Southern Cross from Australia
« on: November 03, 2018, 03:28:57 AM »
I work nightshift in the lower half of Australia and am wondering, how is it possible to see the Southern Cross rotate as if on an axis to the south of it. Shouldn't it fly across the sky in FE theory?
 I almost became a believer until this little riddle.
« Last Edit: November 03, 2018, 03:31:53 AM by OnTheFenceButLeaningRound »

*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1436
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: Southern Cross from Australia
« Reply #1 on: November 03, 2018, 08:26:09 AM »
I work nightshift in the lower half of Australia and am wondering, how is it possible to see the Southern Cross rotate as if on an axis to the south of it. Shouldn't it fly across the sky in FE theory?
 I almost became a believer until this little riddle.
I live near Brisbane, at about 27°S latitude, and if I look south on a clear night the looks a bit like the hour hand of a huge 24 hr clock, appearing to rotate clockwise at about 15°/hr.

I'll leave it to you to solve "this little riddle".

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6235
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Southern Cross from Australia
« Reply #2 on: November 03, 2018, 05:53:00 PM »
I work nightshift in the lower half of Australia and am wondering, how is it possible to see the Southern Cross rotate as if on an axis to the south of it. Shouldn't it fly across the sky in FE theory?
 I almost became a believer until this little riddle.
I live near Brisbane, at about 27°S latitude, and if I look south on a clear night the looks a bit like the hour hand of a huge 24 hr clock, appearing to rotate clockwise at about 15°/hr.

I'll leave it to you to solve "this little riddle".

What evidence do you have of 15 degrees per hour? Round Earth Theory's special pleading says that the observations of stars slowing as they approach the horizon is "refraction".

*

Offline Bobby Shafto

  • *
  • Posts: 1383
  • https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCdv72TaxoaafQr8WD
    • View Profile
    • Bobby Shafto YouTube Channel
Re: Southern Cross from Australia
« Reply #3 on: November 03, 2018, 08:01:36 PM »

What evidence do you have of 15 degrees per hour? Round Earth Theory's special pleading says that the observations of stars slowing as they approach the horizon is "refraction".

May I, rab?

Is Stellarium proof enough?

View from Brisbane.
Set for today.
Atmosphere not displayed so we can follow the stars during daylight.
Starting with the Crux (Alpha, Beta, Gamma and Delta) at the top of an imaginary clock with 360° face.
Display of the equatorial grid with the southern polar star (Sigma Oct) at the center.
24 steps (1 for each hour).
360°/24 hrs = 15°/hr



I won't address the "special pleading" of refraction near the horizon since it is irrelevant and will risk taking the discussion off topic.

*

Online Bad Puppy

  • *
  • Posts: 184
  • Belief does not make something a theory.
    • View Profile
Re: Southern Cross from Australia
« Reply #4 on: November 03, 2018, 08:02:44 PM »
I work nightshift in the lower half of Australia and am wondering, how is it possible to see the Southern Cross rotate as if on an axis to the south of it. Shouldn't it fly across the sky in FE theory?
 I almost became a believer until this little riddle.
I live near Brisbane, at about 27°S latitude, and if I look south on a clear night the looks a bit like the hour hand of a huge 24 hr clock, appearing to rotate clockwise at about 15°/hr.

I'll leave it to you to solve "this little riddle".

What evidence do you have of 15 degrees per hour? Round Earth Theory's special pleading says that the observations of stars slowing as they approach the horizon is "refraction".

Are you saying that stars don't move 15 degrees per hour?
Quote from: Tom Bishop
...circles do not exist and pi is not 3.14159...

Quote from: totallackey
Do you have any evidence of reality?

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6235
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Southern Cross from Australia
« Reply #5 on: November 03, 2018, 08:35:43 PM »
Astronomers claim that the reason the celestial bodies don't match theory in such examples is because there is a permanent refraction effect which can do many marvelous things such as slow bodies down as they approach the horizon.

"As you can see the stars get significantly closer together as they get closer to the horizon" --Mick West

From the Wikipedia page on Atmospheric Refraction we read:

"Whenever possible, astronomers will schedule their observations around the times of culmination, when celestial objects are highest in the sky."

