The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Theory => Topic started by: Serious_Lee on September 26, 2017, 02:06:08 PM

Title: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: Serious_Lee on September 26, 2017, 02:06:08 PM
This question keeps coming up throughout the forum but i haven't seen/read any reasonable explanation for the sun staying the same size as it moves further away towards the horizon. So i've done a very simple sketchup drawing highlighting what should be seen if we were on a flat earth but which we don't actually see in reality. FET puts the sun at 32 miles in diameter and the earth at 25 000 miles in diameter. So comparatively we have a very very small sun which should be getting smaller and smaller as its moving along its path horizontal to the earth.

This is a good video of a sunset in Hawaii which clearly shows that the sun remains the same size as its setting. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmgrtfXGQmI

Can any FE'ers provide an explanation for this?
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: Tom Bishop on September 26, 2017, 02:14:18 PM
This question keeps coming up throughout the forum but i haven't seen/read any reasonable explanation for the sun staying the same size as it moves further away towards the horizon.

What research have you done to determine our views on this?
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: Serious_Lee on September 26, 2017, 02:33:48 PM
This question keeps coming up throughout the forum but i haven't seen/read any reasonable explanation for the sun staying the same size as it moves further away towards the horizon.

What research have you done to determine our views on this?

I've searched the site and found no explanation why the law of perspective doesn't apply to the sun on a flat earth!

Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: TomInAustin on September 26, 2017, 02:36:19 PM
This question keeps coming up throughout the forum but i haven't seen/read any reasonable explanation for the sun staying the same size as it moves further away towards the horizon.

What research have you done to determine our views on this?

He most likely did what we all do, look out the window and see the sun does not get smaller.
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: Tom Bishop on September 26, 2017, 03:00:38 PM
This question keeps coming up throughout the forum but i haven't seen/read any reasonable explanation for the sun staying the same size as it moves further away towards the horizon.

What research have you done to determine our views on this?

I've searched the site and found no explanation why the law of perspective doesn't apply to the sun on a flat earth!

That's funny. Seeing that I have have participated in numerous discussions about this subject across this forum and the other one over the last 9 years and have written a wiki article on the subject, that Flat Earth authors have written about the subject for the last 150 years, and a chapter is dedicated to it in Earth Not a Globe, I think you have not looked hard enough.
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: Ga_x2 on September 26, 2017, 03:01:57 PM

That's funny. Seeing that I have talked about this subject across this forum and the other one for the last 9 years and have written a wiki article on the subject, I think you have not looked hard enough.
but still can't answer the simplest questions on perspective... psst Tom! This way! There are threads eagerly waiting for your input on the subject  ;D
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: Serious_Lee on September 26, 2017, 03:22:31 PM
This question keeps coming up throughout the forum but i haven't seen/read any reasonable explanation for the sun staying the same size as it moves further away towards the horizon.

What research have you done to determine our views on this?

I've searched the site and found no explanation why the law of perspective doesn't apply to the sun on a flat earth!

That's funny. Seeing that I have have participated in numerous discussions about this subject across this forum and the other one over the last 9 years and have written a wiki article on the subject, that Flat Earth authors have written about the subject for the last 150 years, and a chapter is dedicated to it in Earth Not a Globe, I think you have not looked hard enough.

Or maybe i have Tom. Your 'Magnification at Sunset' explanation makes ZERO sense when measured against real world testing. Was hoping for a different explanation as to why we don't see any change in the suns size as the law of perspective would dictate but obviously there is none. So here is the hard evidence:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrS87lS67wA

**Edit** I should mention that this video was created by a FE'er. He's managed to disprove the flat earth model which should show the sun getting considerably smaller due to perspective as it moves along its path.
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: 3DGeek on September 26, 2017, 04:30:34 PM
RULE #1 of Flat Earth Perspective:

   Perspective can do anything that Tom wants it to do - without further explanation or clarification being needed.

Honestly, Tom is unable (or more likely, unwilling) to answer the two simplest possible questions:

* At sunset, where is the sun physically located?
* What path do the photons take to get from the Sun into our Eyes at sunset?

If he can't answer even those two simple things - and not a single one of the other FE'ers will step up to the plate to answer them...then why would you assume that they'd be anything other than utterly clueless about the size of the sun at sunset?

As for the Wiki...it's a chaotic mess in this regard.

The summary of https://wiki.tfes.org/The_Setting_of_the_Sun (https://wiki.tfes.org/The_Setting_of_the_Sun) says that "The perspective lines nearly merge, causing the receding body to appear to collapse in on itself."...Ah!  So the sun should get smaller at the horizon!   Urh...but it doesn't.

Then right below that is a Rowbotham quote that basically claims that it's refraction that causes this effect (I've debunked that one - and Tom says he doesn't believe it).

