*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 1875
    • View Profile
Re: Moon and Stars
« Reply #140 on: February 26, 2020, 10:17:01 AM »
there should only be 1 shadow. Not different shadows.

Who says there are/were "different shadows"? Who or what are you disputing?
Two different shades of shadow.  Dark in the middle and lighter on the outside of the shadow. like the video. But going off that logic, I can pull a ball away from the screen until I have the 2 different shades in its shadow like the video. Then put another ball equal size closer to the screen in the same path and you would be able to see that shadow inside the other shadow because it would make the original balls shadow(which shadow has a small dark center and lighter outside)  all one dark shadow the same size as the objects size.  I don’t think it works like that.



It certainly doesn't, for the Earth and Moon are not the same size.



I don’t think you can have 2 objects the same size all lined up in a row with one light source and you would be able to see the furthest objects shadow. 


... but we're not examining the "furthest object's" (Earth's) shadow. We're looking at how the Moon's shadow behaves on the Earth

Because the first object would absorb all its light. Light can’t pass through a opaque object like the moon.


Yes, so observers in the right place on Earth (the path of totality) have almost all their light blocked, and see the Total Eclipse. Those North or South of this (again, considering the Great American Eclipse of 2017) saw only Partial Eclipse and less light blocked. 

So how can light go through the moon to hit the earths surface. If it’s a opaque object like the moon, light can only be absorbed or reflected. Can’t go through the object and hit the next object that’s behind it. And that’s what your implying with the video and pictures.

It's the light going around the Moon that reaches the surface. Light hitting the Moon directly is blocked, leading to an area on the surface of Earth being eclipsed.  Not interested in whether or not that light gets beyond the Earth.
=============================
Not Flat. Happy to prove this, if you ask me.
=============================

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

Nearly?

Re: Moon and Stars
« Reply #141 on: February 26, 2020, 11:11:49 PM »
The moon is about 400 times smaller than the Sun. But is also 400 times closer than the Sun.  Which makes them about the same size if looking from Earth which creates a total eclipse. If the Sun was any bigger it could not create a total eclipse.

Yes 

Quote
That being said, since the Sun is the only light source and the moon will cover the entire Sun looking from Earth, there should only be 1 shadow. Not different shadows. And it should be bigger than the size of the moon. So that means it’s he Moon has to be smaller than 70 miles.

No. Because the sun is not a point light source, it emits light from all points and in all directions - obviously,that's why we can see the whole disc of it.
This is quite hard to explain and impossible to show to proper scale but I've had a go at demonstrating the concept.
In this diagram the "sun" is 10 times bigger than the "moon" and 10 times further away from the "earth". So they would appear the same size.
But you can see from the way the light rays travel that the eclipse that would form is smaller than the moon. I've shaded the area of totality.
And you can see the area of partial eclipse



Edit: I thought of another way of explaining it just as I woke up! It is because the sun is 400 times bigger and 400 times further away that the path of totality (the umbra) is so small compared with the size of the earth. And it’s why total eclipses are rare. Think about it. If you line up a large distant ball with a smaller big one in such a way that the small one exactly fits into the outline of the big one then you won’t be able to see the big one, yes? That’s like being in the path of totality. Now what happens if you move your head? Now you can see see the edge of the big ball. That’s like being in a partial eclipse.
The point is, you don’t need to move your head much. And it would be the same if you moved the smaller ball slightly. What happens if you move the smaller ball a bit further away? Now you can see the outline of the bigger ball around the smaller one - and that happens with the moon too because the moon is not a constant distance from the earth, that’s called an annular eclipse.

The point is if a distant large ball is “x” times bigger than a small one and “x” times further away then the small one can “eclipse” the big one because they are the same angular size. But only from one vantage point if anything moves then they don’t line up properly. That’s why the path of totality is small and moves across the earth as the earth spins and the moon moves.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2020, 07:22:59 AM by AllAroundTheWorld »
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

Re: Moon and Stars
« Reply #142 on: February 27, 2020, 06:01:24 PM »
The moon is about 400 times smaller than the Sun. But is also 400 times closer than the Sun.  Which makes them about the same size if looking from Earth which creates a total eclipse. If the Sun was any bigger it could not create a total eclipse.

Yes 

Quote
That being said, since the Sun is the only light source and the moon will cover the entire Sun looking from Earth, there should only be 1 shadow. Not different shadows. And it should be bigger than the size of the moon. So that means it’s he Moon has to be smaller than 70 miles.

