Perspective lines meeting is observed. Look at a long straight line of railroad scene. The tracks appear to meet to perspective. There is zero evidence for your infinitely receding perspective lines idea.
Again, this is nothing to do with perspective. Shadow angle relies on the
physical relationship between the light source and the object which the shadow is cast of.
Please show a diagram demonstrating how you think an object which is physically above you can appear to be below you by perspective.
If "the horizon rises to eye level" (which has shown to be false multiple ways) and the sun "descends to eye level" by perspective (which it doesn't) and they thus merge, causing sunset, then if you're standing on Mount Rainier the shadow would surely be pointing directly behind you, not pointing upwards as in the famous picture.
Or is your claim that the photo only works because it's taken from ground level so from that perspective the sun does appear below the mountain so the shadow points upwards?
If so you are basically claiming that the angle of the shadow depends on where you are, if you're at ground level the sun appears to be below the mountain so the shadow points upwards and hits the clouds and if you're on the mountain then the sun appears level with the top of the mountain so the shadow is directly behind you?
It can't be both, the shadow points where it points.
I'd love to see a diagram of what you think is going on in the famous Rainier photo.
My advice, look into EA more - it has its problems but it works a lot better at explaining certain things than this botched model of perspective does.