Re: Simple Experiments
« Reply #80 on: February 21, 2021, 08:01:31 PM »

Why are these lines straight?
What happened to EA?

Can you please explain how the moon tilt illusion is predicted by EA with a diagram?

If you can’t then I suggest you remove that claim from the Wiki.
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

Re: Simple Experiments
« Reply #81 on: February 21, 2021, 08:19:06 PM »
This is clearly a close range perspective effect that caused this to happen, no different than the previous examples in this thread

I do enjoy it when you talk balls; could you explain how a close range perspective effect works on a ball’s shadow and at what range a true representation would be seen?

It's a close range perspective effect because bodies at close range will appear to tilt and change orientation easier with smaller movement than bodies in the background. This effect is part of standard Euclidean Geometry.
....
I can move the camera around the closer object and create greater shifts in orientation than a background object.

Indeed you can, but can you explain how the closer the ball (not Rubix Cube, cone or other) is to being in direct line between eye and Moon, the more closely the ball's shadow line matches that of the Moon? If you troubled yourself long enough to try it yourself, you'd find this is the case, but you just don't do experiments, do you?
Once again - you assume that the centre of the video is the centre of the camera's frame. We know that this isn't the case.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 8252
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Simple Experiments
« Reply #82 on: February 21, 2021, 08:59:20 PM »

Why are these lines straight?
What happened to EA?

Can you please explain how the moon tilt illusion is predicted by EA with a diagram?

If you can’t then I suggest you remove that claim from the Wiki.

The Sun we see is after EA has made its effect. The light is locally Euclidean. At sunset the light from the apparent Sun touching the horizon is hitting the observer horizontally. Sun is hitting the observer horizontally in his local area.

From the image on the EA page, during sunset the observer sees the Sun's light from a horizontal direction in his local area:



There are diagrams on how the Moon Tilt works with EA on the Wiki Moon Tilt Illusion page. It's right there in the second section:

https://wiki.tfes.org/Moon_Tilt_Illusion#Flat_Earth_Moon_Tilt

Quote
Flat Earth Moon Tilt

It has been asked if there is an example of a celestial event that the Flat Earth Theory predicts which the Round Earth Theory does not. The Moon Tilt Illusion is one such example. While RET has difficulty explaining this anomaly, with its professors calling it "counter-intuitive and magical"[1], and multiple contradictory and geometrically questionable explanations are put forward in attempt to explain it, the phenomenon is directly predicted by the Flat Earth astronomical model. According to the theory of Electromagnetic Acceleration light curves upwards over very long distances, is the cause for the rising and setting of celestial bodies, and is responsible for various dome-like observations. When this scheme of upwardly bending light is applied to the orientation of the Moon it is seen that Electromagnetic Acceleration directly predicts the Moon Tilt Illusion.

Moon Flipped

Due to EA the observer will always see the nearside (underside) of celestial bodies. As result the orientation of the image on opposite sides will be upside-down. The illustration below shows the extremes of the Moon's rising and setting and the upside-down flipping of the Moon's image to observers positioned on opposite sides of the Moon.



An observer to the West of the Moon sees the phase pointed upwards away from the horizon, and an observer to the East of the Moon sees the phase pointed downwards towards the horizon.

Moon Tilted

When viewing the Moon at various positions around it, it is seen that the Moon's phase tilts until it matches the opposite orientation. In the below illustration observers A - H are standing around the Moon, viewing it at various positions around it. The Moon over the solid horizon shows the observer's view. The central Moon illustration is the nearside (underside) of the Moon.



Notice that the views on opposite sides of each observer (A - H) are vertically flipped to each other like in the rising and setting side view diagram.

To simulate the view for each observer flip the central nearside face in relation to the observer's orientation around the Moon (positions A - H), so that the observer sees the furthest part of the Moon from his or her position at the closest to that observer's horizon. This represents each observer's view of the Moon.



For instance, Observer C at midmoon is looking to the right (Southward) at the Moon and from that position will see the darkened portion to the left of the Moon's image, with the furthest part of the Moon from Observer C's location at the bottom closest to that observer's horizon. The same may be applied for each observer, relative to their various positions around the Moon. Alternatively, one may take the vertically flipped rising phase for Observer A and rotate that image in 45 degree increments to match the positions of the Observers B - H around the Moon.

