The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Theory => Topic started by: Scroogie on February 14, 2018, 03:55:19 AM
-
Browsing the tfes Wiki I came across the "Viewing Distance" subject, in which the concept of the "Vanishing Point", "beyond which no man can see", is discussed briefly. It is described thus:
"The vanishing point, beyond which no man can see, is created when his perspective lines approach each other at a certain angle smaller than the eye can see."
I must assume that this "Vanishing Point" has a finite and measurable length, or distance from the eye of the observer, as it is evoked to explain, in part, our inability to perceive objects beyond the "Vanishing Point". This limitation, in turn, is invoked to explain why, no matter how high we ascend above the flat earth, we will never see the edge.
The effectiveness of the "Vanishing Point" in limiting our vision is explained thus:
"The vanishing point acts as the limi[ti]ng point of all vision, as all bodies beyond it are too small and squished into the surface to see with the naked eye."
Now, does anyone out there have the numbers associated with the "Vanishing Point"? IE, how far from my eye is it? It seems, strangely, to vary with altitude, according to the Wiki article, so I'll rephrase the question. How far from my eye is it when I am standing on the surface of the flat earth, not above it?
-
Oh my, the lack of response here from the Flat Earth contingent is quite disappointing. In the introduction to the The Flat Earth Wiki it is stated that:
"As people walked through the ages collecting data and knowledge, the Flat Earth Theory walked with them, growing wise and robust in kind."
Were the Flat Earth Theorists also collecting data as they walked, or were they just smelling the roses? Given the complete lack of response to this thread one would not be remiss in concluding that the little tidbit of data requested has been overlooked by the society and was not collected. My initial reaction on reading the ramblings on perspective was that a bit of numerical data would be a handy thing with which to bolster one's position on the matter.
Apparently I was incorrect. Simply stating that perspective works as described is apparently sufficient to convince both believers and non believers alike.
-
It was less than a day after you made the original post. Spamming the upper fora whining about how no one replied to your thread is low-content since you aren't adding anything notable. Since you are on 3 warnings already, have a few days off to review the rules.
-
Browsing the tfes Wiki I came across the "Viewing Distance" subject, in which the concept of the "Vanishing Point", "beyond which no man can see", is discussed briefly. It is described thus:
"The vanishing point, beyond which no man can see, is created when his perspective lines approach each other at a certain angle smaller than the eye can see."
I must assume that this "Vanishing Point" has a finite and measurable length, or distance from the eye of the observer, as it is evoked to explain, in part, our inability to perceive objects beyond the "Vanishing Point". This limitation, in turn, is invoked to explain why, no matter how high we ascend above the flat earth, we will never see the edge.
The effectiveness of the "Vanishing Point" in limiting our vision is explained thus:
"The vanishing point acts as the limi[ti]ng point of all vision, as all bodies beyond it are too small and squished into the surface to see with the naked eye."
Now, does anyone out there have the numbers associated with the "Vanishing Point"? IE, how far from my eye is it? It seems, strangely, to vary with altitude, according to the Wiki article, so I'll rephrase the question. How far from my eye is it when I am standing on the surface of the flat earth, not above it?
There are too many variables missing in this vague and ambiguous struggle of yours, which you present in the form of a question. It is not worth giving the time for it and I hope no one else falls into this baited trap.
-
Browsing the tfes Wiki I came across the "Viewing Distance" subject, in which the concept of the "Vanishing Point", "beyond which no man can see", is discussed briefly. It is described thus:
"The vanishing point, beyond which no man can see, is created when his perspective lines approach each other at a certain angle smaller than the eye can see."
I must assume that this "Vanishing Point" has a finite and measurable length, or distance from the eye of the observer, as it is evoked to explain, in part, our inability to perceive objects beyond the "Vanishing Point". This limitation, in turn, is invoked to explain why, no matter how high we ascend above the flat earth, we will never see the edge.
The effectiveness of the "Vanishing Point" in limiting our vision is explained thus:
"The vanishing point acts as the limi[ti]ng point of all vision, as all bodies beyond it are too small and squished into the surface to see with the naked eye."
Now, does anyone out there have the numbers associated with the "Vanishing Point"? IE, how far from my eye is it? It seems, strangely, to vary with altitude, according to the Wiki article, so I'll rephrase the question. How far from my eye is it when I am standing on the surface of the flat earth, not above it?
There are too many variables missing in this vague and ambiguous struggle of yours, which you present in the form of a question. It is not worth giving the time for it and I hope no one else falls into this baited trap.
This isn't ambiguous; it may be verbose. Essentially he's asking for an explanation of why the vanishing point gets farther away with increasing altitude. The perspective argument doesn't cut it. Your assertion that "there are too many variables" suggests that you haven't done any sort of scientific research, where oftentimes there are far more noisy variables.
