Offline Pinky

  • *
  • Posts: 88
    • View Profile
How do FE-researchers account for the limited resolution of the instruments they use?

You can measure a distance only with a certain accuracy, you measure angles only with a certain accuracy, you can measure time only with a certain accuracy, digital images have a pixel-resolution and silverhalogenide-photographies have a grain-resolution. How do you take that fact into account?

How do you design your experiments and how do you analyze your data to sidestep the problem that you cannot get a precise value?

*

Offline Tim Alphabeaver

  • *
  • Posts: 110
  • That's no beaver
    • View Profile
Re: How do FE-researchers account for limited instrumental resolution?
« Reply #1 on: May 20, 2019, 11:16:23 PM »
Presumably in the same way as non-FE researchers
**I move away from the infinite flat plane to breathe in

Re: How do FE-researchers account for limited instrumental resolution?
« Reply #2 on: May 22, 2019, 10:54:11 PM »
There's not a common methodology for FEs, each of them speaks for himself. But usually they have a double standard:

- if your instrument proves FE, then whatever amount of error is disregarded.
- if your instrument proves RE, then even the tiniest error makes the measure invalid, and anyway the person taking the measurement was untrustable in the first place.

I wish I was joking, but I am not.
Quote from: Pete Svarrior
these waves of smug RE'ers are temporary. Every now and then they flood us for a year or two in response to some media attention, and eventually they peter out. In my view, it's a case of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".

tellytubby

Re: How do FE-researchers account for limited instrumental resolution?
« Reply #3 on: May 22, 2019, 10:59:20 PM »
With you on that one.  Bedford level experiment is a case in point.  Rowbothams original method (as described in FE Wiki) stick some flags in a canal over a distance of a few miles and then check their height relative to each other with a telescope of the quality that would have existed 1st half 19th century.

Cleary no obvious sources or margins of error in that method is there?!?  As precise as you like.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6364
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: How do FE-researchers account for limited instrumental resolution?
« Reply #4 on: May 24, 2019, 01:04:51 AM »
The entire last smaller flag should have been below the horizon in the experiment you are talking about. Surely the only mistake he could have made was to lie the flag flat instead of vertically?
« Last Edit: May 24, 2019, 10:13:21 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 1128
    • View Profile
Re: How do FE-researchers account for limited instrumental resolution?
« Reply #5 on: May 24, 2019, 07:00:23 AM »
The entire last flag should have been below the horizon in the experiment you are talking about. Surely the only mistake he could have made was to lie the flag flat instead of vertically?

Something is not adding up, literally.

In SBR’s ENAG Experiment #2, he describes the set up as follows:

"Along the edge of the water, in the same canal, six flags were placed, one statute mile from each other, and so arranged that the top of each flag was 5 feet above the surface. Close to the last flag in the series a longer staff was fixed, bearing a flag 3 feet square, and the top of which was 8 feet above the surface of the water”

Observer seems to be at 5 feet based upon the diagrams.

He claims that the last flag, at 6 miles out, at 8 feet tall (The others 5 feet tall) should be, on RE: "but the top of the last and largest flag, being 3 feet higher than the smaller ones, would have been 13 feet 8 inches below the line of sight at the point B.” Meaning, 13 feet 8 inches below the 5 foot observer line of sight.

But, instead, according to Bilsin’s calculator, the top of the 8 foot flag at 6 miles out still has about a foot visible. Meaning the top of the 8 foot flag in SBR’s experiment would only be about 4 feet below the 5 foot line of sight.

Why is is SBR saying 13 feet 8 inches when it should only be 4 feet?

Bilson’s Calc:

Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6364
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: How do FE-researchers account for limited instrumental resolution?
« Reply #6 on: May 24, 2019, 01:17:24 PM »
It sounds as if he is talking about a horizontal line into space, not looking across the horizon.

« Last Edit: May 24, 2019, 01:19:28 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 1359
    • View Profile
Re: How do FE-researchers account for limited instrumental resolution?
« Reply #7 on: May 24, 2019, 01:24:05 PM »
It sounds as if he is talking about a horizontal line into space, not looking across the horizon.



Who? Teletubby? Rowbotham? Bilson?

