1
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Lunar Eclipses
« on: January 13, 2020, 04:38:30 PM »
This doesn’t seem to be geometrically possible. Can you provide a sketch which would illustrate the angles?
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.
Pages: [1]
2
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Lunar Eclipses
« on: January 13, 2020, 03:54:22 PM »However the correct alignment to produce lunar eclipse would beThis is incorrect. All that needs to be visible from the night side is the antimoon's shadow.
Sun
Anti Moon (night side)
Moon (night side)
This isn’t entirely correct. Specifically the shadow of the anti moon needs to be seen on the moon. Since the anti moon is on the other side of the sun. The shadow points away from the moon.
3
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Lunar Eclipses
« on: January 13, 2020, 02:12:12 PM »
Per the Wiki
However lunar eclipses always occur during night, or the night side of the earth to use your termiology.
This gives the following alignment according to your model
Antimoon (day side)
Sun
Moon (night side)
However the correct alignment to produce lunar eclipse would be
Sun
Anti Moon (night side)
Moon (night side)
So your model seems to be flawed.
Quote
The shadow object is never seen in the sky because it orbits the sun on the day side of the earth,
However lunar eclipses always occur during night, or the night side of the earth to use your termiology.
This gives the following alignment according to your model
Antimoon (day side)
Sun
Moon (night side)
However the correct alignment to produce lunar eclipse would be
Sun
Anti Moon (night side)
Moon (night side)
So your model seems to be flawed.
4
Flat Earth Theory / Lunar Eclipses
« on: January 13, 2020, 09:55:25 AM »
So after reading the wiki, I don’t understand a few things.
If the anti moon is only around in the day, and lunar eclipses are only seen in the night. How can lunar eclipses work?
Wouldn’t the sun always be between the moon and the anti moon?
If the anti moon is only around in the day, and lunar eclipses are only seen in the night. How can lunar eclipses work?
Wouldn’t the sun always be between the moon and the anti moon?
5
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Revisiting Bedford Level Experiment
« on: January 09, 2020, 08:27:36 PM »
Funny you should mention that......
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bedford_Level_experiment
Quote
Rowbotham repeated his experiments several times over the years but his claims received little attention until, in 1870, a supporter by the name of John Hampden offered a wager that he could show, by repeating Rowbotham's experiment, that the earth was flat. The noted naturalist and qualified surveyor Alfred Russel Wallace accepted the wager. Wallace, by virtue of his surveyor's training and knowledge of physics, avoided the errors of the preceding experiments and won the bet.[5][6] The crucial steps were to
Set a sight line 13 feet (4 m) above the water, and thereby reduce the effects of atmospheric refraction, and
Add a pole in the middle that could be used to see the "bump" caused by the curvature of the earth between the two end points.[1]
Despite Hampden initially refusing to accept the demonstration, Wallace was awarded the bet by the referee, editor of The Field sports magazine. Hampden subsequently published a pamphlet alleging that Wallace had cheated and sued for his money. Several protracted court cases ensued, with the result that Hampden was imprisoned for threatening to kill Wallace[7] and for libel.[8][9] The same court ruled that the wager had been invalid because Hampden retracted the bet and required that Wallace return the money to Hampden. Wallace, who had been unaware of Rowbotham's earlier experiments, was criticized by his peers for "his 'injudicious' involvement in a bet to 'decide' the most fundamental and established of scientific facts".[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bedford_Level_experiment
6
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Revisiting Bedford Level Experiment
« on: January 07, 2020, 06:05:58 PM »
Hi,
Don’t mean to hijack this conversation, but I do have two comments.
I agree with somerleds position that if you have a flat earth model, refraction doesn’t make sense as the line of sight is always perpendicular with the thermal gradient, so refraction would always be zero.
But you do have two problems otherwise.
1. In the Wiki, it is stated that one of the reasons that ships vanish below the horizon, which is basically the same thing as this Bedford experiment, is refraction. You can have it both ways, either refraction interferes with the path of light in the flat earth model or it doesn’t.
2. Whenever I have seen these “Rowbotham effecst” demonstrated, it is pretty clear that the experimenter always puts the observation point and the target very close to the ground. (including Rowbotham). The reason seem pretty obvious, when you are close to the ground, the thermal gradient is the highest and therefore the refraction is the highest and you get the illusion that the earth is curved more than it actually is. If you see others perform the experiment, they always make sure to do it well above the surface which minimizes refraction and shows that the earth is curved.
Don’t mean to hijack this conversation, but I do have two comments.
I agree with somerleds position that if you have a flat earth model, refraction doesn’t make sense as the line of sight is always perpendicular with the thermal gradient, so refraction would always be zero.
But you do have two problems otherwise.
1. In the Wiki, it is stated that one of the reasons that ships vanish below the horizon, which is basically the same thing as this Bedford experiment, is refraction. You can have it both ways, either refraction interferes with the path of light in the flat earth model or it doesn’t.
2. Whenever I have seen these “Rowbotham effecst” demonstrated, it is pretty clear that the experimenter always puts the observation point and the target very close to the ground. (including Rowbotham). The reason seem pretty obvious, when you are close to the ground, the thermal gradient is the highest and therefore the refraction is the highest and you get the illusion that the earth is curved more than it actually is. If you see others perform the experiment, they always make sure to do it well above the surface which minimizes refraction and shows that the earth is curved.
Pages: [1]