[Flatout]

Tom, I have absolutely no idea what you are trying to infer.

The distance is what it is. The celestial sphere effect doest cause anything to physically change their distance.   This illusion would happen regardless of the distance.

How about you explain why they don't appear to line up.  Prove that the light is bending.  Please do an electromagnetic acceleration experiment that bends light.

[model 29]

You do realize that in order for a body to descend to perspective as it recedes from you it needs to double and quadruple and n-tuple its distance to you. Right? Don't be clueless.

In order for a body to descend in height as it recedes from you, it must increase its distance to you by many times.

So you're saying a 3000 mile high sun over a flat Earth would never produce a sunset.    Thanks for clearing that up.

[nobulart]

Thought I'd share my photographic record of this phenomenon. Shot with an iPhone 6 panoramic stitched image with the camera pan center-point tracking the azimuthal 0˚. Images have been contrast and brightness adjusted. Originals with EXIF data available on request. The black dot in the center of the sun approximates the actual solar disk size.

Download full resolution : http://nobulart.com/assets/sunmoon_20170704.jpg (11.4mb 8400x10000 pixels)

[model 29]

Thought I'd share my photographic record of this phenomenon. Shot with an iPhone 6 panoramic stitched image with the camera pan center-point tracking the azimuthal 0˚. Images have been contrast and brightness adjusted. Originals with EXIF data available on request. The black dot in the center of the sun approximates the actual solar disk size.

Download full resolution : http://nobulart.com/assets/sunmoon_20170704.jpg (11.4mb 8400x10000 pixels)

Just for fun, try holding a small ball out at arm's length in the direction of the moon while observing this and see if the phase on the ball matches that of the moon.  Bonus points if you post a picture of it.

[ErnestV1]

Nobulart, your shadows on the 3rd (woman on the beach far right) and 4th pictures (awning shadow far left portion of the house on the right) do not line up with the sun, how can we trust that the lens distortion ... or whatever... isn't so bad that drawing a line from point a to point b on any of them are true to life representations?

[Jura-Glenlivet]

this is the same problem Tom had, if you track along the horizon as you naturally turn you don't actually go the shortest way, which is more over your head, if you do the string experiment we talked about earlier in the thread, the angle bisects.

[JHelzer]

Nobulart, your shadows on the 3rd (woman on the beach far right) and 4th pictures (awning shadow far left portion of the house on the right) do not line up with the sun, how can we trust that the lens distortion ... or whatever... isn't so bad that drawing a line from point a to point b on any of them are true to life representations?

I printed out the picture and bent it into a semi-circle.  Bam!  The sun and the woman's shadow lined right up.  I also domed the sky and cut up a line of sticky notes. Bam!  The sun and the moon's shadow line right up. 

Following the horizon from the moon to the sun isn't the only straight line between them.  The one that bisects the moon is the true straight line in 3D space.  The rest are illusions.

Here's a pic...   (my dome cutting was off a little, but it's really close  )

[Nirmala]

Very clever way to show the effect of putting the image into three dimensions!

[ErnestV1]

Nicely done, JHeltzer. 

[neutrino]

I came across a youtube video which asks some interesting questions about the angles of the sun and moon.

Bishop, you aren't serious about that, right? Ever heard of a spherical sky map? The straight lines just don't work.

Woof, you guys need to study a bit of math really. You draw conclusions like a 1-grade boy. Do you have B.Sc degree in anything technical?

[ErnestV1]

I wish I had a wide angle lens. My thinking is that if instead of using the horizon as the plane of reference which most humans prefer to do, instead, put the roughly half moon on the far right or left with the phase line oriented up/down in the view finder and the sun on the opposite side of the view from that of the moon. This should orient the camera's wide angle plane (I will refer to this as bisecting the horizontal view of the camera) to that of the same plane as described by A (sun) B (earth) and C (moon). Then also take the same picture with the earth's horizon bisecting the horizontal view of the camera. Compare the phase angle to that of the 2D representation of the sun/moon most direct line. If I am right, the first picture will show a distinctly different phase angle of the moon than the second.

Where we get into trouble on this earth in looking for the phase to match the sun's perceived angle is by forgetting that the horizon is a plane which does not include any but the earth itself except at either sunset or moonset, or on very rare occasions where both occur simultaneously.

Again, I do not have a wide angle camera lens, so cannot perform this experiment myself, so am asking the help of someone who does... if I have been unclear in describing the experiment, please ask for clarification.

[model 29]

Again, I do not have a wide angle camera lens, so cannot perform this experiment myself, so am asking the help of someone who does...

No special lenses or waiting for certain phases of the moon to occur are needed.

Do you have access to a room or hallway with straight walls?  A ball with a line around it (representing the moon and it's day/night side) and another ball representing the sun will also aid in this experiment.  Secure the 'sun' to one upper corner of the room, and the 'moon' to the next corner with one half facing the 'sun' (line should be perpendicular to the wall/ceiling seam that runs between moon ball and sun ball)

Stand a few feet from wall partway between moon and sun balls and look up at them. 

Does it look similar to actual moon phase angle?