This should give you an idea of the magnitude of refraction they are claiming. Any theoretical prediction based on uniform movement will likely not manifest in reality, considering all of this "refraction" necessary to salvage the Round Earth Theory.
« Last Edit: November 03, 2018, 08:47:13 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Bobby Shafto

  • *
  • Posts: 1383
  • https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCdv72TaxoaafQr8WD
    • View Profile
    • Bobby Shafto YouTube Channel
Re: Southern Cross from Australia
« Reply #6 on: November 03, 2018, 08:46:21 PM »
It's not a precision measurement of elevation about horizon or angular rotation. Atmospheric refraction will slow the apparent motion of the stars as they set and rise on the horizon. (You, of course, won't see that portion of rotation when they are below the horizon.)

But precision down to the arcminute is not the point of rabinoz's claim.

I'd love to get into a discussion about the effects of atmosphere on refracting of light from stars, moon and the sun. Even if you don't believe the earth is a globe with a conforming spherical layer of air around it, you should still be able to comprehend how the shape of such an atmoSPHERE will refract light when it is closer to being tangent to the earth. But that's a different topic and not germane to the 15°/hr clock-like motion of a constellation like the Southern Cross from a southern hemisphere vantage point. It's off topic and distracting.

*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1436
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: Southern Cross from Australia
« Reply #7 on: November 03, 2018, 09:44:51 PM »
I work nightshift in the lower half of Australia and am wondering, how is it possible to see the Southern Cross rotate as if on an axis to the south of it. Shouldn't it fly across the sky in FE theory?
 I almost became a believer until this little riddle.
I live near Brisbane, at about 27°S latitude, and if I look south on a clear night the looks a bit like the hour hand of a huge 24 hr clock, appearing to rotate clockwise at about 15°/hr.

I'll leave it to you to solve "this little riddle".

What evidence do you have of 15 degrees per hour? Round Earth Theory's special pleading says that the observations of stars slowing as they approach the horizon is "refraction".
There is no "special pleading". Refraction affecting astronomical measurements has been known for many centuries.
Perhaps the first to make detailed measurements was the great astronomer (and geocentrist) Tycho Brahe.

But in my short post, I made no claim any precise 15°/hr. All I said was "appearing to rotate clockwise at about 15°/hr".

Certainly, there is refraction near the horizon but the important point is by how much? This is of great importance to astronomers and surveyors and here is the typical astronomical refraction as it varies with altitude:And this article has a little on the distortion it can cause on the sun's shape Atmospheric Optics, Optics Picture of the Day.

So there is atmospheric refraction but too little to be noticeable to the unaided eye except within a few degrees of the horizon and stars are rarely visible that low anyway.

*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1436
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: Southern Cross from Australia
« Reply #8 on: November 03, 2018, 10:15:44 PM »
Astronomers claim that the reason the celestial bodies don't match theory in such examples is because there is a permanent refraction effect which can do many marvelous things such as
Astronomers do not "claim that the reason the celestial bodies don't match theory" because the atmospheric refraction has been studied for centuries and is part of said theory.
And your appeal to ridicule with statements like "can do many marvelous things such as" should have no place in a rational debate.

I fail to see why this "permanent refraction effect" is such a mystery to you. Air typically has a refractive index of about 1.00029 at sea level.

Whether the earth is flat or a Globe, light entering the atmosphere from outside is going to be bent slightly downwards.
The amount of bending depends on the incidence angle and an approximate calculation is not difficult.

Quote from: Tom Bishop
slow bodies down as they approach the horizon.

"As you can see the stars get significantly closer together as they get closer to the horizon" --Mick West

From the Wikipedia page on Atmospheric Refraction we read:

"Whenever possible, astronomers will schedule their observations around the times of culmination, when celestial objects are highest in the sky."

This should give you an idea of the magnitude of refraction they are claiming.
Mick West's "significantly closer together" is really very small compared to the vast difference in the motion of stars observed and that expected from any flat earth model I've seen.

Yes, it certainly does "give you an idea of the magnitude of refraction they are claiming" and it is very slight except within a fraction of a degree of the horizon.
Please show any FE theory predicting the apparent motion of the stars as close to the horizon as that.

Quote from: Tom Bishop
Any theoretical prediction based on uniform movement will likely not manifest in reality, considering all of this "refraction" necessary to salvage the Round Earth Theory.
"All of this 'refraction' "is not "necessary to salvage the Round Earth Theory"! It is a well-known factor that has been known and is simply accounted for by astronomers.

Are you denying that such refraction would occur on your flat earth?

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6235
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Southern Cross from Australia
« Reply #9 on: November 03, 2018, 10:49:48 PM »
Mick West's lines get nearly twice as close to each other than the top of the screen. Hardly insignificant.