No. Because the sun is not a point light source, it emits light from all points and in all directions - obviously,that's why we can see the whole disc of it.
This is quite hard to explain and impossible to show to proper scale but I've had a go at demonstrating the concept.
In this diagram the "sun" is 10 times bigger than the "moon" and 10 times further away from the "earth". So they would appear the same size.
But you can see from the way the light rays travel that the eclipse that would form is smaller than the moon. I've shaded the area of totality.
And you can see the area of partial eclipse



Edit: I thought of another way of explaining it just as I woke up! It is because the sun is 400 times bigger and 400 times further away that the path of totality (the umbra) is so small compared with the size of the earth. And it’s why total eclipses are rare. Think about it. If you line up a large distant ball with a smaller big one in such a way that the small one exactly fits into the outline of the big one then you won’t be able to see the big one, yes? That’s like being in the path of totality. Now what happens if you move your head? Now you can see see the edge of the big ball. That’s like being in a partial eclipse.
The point is, you don’t need to move your head much. And it would be the same if you moved the smaller ball slightly. What happens if you move the smaller ball a bit further away? Now you can see the outline of the bigger ball around the smaller one - and that happens with the moon too because the moon is not a constant distance from the earth, that’s called an annular eclipse.

The point is if a distant large ball is “x” times bigger than a small one and “x” times further away then the small one can “eclipse” the big one because they are the same angular size. But only from one vantage point if anything moves then they don’t line up properly. That’s why the path of totality is small and moves across the earth as the earth spins and the moon moves.

Think your right on the shadow size. Didn’t give it much thought and I was looking at it the wrong way.

Now can someone show me how the shadow starts off going from east to west then turns south/north and then finishes going  west to east.

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 1875
    • View Profile
Re: Moon and Stars
« Reply #143 on: February 27, 2020, 06:07:19 PM »
Now can someone show me how the shadow starts off going from east to west then turns south/north and then finishes going  west to east.

I could, but I suggested a method by which you could examine it yourself in Reply #126 on: February 24.

I would suggest that the combination of Earth's axial tilt, along with the passage of the Moon (EDIT - the Moon's SHADOW) over a near-polar region accounts for it.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2020, 09:05:29 AM by Tumeni »
=============================
Not Flat. Happy to prove this, if you ask me.
=============================

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

Nearly?

Offline wpeszko

  • *
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: Moon and Stars
« Reply #144 on: February 28, 2020, 08:34:14 AM »
Now can someone show me how the shadow starts off going from east to west then turns south/north and then finishes going  west to east.

I could, but I suggested a method by which you could examine it yourself in Reply #126 on: February 24.

I would suggest that the combination of Earth's axial tilt, along with the passage of the Moon over a near-polar region accounts for it.
Like this one
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_eclipse_of_June_10,_2021

Offline somerled

  • *
  • Posts: 292
    • View Profile
Re: Moon and Stars
« Reply #145 on: March 01, 2020, 12:03:27 PM »
The moon is about 400 times smaller than the Sun. But is also 400 times closer than the Sun.  Which makes them about the same size if looking from Earth which creates a total eclipse. If the Sun was any bigger it could not create a total eclipse.

Yes 

Quote
That being said, since the Sun is the only light source and the moon will cover the entire Sun looking from Earth, there should only be 1 shadow. Not different shadows. And it should be bigger than the size of the moon. So that means it’s he Moon has to be smaller than 70 miles.

No. Because the sun is not a point light source, it emits light from all points and in all directions - obviously,that's why we can see the whole disc of it.
This is quite hard to explain and impossible to show to proper scale but I've had a go at demonstrating the concept.
In this diagram the "sun" is 10 times bigger than the "moon" and 10 times further away from the "earth". So they would appear the same size.
But you can see from the way the light rays travel that the eclipse that would form is smaller than the moon. I've shaded the area of totality.
And you can see the area of partial eclipse



Edit: I thought of another way of explaining it just as I woke up! It is because the sun is 400 times bigger and 400 times further away that the path of totality (the umbra) is so small compared with the size of the earth. And it’s why total eclipses are rare. Think about it. If you line up a large distant ball with a smaller big one in such a way that the small one exactly fits into the outline of the big one then you won’t be able to see the big one, yes? That’s like being in the path of totality. Now what happens if you move your head? Now you can see see the edge of the big ball. That’s like being in a partial eclipse.
The point is, you don’t need to move your head much. And it would be the same if you moved the smaller ball slightly. What happens if you move the smaller ball a bit further away? Now you can see the outline of the bigger ball around the smaller one - and that happens with the moon too because the moon is not a constant distance from the earth, that’s called an annular eclipse.

The point is if a distant large ball is “x” times bigger than a small one and “x” times further away then the small one can “eclipse” the big one because they are the same angular size. But only from one vantage point if anything moves then they don’t line up properly. That’s why the path of totality is small and moves across the earth as the earth spins and the moon moves.