EA predicts that between rising and midmoon the Moon's phase will be pointed significantly away from the Earth and Sun, angled upwards above it. At midmoon the illuminated portion of the Moon will be pointing at a right angle in the sky. Between midmoon and setting the phase will be pointing downwards towards the Earth. EA also predicts that the Moon's face will roll and rotate clockwise in the North and counter-clockwise in the South.

Comparison

Compare the EA Moon Tilt diagrams to the diagrams shown at the beginning of the page showing the Moon Tilt Illusion for the Waxing Phases in the North and South.

Moon Tilt Northern Waxing
Moon Tilt Southern Waxing
Northern Waxing Phases at Sunset
« Last Edit: February 21, 2021, 09:16:55 PM by Tom Bishop »
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

*

Offline JSS

  • *
  • Posts: 1235
  • Math is math!
    • View Profile
Re: Simple Experiments
« Reply #83 on: February 21, 2021, 09:11:33 PM »
You seem unable to respond to my pictures, as your responses are just quoting yourself and nit-picking at other sites. But here they are again, do you not see the resemblance? Do you not see how in both pictures the light source is not aligned with the shadow?

Now why would this be? Think about it before replying. Why do these two images show the same illusion? Perhaps because they are the same?





You're going to have to re-do this one over with a rectilinear lens.

I'm still waiting for your reasoning for this request, what specific lens you think I should use, and what you think the results would be. 

1. Why do I even need to use a rectilinear lens?  What is your reasoning here?  What is wrong with the lens I used?

2. What rectilinear lens are you saying I should use?  Please specify the sensor format, mm and fov required.  A specific model of lens and camera would also work.  There are thousands of rectilinear lenses out there, you have to be specific to what you are asking for.

3. What do you expect the result to be?  If I take a picture with your rectilinear lens, what is the photo going to look like?  What will it prove?

If you can't answer these questions, then I don't understand why I 'have' to redo it and you can withdraw your request.

Re: Simple Experiments
« Reply #84 on: February 21, 2021, 09:16:51 PM »
There are diagrams on how the Moon Tilt works with EA on the Wiki Moon Tilt Illusion page. It's right there in the second section:

https://wiki.tfes.org/Moon_Tilt_Illusion#Flat_Earth_Moon_Tilt

And this is precisely the problem. If someone discovers the Moon's shadow alignment is replicated at ground level with a common ping pong ball held between eye and Moon, then what need is there to explain this with Electromagnetic Acceleration? Tom created and has expanded and worked on the Moon Tilt Illusion page in the wiki since 2019 and it would make all his effort rather pointless when it turns out that the illusion is just that, an optical illusion.

It has nothing to do with FE, it neither explains nor is explained by special light-bending ideas like EA – they're simply not needed. Rather like imagining a complex distribution system to get presents from the North Pole to every kid's home in the whole world in a single night and then that snotty kid next door tells you it's just your Mom and Dad: rather galling, but true.

Grow up.
Once again - you assume that the centre of the video is the centre of the camera's frame. We know that this isn't the case.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 8252
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Simple Experiments
« Reply #85 on: February 21, 2021, 09:41:16 PM »
Quote from: Longtitube
And this is precisely the problem. If someone discovers the Moon's shadow alignment is replicated at ground level with a common ping pong ball held between eye and Moon, then what need is there to explain this with Electromagnetic Acceleration?

EA wasn't made up to explain the Moon Tilt Illusion. The Moon Tilt Illusion is simply a geometric consequence of EA.

RE'ers of all stripes are blasting the internet and literature, searching for explanations and ways to explain the Moon Tilt Illusion in RE under straight line geometry - invoking odd distortion to our vision, perspective effects, celestial spheres, and spamming all manner of specious reasonings, whereas it is simply a geometrical consequence of the FE model.