Come on, you can be clearer than this if you really want to ...
==============================
==============================
Pete Svarrior "We are not here to directly persuade anyone ... You mistake our lack of interest in you for our absence."

Tom Bishop "We are extremely popular and the entire world wants to talk to us. We have better things to do with our lives than have in depth discussions with every single curious person. You are lucky to get one sentence dismissals from us"

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6364
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: How do FE-researchers account for limited instrumental resolution?
« Reply #8 on: May 24, 2019, 05:54:34 PM »
It sounds as if he is talking about a horizontal line into space, not looking across the horizon.



Who? Teletubby? Rowbotham? Bilson?

Come on, you can be clearer than this if you really want to ...

SBR. I am responding directly to the post above mine.

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 1359
    • View Profile
Re: How do FE-researchers account for limited instrumental resolution?
« Reply #9 on: May 24, 2019, 05:58:06 PM »
It sounds as if he is talking about a horizontal line into space, not looking across the horizon.



Who? Teletubby? Rowbotham? Bilson?

Come on, you can be clearer than this if you really want to ...

SBR. I am responding directly to the post above mine.

... a post which mentions both Bislin and SBR.

Clarity, man, clarity.
==============================
==============================
Pete Svarrior "We are not here to directly persuade anyone ... You mistake our lack of interest in you for our absence."

Tom Bishop "We are extremely popular and the entire world wants to talk to us. We have better things to do with our lives than have in depth discussions with every single curious person. You are lucky to get one sentence dismissals from us"

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6364
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: How do FE-researchers account for limited instrumental resolution?
« Reply #10 on: May 24, 2019, 06:00:42 PM »
... a post which mentions both Bislin and SBR.

Clarity, man, clarity.

Only SBR is saying anything in that post. The Bislin reference is a reference to a result from his calculator.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 1128
    • View Profile
Re: How do FE-researchers account for limited instrumental resolution?
« Reply #11 on: May 24, 2019, 06:01:09 PM »
It sounds as if he is talking about a horizontal line into space, not looking across the horhttps://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=14829.0izon.



But even at the horizontal line 5 feet tall looking off into space SBR has the top of the 8 foot flag 13 feet 8 inches below that line. Bilsin seems to have it at 4 feet below:



Am I calculating something wrong?
Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6364
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: How do FE-researchers account for limited instrumental resolution?
« Reply #12 on: May 24, 2019, 06:10:46 PM »
You are applying visualizations on a globe to a plane in your third image. The total drop in RET is greater.

It's right there in your previous image. The total earth drop at 6 miles in RET according to the methods of that calculator is 24 ft:


*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 1128
    • View Profile
Re: How do FE-researchers account for limited instrumental resolution?
« Reply #13 on: May 24, 2019, 06:38:22 PM »
You are applying visualizations on a globe to a plane in your third image. The total drop in RET is greater.

It's right there in your previous image. The total earth drop at 6 miles in RET according to the methods of that calculator is 24 ft:



But Bilsin has the drop from eye level at 10 feet. Not 13' 8" as SBR does.  I'm just trying to figure out how SBR came up with his number.

Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6364
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: How do FE-researchers account for limited instrumental resolution?
« Reply #14 on: May 24, 2019, 06:48:36 PM »
24 foot drop - 8 foot tall flag = 16 feet drop.

You said that Rowbotham said there was a 13.8 ft drop to the top of the flag. It sounds close enough to me. There are multiple ways of computing the curve. It's probably a different method.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 1128
    • View Profile
Re: How do FE-researchers account for limited instrumental resolution?
« Reply #15 on: May 24, 2019, 08:35:26 PM »
24 foot drop - 8 foot tall flag = 16 feet drop.

You said that Rowbotham said there was a 13.8 ft drop to the top of the flag. It sounds close enough to me. There are multiple ways of computing the curve. It's probably a different method.

Yes, Bilson's is different. Not in terms of drop, but in terms of "hidden":

"Note: To calculate the hidden height you must not use the famous equation 8 inches per miles squared! This equation is an approximation to calculate the drop of the earth surface from a tangent line on the surface at the observer. It calculates not the hidden part of an object."
Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.