[Scroogie]

The diagram assumes certain p[r]operties of the sun. If the light from the sun were exiting its surface in a direction that was only outwards from its center, like a point light source, the shadow would be solid.

point light source!?!?!?!? After years of "studying" FE theory that's what you have?!?!?! point light source... ... ... ...

I won't waste our time in asking for any proof to support that supposition. Instead, I'll suggest that you already have in your possession the empirical evidence (which FEers seem to prize and cherish, after all) to refute your own proposition. You have, I'm somewhat certain, actually seen the sun, or at least a photo of it (taken by an FEer). Did it appear as a point source? In my own experience it almost never does. 

Nowhere did I say that the sun was a pointed light source. Pay attention to the details next time.

And nowhere did I say that you said that the sun was a pointed light source. You offered a supposition which I suggested to be refutable by empirical evidence already in your possession.

"Pay attention to the details next time."

And speaking of details, in your original post on this thread you referred to a "point light source", which in your last post became a "pointed light source".

Again, "Pay attention to the details...".

[Scroogie]

Actually, by the reactions shown in this thread it seems to me that no one had previously been exposed to a diagram such as the one presented. After a quick perusal of the three wiki pages quoted earlier it should quickly become evident to anyone with a modicum of imagination that an object of X diameter, when placed between two other objects of (roughly) 3X to 6X diameter, regardless of their shapes, cannot, under any circumstances, prevent the light emitted from the entire surface of one reaching more than a small portion of the surface of the other, even given the evocation of "bendy light".

As has been said before, "End of Story".

[Tom Bishop]

Actually, by the reactions shown in this thread it seems to me that no one had previously been exposed to a diagram such as the one presented. After a quick perusal of the three wiki pages quoted earlier it should quickly become evident to anyone with a modicum of imagination that an object of X diameter, when placed between two other objects of (roughly) 3X to 6X diameter, regardless of their shapes, cannot, under any circumstances, prevent the light emitted from the entire surface of one reaching more than a small portion of the surface of the other, even given the evocation of "bendy light".

As has been said before, "End of Story".

It has been brought up before. The argument is assuming that the the surface of the sun is a surface where on any point light can spread out in all directions from it, rather than exiting the sun only in the direction away from it. Your argument would require knowledge on what the sun actually is.

[Scroogie]

It has been brought up before. The argument is assuming that the the surface of the sun is a surface where on any point light can spread out in all directions from it, rather than exiting the sun only in the direction away from it. Your argument would require knowledge on what the sun actually is.

"...light can spread out in all directions from it, rather than exiting the sun only in the direction away from it."

Sounds much like a semantically null sentence as all directions in which light may "exit" would be "away from it".

[Tom Bishop]

It has been brought up before. The argument is assuming that the the surface of the sun is a surface where on any point light can spread out in all directions from it, rather than exiting the sun only in the direction away from it. Your argument would require knowledge on what the sun actually is.

"...light can spread out in all directions from it, rather than exiting the sun only in the direction away from it."

Sounds much like a semantically null sentence as all directions in which light may "exit" would be "away from it".

Away from it as in the light leaves away from center.

[Scroogie]

"...light can spread out in all directions from it, rather than exiting the sun only in the direction away from it."

Sounds much like a semantically null sentence as all directions in which light may "exit" would be "away from it".

Away from it as in the light leaves away from center.

As in "leaves away from center" and travels to the circumference, at which point it exits the sun?

[Tom Bishop]

"...light can spread out in all directions from it, rather than exiting the sun only in the direction away from it."

Sounds much like a semantically null sentence as all directions in which light may "exit" would be "away from it".

Away from it as in the light leaves away from center.

As in "leaves away from center" and travels to the circumference, at which point it exits the sun?

As in, in one outward direction away from the surface and center.

[Tom Haws]

Tom, I get the idea you are visualizing a bright point inside a large shroud. But if the shroud is illuminated by the point, the shroud then diffuses the light as though it were coming from the larger shroud. You can't have a point light coming from a large, bright shroud. That's not a workable answer to the opening post.

[Tom Bishop]

Tom, I get the idea you are visualizing a bright point inside a large shroud. But if the shroud is illuminated by the point, the shroud then diffuses the light as though it were coming from the larger shroud. You can't have a point light coming from a large, bright shroud. That's not a workable answer to the opening post.

You are making an assumption for what the surface of the sun is. Have you been there?

[Scroogie]

As in "leaves away from center" and travels to the circumference, at which point it exits the sun?

As in, in one outward direction away from the surface and center.

As in a single direction, such as straight up, directly west, or 25° north of WSW?

[Tom Bishop]

As in "leaves away from center" and travels to the circumference, at which point it exits the sun?

As in, in one outward direction away from the surface and center.

As in a single direction, such as straight up, directly west, or 25° north of WSW?

No.

[douglips]

How does an annular solar eclipse work if light shines out from the sun as if it were a point source?

[Scroogie]

As in "leaves away from center" and travels to the circumference, at which point it exits the sun?

As in, in one outward direction away from the surface and center.

As in a single direction, such as straight up, directly west, or 25° north of WSW?

No.

I'm sorry, now you've lost me. A single direction, but none of the above. Are you referring, then, to a specific single direction as opposed to a random single direction?

[Curious Squirrel]

How does an annular solar eclipse work if light shines out from the sun as if it were a point source?

Bingo. We don't need to know the nature of the sun, annular eclipses prove it doesn't function like a point source, but rather light is emitted from it's entire surface area. Hell, you couldn't have partial eclipses if it did so either.

[devils advocate]

You are making an assumption for what the surface of the sun is. Have you been there?

have YOU been there Tom? So you are in the same boat as everyone else and when we LOOK at the sun we can see that it is not a point light source as we see the light radiating from all sides

[JocelynSachs]

I'm pretty sure Tom was suggesting that light only leaves the surface of the sun in a direction perpendicular to its surface at that point. Which is clearly, outrageously untrue.

[StinkyOne]

Tom, I get the idea you are visualizing a bright point inside a large shroud. But if the shroud is illuminated by the point, the shroud then diffuses the light as though it were coming from the larger shroud. You can't have a point light coming from a large, bright shroud. That's not a workable answer to the opening post.

You are making an assumption for what the surface of the sun is. Have you been there?

You are also making assumptions about the Sun with a preconceived notion in mind. That is NOT Zetetic at all. Shame. Do you accept that photons are released when an electron drops from a higher energy state to a lower one?

Here is a pic of the total eclipse. The solar corona is visible. It is clearly visible that the Sun radiates energy in all directions.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_eclipse#/media/File:Solar_eclipse_1999_4_NR.jpg

Edit for clarity: as you can see in the image, energy that is not directed at the Earth is still visible. In order for this to be visible, light has to be radiating out in our direction. This is where I was going with the photon question, which I will expand upon if Tom accepts this very basic bit of physics.

[JocelynSachs]

Here is a pic of the total eclipse. The solar corona is visible. It is clearly visible that the Sun radiates energy in all directions.

For clarity, might I suggest "Each point on the surface of the sun radiates energy in all directions", because Tom's version of the sun radiates energy in all directions too.

[Scroogie]

I'm pretty sure Tom was suggesting that light only leaves the surface of the sun in a direction perpendicular to its surface at that point.

Tom, is that correct? IE, is that what you were suggesting?