[cone_sun]

I was looking at the standard FE theory and thinking about how the sun only lights up parts of the earth at a time.  And I've heard this theory described as the lighthouse theory, and I was wondering if it would make sense for the sun to be conical, with light shining out of the flat circular part, and it would pivot around the tip to shine light on different parts of the world.  And it would explain why the sun appears circular, because we only see the circular part.  And with this in mind, it would allow us to wonder if different so-called planets are different shapes and we only see a circular face due to geometry.

Thoughts?  Has anyone considered alternate shapes of the planets and the planar earth?

[Bad Puppy]

Of course it's possible.  Give it some time and they'll find a way to bend the light around the dome, invent some maths, and voila.  Conical sun.

Even a spherical sun on a flat earth can't explain the Antarctic summer solstice.  So, the problem isn't the shape of the sun.  It's the other thing.

[EartherUnMaster]

A conical sun still would have various degrees of oblateness to anyone not experiencing local noon - that is, if the glowing face of the sun were flat. With a curved face (teardrop-shaped sun?), it would be possible to view it as a universally circular disk.
Even we can rule out every other possible model of the sun, it would just be only a single facet of the its description; the issues of angular momentum, size and even whatever the heck it even is remains unsolved.

Concerning the earth itself, I'd had an idea of a Hersey's drop shaped earth. One part flat, one part convex curve, one part concave curve. Now I don't believe this one bit, but it's fun to imagine.

[JCM]

Sunspots taking approximately 27 days to visibly rotate around to come back to the same location as viewable from the same location on Earth is a huge problem for these questions about the Sun’s shape.  The angular rotation of the sunspots at various latitudes of the Sun match a spherical rotation. 

The Sun does change size throughout the year interestingly.  The angular size of the Sun as seen through filters changes size incredibly slowly from aphelion to perihelion over 6 months.  At aphelion the Sun occupies 31.46 arc minutes or .52538 of a degree of sky.  At perihelion the Sun occupies 32.53 arc minutes or .543251 degrees of sky.  Or better said the Sun is 3.6% larger at perihelion then at aphelion.  To the eye, this is indistinguishable, but filtered photos of the Sun clearly show the size difference.   

At sunset, the Sun appears to be larger, but it is not, as seen through filters, the Sun is the same size throughout the day.  This is a geometric optical illusion known as the Ponzo Effect.  The brain perceives the increase in depth of the Moon or Sun combined with constant light size near the horizon and it translates it into a seemingly larger object. Again, photographs throughout the day with the same focal length and filters shows this to be an illusion.  This effect is easily demonstrated by looking down a dark street illuminated only with streetlights, our brains interpret the lights to be larger the farther they are as they have more depth.

[WellRoundedIndividual]

However, there are still disagreements on the exact explanation of this illusion - some attribute it to the Ponzo Effect. Others attribute it to the Ebbinghaus illusion.  The fact that it is an illusion is an established fact. The CAUSE of the illusion is still debated.

But other thoughts on the cone sun...

A simple test determining starlight aberration will tell you that the Earth does truly rotate around the sun in combination with the observed rotation of the sunspots dispenses with the need to invent a different shape of the sun and orbit of the sun.  A cone sun is simply an ad hoc/post hoc explanation.

[JCM]

However, there are still disagreements on the exact explanation of this illusion - some attribute it to the Ponzo Effect. Others attribute it to the Ebbinghaus illusion.  The fact that it is an illusion is an established fact. The CAUSE of the illusion is still debated.

But other thoughts on the cone sun...

A simple test determining starlight aberration will tell you that the Earth does truly rotate around the sun in combination with the observed rotation of the sunspots dispenses with the need to invent a different shape of the sun and orbit of the sun.  A cone sun is simply an ad hoc/post hoc explanation.

That Ebbinghaus illusion is pretty trippy, I have seen versions of that before but did not know the name.  The two phenomenon are both applicable looks like to me.   What is clear is that it is our brains making it larger.  There are some good documentaries which show how bad we are at interpreting accurately what we are seeing.  Depth, colors, and shadows all mess with our brain as it fills in the gaps and makes massive shortcuts (assumptions) even while we consciously pay attention to it and can see its effect over and over and over.   

[JCM]

However, there are still disagreements on the exact explanation of this illusion - some attribute it to the Ponzo Effect. Others attribute it to the Ebbinghaus illusion.  The fact that it is an illusion is an established fact. The CAUSE of the illusion is still debated.

But other thoughts on the cone sun...

A simple test determining starlight aberration will tell you that the Earth does truly rotate around the sun in combination with the observed rotation of the sunspots dispenses with the need to invent a different shape of the sun and orbit of the sun.  A cone sun is simply an ad hoc/post hoc explanation.

Relating to the Earth orbiting the Sun, I have not seen good FET explanations for why our view of the stars changes from season to season either, Hemisphere-wise seasonally as well for stars near the horizon.   I try to stick to geometry and basic observation anyone can make when discussing these issues.  Seems to me concepts like star aberration and other intricate measurements just causes many  FE supporters to roll their eyes and not even consider it.

[WellRoundedIndividual]

I agree with your comment that they can both be applicable. I just wanted to make sure we had a full disclosure on the matter before someone might have chimed in and said that because the cause was not determined that therefore it is not evidence of anything - when that is not the case.


Well, I am not sure the concept of starlight aberration is really that hard to understand. They agree that parallax exists but say that math can also prove that parallax shows a flat earth. Starlight aberration is simply shown to be of the same magnitude for all stars. If parallax calculated either by one method or another shows that stars are at varying distances (whether or not those distances are far far away or not), then at the same time starlight aberration shows that velocity is of the same magnitude for all stars that is conclusive evidence that it is our frame of reference that has velocity.  Now, I may have simplified the concept a bit, but that does not negate the results. I have searched all the forums here and other places and no one has really discussed aberration for at least a few years.

[Balls Dingo]

A conical sun still would have various degrees of oblateness to anyone not experiencing local noon - that is, if the glowing face of the sun were flat. With a curved face (teardrop-shaped sun?), it would be possible to view it as a universally circular disk.

A curved shape that appears circular to observers viewing at different solar altitude and azimuth is impossible. In fact, I'd go further and say there is no curved shaped that would appear circular to different observers on just one of those coordinate systems. For example, if that curved shape appeared circular to someone viewing the sun with a solar altitude of 45 degrees, it would appear squashed (an oval) at 90 degrees, and vice versa. A cone sun is not possible, nor is a projected or reflected cone sun. Nor is a projected or reflected sun of any shape on any surface or layer for that matter.

[jimster]

The issue is not the shape of the sun. Suppose you are in a dark room and someone across the room is holding a flashlight poining down. Due to dust in the air reflecting light, you will see the beam, like you see searchlights at grand openings and shooting down planes in WW2. The air also diffuses the light, as you see for a short while after sunset when it is still light after the sun is below the horizon. An hour after sunset, you would see the cone of light shining down, as I said, like a giant spotlight pointing down in the distance.

And you WOULD see it. You can see stars all over the dome everywhere on earth, so we know we can see across the entire diameter of the earth.

FE has never explained where the sun goes at night and why you can't see it off in the distance, yet you can see stars over the entire dome. The sun that was so bright at your noon is not just distant at nioght, you can see stars through it. If it isn't simultaneously bright to those under it and invisible to those seeing stars right through it, where is it?