If only the sun propagated it's light in that silly manner the drawing of umbra and penumbra of eclipse would make sense . I mean Eratosthenes carried out his mythical experiment in the knowledge that at that huge distance between earth and sun all the rays were parallel , which logic also dictates that the moon is the same size as it's shadow .
If the sun propagated its light in that silly manner we wouldn't have polar regions .

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 1452
    • View Profile
Re: Moon and Stars
« Reply #146 on: March 01, 2020, 07:54:39 PM »
The moon is about 400 times smaller than the Sun. But is also 400 times closer than the Sun.  Which makes them about the same size if looking from Earth which creates a total eclipse. If the Sun was any bigger it could not create a total eclipse.

Yes 

Quote
That being said, since the Sun is the only light source and the moon will cover the entire Sun looking from Earth, there should only be 1 shadow. Not different shadows. And it should be bigger than the size of the moon. So that means it’s he Moon has to be smaller than 70 miles.

No. Because the sun is not a point light source, it emits light from all points and in all directions - obviously,that's why we can see the whole disc of it.
This is quite hard to explain and impossible to show to proper scale but I've had a go at demonstrating the concept.
In this diagram the "sun" is 10 times bigger than the "moon" and 10 times further away from the "earth". So they would appear the same size.
But you can see from the way the light rays travel that the eclipse that would form is smaller than the moon. I've shaded the area of totality.
And you can see the area of partial eclipse



Edit: I thought of another way of explaining it just as I woke up! It is because the sun is 400 times bigger and 400 times further away that the path of totality (the umbra) is so small compared with the size of the earth. And it’s why total eclipses are rare. Think about it. If you line up a large distant ball with a smaller big one in such a way that the small one exactly fits into the outline of the big one then you won’t be able to see the big one, yes? That’s like being in the path of totality. Now what happens if you move your head? Now you can see see the edge of the big ball. That’s like being in a partial eclipse.
The point is, you don’t need to move your head much. And it would be the same if you moved the smaller ball slightly. What happens if you move the smaller ball a bit further away? Now you can see the outline of the bigger ball around the smaller one - and that happens with the moon too because the moon is not a constant distance from the earth, that’s called an annular eclipse.

The point is if a distant large ball is “x” times bigger than a small one and “x” times further away then the small one can “eclipse” the big one because they are the same angular size. But only from one vantage point if anything moves then they don’t line up properly. That’s why the path of totality is small and moves across the earth as the earth spins and the moon moves.

If only the sun propagated it's light in that silly manner the drawing of umbra and penumbra of eclipse would make sense . I mean Eratosthenes carried out his mythical experiment in the knowledge that at that huge distance between earth and sun all the rays were parallel , which logic also dictates that the moon is the same size as it's shadow .
If the sun propagated its light in that silly manner we wouldn't have polar regions .

If I understand what you're asking, the reason why the unmbra is smaller than the moon has to do with the distances between earth, moon, and sun and their sizes. Here's a fun little experiment you can try at home that demonstrates the phenomenon.

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

Re: Moon and Stars
« Reply #147 on: March 01, 2020, 10:08:30 PM »
If only the sun propagated it's light in that silly manner the drawing of umbra and penumbra of eclipse would make sense.
However silly you may find it, that is exactly how the light from the sun propagates. If you think about it, it must do. How can you see the whole disc of the sun if from every point in its surface it is emitting light in your direction.

Quote
I mean Eratosthenes carried out his mythical experiment in the knowledge that at that huge distance between earth and sun all the rays were parallel , which logic also dictates that the moon is the same size as it's shadow.

I see how that could confuse someone, but it's simply that the sun is a long, long way away. The above diagram is not even close to scale.
Here's some information about how to visualise the true distances

https://sunearthday.nasa.gov/2007/materials/solar_pizza.pdf

Quote
If the sun propagated its light in that silly manner we wouldn't have polar regions.

We would and we do because if the earth is a globe then light will hit the middle of the earth straight on but because the earth's surface curves the light hits the top and bottom at an angle - that means the same amount of energy is dispersed over a greater area, that's what makes the equatorial areas hot and the polar regions cold. And a combination of the earth's tilt with respect to the sun and orbit around it means the seasons alternate between the hemispheres.

I urge you to learn more about the heliocentric model you have rejected.
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

Offline model 29

  • *
  • Posts: 422
    • View Profile
Re: Moon and Stars
« Reply #148 on: March 02, 2020, 05:49:53 AM »
If only the sun propagated it's light in that silly manner the drawing of umbra and penumbra of eclipse would make sense .
  It can be demonstrated with two coins, a paperclip, and sunlight.  Or, go look at shadows on a sunny day and notice that the shadows become increasingly blurred the farther one gets from the object casting it.