in reality as well.



Quote from: turbonium2 on February 23, 2024, 11:59:42 PM
Horizons have never been seen on a massive sphere, we only know what they look like on a massive flat surface.
I am yet to see a single sphere which has not had a horizon.
I have NEVER seen a flat surface that has a horizon other than the edge.

Again, you are just falsely asserting Earth is flat to pretend a flat surface produces a horizon, even though you can't explain how at all.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 23, 2024, 11:59:42 PM
We can draw them, and make simulations of them, with perspective included, as it appears to us on Earth.
Yes, showing how a round surface produces a horizon while a flat surface does not.
Showing how a round surface will obstruct the view, while a flat surface does not.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 23, 2024, 11:59:42 PM
On a flat surface, we have straight lines that appear to rise upward in the distance, on two sides of it, which appear to be converging as they rise upward in the distance.
And taking an infinite distance to do so.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 23, 2024, 11:59:42 PM
What proves a horizon doesn’t have a curve, proves it is a flat surface up to and beyond a horizon, is so easy, so obvious to do, we could settle this whole terrible mess, is why your side tries to ignore it all the time, and won’t address it at all.
What proves the horizon does have a curve is that it is roughly the same distance in every direction.
As a hint, that is saying the horizon is a line where every point on the line is equidistant from another point.
Do you know what that is a description of? A circle.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 23, 2024, 11:59:42 PM
Do you realize that a horizon isn’t seen from only one viewpoint, outward to it?
No. That is the COMMON viewpoint of the horizon on Earth.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 23, 2024, 11:59:42 PM
Horizons aren’t some mysterious line out in the distance, and things vanish beyond it, and that’s it!!
No, they are simply the point where a line from your eye passes tangent to Earth.

You are the one trying to make it magic.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 23, 2024, 11:59:42 PM
When we see the same horizon from other viewpoints, at every other angle, at that same horizon, the mystery is solved, there’s no more excuses
That's right, and it makes it clear the surface is round.

You can even go get a small ball yourself. Look at it.
See where the horizon is.
Have something mark it.
Then look at it from a bunch of different angles.

See how it matches Earth so well.
As if Earth is just a giant ball.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 23, 2024, 11:59:42 PM
Seeing the horizon from these viewpoints, proves it is not a ball Earth, when there is no curve seen anywhere at all.
Again, seeing the horizon is seeing the curve.

Until you provide an explanation for what magic causes the horizon on a flat surface the horizon will continue to prove Earth is round.
Logged
?

turbonium2

  • 1636
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #344 on: February 24, 2024, 01:48:13 AM »
Your flat metal sheet appears to rise upward over it, right?

If the same flat sheet was twice as long, it would rise up even more, and so would longer sheets rise up more and more, right?

So why would you believe they rise up less and less suddenly, and where does it suddenly change like this? You just say it does, so it does!!

Logged
*

Smoke Machine

  • 3165
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #345 on: February 24, 2024, 02:10:22 AM »
Quote from: turbonium2 on February 24, 2024, 01:48:13 AM
Your flat metal sheet appears to rise upward over it, right?

If the same flat sheet was twice as long, it would rise up even more, and so would longer sheets rise up more and more, right?

So why would you believe they rise up less and less suddenly, and where does it suddenly change like this? You just say it does, so it does!!

Try to get your head around the fact that your immediate environment at face value looks like a flat earth, but with a tiny bit of observation, it is revealed the larger picture of Earth is as a sphere.

The horizon gets lower, the higher you go, Turbonium. Can you put some effort into this? I mean, I know you're on a sinking ship with flat earth, but still.
Logged
*

JackBlack

  • 21780
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #346 on: February 24, 2024, 02:43:08 AM »
Quote from: turbonium2 on February 24, 2024, 01:48:13 AM
Your flat metal sheet appears to rise upward over it, right?
All the way until the edge.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 24, 2024, 01:48:13 AM
If the same flat sheet was twice as long, it would rise up even more, and so would longer sheets rise up more and more, right?
Yes. Without end.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 24, 2024, 01:48:13 AM
So why would you believe they rise up less and less suddenly, and where does it suddenly change like this? You just say it does, so it does!!
Why do you keep repeating this?
YOU are the one claiming it magically stops.
You are the one claiming it changes.

