Sweet, thanks for replying!
Unfortunately it doesn't seem like the Electromagnetic Accelerator equation is ready to be applied yet, as per your suggestion. Bishop's constant hasn't been defined and the theory isn't complete yet, let alone experimentally verified (reportedly the theory was close to complete three years ago, so hopefully the first experiments will be just around the corner!)
In any case it's very mathsy. I had to look up GCSE trigonometry to pose my question properly in the first place, so does anybody out there have a layman's answer for me?
Unfortunately that's the consequence of most flat theories - it either takes a huge amount of arithmetical acrobatics or a set of axioms that boils down to "it just is."
Sure, all systems have axioms but if the precept of the Flat Earth theory is Occam's Razor, then these mathematical twists and turns seem disingenuous to say the least.
The truth is that? Just like the positions and nature of the moon, the position of the sun is irreconcilable with the theories of the Flat Earth.
Incidentally, the bendy light theory directly contradicts another assertion by Flat Earth Theorists that noting can bend light, often used as a way to disprove gravity.
There is no one theory because no one theory can unite all the disparate facets of the various Flat Earth diaspora.
The spherical Earth model can explain it - you can't see it because it's not where the Flat model says it should be - it's behind the limb of the horizon, simple as that.