Then, in https://wiki.tfes.org/Magnification_of_the_Sun_at_Sunset (https://wiki.tfes.org/Magnification_of_the_Sun_at_Sunset) it again quotes Rowbotham - only this time he's claiming that the sun's image is magnified by water droplets in the air (in the manner that street lamps appear to get larger into the distance on a foggy day).   I debunked this one too...plus see photos of sunset over death valley or the sahara desert - where the humidity is nearly zero and there ARE no water droplets.

Then, in https://wiki.tfes.org/Electromagnetic_Accelerator (https://wiki.tfes.org/Electromagnetic_Accelerator) it says that the suns rays are bent according to some funky equation containing the "Bishop Constant".  Tom says this one isn't true...which is a wise decision because it's stupidly easy to debunk.

Then, in https://wiki.tfes.org/Optics (https://wiki.tfes.org/Optics) is quotes Rowbotham AGAIN, only now he's saying that "the angular limits of the human eye" are involved in the whole sorry mess.  Evidently, Mr Rowbotham had never taken a photograph to see whether the human eye truly was the issue here.

Truly - reading the Wiki about this is a complete waste of time.

The FE'ers are totally all over the map about sunsets - and this should come as no surprise.   Short of magic, no set of optical effects can explain the position *AND* the roundness *AND* the size of the setting sun.   Any prediction based on any of their ideas breaks one of those three self-evident properties.   And that's before we ask how the setting sun can illuminate the undersides of clouds and airplanes...even AFTER it's gone away (I want to say "gone below the horizon" - but FET can't make THAT happen either...so for chrissakes don't even try to ask what happens when the sun sets into a notch in the horizon caused by a deep valley!

Look - FET is busted.

So long as nobody has the guts to tell us the path of the photons...their entire tissue of nonsensical junk theories has collapsed around them.  Tom has CLEARLY decided to "chicken out" of this one!




Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: Tom Bishop on September 26, 2017, 04:54:57 PM
RULE #1 of Flat Earth Perspective:

   Perspective can do anything that Tom wants it to do - without further explanation or clarification being needed.

Honestly, Tom is unable (or more likely, unwilling) to answer the two simplest possible questions:

* At sunset, where is the sun physically located?
* What path do the photons take to get from the Sun into our Eyes at sunset?

If he can't answer even those two simple things - and not a single one of the other FE'ers will step up to the plate to answer them...then why would you assume that they'd be anything other than utterly clueless about the size of the sun at sunset?

As for the Wiki...it's a chaotic mess in this regard.

The summary of https://wiki.tfes.org/The_Setting_of_the_Sun (https://wiki.tfes.org/The_Setting_of_the_Sun) says that "The perspective lines nearly merge, causing the receding body to appear to collapse in on itself."...Ah!  So the sun should get smaller at the horizon!   Urh...but it doesn't.

Then right below that is a Rowbotham quote that basically claims that it's refraction that causes this effect (I've debunked that one - and Tom says he doesn't believe it).

Then, in https://wiki.tfes.org/Magnification_of_the_Sun_at_Sunset (https://wiki.tfes.org/Magnification_of_the_Sun_at_Sunset) it again quotes Rowbotham - only this time he's claiming that the sun's image is magnified by water droplets in the air (in the manner that street lamps appear to get larger into the distance on a foggy day).   I debunked this one too...plus see photos of sunset over death valley or the sahara desert - where the humidity is nearly zero and there ARE no water droplets.

Then, in https://wiki.tfes.org/Electromagnetic_Accelerator (https://wiki.tfes.org/Electromagnetic_Accelerator) it says that the suns rays are bent according to some funky equation containing the "Bishop Constant".  Tom says this one isn't true...which is a wise decision because it's stupidly easy to debunk.

Then, in https://wiki.tfes.org/Optics (https://wiki.tfes.org/Optics) is quotes Rowbotham AGAIN, only now he's saying that "the angular limits of the human eye" are involved in the whole sorry mess.  Evidently, Mr Rowbotham had never taken a photograph to see whether the human eye truly was the issue here.

Truly - reading the Wiki about this is a complete waste of time.

The FE'ers are totally all over the map about sunsets - and this should come as no surprise.   Short of magic, no set of optical effects can explain the position *AND* the roundness *AND* the size of the setting sun.   Any prediction based on any of their ideas breaks one of those three self-evident properties.   And that's before we ask how the setting sun can illuminate the undersides of clouds and airplanes...even AFTER it's gone away (I want to say "gone below the horizon" - but FET can't make THAT happen either...so for chrissakes don't even try to ask what happens when the sun sets into a notch in the horizon caused by a deep valley!

Look - FET is busted.

So long as nobody has the guts to tell us the path of the photons...their entire tissue of nonsensical junk theories has collapsed around them.  Tom has CLEARLY decided to "chicken out" of this one!

Please stay on topic. Most of your post is talking about sun set and not sun size. There is another thread on that topic for you to post your rants to.
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: 3DGeek on September 26, 2017, 05:12:18 PM
RULE #1 of Flat Earth Perspective:

   Perspective can do anything that Tom wants it to do - without further explanation or clarification being needed.