We are the ones correctly identifying that a flat surface will continue to rise, and it is a round surface that changes.

We also know that the rate of "rise" does reduce.

If you position a measuring device at a height of 1 m above a flat surface, then directly below is at -90 degrees.
1 m ahead is at -45 degrees.
2 m ahead is at -26.6 degrees.
10 m ahead is at -5.7 degrees.
20 m ahead is at -2.9 degrees.
100 m ahead is at -0.57 degrees.
200 m ahead is at -0.29 degrees.

Once you reach a sufficient distance, multiplying the distance by some amount will divide the angle by the same amount.

The surface doesn't magically rise at the same rate for some distance then magically change.
Right from the start, the rate at which the angle gets higher decreases.
And for a flat surface, this will continue forever.

So why would you believe they rise up less and less suddenly, and where does it suddenly change like this? You just say it does, so it does!!
Logged
?

turbonium2

  • 1636
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #347 on: March 01, 2024, 08:46:52 PM »
The surface is always seen as flat, over it, going outward from us to the rising upward horizons, there is never a curve or arc or downward shape seen on the surface.

Curved surfaces have to be seen curving over them, not be seen as a flat surface is everywhere, at all distances outward, along all lengths of horizons across them, all measurements as a flat surface for them, it’s flat in all ways because it IS flat.


How long does a horizon go across the Earths surface before we see it start to show a curve over it?

Why wouldn’t they have told us that, if it’s already been seen, from those in rockets, flying up into ‘space’, so many times?  It’d be filmed many times, and shown to us many times.

What altitude is it first seen, noticeable, apparent to detect it exists at all?

They don’t say or show what horizons look like from ground up to ‘space’ as a progression. They’ve never told us where the horizon starts to show a curve over it, so why not?

To your excuse about how the altitude varies for that, still would have a range of altitudes for it, they’d know the range of altitude of it.

It’s so simple, so basic, yet so unknown and unseen to the world, is what the horizons look like when they’re curving, where it is first seen, as a curve, how it looks after that, until a ball is seen from ‘space’.

This would show the world, for the very first time in all history, something never seen or known what will be seen at all yet, until then.

How does a horizon look when going higher and higher above Earth than in a plane?

Where do we start to see the amazing curve, is a simple question, and should be simple to answer it, but they haven’t answered it, specifically, at all.

You keep saying that horizons are proof that Earth is a ball, so why can’t you show me how a horizon looks from the ground up to a ball in ‘space’, then?

I’ve seen a couple of attempts at it, which both failed miserably.  The horizon curved way too low, we’d see it if it was curving by that point. 

It is easy for you to say it’s true, but it’s not easy to show how it would really look in a simulation of it.

They knew that it couldn’t be properly simulated, to show a horizon that remains perfectly flat and horizontal when seen in planes flying at 25000 feet, has to already show a slight curve forming by that point, to end up as a ball seen from ‘space’ at the end!

That’s why they skipped right over it all. They went from ground to ‘space’ in one massive leap!  No problem then!
Logged
*

JackBlack

  • 21780
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #348 on: March 02, 2024, 12:14:45 AM »
Quote from: turbonium2 on March 01, 2024, 08:46:52 PM
The surface is always seen as flat, over it, going outward from us to the rising upward horizons, there is never a curve or arc or downward shape seen on the surface.
Again, IN WHAT WAY?
Just HOW are you seeing this as "flat"?
How does this differ from "curved"?

Do you know how you typically notice the curve for a curved surface?
THE HORIZON!!!
The very point you keep ignoring.

Flat surfaces DO NOT HAVE HORIZONS!!
This is a feature of curved surfaces.

Notice how desperate you are to flee from this simple fact?

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 01, 2024, 08:46:52 PM
all measurements as a flat surface for them
Except the measurements you ignore because it is inconvenient.
Like the angle of dip to the horizon.

