1

Flat Earth Theory / How do FE meteors work

« on: December 14, 2022, 03:29:39 PM »

I know, the simple answer to the thread title is just like RE meteors.

With the Geminids coming up I started thinking how meteors would work in the FE model. As I would understand FE theory, a meteor would have to start out under the effect of UA and be accelerated at the same rate as the earth.  Afterall, it starts at a distance from earth similar to all of the other celestial bodies so why would it not be affected by UA the same way.  What causes a meteor to suddenly lose acceleration and 'fall' into the Earth's atmosphere.

2

Flat Earth Theory / My weekend Moon Tilt

« on: September 06, 2022, 02:40:21 PM »

Had beautiful clear skies to look at the first quarter moon this weekend.  Watched it from about 8pm to about 10 pm where I live.  Starting thinking about what I was seeing with the moon tilt.

The WIKI (https://wiki.tfes.org/Moon_Tilt_Illusion) attempts to explain what is witness based on EA and viewing the bottom of the moon.  I didn't have my camera, but these mooncalc snips show what I witnessed with respect to how the moon tilt changed during my observation.



According to the EA explanation, we are looking at the bottom surface of the moon with EA bending the light for what we view.  The WIKI explanation is pretty good.  However, when one follows the position of the sun with respect to how my witnessed moon tilt changed, the two are not possible.

If I'm looking at the bottom of the moon, then as the sun and moon continue to rotate around the pole, the tilt of the moon should actually rotate counter clockwise based on my location and looking south to view the moon.  In order for moon tilt to rotate clockwise from my viewing location would be for the moon to be moving away from the pole on a FE mononpole or bi polar map.

Here's a sketch of how the sun and moon would have rotated about me at that time.  If you envision how my view of the bottom would be if EA were actually in affect what would be the upper limit of the moon terminator should move counter clockwise.  This sketch shows what would be seen looking down on the situation and the terminator is rotating clockwise.  When viewed from the bottom as we would, the terminator would be rotating counter clockwise.  This is not what I witnessed.

3

Flat Earth Theory / Question re. EA

« on: August 30, 2022, 06:33:53 PM »

Been thinking of a few things we observe and had a quick question for the EA crowd.  Does the effect of EA lessen as you get farther from the surface or the earth.  In other words, does horizontal light begin to straighten as you get farther from the earth?

4

Philosophy, Religion & Society / So Long Boris!

« on: July 07, 2022, 02:08:11 PM »

Evidently Boris figured out how to Brexit.

5

Flat Earth Theory / The sundial problem

« on: July 09, 2021, 02:45:42 PM »

A post in another thread got me thinking about how shadows would move differently in the northern and southern hemiplanes.  This made me think about sundials.

At the same latitude, a (RE) sundial from in the northern hemisphere will work exactly as the in the south.  You must rotate it 180 and reverse the numbers but the timing and shadow angels and lengths will be identical.  This is what we observe.

I drew up another one of my FE sketches (which I'm unable to upload for the moment) based on the sun's positions at 9AM and 3PM on the equinox and sundials positioned at 45 deg N and S.  What you find is that the angle of the shadow on the sundial between those two times on a sundial is different, 148 deg. in the north and 84 deg. in the south.

I'm curious the zetetic explanation for why we observe that the sundials actually show the same angle.

6

Flat Earth Theory / EA simply can't explain lunar eclipses

« on: December 08, 2020, 05:43:23 PM »

There's a section in the WIKI - https://wiki.tfes.org/Lunar_Eclipse_due_to_Electromagnetic_Acceleration - discussing lunar eclipses caused by EA.  The premise is that a full moon happens when the moon travels " "out of bounds," beyond the vertical rays of the Sun."

This is fairly easy to disprove by simply finding a full moon that occurs further from the sun than a lunar eclipse.

Jan 21, 2019, a full lunar eclipse occurred at 5:12 UTC.  At 5:12 UTC the moon was above Cuba at approximately 20.2 deg N, 75.16 deg. W. seen here:



At that time, the sun would have traveled 31 days from the solstice and covered 8 deg. placing it at 15.5 deg south.  Do the math on the flat earth model and you have them separated by 69.8 + 90 +15.5 = 175.3 deg.

The previous full moon occurred occurred very near Honolulu, HI Dec. 22, 2018.  At that time the moon was at approximately 20.8 deg N, 157.93 deg W seen here:



At that time, the sun is 1 day past the winter solstice placing it at 23.24 deg south.  Do the math on the flat earth model and you have them separated by 69.2 + 90 + 23.24 = 182.44 deg.

As you can see, the full moon occurred over 7 deg. further from the sun than the lunar eclipse.  In the FE theory of EA this places the lunar eclipse occurring with the moon well within the verticle upreach of the suns rays.

7

Flat Earth Theory / Why don't we see more solar eclipses?

« on: December 02, 2020, 10:30:38 PM »

The August 12, 2017 total solar eclipse was a marvelous thing to witness.  I was lucky enough to enjoy it while having a fine cigar in my backyard.

A few things I've discovered about it.  The center (my term for the exact longitudinal alignment of the sun and moon) of the eclipse occurred near the longitude of St. Louis, MO.  If you check https://www.timeanddate.com/moon/phases/usa/st-louis you'll find that solar noon and the lunar meridian crossing of the new moon occur at the same time as one would expect.

