The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Investigations => Topic started by: Tom Bishop on December 29, 2018, 03:41:54 AM
-
According to RET the Midnight Sun of the Arctic occurs because for a portion of the year the earth is tilted on it's axis, with the Arctic towards the sun, as the earth rotates:
(https://c.tadst.com/gfx/750x500/june-solstice-illustration.png?2)
This should produce a smoothly rotating sun around the Arctic that never sets.
In contradiction to this expected smoothness, we find videos of the sun from the Arctics which apparently zig-zaggs in the sky:
https://youtu.be/RdTduSstXVM
Source (https://youtu.be/ndlQNicOeso)
Under the Flat Earth Theory my interpretation of this is because the sun is close to the earth and much more subject to perspective and perspective lines, which are straight, and which is why the sun seems to be going on straight paths as it approaches and recedes, with abrupt changes of direction.
However, the Round Earth Theory proposes a sun that is very far away and is not subject to this sort of perspective.
How does RET explain this geometry of the sun's movement?
-
You didn't say at exactly which latitude and on what date the video was done. The Sun should only stay at a constant distance above the horizon at the North Pole and only on one day a year. Think about a person just a little below the Arctic circle. The Sun would dip down below the horizon, slowly rise, then slowly fall again below the horizon. Rinse & repeat. Please provide more information about the video for more exact information about the height vs azimuth information. It's all possible on the Globe Earth after all.
-
Does it matter what latitude it is on? Look at the diagram. The Northern Hemisphere of the earth is tilted towards the sun and is smoothly rotating:
(https://c.tadst.com/gfx/750x500/june-solstice-illustration.png?2)
-
Please think about your reply and do your homework.
I've provided an example in my first post were the Sun would go up & down when just below the Arctic circle. Going above the Arctic Circle won't matter much except for the magnitude of the bouncing until you got all the way to the North Pole. Sit down, really study the situation, and then let the math do the talking. It is completely earth agnostic and won't lie to you.
-
.... Look at the diagram.....
(https://c.tadst.com/gfx/750x500/june-solstice-illustration.png?2)
Indeed, let us do that.
At the "top" of the globe in the diagram where a spot along the arctic circle is close to, or touching, the day/night terminator (Let us say 11:59 PM), is the sun hitting the surface at a shallower angle than at a spot "down and to the right" along the arctic circle in the diagram where it is 'noon'?
Yes or no.
-
How does RET explain this geometry of the sun's movement?
By understanding trigonometry. A sine wave (not a zig-zag) is the natural result of plotting circular motion over the course of a straight line.
https://betterexplained.com/articles/intuitive-understanding-of-sine-waves/
(https://betterexplained.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/circle-two-sine-waves.gif)
-
This should produce a smoothly rotating sun around the Arctic that never sets.
In contradiction to this expected smoothness, we find videos of the sun from the Arctics which apparently zig-zaggs in the sky:
Why should it be smooth? Substantiate that statement.
"According to RET" it should undulate; the further you are from the pole, the more it will "zig zag." Only at 90° latitude will it be "smooth." Explain why you think otherwise.
-
How does RET explain this geometry of the sun's movement?
By understanding trigonometry. A sine wave (not a zig-zag) is the natural result of plotting circular motion over the course of a straight line.
https://betterexplained.com/articles/intuitive-understanding-of-sine-waves/
(https://betterexplained.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/circle-two-sine-waves.gif)
The sun is going around the observer. The observer isn't looking at the sun externally from its side.
This should produce a smoothly rotating sun around the Arctic that never sets.
In contradiction to this expected smoothness, we find videos of the sun from the Arctics which apparently zig-zaggs in the sky:
Why should it be smooth? Substantiate that statement.
"According to RET" it should undulate; the further you are from the pole, the more it will "zig zag." Only at 90° latitude will it be "smooth." Explain why you think otherwise.
I don't see anything like what is seen in the video in any of the polar views of the Sun Path programs. The sun is low to the horizon and circular around the observer.
http://andrewmarsh.com/apps/releases/sunpath2d.html
(https://i.imgur.com/sjXOQ8o.png)
Why not show us the Sun Path programs with a zig-zagging sun?
-
You just did.
-
The sun is practically hugging the horizon in the above web app as it circles the observer. Show us these zig-zags.
-
13° above the horizon to the North.