What you are really saying is that Earth is so large, you can't easily notice the curve because it isn't a tiny ball.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 01, 2024, 08:46:52 PM
How long does a horizon go across the Earths surface before we see it start to show a curve over it?
Do you mean left to right?

Because that has been explained to you repeatedly.
If you want to see the curve of that horizon, LOOOK DOWN!
And then get far enough back so you can see that horizon inside your FOV, and you will see it as a circle.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 01, 2024, 08:46:52 PM
It’d be filmed many times, and shown to us many times.
Stop just repeating the same pathetic BS.
If you want it filmed, do it yourself.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 01, 2024, 08:46:52 PM
What altitude is it first seen, noticeable, apparent to detect it exists at all?
From ground level, where the notice the horizon is a circle that goes around you.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 01, 2024, 08:46:52 PM
They don’t say or show what horizons look like from ground up to ‘space’ as a progression.
You can simulate this yourself.
But it depends on many factors, like what kind of camera is being used, what type of lens, what is the FOV, are you keeping the camera level, or are you following the horizon.

And you can even test this yourself, with a small ball.
But you will need a really tiny camera to get the to-scale shot of a person standing on the surface.

The fact you keep on ignoring is that a small enough portion of a large enough curve will be indistinguishable from a straight line.
That means if the FOV is small enough to only show a small portion of the horizon, then it can appear as a straight line in the resulting footage.

Depending on the lens, it may distort lines, such that a line at the same angle of dip appears as a straight line.
That would mean a circle would be distorted into a straight line.

Conversely, if you have a fish eye lens, you can see the curve at ground level.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 01, 2024, 08:46:52 PM
They’ve never told us where the horizon starts to show a curve over it, so why not?
Because then dishonest scum like you would cherry pick an example, probably even cropping a photo, to boldly proclaim you can't see the curve so Earth can't be round.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 01, 2024, 08:46:52 PM
You keep saying that horizons are proof that Earth is a ball, so why can’t you show me how a horizon looks from the ground up to a ball in ‘space’, then?
Deal with the topic, admit that the horizon is clear proof that Earth is a ball, or conversely explain how it magically forms on a flat surface, with an actual explanation, not just handwavy BS, and then I can provide a simulation.

Again, what magic causes perspective to magically stop to magically produce a magical horizon which then magically blocks light to more distant land and objects?
Can you explain that?
Until you do, the horizon remains clear proof that Earth is round.
Logged
?

turbonium2

  • 1636
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #349 on: March 02, 2024, 12:30:41 AM »
Horizons show us what the real surface is shaped as. Flat.

They’d have a curve if the surface WAS curved.

The Earth ball you have is about 24000 miles around, which is certainly a large ball, yet it must be curved everywhere on the surface to be a ball.

A horizon that is a thousand miles across the Earth, is a straight horizontal line, seen over a parallel viewpoint along it, not seen as a circular line that’s straight across as you see it as.

Not that it matters, but we’ve got a straight line across, not a line circling you.

To stop your bs excuse of being a circle, as your lame excuse here.

Logged
*

JackBlack

  • 21780
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #350 on: March 02, 2024, 01:01:35 AM »
Quote from: turbonium2 on March 02, 2024, 12:30:41 AM
Horizons show us what the real surface is shaped as.
i.e. CURVED!!

If it was flat, it wouldn't have a horizon.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 02, 2024, 12:30:41 AM
They’d have a curve if the surface WAS curved.
And it is a circle.
As a reminder, a circle is a curve.

If the surface was flat, the horizon wouldn't exist.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 02, 2024, 12:30:41 AM
A horizon that is a thousand miles across the Earth
Is a circle.

But do you have a picture of this thousand mile wide horizon?
For a simple observer with an elevation of roughly 2 m, the horizon is a circle with a radius of roughly 5 km.
That means it is roughly 31.4 km long. No where near the thousand miles you claim.