I appreciate @Tom Bishop for turning me on to the mooncalc website.  One can gather great data there. Using that site, I was able to iterate that at the time of the center of the eclipse the moon was directly above between 12 deg. 18'-20' N lattitude.  Just doing a little math with the sun traveling .26 deg/day, the sun would be approximately 8 deg. 30' N at that time.  That alignment was able to cast the umbra as far north as 44 deg.

Now according to the WIKI: "When the moon is below the sun's altitude and near it, the moon is dark and a New Moon occurs."

So this raises the following question.  Twice a year, the sun and new moon approach the equator at the same time.  Near the Sept. equinox in 2025 they are within a degree of each other and within a degree of the equator.  How could this alignment not cause a total solar eclipse at that time as well as the numerous other times the sun and new moon would align in locations nearer the equator and closer to each other than the nearly 4 degree difference witnessed in August 2017?

8

Flat Earth Theory / Solar noon drift

« on: November 23, 2020, 10:49:39 PM »

In researching a response to another post I ran across an unexpected interesting phenomenon.

"Solar noon occurs when the sun reaches its maximum height in the sky on any given day. At any location on Earth, the time of noon slowly oscillates back and forth by several minutes throughout the year (in other words, a sundial would not consistently show noon occurring at the same time as your wristwatch). These shifts are due to the earth’s elliptical (non-circular) orbit and axial tilt, and are summed up in a complex relationship called the equation of time (for simplicity, let’s call it the “solar noon effect”)." - https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/post/winter-solstice-marks-the-shortest-day-of-the-year-thursday-morning/2011/12/21/gIQANxaG9O_blog.html

With the Sun rotating about the north pole above a flat disc once a day, how does the FE model explain not only the oscillation of solar drift but the fact that solar noon drift occurs at all?

9

Flat Earth Theory / Fun with 2-D orbital geometry

« on: November 19, 2020, 09:20:02 PM »

The nice thing about FE theory is that it allows what would be a complicated 3-D discussion to be presented in a 2-D world.  2-D is much easier to comprehend and the math is often basic.

I apologize for starting several threads recently discussing the topic of lunar orbital phenomenon.  It's a discussion where "the documentation is fake" is usually of little use.

I created this for another topic:



The purpose was to illustrate the positions of the sun, moon, north pole, and a viewer on earth at the 1st quarter moon.  These relationships are constant regardless orbital radii of the sun and moon.  They can differ in any way and the 12:00-3:00 relationship will still hold true.  The FE model and 2-D geometry dictate it. The relationship is also the same regardless the viewer's position on earth.  What is also constant is the fact that the sun will lead the moon by a little over 6:12 at this time due to their differing orbital periods.

At the 1st quarter moon at my location on June 28, 2020 solar noon led lunar meridian crossing by 6:40.  At the upcoming 1st quarter moon on Nov. 12, 2020 solar noon will lead lunar meridian crossing by 6:20.  So, not only do the observable times differ from what the geometry dictates they also vary.  I specifically discuss solar noon and meridian crossing as they are the times when the sun and moon are directly south of the viewer so any effects of EA or refraction are negated.

How does FE theory explain these observed differences?

10

Flat Earth Theory / Moonrise-Moonset in northern lattitudes

« on: November 17, 2020, 03:35:45 PM »

FET explains sunrise-sunset, moonrise-moonset with the theory of EA.  In addtion, EA is also given as the driver for the lunar phase cycle - https://wiki.tfes.org/Electromagnetic_Acceleration#Lunar_Phases

In the FE model, the sun is farthest away from the moon at the full moon.  At that time, the sun's rays are powerful enough to illuminate the moon.  This would mandate that at all phases of the lunar cycle, the sun's rays are powerful enough to illuminate the moon as empirical observation verifies. 

Also at this time, the moon is viewable from moonrise to moonset. This is true at every location on the earth plane.  Even at the extreme northern lattitudes a full moon can be witnessed.  What this observation means is that even when the EA effect is at its most extreme (object at its farthest viewing distance) the reflection of the sun's light off the moon can be witnessed.

This being the case, how does FET explain the fact that one day a month the moon doesn't rise in the extreme northern lattitudes.  The RE model explains this phenomenon quite easily.


Note:  In my orginal post I mistakenly typed UA instead of EA.  The post has been corrected.  My apologies for any confusion.

11

Flat Earth Theory / Daytime/Nighttime half moon

« on: November 16, 2020, 02:44:41 PM »

According to the WIKI diagram here: https://wiki.tfes.org/Electromagnetic_Acceleration#Lunar_Phases

The FE explanation for 1/2 moon phases would have them always occurring with an identical relationship to the sun.  This being the case, how is it possible to have both a daytime 1/2 moon as well as a nighttime 1/2 moon which can be easily witnessed.

12

Flat Earth Theory / Solar eclipse paths on a FE map

« on: November 13, 2020, 03:40:32 PM »

The Wiki poses that solar eclipse paths make more sense on a flat earth map than the RE map.

https://wiki.tfes.org/File:AE-TwentyYearsOfEclipses.jpg#file

At first glance, this appears reasonable.  However, upon further thought the map would appear to me to refute the FE model.  Two objects rotating in circular orbits around the same point would cause shadow arcs to appear on the map below which have starting and ending points at the same lattitude.  This is absolutely certain. Geometry dictates it.  Two objects rotating in concentric circles in a 3-D model would always have their, what I'll term 'visual intersection point', drawing a concentric circle as well when projected on a plane below them.  On the FE map though the arcs are at multiple orientations.  EA would not be an adequate explanation for this as even if the sun's light waves are bending, they would still be traveling in a circular path.

Is there another piece of FE theory which would explain this?