[pj1]

Pete favours EA which claims that there is a force which bends light upwards so the light simply goes up and over our heads. That one sort of works but I don't think there's any actual evidence of that force. You could argue that sunset is that evidence but that is circular reasoning.

Thanks for the further info. Out of those explanations I think the above is the most logical / least ridiculous.

[Ofcourseitsnotflat]

OK, so ...

What shape is this 'spotlight'? Does it have any body or substance behind the 'lit face'? What shape is the 'lit face'?

[JRowe]

Perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't understand why (when the we can't see the spotlight pointing at us) we don't see something akin to this?

See attached

Again, how close does the Sun appear to get to the Earth upon sunset?
That is the height you are expecting to see light in. You are expecting to see light with a zero dimension. There's nothing to see.

[JRowe]

OK, so ...

What shape is this 'spotlight'? Does it have any body or substance behind the 'lit face'? What shape is the 'lit face'?

Circular, yes, circular.

[AATW]

OK, so ...

What shape is this 'spotlight'? Does it have any body or substance behind the 'lit face'? What shape is the 'lit face'?

Circular, yes, circular.

Please tell me you don't think that the sun is literally a spotlight which only shines light in one direction?
Clue: What is the only shape which appears to be a circle no matter of which direction you look at it from?
Where is the sun at sunset in your model?

[JRowe]

OK, so ...

What shape is this 'spotlight'? Does it have any body or substance behind the 'lit face'? What shape is the 'lit face'?

Circular, yes, circular.

Please tell me you don't think that the sun is literally a spotlight which only shines light in one direction?
Clue: What is the only shape which appears to be a circle no matter of which direction you look at it from?
Where is the sun at sunset in your model?

Not as trivial to answer as you think, space isn't a constant.

[Bobby Shafto]

Perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't understand why (when the we can't see the spotlight pointing at us) we don't see something akin to this?

See attached

Again, how close does the Sun appear to get to the Earth upon sunset?
That is the height you are expecting to see light in. You are expecting to see light with a zero dimension. There's nothing to see.

1. How can a sun that's above the plane of the earth appear close to the earth upon sunset?
2. Why is it that we pass out of its spotlight pattern the moment it appears to be eclipsed by the earth?
3. Why can I see the sun again if I rise in altitude (even while moving further away from the sun)?
4. Is there an altitude at which I could be where I will not be in the spotlight pattern but could still see it cast upon the earth in the distance?
5. Why does the sun appear circular until appearing close to the earth (and even, when atmospheric conditions permit, as it appears eclipsed by the earth)?
6. How is the moon illuminated by the sun if the sun casts its light in a spotlight pattern? (I know you promote moon generating it's own light, but I ask to be sure this is integrated with your answers)

[JRowe]

1. How can a sun that's above the plane of the earth appear close to the earth upon sunset?
2. Why is it that we pass out of its spotlight pattern the moment it appears to be eclipsed by the earth?
3. Why can I see the sun again if I rise in altitude (even while moving further away from the sun)?
4. Is there an altitude at which I could be where I will not be in the spotlight pattern but could still see it cast upon the earth in the distance?
5. Why does the sun appear circular until appearing close to the earth (and even, when atmospheric conditions permit, as it appears eclipsed by the earth)?
6. How is the moon illuminated by the sun if the sun casts its light in a spotlight pattern? (I know you promote moon generating it's own light, but I ask to be sure this is integrated with your answers)

1.
2. What? it is never eclipsed by the Earth. it just gets far enough away that it can't be seen, which would obviously coincide with appearing to be near the Earth.
3, 4, 5. Like i said above, space isn't constant, there's no way to explain the intricacies without going through pages of underlying physics (like any science, answers are built on what comes before, there are consequences), if you're interested click my sig and get back to me.
6. Like you said, the moon generates it's own light, in much the same fashion. What needs to be integrated?

[Ofcourseitsnotflat]

OK, so ...

What shape is this 'spotlight'? Does it have any body or substance behind the 'lit face'? What shape is the 'lit face'?

Circular, yes, circular.

So ..... why does it never appear elliptical? If we see the 'lit face' at mid-day, and we can't see this face at night, what has happened inbetween? Has the lit face turned away from us? If so, why didn't we see it as an ellipse as it turned?

[Ofcourseitsnotflat]

space isn't a constant.

How do you KNOW this, and how would you prove it to everyone here?

[JRowe]

OK, so ...

What shape is this 'spotlight'? Does it have any body or substance behind the 'lit face'? What shape is the 'lit face'?

Circular, yes, circular.

So ..... why does it never appear elliptical? If we see the 'lit face' at mid-day, and we can't see this face at night, what has happened inbetween? Has the lit face turned away from us? If so, why didn't we see it as an ellipse as it turned?