Honestly, Tom is unable (or more likely, unwilling) to answer the two simplest possible questions:

* At sunset, where is the sun physically located?
* What path do the photons take to get from the Sun into our Eyes at sunset?

If he can't answer even those two simple things - and not a single one of the other FE'ers will step up to the plate to answer them...then why would you assume that they'd be anything other than utterly clueless about the size of the sun at sunset?

As for the Wiki...it's a chaotic mess in this regard.

The summary of https://wiki.tfes.org/The_Setting_of_the_Sun (https://wiki.tfes.org/The_Setting_of_the_Sun) says that "The perspective lines nearly merge, causing the receding body to appear to collapse in on itself."...Ah!  So the sun should get smaller at the horizon!   Urh...but it doesn't.

Then right below that is a Rowbotham quote that basically claims that it's refraction that causes this effect (I've debunked that one - and Tom says he doesn't believe it).

Then, in https://wiki.tfes.org/Magnification_of_the_Sun_at_Sunset (https://wiki.tfes.org/Magnification_of_the_Sun_at_Sunset) it again quotes Rowbotham - only this time he's claiming that the sun's image is magnified by water droplets in the air (in the manner that street lamps appear to get larger into the distance on a foggy day).   I debunked this one too...plus see photos of sunset over death valley or the sahara desert - where the humidity is nearly zero and there ARE no water droplets.

Then, in https://wiki.tfes.org/Electromagnetic_Accelerator (https://wiki.tfes.org/Electromagnetic_Accelerator) it says that the suns rays are bent according to some funky equation containing the "Bishop Constant".  Tom says this one isn't true...which is a wise decision because it's stupidly easy to debunk.

Then, in https://wiki.tfes.org/Optics (https://wiki.tfes.org/Optics) is quotes Rowbotham AGAIN, only now he's saying that "the angular limits of the human eye" are involved in the whole sorry mess.  Evidently, Mr Rowbotham had never taken a photograph to see whether the human eye truly was the issue here.

Truly - reading the Wiki about this is a complete waste of time.

The FE'ers are totally all over the map about sunsets - and this should come as no surprise.   Short of magic, no set of optical effects can explain the position *AND* the roundness *AND* the size of the setting sun.   Any prediction based on any of their ideas breaks one of those three self-evident properties.   And that's before we ask how the setting sun can illuminate the undersides of clouds and airplanes...even AFTER it's gone away (I want to say "gone below the horizon" - but FET can't make THAT happen either...so for chrissakes don't even try to ask what happens when the sun sets into a notch in the horizon caused by a deep valley!

Look - FET is busted.

So long as nobody has the guts to tell us the path of the photons...their entire tissue of nonsensical junk theories has collapsed around them.  Tom has CLEARLY decided to "chicken out" of this one!

Please stay on topic. Most of your post is talking about sun set and not sun size. There is another thread on that topic for you to post your rants to.

They are NOT unrelated.   Perspective changes the apparent SIZE of things as well as their apparent position.  The fact that you don't seem to understand this actually underpins one of the major ways we know that your theory is broken.

If perspective is somehow able to bring something from 3,000 miles up down to zero - then it must also bring something 3,015 and something 2,985 miles to very nearly zero - which would result in the sun being far, far smaller than it seems at noon.

He who lives by perspective also dies by perspective.
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: Tom Bishop on September 26, 2017, 05:37:39 PM
They are NOT unrelated.   Perspective changes the apparent SIZE of things as well as their apparent position.  The fact that you don't seem to understand this actually underpins one of the major ways we know that your theory is broken.

If perspective is somehow able to bring something from 3,000 miles up down to zero - then it must also bring something 3,015 and something 2,985 miles to very nearly zero - which would result in the sun being far, far smaller than it seems at noon.

He who lives by perspective also dies by perspective.

They are not unrelated, but that is not the reason this thread was posted. A specific question was asked and you should try to stay on topic. It is disrespectful to go off on tangents and ignore the question asked.
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: Tom Bishop on September 26, 2017, 05:42:05 PM
Or maybe i have Tom. Your 'Magnification at Sunset' explanation makes ZERO sense when measured against real world testing. Was hoping for a different explanation as to why we don't see any change in the suns size as the law of perspective would dictate but obviously there is none.

Why would we give a different explanation other than the one published in the Wiki and our Flat Earth literature?

What is wrong with the explanation?
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: Curious Squirrel on September 26, 2017, 07:04:05 PM
Or maybe i have Tom. Your 'Magnification at Sunset' explanation makes ZERO sense when measured against real world testing. Was hoping for a different explanation as to why we don't see any change in the suns size as the law of perspective would dictate but obviously there is none.

Why would we give a different explanation other than the one published in the Wiki and our Flat Earth literature?

What is wrong with the explanation?
I mean, you've told us practically half the wiki is actually wrong by this point. Becomes difficult to keep track of what's up to date and what isn't you know.