And again, the distinction between your delusional BS and reality, is your delusional BS has that 5 km radius circle ~2 m below you, while reality has it ~4 m below you.

And importantly, this is the same angle of dip all around.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 02, 2024, 12:30:41 AM
Not that it matters, but we’ve got a straight line across, not a line circling you.
The fact you can follow it all around you shows it is a line circling you, not a slight line across.
You must really be getting desperate if you are resorting to just blatantly rejecting such a basic and verifiable part of reality.

If it was a straight line, you would be able to follow it across roughly 180 degrees. Not 360.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 02, 2024, 12:30:41 AM
To stop your bs excuse of being a circle, as your lame excuse here.
Why not say that honestly?
Stop my clear logical reasoning, of pointing out that in reality the horizon is a circle, not a straight line.
Telling me to not bring up reality because it shows your argument is BS, is a new level of desperation from you.


But notice how you still fail to explain your magic?
You still fail to address the fact that the horizon is clear proof that Earth is round?

Again, what magic causes perspective to magically stop to magically produce a magical horizon which then magically blocks light to more distant land and objects?
Can you explain that?
Until you do, the horizon remains clear proof that Earth is round.
Logged
?

DataOverFlow2022

  • 4193
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #351 on: March 02, 2024, 01:24:56 AM »
Quote from: turbonium2 on March 02, 2024, 12:30:41 AM


They’d have a curve if the surface WAS curved.



As in a measurable dip to the horizon. 
Logged
?

Themightykabool

  • 10491
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #352 on: March 02, 2024, 08:22:02 AM »
Quote from: turbonium2 on March 02, 2024, 12:30:41 AM
Horizons show us what the real surface is shaped as. Flat.

They’d have a curve if the surface WAS curved.

The Earth ball you have is about 24000 miles around, which is certainly a large ball, yet it must be curved everywhere on the surface to be a ball.

A horizon that is a thousand miles across the Earth, is a straight horizontal line, seen over a parallel viewpoint along it, not seen as a circular line that’s straight across as you see it as.

Not that it matters, but we’ve got a straight line across, not a line circling you.

To stop your bs excuse of being a circle, as your lame excuse here.


Why do you not concede that the ball curves away from you?

And you can see straight, a greater distance tahn your eyes can see perifpherally left-right

Is vision also part of the conspiracy along with circles amd triangles?


If you can see 5km out to the horizon and roughly 60degree left/right peripheral you can see 20km.
If the supposed ball is 40,000km.
What angle would there be between 20km segments?
10km segments?
Can you eye detect that?



If the curve were curcing away from you, would you be able to detect taht?
Are you one ofbthe mircaculous people who can see around a hill as it curves away from you?
« Last Edit: March 02, 2024, 08:29:04 AM by Themightykabool »
Logged
?

turbonium2

  • 1636
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #353 on: March 09, 2024, 11:47:52 PM »
You’re trying to conflate a ball and a circle, as the same thing, and they certainly are NOT the same thing, same shape, nor even the same in their dimensions.

A spherical Earth is seen in a 3 dimensional shape, it is your big ball of Earth, which has 3 dimensional curved surfaces over it, and everywhere you look on it is curved downward, curved across from you, and most important, a sphere will curve across from you, forming as an ARC, curving down from the middle of it. 

That is what you can see from their Earth ball seen from ‘space’, too.

Those arcs would be your ball Earth horizons, curving down from you in all directions.

The entire surface is curving around itself as a ball, everywhere is a curve, and it cannot exist if it’s never seen as curving, cannot measure a curve existing on the surface, and when we have always measured it as a flat surface, with instruments that are made for measuring a flat and level surface, or the air above the surface, and the exact direction 90 degrees as a SQUARE to level, straight up or down to level, we are measuring for a straight across flat and level and horizontal, or vertical to it as a square of two straight lines or directions.

Every one of our instruments are designed specifically to measure for a straight flat horizontal line or surface, and squared to straight horizontal lines and surfaces, based on both being straight lines to one another, which is why we can use levels to measure both of those straight lines in two directions forming as a square.