22° above the horizon to the West.
33° above the horizon to the South.
22° above the horizon to the East.
"Zig zag"
-
The closer to 90° (North Pole) latitude, the less the variation.
On that day (June 8th), at 90° latitude, the sun goes around a "smooth" 22°, 51' all the way around.
-
The sun is practically hugging the horizon in the above web app as it circles the observer. Show us these zig-zags.
I'm not seeing an RET issue:
(https://i.imgur.com/UbcUAqj.png)
It does the same thing in Antarctica, different time of year, only in the opposite direction:
(https://i.imgur.com/ZtGwHUI.png)
-
I just put that scenario into Stellarium and it looks exactly like the video. But Stellarium is entirely consistent with RET.
-
And here are the sun altitudes (in degrees) for a location 70 deg N, 0W corresponding to each hour of a 24 hour clock.
If you copy these numbers into a spreadsheet (use text import wizard and choose comma separated delimiter), then graph the second column, you will see something v familiar.
1, 3.18
2, 3.78
3, 5.52
4, 8.32
5, 12.02
6, 16.42
7, 21.25
8, 26.25
9, 31.1
10, 35.48
11, 39
12, 41.3
13, 42.08
14, 41.27
15, 38.95
16, 35.42
17, 31.03
18, 26.18
19, 21.2
20, 16.38
21, 12.02
22, 8.33
23, 5.57
24, 3.85
-
Tom,
If you place yourself at about 65N you will find that the Sun will follow exactly the type of behaviour that is shown in your original video. I am using Starry Night v7 software which of course is modelled according to RET. I set the latitude to 65.5N but without changing the longitude setting that I already had. That placed me according to the software 352km NW of Trondheim in Norway. By fast forwarding on the month through a couple of years I saw the Sun follow exactly the same 'zig zagging' pattern that your time lapsed video link shows.
From 65N latitude the Sun never goes far enough below the horizon to make the sky fully dark. You need to go further north in order for the sky to go fully dark as you would expect of the NP region. That again can be demonstrated very nicely in StarryNight. The free program Stellarium also shows the identical pattern.
So how then does your video provide evidence of FET?
-
How is this "problem" any different from on a Flat Earth if the sun is circling above the north pole.
In that scenario if you're at the north pole (left below) then surely the sun would go around you in a straight line at a constant altitude.
If you're off centre (right below) then the sun would be closer to you at some points of the day and further at other points and thus appear higher or lower
(https://i.ibb.co/KD4Qv36/Sun-At-North-Pole.jpg)
-
I just put that scenario into Stellarium and it looks exactly like the video. But Stellarium is entirely consistent with RET.
Stellarium isn't an RET program. It's based on patterns. It's made to replicate what is seen in real life with the sun's odd tendency to seem to approach and recede from you in straight lines.
Download Celestia, which is a 3D planetarium program. Navigate to the higher latitudes and you will find that there is no zig-zagging sun. The sun floats above the horizon around the observer just as expected:
(https://i.imgur.com/VpAUlVE.png)
-
Download Celestia, which is a planetarium program. Navigate to the higher latitudes and you will find that there is no zig-zagging sun. The sun floats across above horizon just as expected:
You get the same effect with Stellarium if you choose the planetarium view.
-
That red line and the blue line are converging at the edges of that screenshot. There is your zigging and zagging.
-
Download Celestia, which is a planetarium program. Navigate to the higher latitudes and you will find that there is no zig-zagging sun. The sun floats across above horizon just as expected:
You get the same effect with Stellarium if you choose the planetarium view.
Stellarium uses Earth-based equatorial/ecliptic coordinate system methods of pattern prediction, based on the patterns seen on the celestial "dome" above the observer.
Go to this website which describes such Earth-based equatorial coordinate system prediction methods and point out to us where the distance to the sun or the radius or diameter of the earth in RET is expressed: https://www.aa.quae.nl/en/reken/zonpositie.html
That red line and the blue line are converging at the edges of that screenshot. There is your zigging and zagging.
The same thing is seen at 80 degrees. The sun just floats above the horizon in a circle around the observer, regardless of whether it gets a little higher or lower.
That some can pretend that a circle around the observer and low to the horizon is a zig-zag is odd.