The problem with it though is that it does a piss poor job of explaining how it happens in exactly the same way, every single night, across every location on Earth. That's what's wrong with it.
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: Tom Bishop on September 26, 2017, 08:08:02 PM
I mean, you've told us practically half the wiki is actually wrong by this point. Becomes difficult to keep track of what's up to date and what isn't you know.

Where have I said that?

Quote
The problem with it though is that it does a piss poor job of explaining how it happens in exactly the same way, every single night, across every location on Earth. That's what's wrong with it.

Why? Does the atmosphere not exist at other parts on earth?
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: Curious Squirrel on September 26, 2017, 09:18:30 PM
I mean, you've told us practically half the wiki is actually wrong by this point. Becomes difficult to keep track of what's up to date and what isn't you know.

Where have I said that?

Quote
The problem with it though is that it does a piss poor job of explaining how it happens in exactly the same way, every single night, across every location on Earth. That's what's wrong with it.

Why? Does the atmosphere not exist at other parts on earth?
Too tired of your shit to go quote mining right now. All of EA for starters though. Neither map is actually a map. Sleepy or I would have more.

It's that the atmosphere varies widely across the globe, and there's nothing suggesting something above us that is distorting the view of the sun in such a way. No measurements about it have ever been recorded, and EnaG gives something like 3 different reasons it happens. You've got guesses at best. Everything is based on "I don't see what I would call curvature so the Earth must be flat" and deny anything that doesn't fit that, as well as have to come up with an incredibly amount of excuses to explain why all of these tests fit a globe model perfectly. But that's off-topic.

The fact is you have no measurements (that I've ever seen) for anything having such an effect upon the sun to help it keep it's size. None. Just the vague claim that boils down to "Well the Earth is flat so there *has* to be something."
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: 3DGeek on September 26, 2017, 09:43:59 PM
Or maybe i have Tom. Your 'Magnification at Sunset' explanation makes ZERO sense when measured against real world testing. Was hoping for a different explanation as to why we don't see any change in the suns size as the law of perspective would dictate but obviously there is none.

Why would we give a different explanation other than the one published in the Wiki and our Flat Earth literature?

What is wrong with the explanation?

Well, in my post, above, where I explained this (which you are evidently trying to brush off as "off-topic") I list half a dozen places in the Wiki where clearly contradictory explanations are given.

If you think there is nothing wrong with that then it's no surprise that people are confused when they read it and request some clarification.
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: StinkyOne on September 27, 2017, 12:19:41 AM
I mean, you've told us practically half the wiki is actually wrong by this point. Becomes difficult to keep track of what's up to date and what isn't you know.

Where have I said that?

Quote
The problem with it though is that it does a piss poor job of explaining how it happens in exactly the same way, every single night, across every location on Earth. That's what's wrong with it.

Why? Does the atmosphere not exist at other parts on earth?

Tom, I pointed out that the very first 100 proofs was demonstrably wrong and you quipped that it was written in the 1800's. Then here recently, I see you make reference to it again as though it was factual. The Wiki is so short on details it is essentially worthless for someone who questions why.
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: Serious_Lee on September 27, 2017, 09:06:30 AM
Or maybe i have Tom. Your 'Magnification at Sunset' explanation makes ZERO sense when measured against real world testing. Was hoping for a different explanation as to why we don't see any change in the suns size as the law of perspective would dictate but obviously there is none.

Why would we give a different explanation other than the one published in the Wiki and our Flat Earth literature?

What is wrong with the explanation?


These are some statements from your wiki. There are a few things that I want to point out here that is contradictory to what i've posted.

1. From Wiki - 'The sun remains the same size as it recedes into the distance due to a known magnification effect caused by the intense rays of light passing through the strata of the atmolayer.'

Yes, I agree that LIGHT passing through a denser medium can distort to some degree the size of the object. Like a car's headlights shining through fog will create a haze effect around the headlight itself. However, in the video I posted with the sun viewed through a welders glass, the LIGHT of the sun is filtered out which leaves us with only the sun itself moving towards the horizon. The video clearly shows that the sun itself does not change in size as would be expected on a flat earth.


2. From Wiki - "IT is well known that when a light of any kind shines through a dense medium it appears larger, or magnified, at a given distance than when it is seen through a lighter medium. This is more remarkable when the medium holds aqueous particles or vapour in solution, as in a damp or foggy atmosphere. Anyone may be satisfied of this by standing within a few yards of an ordinary street lamp, and noticing the size of the flame; on going away to many times the distance, the light upon the atmosphere will appear considerably larger. This phenomenon may be noticed, to a greater or less degree, at all times; but when the air is moist and vapoury it is more intense. It is evident that at sunrise, and at sunset, the sun's light must shine through a greater length of atmospheric air than at mid-day; besides which, the air near the earth is both more dense, and holds more watery particles in solution, than the higher strata through which the sun shines at noonday; and hence the light must be dilated or magnified, as well as modified in colour."
—"Earth Not a Globe", Samuel Birley Rowbotham


Here Rowbotham confirms that LIGHT itself causes the object to appear larger. Not that the object itself increases in size. So if it's only the LIGHT of the sun which makes it appear larger than what it is, then why does the video show the sun not shrinking with perspective as its moving towards the horizon?
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: 3DGeek on September 27, 2017, 12:12:52 PM
1. From Wiki - 'The sun remains the same size as it recedes into the distance due to a known magnification effect caused by the intense rays of light passing through the strata of the atmolayer.'