See above, don't just pretend people haven't asked the same.

space isn't a constant.

How do you KNOW this, and how would you prove it to everyone here?

See sig, and for the love of god, again, actually read the thread, this is just obnoxious.

[Ofcourseitsnotflat]

it is never eclipsed by the Earth. it just gets far enough away that it can't be seen, which would obviously coincide with appearing to be near the Earth.

But surely if it was getting farther away, it would decrease in angular size? It doesn't. Surely if it was going far enough away not to be seen, we would see it diminishing in size? We don't.

[JRowe]

it is never eclipsed by the Earth. it just gets far enough away that it can't be seen, which would obviously coincide with appearing to be near the Earth.

But surely if it was getting farther away, it would decrease in angular size? It doesn't. Surely if it was going far enough away not to be seen, we would see it diminishing in size? We don't.

*continues to bang head on wall*

You would've seen i'd posted given that was put up after mine, there's an alert when there's a new post, are you just physically incapable of reading a thread?

[edby]

it is never eclipsed by the Earth. it just gets far enough away that it can't be seen, which would obviously coincide with appearing to be near the Earth.

But surely if it was getting farther away, it would decrease in angular size? It doesn't. Surely if it was going far enough away not to be seen, we would see it diminishing in size? We don't.

*continues to bang head on wall*

You would've seen i'd posted given that was put up after mine, there's an alert when there's a new post, are you just physically incapable of reading a thread?

I have read this thread twice and I don't see the bit where it explains why a nearby sun doesn't decrease in angular size as it moves further away.

[edit]Also, I don't understand "space isn't a constant".

[JRowe]

[edit]Also, I don't understand "space isn't a constant".

That's basically what it comes down to; under my model space varies in 'concentration' depending on location, and follows generally intuitive rules. Under RET it is assumed that space is homogenous; not proven, it's just a postulate. When that isn't assumed, everything basically falls into place.

[edby]

[edit]Also, I don't understand "space isn't a constant".

That's basically what it comes down to; under my model space varies in 'concentration' depending on location, and follows generally intuitive rules. Under RET it is assumed that space is homogenous; not proven, it's just a postulate. When that isn't assumed, everything basically falls into place.

You mean space has a kind of density? What would happen if you put a ruler into the less concentrated space? Would it shrink?

[JRowe]

[edit]Also, I don't understand "space isn't a constant".

That's basically what it comes down to; under my model space varies in 'concentration' depending on location, and follows generally intuitive rules. Under RET it is assumed that space is homogenous; not proven, it's just a postulate. When that isn't assumed, everything basically falls into place.

You mean space has a kind of density? What would happen if you put a ruler into the less concentrated space? Would it shrink?

Other way around. Think of it like a spring; the length along the coils is constant, but if you put multiple compressed springs end on end, a stretched spring would be able to cover the same distance. You'd only notice anything when the concentrations transition.

[Bobby Shafto]

1. How can a sun that's above the plane of the earth appear close to the earth upon sunset?

1.

If by that you mean "perspective," it doesn't resolve to explain how the sun (or moon) can decline to the horizon line. Surely you are not subscribing to the Earth Not a Globe ersatz explanation of perspective.

How can a sun with a constant angular width of about 0.5° ever reach the horizon due to perspective? Disappear to a dot (vanishing point) 20° above the horizon given the size/dimensions of the TFES Wiki cosmos? Sure. You'd need a lot more distance to approach the horizon, and an explanation for why the sun doesn't proportionally appear to diminish in size.

Don't just show me train tracks. That's not an answer I'd expect from you.

[Bobby Shafto]

2. Why is it that we pass out of its spotlight pattern the moment it appears to be eclipsed by the earth?

2. What? it is never eclipsed by the Earth. it just gets far enough away that it can't be seen, which would obviously coincide with appearing to be near the Earth.

I used the word "appears" for a reason, knowing that you do not believe it is actually eclipsed by the earth.

It disappears as a full orb, bottom up. It's the same visual appearance as if the sun has gone behind a mountain ridge or other elevated terrestrial feature. It doesn't fade or diminish as a whole. It gets cut off at the horizon, starting with the lower limb and then proceeding upward until the upper limb is extinguished. That's not the behavior of a light getting just far enough away that it can't be seen. Is it just coincidence that this phenomenon occurs when the sun appears to intersect with the earth, and the earth has nothing to do with it?

[edby]

From what he says above, I think he means that as the sun gets more distant, the space becomes less concentrated, and (by analogy with his example about compressed springs) the sun expands. But at the very same time, it is getting more distant so the perspective effect compresses it again. So it appears the same size to us.

My next question would be why people standing further West directly underneath the sun do not notice that it is expanding.