We didn't search for an answer, it was already there, due to the geometry of the pre-existing model. You know that it's not part of your model, hence the multiple explanations and nonsense.
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 1940
    • View Profile
Re: Simple Experiments
« Reply #86 on: February 21, 2021, 09:50:34 PM »
Quote from: Longtitube
And this is precisely the problem. If someone discovers the Moon's shadow alignment is replicated at ground level with a common ping pong ball held between eye and Moon, then what need is there to explain this with Electromagnetic Acceleration?

EA wasn't made up to explain the Moon Tilt Illusion. The Moon Tilt Illusion is simply a geometric consequence of EA.

RE'ers of all stripes are blasting the internet and literature, searching for explanations and ways to explain the Moon Tilt Illusion in RE under straight line geometry - invoking odd distortion to our vision, perspective effects, celestial spheres, and spamming all manner of specious reasonings, whereas it is simply a geometrical consequence of the FE model.

We didn't search for an answer, it was already there, due to the geometry of the pre-existing model. You know that it's not part of your model, hence the multiple explanations and nonsense.

Aren't you relying on the Bishop Constant to show the predictability potential of EA? In the wiki it says, "the Bishop constant, which defines the magnitude of the acceleration on a horizontal light ray due to Dark Energy. When the theory is complete, attempts will be made to measure this experimentally."

How can you claim that EA is predictable, and even applicable, when it hasn't been able to be used to measure anything experimentally?

Re: Simple Experiments
« Reply #87 on: February 21, 2021, 09:59:08 PM »
The Sun we see is after EA has made its effect. The light is locally Euclidean.

Fair enough. I'll agree that works. To be honest, I didn't really understand the Wiki explanation of why this is predicted by EA, but thanks for providing it finally. But I think the implication of your explanation is that the terminator of the moon and the sun are really misaligned. But they aren't. The string experiment proves this.

EA wasn't made up to explain the Moon Tilt Illusion.

Correct, it was made up to explain sunrise and sunset - although I'll note here that you used to explain those by "perspective" and have quietly abandoned that in favour of EA.

Quote
RE'ers of all stripes are blasting the internet and literature, searching for explanations and ways to explain the Moon Tilt Illusion in RE under straight line geometry

It's really easy to explain, although perhaps not that easy to understand. It's an optical illusion. The string experiment demonstrates this. It shows that the line perpendicular to the moon's terminator does indeed intersect the sun, as it should, and that the appearance that it is misaligned is merely an optical illusion. Which shows EA to be incorrect, the light is going in straight lines across the sky even if it appears not to be.
You continuing not to understand that doesn't change that.
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

Re: Simple Experiments
« Reply #88 on: February 21, 2021, 11:05:06 PM »


From what I’ve seen as I try to familiarize myself with what’s in the WIKI is that many of the drawings are drawn with just enough inaccuracy to hide what would actually happen. The above drawing is slightly inaccurate. What is shown is a 1st quarter moon but the center high moon should have the terminator vertical not slanted. This would make the lit side of the moon point straight up when viewed at rise from the west and straight down at set from the east if the drawing was accurate.  Someone else would have to verify this as I live between two mountain ranges so I can not view the moon when it rises or sets on the flat earth. Also, it only depicts what would happen due east and west but not how the moon would be seen at higher latitudes.

If a top down image was drawn showing the sun lighting half the moon and the show the moons circular viewing area on a flat earth I believe that you would notice that the higher latitudes would actually see a significantly different moon tilt.
« Last Edit: February 21, 2021, 11:17:35 PM by Mothra »

Re: Simple Experiments
« Reply #89 on: February 22, 2021, 03:23:25 PM »
While we're here. Here's another optical illusion



Those horizontal lines don't appear straight. Tom's argument seems to be that because things don't appear a certain way, they can't be that way. The entire point of the string experiment is it "breaks" the illusion. It shows the apparent misalignment between the moon and the sun is merely an optical illusion.

Now, because this is in 3D space it could be that the light is actually bowing away from us, so the string is straight but the light is going in an arc but
a) That's not how light behaves and
b) Even if that was true, that wouldn't explain the illusion, where it looks like the light is arcing across the sky like a rainbow. The string proves that this is not the case.