The other problem with this stupid statement is that it's not just the Sun that "sets" - the moon, the planets, stars, comets...all of those things disappear over the horizon.

So it can't be anything to do with the "intense rays of light" because even the dimmest stars set over the horizon.

Whoever wrote that sentence obviously wasn't thinking very clearly!

Quote

2. From Wiki - "IT is well known that when a light of any kind shines through a dense medium it appears larger, or magnified, at a given distance than when it is seen through a lighter medium. This is more remarkable when the medium holds aqueous particles or vapour in solution, as in a damp or foggy atmosphere. Anyone may be satisfied of this by standing within a few yards of an ordinary street lamp, and noticing the size of the flame; on going away to many times the distance, the light upon the atmosphere will appear considerably larger. This phenomenon may be noticed, to a greater or less degree, at all times; but when the air is moist and vapoury it is more intense. It is evident that at sunrise, and at sunset, the sun's light must shine through a greater length of atmospheric air than at mid-day; besides which, the air near the earth is both more dense, and holds more watery particles in solution, than the higher strata through which the sun shines at noonday; and hence the light must be dilated or magnified, as well as modified in colour."
—"Earth Not a Globe", Samuel Birley Rowbotham


Here Rowbotham confirms that LIGHT itself causes the object to appear larger. Not that the object itself increases in size. So if it's only the LIGHT of the sun which makes it appear larger than what it is, then why does the video show the sun not shrinking with perspective as its moving towards the horizon?

And again...in the photos of the receding street lamps - it's only the brightly glowing bulbs that seem to "grow" in size - the light poles themselves don't retain their size.   The claim must be that they aren't bright enough to cause the effect - but yet the dimmest planets can be shown to produce a disk that doesn't get smaller as they cross the horizon.

So the "sunset phenomenon" can't possibly have anything to do with the brightness of the object.

Which brings us back to Tom's "magic perspective" that somehow moves the apparent positions of things to the horizon - but doesn't also squash them flat or make them get smaller like "normal" perspective.  His claim that this is due to the brightness of the sun doesn't explain the setting of the moon, stars, planets, etc...so it's clearly not true.

Tom's is an indefensible claim...it simply doesn't hold water EVEN IF you accept it's premise.
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: junker on September 27, 2017, 04:08:27 PM
Quoted post moved here: https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6541.msg127204#msg127204

This post was already split and moved to the lower fora. No need to post it again. It wasn't interesting the first time and still isn't. Please refrain from low-content posing in the upper fora. Warned.
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: DarkStar on September 29, 2017, 03:30:25 PM
Why would we give a different explanation other than the one published in the Wiki and our Flat Earth literature?

What is wrong with the explanation?

1. From Wiki - 'The sun remains the same size as it recedes into the distance due to a known magnification effect caused by the intense rays of light passing through the strata of the atmolayer.'


What ISN'T wrong with that statement?

#1 it is an assertion unsupported by any observation or fact.  Your simplistic appeals are not sound arguments.

#2 atmoSPHERIC refraction, caused by the pressure differential created by gravity, causes the sun to actually appear to SHRINK along the vertical axis in the moments before sunset and this shrinking fits completely within the Globe model (http://aty.sdsu.edu/explain/atmos_refr/flattening.html (http://aty.sdsu.edu/explain/atmos_refr/flattening.html) -- note how I have the model, the science, and observation on my side?).  The WIDTH of the sun remains the same.  Your appeal to unevidenced atmoSPHERIC effects do not hold water as the Globe does due to Gravity.

#3 the AMOUNT of magnification required to keep a 3000-something-mile distant Sun the same size as it zooms off would require nuclear explosion levels of changes in the atmoSPHERE that would end all human life.  Please show me where YOU calculated the temperature and pressure differentials required to maintain such an effect and explained how they magically don't appear to anyone else but the distant observer and how they manage even greater horizontal magnification!

#4 a huge proportion of Flat Earthers claim it does shrink - here is a little helpful graphic to help stop them from embarrassing themselves and your 'movement'

(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-MiSKTnBOMLo/WUBkG0WXsiI/AAAAAAAAET8/ycoRftTXXLUrQRyIwMZC9zgp-S0opyabgCLcBGAs/s1600/Sun-doesnt-change-size-exposure-moon-meme.png)


Flat Earth thoroughly debunked: https://flatearthinsanity.blogspot.com/ (https://flatearthinsanity.blogspot.com/)
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: 3DGeek on September 29, 2017, 03:54:21 PM
Why would we give a different explanation other than the one published in the Wiki and our Flat Earth literature?