-
Download Celestia, which is a planetarium program. Navigate to the higher latitudes and you will find that there is no zig-zagging sun. The sun floats across above horizon just as expected:
You get the same effect with Stellarium if you choose the planetarium view.
Stellarium uses Earth-based equatorial/ecliptic coordinate system methods of pattern prediction, based on the patterns seen on the celestial "dome" above the observer.
So Stellarium will give different results from Celestia? Evidence please, using azimuth and altitude readings from each program.
That some can pretend that a circle around the observer and low to the horizon is a zig-zag is odd.
As I said above, depending on the view you choose (Stellarium) they appear as both. Not odd at all. Note the planetarium view shows the horizon as curved, indeed circular.
-
Download Celestia
So Tom this Celestia simulator, is that specifically made to simulate a FE world? If not then why should that be highlighted as any better or any different to any other space simulator available? Since FE theorists apparently don't think that any one or anything has gone beyond the Earths 'atmoplane' I can't see how any of that is relevant to you.
-
Download Celestia
So Tom this Celestia simulator, is that specifically made to simulate a FE world? If not then why should that be highlighted as any better or any different to any other space simulator available? Since FE theorists apparently don't think that any one or anything has gone beyond the Earths 'atmoplane' I can't see how any of that is relevant to you.
If it were designed to simulate an FE world that would be strange, given that NASA promote it and use it as part of their educational outreach https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestia.
-
Stack already explained above how a circle can appear both as a circle and a 'zig zag' i.e. a sin function.
(https://i.imgur.com/UbcUAqj.png)
-
Download Celestia, which is a 3D planetarium program. Navigate to the higher latitudes and you will find that there is no zig-zagging sun. The sun floats above the horizon around the observer just as expected:
I haven't downloaded or tried Celestia Tom but in mentioning this your point is??
Update to my last: I have now installed Celestia. On the face of it looks to be a good simulator. Opens up with a nice view of a big, round Earth!
-
Download Celestia, which is a 3D planetarium program. Navigate to the higher latitudes and you will find that there is no zig-zagging sun. The sun floats above the horizon around the observer just as expected:
I haven't downloaded or tried Celestia Tom but in mentioning this your point is??
Update to my last: I have now installed Celestia. On the face of it looks to be a good simulator. Opens up with a nice view of a big, round Earth!
Well done. Now, does the sun altitude show up?
-
I haven't got that far with it yet. So far great tool for exploring the solar system but not sure how to simulate the video yet that started this post. Will keep you updated.
-
Download Celestia, which is a 3D planetarium program. Navigate to the higher latitudes and you will find that there is no zig-zagging sun. The sun floats above the horizon around the observer just as expected:
(https://i.imgur.com/VpAUlVE.png)
I did. I found a "zig-zagging" sun, just as with the AndrewMarsh app you linked to earlier.
Allow me to decipher your Celestia screencap and explain:
(http://oi63.tinypic.com/ajmd08.jpg)
You had the red line of the sun's ecliptic displayed against a blue equatorial grid and a horizon reference for the earth.
My image takes the same snapshot and adds some elevation above the horizon lines (green) and an apparent path of the sun (white) in reference to that those.
Your snapshot was from a point in time 2 hours after the sun had reached its lowest elevation on that date, as seen from 75° north latitude. At the time of the your picture, the sun is ascending. It was ended its "zig" 2 hours earlier and is now on it's "zag."
Though this is for 2014, look at how the Andrew Marsh calculator depicts that: the sun is "zigging" just prior to reach N where it will reach it's lowest point over the horizon, and then will "zag" as the elevation increases over the next ~12 hours.
(http://oi68.tinypic.com/e6wz6p.jpg)
Checking this with Stellarium, and it's the same story. I put all 3 grids in (equatorial, azimuthal and ecliptic) so you could see how they are related.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2mFf0yzZEo
This is what is happening in the opening video you posted. I wouldn't call it "zig zag." More like "undulating" but it's not "smooth." The "zig zag" is a function of latitude. At 75°, it's "zig zags," as illustrated by the resources you brought to the table.
-
How does RET explain this geometry of the sun's movement?
By understanding trigonometry. A sine wave (not a zig-zag) is the natural result of plotting circular motion over the course of a straight line.
https://betterexplained.com/articles/intuitive-understanding-of-sine-waves/
(https://betterexplained.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/circle-two-sine-waves.gif)
The sun is going around the observer. The observer isn't looking at the sun externally from its side.