When you try saying that we cannot measure this curve at all, after saying this same unmeasurable curve would cause a ship to vanish from all sight because of your tiniest of a curve, so very little of a curve to be seen or measured….

Ships are a known height, and we know that they go out of sight just after three miles away, or only the top seen when high enough.

But the measurements of your curvature don’t match the distance of vanishing ships at their heights. 

There clearly is nothing of a curve over three miles distance, and perspective doesn’t make curved surfaces appear completely flat, that is only seen if the surface IS flat.

While perspective does create many illusions we see, and will cause all surfaces to appear to be rising up in the distance, causes parallel lines to appear to converge together in the distance, every one of those illusions will look different from the others.

A flat surface seen over it as entirely flat, cannot be any sort of curved surface.  Because that is not what perspective can ever do. It cannot cause curved surfaces to appear entirely flat. What would it make a flat surface look like, a curved surface? It makes just as much sense as saying it makes curved surfaces appear entirely flat, which makes no sense either.

Curved surfaces cannot easily be drawn or modeled in what they’d look like to us, over the Earths surface.  There is no examples to base them on, no specific example of its curvature over a distance which works.

How would a surface that curves down by 8 inches per one mile, squared by every additional mile. 

The one thing that it would not look like, is an entirely flat surface over a 3 mile distance.

The entire surface is flat, nothing else but flat. Curves don’t disappear over surfaces by perspective. It would make them rise up, but we certainly wouldn’t see them over a 3 mile distance as entirely flat, we’d not see the whole surface to 3 miles out, or not as flattened over it all by perspective.


Logged
?

turbonium2

  • 1636
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #354 on: March 10, 2024, 01:02:44 AM »
We always depict, draw, and model things far away, to show depth seen in reality, with two straight rising or converging lines with one line on each side.

These straight lines indicate they go outward over a flat surface. Lines going across our view side to side are also straight lines, which indicate the vanishing point of a horizon.

Curved lines don’t work, because they don’t depict the reality we see on Earth in any way.

A sphere would look very different than what we actually see on Earth. Spheres don’t show distances outward like we see on Earth. Because if you were on a sphere, no matter how large it is, everything you see outward goes downward in a curve.

If you were on a sphere which had a curve so sharp over it, that a ship curved out of sight only 3 miles away, it would be seen as a curve across the surface too, and we could measure curvature over 3 miles distance to your rate of curvature being 8 inches per first mile over it, and 8 inches per 1 mile squared is 2 times 8 inches for 16 inches of curvature, three miles squared is 9 times 8 inches for 72 inches of curvature. So a ship of only 72 inches high would be the highest ship that would vanish down a curve three miles away, yet ships much higher than that also vanish past the horizon, which proves there is no curvature that could cause it. Ships that are fifty or sixty feet high will vanish past a horizon that would only curve down by 6 feet by that point.

You cannot account for your rate of curvature jumping up to a 60 foot curve over 3 miles, it doesn’t work with your ball Earth dimensions and circumference. It would be a very small Earth if you did.

Logged
*

JackBlack

  • 21780
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #355 on: March 10, 2024, 01:32:44 AM »
Quote from: turbonium2 on March 09, 2024, 11:47:52 PM
You’re trying to conflate a ball and a circle, as the same thing, and they certainly are NOT the same thing, same shape, nor even the same in their dimensions.
No.
You're trying to conflate a straight line and a circle, as the same thing, and they certainly are NOT the same thing, same shape, nor even the same in their dimensions.

The horizon is a circle, not a straight line.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 09, 2024, 07:22:37 PM
a sphere will curve across from you, forming as an ARC, curving down from the middle of it.
No, it wont. Not if you are looking roughly 90 degrees away from towards the centre of it.
Then it will appear at the same angle of dip all around.

