21
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Terrible Political Memes
« on: October 20, 2020, 07:52:33 PM »
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
22
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Angular size of the Moon
« on: October 14, 2020, 01:33:21 PM »
Also, parallax does definitely work with the Moon. That's how we calculated the lunar distance before we had more advanced techniques (radar, laser), and the results were consistent.
23
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Angular size of the Moon
« on: October 14, 2020, 08:11:41 AM »QuoteWhat's your idea of "very small scales"?
In this context, human scales - i.e. NOT astronomical.
QuoteWhen would optics as we know it stop to work, and why?
Generally, light seems to vary considerably with the media it is a pressure wave within. We don't know for certain what optical effects those media(s) cause to the light waves traveling through them. Things that work hunky dory on human scales through mostly uniform media over short distances (even for humans) may not work at all over astronomical ones. For instance, the sun may appear to you on the ground as being over your head when in fact its actual location is very different than what it appears (due to the media through which the light travels).
Optics as we know it works perfectly well on Earth with distances of a few hundreds km. The proposed distance of the close Moon on a flat Earth is just a few thousands km. Yet the way the Moon appears to us in the sky isn't compatible with these simple optics. My question is: is there a proposed explanation for this?
24
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Angular size of the Moon
« on: October 13, 2020, 05:16:44 PM »
Could you explain what a "non-physical" Moon could be? If it's not physical, how does it block the light of the Sun during an eclipse? If it's not the Moon that causes solar eclipses, then what is it and why does it always occur during a new moon?
What's your idea of "very small scales"? When would optics as we know it stop to work, and why?
What's your idea of "very small scales"? When would optics as we know it stop to work, and why?
25
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Please don't hit the dome. Astra
« on: October 13, 2020, 10:38:05 AM »
Make that 100%: a geostationary orbit is only possible over the Equator, and as far as I know there is no launch site on the Equator (the closest is probably Kourou at 5 degrees north).
26
Flat Earth Theory / Angular size of the Moon
« on: October 12, 2020, 11:06:29 AM »
The angular size (apparent diameter) of the Moon varies with time. Its variation is somewhat faster than the phases cycles: sometimes the largest apparent Moon will coincide with a full moon, causing the so-called "Supermoon"
The difference between a small (apogee) Moon and a big (perigee) Moon is about 13%. Examples are easily found:
Pictures typically depict a full moon because that's more spectacular and makes it easier to compare, but they could be made with any visible phase.
This kind of photos is quite easy to make, photographing the Sun is tricky and even dangerous if done wrong, but for the Moon you only need a decent DSLR and long-focus lens to get this kind of pictures.
Two things to note:
* When the Moon appears bigger, it appears bigger for everyone, wherever they are on Earth
* The angular size of the Moon doesn't vary significantly as it moves through the sky
Now, from the wiki (https://wiki.tfes.org/Moon) :
Using these values, for a Moon that's directly overhead, we calculate an angular size of about 0.611 degress or 36.6 arcminutes (https://rechneronline.de/sehwinkel/angular-diameter.php ). That's slightly above the observed largest Moon but in the right ballpark.
But for a Moon that's above a point 5000 miles away, the distance from the observer is sqrt(3000^2+5000^2) (Pythagorus) = 5830 miles. That gives us an angular diameter of 0.314 degrees or 18.8 arcminutes. Half as small. Such a variation has never been observed anywhere, not even at different times, and certainly not from two places at the same time
On a flat Earth with a close Moon:
* What causes the variation of the apparent size of the Moon for every observer on Earth over a cycle of about 27 days, slightly shorter than the cycles of lunar phases?
* What causes the Moon to have an apparent size that's not significantly different whether it's 3000 or 6000 miles away (without ever distorting its shape)?
The difference between a small (apogee) Moon and a big (perigee) Moon is about 13%. Examples are easily found:
Pictures typically depict a full moon because that's more spectacular and makes it easier to compare, but they could be made with any visible phase.
This kind of photos is quite easy to make, photographing the Sun is tricky and even dangerous if done wrong, but for the Moon you only need a decent DSLR and long-focus lens to get this kind of pictures.
Two things to note:
* When the Moon appears bigger, it appears bigger for everyone, wherever they are on Earth
* The angular size of the Moon doesn't vary significantly as it moves through the sky
Now, from the wiki (https://wiki.tfes.org/Moon) :
Quote
The Moon is a revolving sphere. It has a diameter of 32 miles and is located approximately 3000 miles above the surface of the earth.
