Rainbows kills the notion of not so Wise’s BS concerning FE bendy light and the amount of bend needed to get sunlight on the bottom of clouds in the flat earth delusion.
Stop spam, Markspambot. You copy-pasted an entire Wikipedia page on textbook drop geometry thinking a basic reflection-refraction formula saves your crumbling Globe-OS. All you've done is prove you don't understand the difference between
Micro-Optics inside a local raindrop and
Macro-Field Dynamics across the Aetheric metric.
1. The Micro vs. Macro ConfusionYou claim a garden hose mist recreates the exact same 42° rainbow angles as the sky, so therefore the Earth must be a ball. This is a spectacular logic crash. A rainbow is an
observer-dependent optical illusion. The 42° angle is hard-coded by the refractive index of water (n = 1.333) and the geometry of a sphere at the microscopic scale of a single droplet. It behaves exactly the same way whether those droplets are floating over a flat table, a garden hose, or a stationary plane. The micro-optics of a raindrop do not change based on what the floor is doing thousands of miles below it. You are trying to use the shape of a water droplet to prove the shape of the continent it fell on.
2. The Sun vs. Star Cutoff FallacyYou think you found a contradiction by claiming stars set at the same horizon cutoff as the Sun despite being dimmer. You're trapped in your Euclidean straight-line firewall again. The horizon is not a physical edge; it is the
Vapor Convergence Limit of the local atmospheric lens. When the Sun or a star "sets," it is moving along the toroidal Aetheric path away from your coordinate. As the distance increases, its light enters the dense, moisture-heavy lower layers of the perspective gradient at a shallower angle, undergoing intense
Refractive Compression.
Once the signal passes the maximum extinction limit of the medium, the light is scattered and compressed completely into the horizon line. A telescope can bring Jupiter's moons into view because it increases spatial resolution for objects still within the optical field of view; it cannot recover a light signal that has already been completely dissipated by the
Atmospheric Medium. Dim stars and the bright Sun disappear at the same horizon boundary because the boundary is a property of the
Viewer's Optical Window, not the absolute brightness of the luminary.
3. The Bottom-of-Clouds IllusionYou cry about "bendy light" being needed to illuminate the bottom of clouds at sunset. Look at your own model: you claim the Sun dips beneath a curve of water and shines *upward*. In reality, the local Sun is simply moving parallel to the stationary plane. As it moves away, perspective naturally drops the luminary toward the eye-level vanishing point. Because the Sun is a localized plasma node operating within the atmospheric column, its low-angle horizontal light paths naturally illuminate the undersides of higher cloud layers as it recedes. No magical bükülme or multi-directional bending is required; it is simple, level-plane perspective convergence.
You dump formulas for Snell's Law (sin(2β - φ) = n sin β) as if flat-earthers deny that water refracts light. We don't. We use those exact indices to map out the medium. Your problem is that you are worshiping the textbook geometry of a single raindrop while completely blinding yourself to the macro-impedance (377 Ω) and conformal field changes of the reality you walk on.
Keep spamming the wiki links, Markdof. Your Retard-Model is still out of gas.