The observer is tracking the movement of the sun resulting in the zig-zagging. Perhaps this might help you visualize the sun's movements a little better:
http://astro.unl.edu/naap/motion3/animations/sunmotions.html
-
Under the Flat Earth Theory my interpretation of this is because the sun is close to the earth and much more subject to perspective and perspective lines, which are straight, and which is why the sun seems to be going on straight paths as it approaches and recedes, with abrupt changes of direction.
All I'm seeing is that the observation matches a globe earth model. What I'm not seeing is how the observation matches a flat earth model. If the sun is circling around you from this location somewhat equidistantly then it is not 'approaching' and 'receding', it's circling. The perspective doesn't change. The only other explanation for the observation would be that the sun changes altitudes when circling over a flat earth.
-
Stack already explained above how a circle can appear both as a circle and a 'zig zag' i.e. a sin function.
(https://i.imgur.com/UbcUAqj.png)
That image seems to imply a small and close sun that makes jarring movements near the observer, just as was suggested in the premise.
Now, rather than showing us something that more closely reflects our model, how about showing something which implies a sun that is 93 million miles away making a circle around the observer?
-
Tom,
From naked eye observations of the Sun in the sky only, how can you tell what the distance of the Sun from Earth is?
-
Stack already explained above how a circle can appear both as a circle and a 'zig zag' i.e. a sin function.
(https://i.imgur.com/UbcUAqj.png)
That image seems to imply a small and close sun that makes jarring movements near the observer, just as was suggested in the premise.
Now, rather than showing us something that more closely reflects our model, how about showing something which implies a sun that is 93 million miles away making a circle around the observer?
(1) There are no 'jarring movements'. The change in altitude is measurably the same as a sine wave.
(2) It is perfectly consistent with GET
(3) GET does not posit a sun 'making a circle around the observer'. The earth, hence the observer, is rotating
I don't know how FET explains the sine wave effect. Can you show us?
-
Stack already explained above how a circle can appear both as a circle and a 'zig zag' i.e. a sin function.
(https://i.imgur.com/UbcUAqj.png)
That image seems to imply a small and close sun that makes jarring movements near the observer, just as was suggested in the premise.
Now, rather than showing us something that more closely reflects our model, how about showing something which implies a sun that is 93 million miles away making a circle around the observer?
Ok, let's go with that, you're right, the image, yes, totally implies a small, 32 mile wide, 3000 mile high sun, just like on flat earth. It's, perhaps, a flat earth model. So given that it more closely resembles a flat earth model, why is it that the sun changes altitude like that? Rises up, lowers down when it does, zig zags, if you will, almost 'jarring movements', in your parlance, near the observer. On a flat earth? Curious, indeed.
Perspective is not the answer, it's circling around you (In my world I'm circling around it), not elliptically moving that far from or near to you to create such an effect, according to your own calculations/observations in previous posts. So what could it be? It can only mean that on a flat earth the sun is changing altitudes. And that's interesting. Because that would mean it's actually, physically, rising and falling. Why? How might we reconcile a flat earth sun, for whatever reason, ascending and descending like that. Again, 'perspective' is out, it's circling, too close. Flat Earth questions without Flat Earth answers. Why does your sun change altitudes?
-
Now, rather than showing us something that more closely reflects our model, how about showing something which implies a sun that is 93 million miles away making a circle around the observer?
Tom. the sun doesn't make a circle around the observer. It makes a circle around the poles, just like all the rest of the stars.
-
That image seems to imply a small and close sun that makes jarring movements near the observer, just as was suggested in the premise.
It doesn't imply that, seemingly or otherwise. I'll bow out of this since I don't know how else to contribute without challenging the level of reasoning that would lead one to interpret the illustrations being presented to you as you are doing.
Good luck.
-
Stack already explained above how a circle can appear both as a circle and a 'zig zag' i.e. a sin function.
(https://i.imgur.com/UbcUAqj.png)
That image seems to imply a small and close sun that makes jarring movements near the observer, just as was suggested in the premise.
Now, rather than showing us something that more closely reflects our model, how about showing something which implies a sun that is 93 million miles away making a circle around the observer?
(1) There are no 'jarring movements'. The change in altitude is measurably the same as a sine wave.