What is wrong with the explanation?

1. From Wiki - 'The sun remains the same size as it recedes into the distance due to a known magnification effect caused by the intense rays of light passing through the strata of the atmolayer.'


OK Tom.  Let me explain why it's incorrect.  I'll try to use simple words and no math for your benefit.

What is wrong with this claim is that if only objects with "intense" light remain the same size - then this doesn't explain how the Moon also sets over the horizon without getting smaller.

And if you claim that the moon is sufficiently intense - how about (for example) Jupiter?  It certainly sets over the horizon when it's in the Northern hemisphere skies (as it has been for many months).

Jupiter is a rather dim object.  It's easy to show that the disk of Jupiter remains the same size as it crosses the horizon - just as the sun does.

You can see Jupiter's disk quite well with a 200x telescope.  Tom claims to own a 500x scope - so he can go out tonight and observe this for himself quite easily.

So if "intense rays of light" are the cause of constant sizes of objects as the cross the sky - then objects that are clearly not "intense" should get smaller.   We know that airplanes get smaller - so anything that's no brighter than an airplane should get smaller.  Jupiter is MUCH dimmer than an airplane.

Also, what about this picture?  It's a photo of the recent solar eclipse at sunset:

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/ff/3b/2b/ff3b2b7171ec408072a88157479bb940.jpg)

The sun is pretty dim at this point - yet it's still a perfect circle. (Google "solar eclipse at sunset" and you'll find a bunch more).

So this entry in the Wiki is CLEARLY 100% incorrect.

Quote
Why would we give a different explanation other than the one published in the Wiki and our Flat Earth literature?

Because the one you give there is clearly not true.
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: Tom Bishop on September 30, 2017, 04:40:58 AM
OK Tom.  Let me explain why it's incorrect.  I'll try to use simple words and no math for your benefit.

What is wrong with this claim is that if only objects with "intense" light remain the same size - then this doesn't explain how the Moon also sets over the horizon without getting smaller.

And if you claim that the moon is sufficiently intense - how about (for example) Jupiter?  It certainly sets over the horizon when it's in the Northern hemisphere skies (as it has been for many months).

Jupiter is a rather dim object.  It's easy to show that the disk of Jupiter remains the same size as it crosses the horizon - just as the sun does.

You can see Jupiter's disk quite well with a 200x telescope.  Tom claims to own a 500x scope - so he can go out tonight and observe this for himself quite easily.

Jupiter and the stars fade out before hitting the horizon.

Quote
So if "intense rays of light" are the cause of constant sizes of objects as the cross the sky - then objects that are clearly not "intense" should get smaller.   We know that airplanes get smaller - so anything that's no brighter than an airplane should get smaller.  Jupiter is MUCH dimmer than an airplane.

Your logic is fallacious. Jupiter is not seen at the horizon.

Quote
(http://Also, what about this picture?  It's a photo of the recent solar eclipse at sunset:

[img]https://i.pinimg.com/originals/ff/3b/2b/ff3b2b7171ec408072a88157479bb940.jpg)

The sun is pretty dim at this point - yet it's still a perfect circle. (Google "solar eclipse at sunset" and you'll find a bunch more).

The absolute intensity of the sun is the same. The sun is bright enough to project onto the atmosphere. From that point it may dim with increased distance. The same may be true of the stars or the moon.

Your logic that the sun should follow the same rules as a less luminous object is not equatable. The sun exists as a bright object and at its setting we are seeing it when it is diluted after it has passed through a lot of atmosphere. The situations is not comparable to bodies which are non-luminous or of less luminosity.
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: 3DGeek on September 30, 2017, 05:31:19 AM
Your logic is fallacious. Jupiter is not seen at the horizon.

WHAT?!?!  How can you simply guess - or barefacedly lie about such things?

Here is a photo of the moon and Jupiter on the horizon:

(https://astrojourney.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/moon_jupiter_22.jpg)

I can clearly see Jupiter set from my back porch every evening - it's a naked eye object.

Quote
Quote
Also, what about this picture?  It's a photo of the recent solar eclipse at sunset:
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/ff/3b/2b/ff3b2b7171ec408072a88157479bb940.jpg)

The sun is pretty dim at this point - yet it's still a perfect circle. (Google "solar eclipse at sunset" and you'll find a bunch more).

The absolute intensity of the sun is the same. The sun is bright enough to project onto the atmosphere. From that point it may dim with increased distance. The same may be true of the stars or the moon.

Your logic that the sun should follow the same rules as a less luminous object is not equatable. The sun exists as a bright object and we are seeing it when it is diluted after it has passed through a lot of atmosphere. The situations is not comparable to bodies which are non-luminous or of less luminosity.