Using these values, for a Moon that's directly overhead, we calculate an angular size of about 0.611 degress or 36.6 arcminutes (https://rechneronline.de/sehwinkel/angular-diameter.php ). That's slightly above the observed largest Moon but in the right ballpark.
But for a Moon that's above a point 5000 miles away, the distance from the observer is sqrt(3000^2+5000^2) (Pythagorus) = 5830 miles. That gives us an angular diameter of 0.314 degrees or 18.8 arcminutes. Half as small. Such a variation has never been observed anywhere, not even at different times, and certainly not from two places at the same time
On a flat Earth with a close Moon:
* What causes the variation of the apparent size of the Moon for every observer on Earth over a cycle of about 27 days, slightly shorter than the cycles of lunar phases?
* What causes the Moon to have an apparent size that's not significantly different whether it's 3000 or 6000 miles away (without ever distorting its shape)?
27
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moon landing Technology-Adam ruins everything
« on: October 11, 2020, 07:56:05 AM »QuoteHow does NASA force France's observatories to lie and return false information on the distance to the Moon using software and consultations, assuming either happen at all?
You have answered your own question. Software is programmed by the programmers and not the operators.
Do you think researchers in an observatory are unable to get and interpret their own data? These guys know exactly what they are doing. They shoot a giant laser to a mirror on the Moon and get some of that back. They know the system they operate.
Do you have any evidence that any of Grasse's (or Matera, or Wettzell) hardware or software is provided or controlled by NASA?
Both Grasse and Matera are part of the ILRS network.
So? Grasse was operating well before the ILRS network even existed.
https://ilrs.gsfc.nasa.gov/technology/software/index.html"Software provides a key element in the acquisition, reduction, and analysis of laser ranging data. Since so much time and effort has already been spent on creating software applicable to laser ranging, it is preferable to have the fruits of those labors be freely available when possible. Having a ready library of software will either spare builders of new stations the work of re-inventing the wheel or to at least provide a starting point from which to build something greater."
Good, a list of open source software: that means anyone with knowledge of the programming language can check it does what it's supposed to do. Some of the links point to European sites. Using common tools makes sense for scientists that do the same things.
How could NASA possibly use that to control the output of any observatory? For this to happen, there would need to be closed-source software, directly provided by NASA, that all LLR observatories are forced to install and use. Researchers would probably refuse to use such software, and would definitely notice if the results didn't match the data from their experiments.
"NASA is involved in a global network of observatories that perform LLR" is extremely far away from "NASA has total control over anything anyone does in that network".
Sure, if you try to find an organization that does anything space-related and has no connection at all with NASA, that will probably be hard or even impossible, because that's how globalized science works. But conversely, NASA is collaborating with other organizations.
In short: NASA doesn't have total control over foreign observatories and couldn't possibly force them to publish false data. That would take a global conspiracy.
28
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moon landing Technology-Adam ruins everything
« on: October 10, 2020, 09:16:20 PM »QuoteHow does NASA force France's observatories to lie and return false information on the distance to the Moon using software and consultations, assuming either happen at all?
You have answered your own question. Software is programmed by the programmers and not the operators.
Do you think researchers in an observatory are unable to get and interpret their own data? These guys know exactly what they are doing. They shoot a giant laser to a mirror on the Moon and get some of that back. They know the system they operate.
Do you have any evidence that any of Grasse's (or Matera, or Wettzell) hardware or software is provided or controlled by NASA?
29
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moon landing Technology-Adam ruins everything
« on: October 10, 2020, 07:41:17 PM »
Anyway, the ILRS is only about twenty years old (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00190-019-01241-1): LLR was performed at the Grasse observatory and other non-NASA sites well before that.
30
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Round Earthers and eclipses
« on: October 10, 2020, 06:00:29 AM »
Tom, if that's the explanation for the Sun's almost constant angular size, then what's the explanation for the Moon's almost constant angular size, even when it's not luminous at all (eg during an eclipse) or a very thin crescent?
31
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Round Earthers and eclipses
« on: October 09, 2020, 04:59:28 PM »
Anyway, even if that did explain the Sun's nearly constant angular size, it still wouldn't explain the Moon's nearly constant angular size. A new moon is dark, but during an eclipse we can see its angular size is sometimes slightly smaller and sometimes slightly larger than the Sun's, and not different from the angular size of a full moon.