TL;DR - the brain does a lot of processing of what we see, the moon-tilt illusion and the above image are good examples of how it can be fooled.
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 8252
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Simple Experiments
« Reply #90 on: February 22, 2021, 06:28:42 PM »
On the "Ball Experiment" -

Bay Area California, Feb 21st, 2021, pictures taken around 5:27 PM PST with a Google Pixel 3 XL Phone.

Image 1:

I placed the ball on a post along the side of a road. The sun was shining from a horizontal direction. The ball is half lit.

Full Size: https://i.imgur.com/6AMa1fZ.jpg



Image 2:

Viewpoint from behind the ball, looking at Sun:

Full Size: https://i.imgur.com/dahZJsy.jpg



Image 3:

From a position front of the ball, with our back to sun, we can see that the illuminated portion of the Moon pointing upwards in the background. See Full Size for detail.

Full Size: https://i.imgur.com/yXGCLyR.jpg



Image 4:

Closeup of the Moon in the background, while zooming in the device created a digital leveling tool on the screen to help ensure the device was level. Compare the orientation to the Moon in the Full Size Image 3 above.

Full Size: https://i.imgur.com/eSmtd9N.jpg



Image 5:

Next I moved my position to below the ball and the top of the post, to get the ball to point upwards via a close range perspective effect. I could have done a better job at getting the phase to match, by moving the camera around. But it was easy to move the camera downwards to get the illuminated portion to point upwards:

Full Size:  https://i.imgur.com/rSV2mAx.jpg



Another version of the Tilt - https://i.imgur.com/n1cYCrS.jpg

Image 6:

Finally, I turned the device and placed the ball across the screen from the sun on a wide frame. The illuminated portion pointed at the Sun.

Full Size: https://i.imgur.com/BNazZl6.jpg

« Last Edit: February 22, 2021, 11:39:20 PM by Tom Bishop »
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

Re: Simple Experiments
« Reply #91 on: February 22, 2021, 06:40:23 PM »
Ok. It’s good that you did an experiment.
And what is your conclusion from the results?
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

Re: Simple Experiments
« Reply #92 on: February 22, 2021, 07:00:24 PM »
Next I moved my position to below the ball and the top of the post, to get the ball to point upwards via a close range perspective effect. I could have done a better job at getting the phase to match, by moving the camera around. But it was easy to move the camera downwards to get the illuminated portion to point upwards:

Right. You need to be looking up at the ball so it lines up with the moon so the phase on the moon and the ball line up. I tried to explain why here:



So yes, it is a perspective effect. You seem to see this as a fatal flaw in the experiment when actually it’s the exact point. The phase we see on the moon depends on our perspective.
Only if you line the ball up with the moon are you looking at them from the same perspective and thus the phases are consistent. Hopefully you can see from my diagram that if you place the ball elsewhere then as your photos demonstrate you’ll see a different “phase” on the ball and moon.

This demonstrates that both the ball and the moon are being illuminated by the same light source, a distant sun.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2021, 07:09:09 PM by AllAroundTheWorld »
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 8252
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Simple Experiments
« Reply #93 on: February 22, 2021, 09:51:26 PM »
So yes, it is a perspective effect. You seem to see this as a fatal flaw in the experiment when actually it’s the exact point. The phase we see on the moon depends on our perspective.

As you admit, the experiment is using a perspective effect to get the illuminated portion of the ball to point upwards. This doesn't demonstrate that the Moon is pointing upwards because of a perspective effect. We are using a perspective effect to get the ball to point upwards, when it could alternatively be that the Moon is pointing upwards and we are just matching it.

The experiment is unable to distinguish whether the Moon is actually pointing upwards or not. Previously I had a Moon pointing upwards in the background of a 3D scene and I was moving the camera around a ball in the foreground to match it. Why can't the same thing be going on here?

More on the fallacious ball experiment.

Foreground and background balls misaligned:



Wow, by moving the camera around the ball in the foreground I can make the foreground ball match a similar orientation to the ball in the background. Moon Illusion ProoooF!!