[Efins]

Just a little point... if the Earth had diameter of 12,7 millions of meters, (without furthermore considering that being the Earth a flat disc it should have a double diameter, thus making unrealistic the circumnavigation times in the two emispheres, southern and northern) assuming that the sun, that it is supposet to be 93 millions miles (148mld meters) far away, hits with his warm rays the Earth's surface, all the surface as one would be contemporaneously illuminated and, according your model, there would be no season and no day-night alternation, as the sun is too far from the Earth to product a localized illumination effect, just try with your desktop light.

[ErnestV1]

Again, I do not have a wide angle camera lens, so cannot perform this experiment myself, so am asking the help of someone who does...

No special lenses or waiting for certain phases of the moon to occur are needed.

Do you have access to a room or hallway with straight walls?  A ball with a line around it (representing the moon and it's day/night side) and another ball representing the sun will also aid in this experiment.  Secure the 'sun' to one upper corner of the room, and the 'moon' to the next corner with one half facing the 'sun' (line should be perpendicular to the wall/ceiling seam that runs between moon ball and sun ball)

Stand a few feet from wall partway between moon and sun balls and look up at them. 

Does it look similar to actual moon phase angle?

The one component your ball theory avoids is the possibility of looking at the balls from a plane other than the plane of the balls. In a 3d realm, you must consider the third dimension in your equation or you will deceive yourself.

You can design your experiment, I have defined one I believe will show that most of these 'phase do not match' issues are due to looking at the sun and the moon through an oblique angle to the plane of the horizon of earth which will throw off the phase angle.

[Tom Bishop]

Nobulart, your shadows on the 3rd (woman on the beach far right) and 4th pictures (awning shadow far left portion of the house on the right) do not line up with the sun, how can we trust that the lens distortion ... or whatever... isn't so bad that drawing a line from point a to point b on any of them are true to life representations?

I printed out the picture and bent it into a semi-circle.  Bam!  The sun and the woman's shadow lined right up.  I also domed the sky and cut up a line of sticky notes. Bam!  The sun and the moon's shadow line right up. 

Following the horizon from the moon to the sun isn't the only straight line between them.  The one that bisects the moon is the true straight line in 3D space.  The rest are illusions.

Here's a pic...   (my dome cutting was off a little, but it's really close  )

Unfortunately for this theory the sky is not a sphere which the sun and moon and lines rest against to cause artificial curvature.

[Tom Bishop]

Bishop, you aren't serious about that, right? Ever heard of a spherical sky map? The straight lines just don't work.

Woof, you guys need to study a bit of math really. You draw conclusions like a 1-grade boy. Do you have B.Sc degree in anything technical?

Fictitious premise. The sky is not a sphere which things rest against.

[ErnestV1]

model29, I thought about your experiment a little, and I believe that I could modify what you propose and make it fairly accurate.

1st, you need to know the sun's elevation angle. This can be determined by looking at your own shadow and measuring it... might have to have a friend's help, then use some geometry to calculate the sun's angle (opposite angle to personal height or adjacent angle to shadow length). 2nd you will need a protractor. By setting the sun at the 0 degree reference point, estimate the moon's angle on the protractor. 3rd, use the protractor again, but orient it 90 degrees with the horizon being 0 degrees, and once again estimate the moon's angle.

Now in your hallway, set up a flash light (sun) above your line of sight at the angle calculated above, set up your moon at the angles recorded in 2 and 3 above, be sure to stand in the appropriate spot so flashlight and ball/moon match the recorded information and that your flashlight in the darkened hall is shining at the ball/moon. This should get you the appropriate phase angle viewed by the real moon above.

[ErnestV1]

Bishop, you aren't serious about that, right? Ever heard of a spherical sky map? The straight lines just don't work.

Woof, you guys need to study a bit of math really. You draw conclusions like a 1-grade boy. Do you have B.Sc degree in anything technical?

Fictitious premise. The sky is not a sphere which things rest against.

Isn't one of FE tenets that the heavens are a dome? Am I wrong?

No matter, for all of us, FE or Spherical, the sky appears to be a semi-sphere.

[Tom Bishop]

Isn't one of FE tenets that the heavens are a dome?

Nope. I welcome you to try and find something about a dome in Earth Not a Globe or any of the other Flat Earth literature sources.

No matter, for all of us, FE or Spherical, the sky appears to be a semi-sphere.

The sky is not a sphere. How would things curve against it if it were not a literal sphere? Straight lines would be straight, unless they were resting against something curved.

[Rounder]

The sky is not a sphere which things rest against.

True, it is much larger and more complex than that simplistic image, as any RE will tell you. 

It's also not a two dimensional object like a photograph, which invalidates the method of moon angle measurement attempted by the guy in your thread-opening video.  Spherical Geometry is difficult and occasionally counterintuitive.

Your video accidentally undermines the flat earth.  The guy claims there is something wrong with the moon angle, but he leaves unspoken the rest of the sentence: "if the earth-moon-sun system is the way I imagine it: flat earth, small nearby sun, small nearby moon of identical size and distance."  The fact that things don't look like you think they should under your model?  That suggests your model is wrong.