Again, if you want to see it like that get up high enough to look down at it.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 09, 2024, 07:22:37 PM
it cannot exist if it’s never seen as curving, cannot measure a curve existing on the surface
It is seen as curving, as the horizon clearly demonstrates.
It can be measured as a curve. You just ignore that.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 09, 2024, 07:22:37 PM
we have always measured it as a flat surface
Stop lying.
YOU are yet to measure it with a device accurate and precise enough to be able to measure the curve

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 09, 2024, 07:22:37 PM
the air above the surface
You have had your plane BS refuted countless times, and implicitly agreed that you know you are wrong and you will never bring it up again.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 09, 2024, 07:22:37 PM
When you try saying that we cannot measure this curve at all
We aren't.
You can easily measure it with the angle of dip to the horizon, especially with how that varies with altitude.
What you can't do, is use a poor measuring device to measure it over 1 m.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 09, 2024, 07:22:37 PM
Ships are a known height, and we know that they go out of sight just after three miles away, or only the top seen when high enough.
Yes, clearly showing a curve.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 09, 2024, 07:22:37 PM
But the measurements of your curvature don’t match the distance of vanishing ships at their heights.
Care to provide evidence of that?

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 09, 2024, 07:22:37 PM
There clearly is nothing of a curve over three miles distance
Based upon what?
Your repeated lies?

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 09, 2024, 07:22:37 PM
perspective doesn’t make curved surfaces appear completely flat
And Earth's surface does not appear completely flat.
A big difference is the horizon.
A curved surface has a horizon, a flat surface.
Can you provide an example of a demonstrably flat surface which has a horizon?
That is a surface you can demonstrate is flat to the required precision to rule out any possible curve causing a horizon on it?

No.
The only surface you claim is flat that produces this magical horizon is Earth, as if Earth is not flat, and the curve is causing the horizon.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 09, 2024, 07:22:37 PM
A flat surface seen over it as entirely flat, cannot be any sort of curved surface.
Who cares. That isn't what we see.
Again, the horizon shows it is not entirely flat.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 09, 2024, 07:22:37 PM
Curved surfaces cannot easily be drawn or modeled in what they’d look like to us, over the Earths surface.
They can with computers, and there are countless examples.
You can also model them with smaller balls, if you understand how to scale things.
But you still need a quite large ball to model what the surface would look like.
For example, if you had a camera 2 mm high, for that to represent an observer height of 2 m, you need a ball that is 6.371 km in radius, or at least the top of one.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 09, 2024, 07:22:37 PM
How would a surface that curves down by 8 inches per one mile, squared by every additional mile.
That is such an incredibly poor way of wording it.
The drop, as an approximation, is 8 inches per mile squared.
And it would look quite comparable to what is observed in reality.
For example, with an observer height of 6 ft, the horizon would be ~3 miles away.
Notice how that agrees with reality?

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 09, 2024, 07:22:37 PM
The entire surface is flat, nothing else but flat.
Prove it.
You keep asserting it magically looks flat, but you can't explain how.
What observation are you making that indicates it is flat?
Just what observation are you appealing to?
Be explicit.
And clearly indicate the difference expected for a flat surface and a surface with a radius of 6371 km.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 10, 2024, 01:02:44 AM
These straight lines indicate they go outward over a flat surface. Lines going across our view side to side are also straight lines, which indicate the vanishing point of a horizon.
No, they don't.
For a flat surface, they go out forever, taking an infinite distance to reach the "vanishing point".
This can even be seen quite easily on Earth that this is NOT the case:


You are yet again lying to everyone.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 10, 2024, 01:02:44 AM
Curved lines don’t work, because they don’t depict the reality we see on Earth in any way.
Prove it.
Draw the lines that would be expected for a RE.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 10, 2024, 01:02:44 AM
A sphere would look very different than what we actually see on Earth.
Yet you cannot point to a single observation in which it differs.
Instead you just blatantly lie to everyone.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 10, 2024, 01:02:44 AM
everything you see outward goes downward in a curve.
You have already admitted this is a lie, that perspective will still make things appear to rise.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 10, 2024, 01:02:44 AM
If you were on a sphere which had a curve so sharp over it, that a ship curved out of sight only 3 miles away, it would be seen as a curve across the surface too
No, it wouldn't.
Not unless you are high enough up to look down at it.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 10, 2024, 01:02:44 AM
So a ship of only 72 inches high would be the highest ship that would vanish down a curve three miles away, yet ships much higher than that also vanish past the horizon, which proves there is no curvature that could cause it. Ships that are fifty or sixty feet high will vanish past a horizon that would only curve down by 6 feet by that point.
And now you are just spouting pure BS.