-
Browsing the tfes Wiki I came across the "Viewing Distance" subject, in which the concept of the "Vanishing Point", "beyond which no man can see", is discussed briefly. It is described thus:
"The vanishing point, beyond which no man can see, is created when his perspective lines approach each other at a certain angle smaller than the eye can see."
I must assume that this "Vanishing Point" has a finite and measurable length, or distance from the eye of the observer, as it is evoked to explain, in part, our inability to perceive objects beyond the "Vanishing Point". This limitation, in turn, is invoked to explain why, no matter how high we ascend above the flat earth, we will never see the edge.
The effectiveness of the "Vanishing Point" in limiting our vision is explained thus:
"The vanishing point acts as the limi[ti]ng point of all vision, as all bodies beyond it are too small and squished into the surface to see with the naked eye."
Now, does anyone out there have the numbers associated with the "Vanishing Point"? IE, how far from my eye is it? It seems, strangely, to vary with altitude, according to the Wiki article, so I'll rephrase the question. How far from my eye is it when I am standing on the surface of the flat earth, not above it?
There are too many variables missing in this vague and ambiguous struggle of yours, which you present in the form of a question. It is not worth giving the time for it and I hope no one else falls into this baited trap.
This isn't ambiguous; it may be verbose. Essentially he's asking for an explanation of why the vanishing point gets farther away with increasing altitude. The perspective argument doesn't cut it. Your assertion that "there are too many variables" suggests that you haven't done any sort of scientific research, where oftentimes there are far more noisy variables.
I believe that the OP was made by Scroogie, yes? What does Scroogie say to your stepping in on his (her?) behalf and interrupting my discourse to him (her?)? Just saying...
Respect
-
Now, does anyone out there have the numbers associated with the "Vanishing Point"? IE, how far from my eye is it? It seems, strangely, to vary with altitude, according to the Wiki article, so I'll rephrase the question. How far from my eye is it when I am standing on the surface of the flat earth, not above it?
There are too many variables missing in this vague and ambiguous struggle of yours, which you present in the form of a question. It is not worth giving the time for it and I hope no one else falls into this baited trap.
This isn't ambiguous; it may be verbose. Essentially he's asking for an explanation of why the vanishing point gets farther away with increasing altitude. The perspective argument doesn't cut it. Your assertion that "there are too many variables" suggests that you haven't done any sort of scientific research, where oftentimes there are far more noisy variables.
I believe that the OP was made by Scroogie, yes? What does Scroogie say to your stepping in on his (her?) behalf and interrupting my discourse to him (her?)? Just saying...
Respect
[/quote]
Well, Scroogie has been busy, so hasn't had time to play on the computer.
But, his question is just as stated - How far from my eye is it (the vanishing point) when I am standing on the surface of the flat earth, not above it?
-
But, his question is just as stated - How far from my eye is it (the vanishing point) when I am standing on the surface of the flat earth, not above it?
According EnaG: http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za32.htm (http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za32.htm)
The smallest angle under which an object can be seen is upon an average, for different sights, the sixtieth part of a degree, or one minute in space; so that when an object is removed from the eye 3000 times its own diameter,
and
(http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/img/fig75.jpg)
Let A, B, and C, D, represent two lines parallel but not equi-distant from the eye-line E, H. To an observer at E, the vanishing point of C, D, would be at H, because the lines C, D, and E, H, would come together at H, at an angle of one minute of a degree. But it is evident from a single glance at the diagram that H cannot be the vanishing point of A, B, because the distance E, A, being greater than E, C, the angle A, H, E, is also greater than C, H, E--is, in fact, considerably more than one minute of a degree. Therefore the line A, B, cannot possibly have its vanishing point on the line E, H, unless it is carried forward towards W. Hence the line A, W, is the true perspective line of A, B, forming an angle of one minute at W, which is the true vanishing point of A, B, as H is the vanishing point of C, D, and G, H, because these two lines are equidistant from the eye-line.
My result is: The distance to the vanishing point is 3000 times the hight of the observer.
-
ight of the observer.
Thank you for pointing me to the "Sacred Texts" article which actually gives us a number to work with.
Let's see, the moon is 32 miles in diameter, making its vanishing point (32 X 3000) 96,000 miles distant. Given its altitude of approximately 3,000 miles when it is over the equator (as it is now, near the spring equinox) it should be something just over 9,000 miles or so distant and just over 18 degrees above the horizon when it is at its furthest point from me. 9,000 miles is less than 1/10 of its vanishing point distance, so it should be plainly visible to me in the northern sky at a height which no amount of atmospheric refraction (no matter how impossibly imagined) can rent asunder.
Now, I'll admit that this scenario will take place during my daytime if I should watch during a full moon, so I'll have to watch for it during the waxing or waning phases, when the sun is not up yet. What do you think I will see?
Given its height above the equator of 18 degrees or more at all times, it should be quite easy to see a great many times when it is supposed to be below my horizon. So far, I've had no luck in this regard.