(2) It is perfectly consistent with GET
(3) GET does not posit a sun 'making a circle around the observer'. The earth, hence the observer, is rotating
I don't know how FET explains the sine wave effect. Can you show us?
I would suggest looking more into what the sine and cosine waves and functions are.
https://www.khanacademy.org/science/electrical-engineering/ee-circuit-analysis-topic/ee-ac-analysis/v/ee-sine-cosine-circles
Please point out for us where it says that it is what an observer would see when a body circles around them.
-
I think it effectively says that here
Sine and cosine can be generated by projecting the tip of a vector onto the y-axis and x-axis as the vector rotates about the origin
But even if I have interpreted that wrongly, you’ve linked to a page about circuits and electrical engineering. Why would the omission of that information add any weight to this debate. And like many things debated on here, this is not something one can debate. The observation is that the sun makes a sine wave in the sky near the Poles in their summer, the globe earth mode can predict and explain that observation (whether you understand that explanation is irrelevant), what is the FE explanation?
-
I think it effectively says that here
Sine and cosine can be generated by projecting the tip of a vector onto the y-axis and x-axis as the vector rotates about the origin
But even if I have interpreted that wrongly, you’ve linked to a page about circuits and electrical engineering. Why would the omission of that information add any weight to this debate. And like many things debated on here, this is not something one can debate. The observation is that the sun makes a sine wave in the sky near the Poles in their summer, the globe earth mode can predict and explain that observation (whether you understand that explanation is irrelevant), what is the FE explanation?
Please find a link about sines which says anything like you are describing.
All links describing sines show a 2D circle. If the horizon had no obstructions and the sun were horizontal to you, with it's bottom edge sliding across the horizon at all times, neither increasing or decreasing it's altitude, on a 2D plane just as the sine illustrations imply, how does the sine wave apply at all?
Sine is a mathematical function used for an entirely different purpose, not for this purpose. It appears that some here may be performing creative thinking in the spirit of theoretical rivelry.
-
I think it effectively says that here
Sine and cosine can be generated by projecting the tip of a vector onto the y-axis and x-axis as the vector rotates about the origin
But even if I have interpreted that wrongly, you’ve linked to a page about circuits and electrical engineering. Why would the omission of that information add any weight to this debate. And like many things debated on here, this is not something one can debate. The observation is that the sun makes a sine wave in the sky near the Poles in their summer, the globe earth mode can predict and explain that observation (whether you understand that explanation is irrelevant), what is the FE explanation?
Please find a link about sines which says anything like you are describing.
All links describing sines show a 2D circle. If the horizon had no obstructions and the sun were horizontal to you, with it's bottom edge sliding across the horizon at all times, neither increasing or decreasing it's altitude, on a 2D plane just as the sine illustrations imply, how does the sine wave apply at all?
Sine is a mathematical function used for an entirely different purpose, not for this purpose. It appears that some here may be performing creative thinking in the spirit of theoretical rivelry.
All fine and good and kind of 'whatever' at this point. But you're sort of, kind of, actually, completely, dodging the question at hand. In this observation, on a flat earth, why is the Sun bobbing up and down, changing altitudes? What part of FET explains this phenomena?
-
Sounds like your question asking the same thing as I did this morning under my FET Seasons' thread. Why exactly does the Suns distance from a point over the North Pole vary? Toms only reply so far is that the mechanism is 'unknown'.
-
Please find a link about sines which says anything like you are describing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Position_of_the_Sun
Sine is a mathematical function used for an entirely different purpose, not for this purpose.
Incorrect.
-
Actually this page is better
https://www.pveducation.org/pvcdrom/properties-of-sunlight/elevation-angle
Use the formula for 'elevation angle' for any latitude, hour of day and 'declination' (which corresponds to season).
You can easily reproduce this in a spreadsheet and perfectly replicate the 'zig zag' effect.
I think Tom will object that assume 'patterns'. Well fine, we can deal with that later but the question was whether the elevation has anything to do with the sin function.
YES IT DOES!
[EDIT] Actually that formula is well worth playing around with. Put in a declination angle of 23.49, meaning you are at the winter spring solstice in northern hemisphere, and put in a latitude of 66.567 (i.e. the latitude of the arctic circle). Then the bottom of the sine wave just touches the horizon. If you then head further north the wave gets shallower and shallower until at 90 degrees it is a straight line.