If your eyes were at sea level, and you entirely ignored refraction, then a ship 72 inches high would be hidden by the curve at a distance of 3 miles.

What is observed in reality, with an observer height of 6 ft, is that at a distance of 3 miles, the ship is ON the horizon.
It then gradually disappears from the bottom up as it continues to move further away.
It does not reach the horizon and then magically vanish without going further.

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 10, 2024, 01:02:44 AM
You cannot account for your rate of curvature jumping up to a 60 foot curve over 3 miles
Can you provide a video showing a ship completely disappearing from view after only 3 miles? NO!
Yet again, you are lying to try to save your dishonest BS.
Logged
?

DataOverFlow2022

  • 4193
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #356 on: March 10, 2024, 03:21:59 AM »
Quote from: turbonium2 on March 10, 2024, 01:02:44 AM


These straight lines indicate they go outward over a flat surface. Lines going across our view side to side are also straight lines, which indicate the vanishing point of a horizon.

Curved lines don’t work, because they don’t depict the reality we see on Earth in any way.

A sphere would look very different than what we actually see on Earth.


Shrugs…



Why is there a dip to the horizon.  Why in high altitude pictures from amateur balloon enthusiasts is the distance to the horizon consistent with calculations for a spherical earth. Not consistent with a flat earth encircled by a higher ice wall.
Logged
?

turbonium2

  • 1636
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #357 on: March 10, 2024, 04:59:58 AM »
While your real horizon curves downward atop an illusionary higher surface, where no curve would be atop that illusionary higher surface, that’s your version of it?

Surfaces don’t ‘win’ over an illusion, it is the illusion that ‘wins’ over the surfaces. And the illusions decide when they end on surfaces, not the surface.

You think you can pick out horizons as real, when there is nothing of the surface which is the height of a horizon anywhere. Because horizons are also illusions, like the rising surface is up to them. If you saw the same surface a fraction above the ground, your ‘real’ horizon would be closer to you. They don’t exist, they are illusions, they can move out or in anywhere you see them from.  Illusions will do that, because they aren’t real.  They don’t have invisible curves hiding behind them either. If there was a curve behingmd then, we’d see them from a perpendicular view in the middle of a horizon.  No invisible curves exist. You can’t make them exist by saying they do, it doesn’t work that way in the real world.
Logged
?

DataOverFlow2022

  • 4193
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #358 on: March 10, 2024, 05:06:46 AM »
Quote from: turbonium2 on March 10, 2024, 04:59:58 AM
While your real horizon curves downward atop an illusionary higher surface, where no curve would be atop that illusionary higher surface, that’s your version of it?




Why is there a dip to the horizon where on a flat earth the vanishing point should intersect the horizon

Quote from: turbonium2 on March 03, 2024, 03:10:24 AM
So curvature only blocks their bottoms, not the rest of them?

Depends how far relatively over the horizon like a sunset.


Or as seen in this example of the amount the curvature hides the Turning Torso Tower bottom up as the person increases distance from the tower.






The curved earth can physically block the bottom of the building more and more as distance increases.  Where we know the curved earth physically blocks the bottom of the building from view because a pair of binoculars that changes “perspective” can’t unblock it.

Now Turbo, draw out how this is possible on a flat earth.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2024, 05:08:24 AM by DataOverFlow2022 »
Logged
?

DataOverFlow2022

  • 4193
Re: Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?
« Reply #359 on: March 10, 2024, 05:12:02 AM »
Quote from: turbonium2 on March 10, 2024, 04:59:58 AM


You think you can pick out horizons as real,





The horizon is literally measurable because it physical blocks things beyond it from view. 
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14   Go Up
« previous next »