Can anyone understand what Tom just said here?

Quote
The absolute intensity of the sun is the same.

Er..no...the world around you goes DARK during a solar eclipse.  It's like midnight...there is no way the intensity is the same.   The moon is blocking almost all of the light from it.

Quote
The sun is bright enough to project onto the atmosphere.

How can anything project onto something that's transparent?!?  This is just babble.

Quote
From that point it may dim with increased distance. The same may be true of the stars or the moon.

But the Wiki says that only INTENSE light does this.   There are stars that are extremely dim.

So are you saying that there are THREE completely separate mechanisms?

1) For "intense" light sources (even if blocked almost completely by the moon), then the intensity of the light makes them bigger in defiance of perspective (even "altered perspective").
2) For Jupiter - they fade out before reaching the horizon (clearly, demonstrably, untrue).
3) For stars and moon...which are dim...something else?!?  (We can easily see the moon set without the moon getting smaller - that's a naked eye test!)

Tom - your explanations are spiralling away into confusion here.

Could you perhaps take the time to write a simple description about how sunsets/moonsets/planetsets and starsets happen - checking first your facts about what can and cannot be seen - and accounting both for the depression of the object onto the horizon AND the surprising fact that these things don't get smaller with range - no matter the brightness.

Because right now, you're giving a very tangled unclear explanation.

(Oh...and DO tell us how the photons get from the physical location of the sun/moon into my eyes at sunset!  We're all sitting on the edges of our seats waiting for your pronouncement on this one!)
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: Tom Bishop on September 30, 2017, 05:43:17 AM
Er..no...the world around you goes DARK during a solar eclipse.  It's like midnight...there is no way the intensity is the same.   The moon is blocking almost all of the light from it.

Any section of the sun that is revealed is bright enough to catch onto the atmosphere.

Quote
How can anything project onto something that's transparent?!?  This is just babble.

The atmosphere is semi-transparent. Look at a distant mountain sometime. It will be diluted in color.

Quote
But the Wiki says that only INTENSE light does this.   There are stars that are extremely dim.

The intensity between space and the atmosphere is a different matter than between the atmosphere and the eye.

Quote
2) For Jupiter - they fade out before reaching the horizon (clearly, demonstrably, untrue).

Incorrect. Look at a startrail. The stars fade and most celestial bodies fade out before hitting the horizon.

http://www.capella-observatory.com/images/StarTrails/STRICHSPUR-08.jpg

http://www.astronet.ru/db/msg/1210491/eng/

Quote
3) For stars and moon...which are dim...something else?!?  (We can easily see the moon set without the moon getting smaller - that's a naked eye test!)

Again, the intensity between space and the atmosphere is different than the intensity between the atmosphere and the eye.

Quote
Tom - your explanations are spiralling away into confusion here.

Could you perhaps take the time to write a simple description about how sunsets/moonsets/planetsets and starsets happen - checking first your facts about what can and cannot be seen - and accounting both for the depression of the object onto the horizon AND the surprising fact that these things don't get smaller with range - no matter the brightness.

Refer to the explanation in the Wiki. You have pointed out no contradictions except to say things like the horizon makes things dim and therefore the enlarging effect should not occur. Your reasoning does not consider the intensity of the bodies between space and the atmosphere.

Quote
(Oh...and DO tell us how the photons get from the physical location of the sun/moon into my eyes at sunset!  We're all sitting on the edges of our seats waiting for your pronouncement on this one!)

This was already explained to you.
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: Tom Bishop on September 30, 2017, 05:49:58 AM
Your logic is fallacious. Jupiter is not seen at the horizon.

WHAT?!?!  How can you simply guess - or barefacedly lie about such things?

Here is a photo of the moon and Jupiter on the horizon:

(https://astrojourney.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/moon_jupiter_22.jpg)

You are wrong. This is not a photograph.

Look at where the image appears on this website: https://astrojourney.wordpress.com/2010/08/22/events-for-september-2010-center-stage-for-the-georgian-star-as-introduced-by-jupiter/

Notice the caption beneath it: "This shows where the Moon and Jupiter will be at sunset, but you probably won't be bale to pick Jupiter out for another half hour or more. It will tag along with the Moon as they both rise. (Prepared from Starry Nights Pro screen shot.)"
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: 3DGeek on September 30, 2017, 05:50:17 AM
Quote
(Oh...and DO tell us how the photons get from the physical location of the sun/moon into my eyes at sunset!  We're all sitting on the edges of our seats waiting for your pronouncement on this one!)

This was already explained to you.

No you most certainly have not - and you KNOW it.   You've never once told us exactly what path a photon takes as it travels from the PHYSICAL location of the sun (3000 miles above someplace on Earth where it's Noon right now) into my eye when I'm looking at the sun at sunset.

You've dodged and avoided and answered entirely different questions - but you have NOT answered this one.  PANTS...ON...FIRE!!!

Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: 3DGeek on September 30, 2017, 05:56:05 AM
Your logic is fallacious. Jupiter is not seen at the horizon.

WHAT?!?!  How can you simply guess - or barefacedly lie about such things?

Here is a photo of the moon and Jupiter on the horizon:

(https://astrojourney.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/moon_jupiter_22.jpg)

You are wrong. This is not a photograph.

Look at where the image appears on this website: https://astrojourney.wordpress.com/2010/08/22/events-for-september-2010-center-stage-for-the-georgian-star-as-introduced-by-jupiter/

Notice the caption beneath it: "This shows where the Moon and Jupiter will be at sunset, but you probably won't be bale to pick Jupiter out for another half hour or more. It will tag along with the Moon as they both rise. (Prepared from Starry Nights Pro screen shot.)"

Oh...my bad!  I picked one of the MANY from Google images. Here is a better one - along with an article that describes how and when the picture was taken:

(https://www.space.com/14875-venus-jupiter-skywatcher-photos-march-2012.html)
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: Tom Bishop on September 30, 2017, 06:08:00 AM
Oh...my bad!  I picked one of the MANY from Google images. Here is a better one - along with an article that describes how and when the picture was taken:

https://www.space.com/14875-venus-jupiter-skywatcher-photos-march-2012.html

Neither planet is at the horizon. In fact, we see that they are above the portion of the sky that changes color, where the atmosphere begins to builds up in the distance. All stars in that picture fade out in that area. That discolored area is where the not-perfectly-transparent atmosphere builds up to block out most celestial bodies and significantly dim the sun and moon.
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: Tom Bishop on September 30, 2017, 06:11:39 AM
Quote
(Oh...and DO tell us how the photons get from the physical location of the sun/moon into my eyes at sunset!  We're all sitting on the edges of our seats waiting for your pronouncement on this one!)

This was already explained to you.

No you most certainly have not - and you KNOW it.   You've never once told us exactly what path a photon takes as it travels from the PHYSICAL location of the sun (3000 miles above someplace on Earth where it's Noon right now) into my eye when I'm looking at the sun at sunset.

You've dodged and avoided and answered entirely different questions - but you have NOT answered this one.  PANTS...ON...FIRE!!!

I have explained this to you on multiple occasions. I will can make a thread specifically for you when I have time, but you will have to wait. In the meantime you should go back and review our past conversations. This is not really on topic to this thread.
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: xenotolerance on September 30, 2017, 04:32:52 PM
I have explained this to you on multiple occasions. I will can make a thread specifically for you when I have time, but you will have to wait. In the meantime you should go back and review our past conversations. This is not really on topic to this thread.

Here (https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=7001.0) is one especially relevant past conversation relating to perspective. An attentive reader may notice that Tom did not 'explain this' to anyone.

The topics of perspective, sunset, and the apparent size of the sun are closely related, and it makes sense to combine them in any debate thread. After all, that thread just picked up on where this debate thread about sunsets (https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6875.0) left off. We're circling the same set of topics, so let us embrace all of them.
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: JHelzer on September 30, 2017, 10:36:36 PM
I was looking at the star trail pictures Tom posted up above and I wondered where the perspective convergence is.
If the stars are all moving away from us off into the distance until the horizon and stars meet at the vanishing point. Should they not also converge horizontally and not just vertically?  Shouldn't start trails look like this...
(https://www.mytrexinc.com/g/fe/fe-startrail.png)

instead of this...
(http://en.es-static.us/upl/2013/04/star-trail-over-baja-california.jpg)
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: douglips on October 01, 2017, 07:52:39 AM
3DGeek I have to also point out that the eclipse photo is clearly a picture of an annular eclipse. This is not the same thing as a total eclipse, the photosphere of the sun is still visible and is quite bright.

That being said, the "video of headlights" explanation on the wiki page does conflict with the annular eclipse photo.

People looking at the video of headlights and saying that the headlights don't get any bigger are ignoring two really important things:
- The sun, if it is 3000 miles away as in some FE theories, is approximately 30 miles wide. Headlights are 3 inches wide, and would appear to be smaller than the sun even at only 30 feet away from us.
- the DISTANCE BETWEEN THE HEADLIGHTS does change as you would expect.

The annular eclipse photo is essentially a ring of headlights. Why does the annular eclipse ring not shrink at the horizon when the distance between headlights does shrink in all the videos that are supposed to explain how perspective doesn't work for bright objects?
Title: Re: Why doesn't the sun get smaller with perspective?
Post by: douglips on October 01, 2017, 07:56:07 AM
Also: I have an ENTIRE THREAD on star tracks that doesn't seem to be getting anywhere:
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6818.0

Even in the photo Tom posted, you can see the curvature of the star tracks stop as you get to the celestial equator. In flat earth theory, the star tracks should all form circles around the north celestial pole, right? Eagerly awaiting flat earth hypotheses for the southern stars.