32
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Round Earthers and eclipses
« on: October 09, 2020, 07:15:13 AM »There are two to five solar eclipses a year, and the annular eclipse occurs once every one or two years. You are pointing out an anomaly.
Annular eclipses actually outnumber total eclipses: https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEcatmax/SEcatmax.html . Even if they occurred once every 100 eclipses, you'd still need to account for them.
On a flat Earth, why does the Moon sometimes appear slightly larger and sometimes slightly smaller than the Sun? But never much larger nor much smaller, as would be expected when its distance from the observer varies considerably?
33
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Round Earthers and eclipses
« on: October 08, 2020, 08:03:49 AM »Yes, and under RE the visual diameters of the Sun and Moon are described as an "extraordinary coincidence".
And under FE the size of the Sun and Moon being equal would need to be a coincidence too. As well as the fact that a lunar eclipse, even partial, always happens during a full Moon.
It's also a striking coincidence (without an explanation in the Wiki) that the Sun and Moon on a flat Earth have an angular size that doesn't significantly change when they're closer or further.
34
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why? To What End???
« on: October 06, 2020, 08:58:25 AM »QuoteThe ISS can be seen from the ground.
That's true, I think. Something can be seen, but it is the wrong size (WAY too big).
Way too big compared to what? What size do you think should it be?
The ISS is about the size of a football pitch, and orbits at about 400km. At its closest, it gives an angular diameter of about 50 arcseconds - equivalent to the maximum apparent size of Jupiter, a little less than the maximum size of Venus. Therefore, I expect the ISS to be about as big as Jupiter or Venus. The apparent size of the ISS, Venus or Jupiter will vary depending on conditions, but they're in the same range.
35
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Where is the Sun?
« on: October 05, 2020, 10:26:24 PM »How many of those space agencies can really operate as fully independent space agencies?
At least the Soviet (now Russian), European, Japanese and Chinese space programs started as independent from the NASA, and developed fully independent launch capability with their own launch sites, their own rockets and their own satellites (maybe India, Israel and Iran too, would have to check that).
36
Flat Earth Community / Re: Questions for Flat Earthers
« on: October 05, 2020, 08:43:17 AM »Rigorous and repeated measurement of the earth!
We've been doing that for centuries: it's called surveying, and more generally topography.
And to be able to fit together everyone's measurements, we came up with the World Geodetic System.
37
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why are the constellations and the moon upside down in the Southern Hemisphere?
« on: October 04, 2020, 07:23:10 AM »@GreatATuinQuotePolaris, the current North star, cannot be seen in the southern hemisphere.
https://astronomy.com/magazine/ask-astro/2018/12/polaris-from-the-southern-hemisphere
Yes, it can - but not very far into it, depending on weather conditions and date/time viewed.
Sure, the limit is not exactly the Equator, it's maybe about one degree south of it because Polaris isn't exactly at the celestial pole and because of atmospheric refraction.
You do realize that doesn't change anything to my point, don't you? I actually thought of mentioning this fact, but didn't, precisely because it doesn't really add anything to the point.
38
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: October 03, 2020, 09:46:47 AM »So... DJT gets precautionary treatment, but even both he AND FLOTUS have been diagnosed positive, she gets left behind in the WH?
POTUS is male, overweight and 74 years old: three risk factors she doesn't have.
I've read he's been given an experimental treatment. That's not something you normally do when you're confident you'll easily recover.
39
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: October 03, 2020, 08:47:34 AM »Bad news
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-54391986
Well. He officially has mild symptoms, he's officially doing fine, but he's also been flown by helicopter to a military hospital.
Schadenfreude and catharsis apart, I'm not sure anything good would come out of Trump's serious illness or death.
40
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why are the constellations and the moon upside down in the Southern Hemisphere?
« on: September 30, 2020, 08:32:20 PM »QuotePeople don't see the same constellations in the north hemisphere as they do in the Southern hemisphere.
They see some of the same ones, they just don't see ALL the same constellations, or the same stars. The north star can be seem in the southern hemisphere (what do you think that means for the constellations?).
Polaris, the current North star, cannot be seen in the southern hemisphere. More generally, the stars and constellations you can or cannot see depend on just one thing: your latitude. You can see the same stars in Adelaide, Buenos Aires and Cape Town, along the 34th parallel south. You can see the same stars in Crete, in Kyoto and in Albuquerque, along the 35th parallel north. But in the North you'll never see Crux, and in the South you'll never see Polaris.
Also, what does "hemisphere" even mean if the Earth is not a globe?