"Well-known" != Proven. What you have presented is a hypothesis. It is this hypothesis, and numerous others, which prevents a pure Round Earth model from being confirmed. We are treated with one hypothesis and explanation after the next.

It does not really matter if someone can create an equation which describes stars slowing down as they approach the horizon; such knowledge is not satisfactory knowledge at all, and does nothing to provide verification for this alleged mechanism.

*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1436
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: Southern Cross from Australia
« Reply #10 on: November 03, 2018, 10:56:20 PM »
Mick West's lines get nearly twice as close to each other than the top of the screen. Hardly insignificant.
But only when quite close to the horizon and fitting well with the graph I showed of typical astronomical refraction in:

Quote from: Tom Bishop
"Well-known" != Proven.
No, "Well-known" as in known, studied and measured for centuries as in Observations on Atmospherical Refraction As It Affects Astronomical Observations, Author: S. Groombridge

Quote from: Tom Bishop
What you have presented is a hypothesis. It is this hypothesis which prevents a pure Round Earth model from being confirmed. We are treated with one hypothesis and explanation after the next.
No, it is no such thing. Where possible astronomical observations are made within a few tens of degrees of the zenith.

Quote from: Tom Bishop
It does not really matter if someone can create an equation which describes stars slowing down as they approach the horizon; such knowledge is not satisfactory knowledge at all, and does nothing to provide verification for this alleged mechanism.

But in all the cases we are looking at deviations far smaller than any difference between the Globe and any flat-earth predictions.

So, until you can come up with a model that better matches observations I think we'd better stick the model that does fit almost precisely.

Why throw out the model that is very close to observed reality for one known to fail entirely to match what we can see and measure?

Re: Southern Cross from Australia
« Reply #11 on: November 03, 2018, 11:07:46 PM »
I almost became a Flat Earthers until I realized I couldnt see Polaris from Perth....solve that riddle.

*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1436
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: Southern Cross from Australia
« Reply #12 on: November 04, 2018, 12:55:46 AM »
I almost became a Flat Earthers until I realized I couldnt see Polaris from Perth....solve that riddle.
Just for interest here's a video showing simple time-lapse and star-trails looking south from NSW, Australia:

Southern Skies - Star Trails. Callala Bay, NSW, Australia, Old DracO
It starts with the Southern Cross, Crux at about the 2 O'clock position an it can be seen rotating a bit like the hour hand of a 24 Hour clock.
By 1:10 in the video it is around to about the 2 O'clock position and the video changes to a "star-trails" display.

The night sky from Perth would be similar.
The following video shows the night sky from Coonabaran, NSW, looking in all four cardinal directions. It is taken with a very wide-angle lens (almost fish-eye) so is quite distorted.

The Moving Stars of the Southern Hemisphere, AmazingSky

Offline edby

  • *
  • Posts: 1066
    • View Profile
Re: Southern Cross from Australia
« Reply #13 on: November 04, 2018, 11:09:23 AM »
I almost became a Flat Earthers until I realized I couldnt see Polaris from Perth....solve that riddle.
Easy to explain the riddle. Light curves, in a way that can be predicted from a round-earth model. Start with a model of the globe, and project straight lines travelling from each star to the eye of the observer. Then imagine there were a sort of membrane around the globe earth which we could detach and distort until it became flat. Obviously the previously straight lines from the stars and sun and moon etc would become curved. All our observations would appear as though the earth were round, but really the earth would be flat.

The same would apply to measured distances on the earth. These appear consistent with a globe earth, but in reality the continuum of space is distorted, interfering with perceived distances.

So in reality the earth is flat, but the distortions caused by curvature of light cause our scientific measurements to give the appearance of a globe earth.

Offline edby

  • *
  • Posts: 1066
    • View Profile
Re: Southern Cross from Australia
« Reply #14 on: November 04, 2018, 10:25:03 PM »
"Whenever possible, astronomers will schedule their observations around the times of culmination, when celestial objects are highest in the sky."
This should give you an idea of the magnitude of refraction they are claiming.
The Wiki page says
Quote
Atmospheric refraction of the light from a star is zero in the zenith, less than 1′ (one arc-minute) at 45° apparent altitude, and still only 5.3′ at 10° altitude;

Is that what you meant by 'magnitude'? 1 arcminute is 1/60 of a degree. Here is a guide to what 1-5 degrees looks like.

« Last Edit: November 04, 2018, 10:26:53 PM by edby »