« Last Edit: February 22, 2021, 10:53:04 PM by Tom Bishop »
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 8252
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Simple Experiments
« Reply #94 on: February 22, 2021, 09:58:09 PM »
On the "String Experiment" -

If I were to take a water bottle (red) and hold it out to match the Moon's orientation and where the light is coming from, it would appear that both Moon and water bottle are pointing out into space and not at the Sun.

If I were to take a string (blue) and align it with the ecliptic, the path near where the Sun and Moon travel across the sky, the string might be able to hit the Sun, but this 'string experiment' is unable to distinguish whether the string is aligning with the body you are putting it against.



Diagram is more or less similar to what I saw yesterday.

If the Moon and illuminated part of the Moon follows the ecliptic as it moves, aligning the string with the ecliptic would cause the Moon to connect to the Sun. However, this does not show that the illuminated area is pointing at the Sun, any more than being able to connect a string between objects in this scene show that the illuminated area is pointing at the sun:





Wow! We can connect a string between them. The illuminated portion of the Moon must be pointed at the Sun.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2021, 11:15:43 PM by Tom Bishop »
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

Re: Simple Experiments
« Reply #95 on: February 22, 2021, 10:52:03 PM »
As you admit, the experiment is using a perspective effect to get the illuminated portion of the ball to point upwards.

It's not an admission as such, more an explanation of why perspective is key in this experiment.
I don't really know what you mean by "perspective effect", you keep using that term as if it means something magic.
Perspective is important here for the reasons I've outlined. I've added a couple of additional "footballs" to my diagram:

You're looking from point A:



If you hold the ball to the left and the light source is to the right then you can only see the illuminated side of the ball.
If you hold it to the right then you can only see the dark side of the ball.

It's only if you hold it so it lines up with the moon that the line of sight is the same, the perspective is the same and the "phase" you observe on the ball is the same. Perspective is the reason we see different phases of the moon. In reality it's always half lit, half dark. But because of its changing position as it orbits us that changes our perspective so we see the different phases.

And one key thing to note here is of course the scale in my diagram is hopelessly wrong. In reality the moon is very distant - that's why it doesn't matter where you are on earth, you see the same phase. In the context of the moon being 250,000 miles away, a few thousand miles here and there doesn't significantly change your perspective (although the moon's orientation will be different in the southern hemisphere because you are "upside down" with respect to the northern hemisphere).
But the ball is very close to you so it's very easy to move it, or move your position relative to it so you observe different phases.

Quote
This doesn't demonstrate that the Moon is pointing upwards to a perspective effect. We are using a perspective effect to get the ball to point upwards, when it could also be that the Moon is pointing upwards and we are just matching it.

Right. So two experiments have been outlined and they demonstrate different things.
IF the sun is illuminating the moon AND the sun is distant so the light rays from it are in effect parallel AND light travels in straight lines
THEN if you hold a ball up so it lines up with the moon you should observe the same phase on the ball as you do the moon.
Because both the moon and the ball are being illuminated by the same light source, the rays are going straight and parallel, they're hitting the moon and the ball at the same angle and you're looking at both from the same perspective.
That's what my original diagram was trying to explain. Hopefully the new one with the extra balls shows more clearly why perspective is important.

Quote
The experiment is unable to distinguish whether the Moon is actually pointing upwards or not.

Correct. But that isn't what the experiment is intended to do. It's intended to add credence to the idea that the sun is distant and is illuminating the moon and the ball with parallel rays. I'll leave you to consider whether EA would make the same prediction.

There is another experiment we can do to determine whether the moon (more accurately the line perpendicular to the terminator on the moon) is pointing upwards. When you see the illusion the line perpendicular to the terminator looks like it shoots off into the sky. But as I've shown with the optical illusion above, we aren't very good at judging this sort of thing. I previously showed you this image:



It looks like the black line and the blue line join up when in fact it's the red line which is a continuation of the black line:
Humans pretty much suck at judging things in certain situations.

The point of the string experiment is that the string forms a straight line.
If the sun is illuminating the moon and light travels in straight lines then the line perpendicular to the terminator should intersect the sun. The string experiment shows that, contrary to what it appears to the naked eye, the string does indeed intersect the sun. Just like you can draw a line on the above picture to show that it is the black and red lines which form a straight line, not the blue:



And yes, the string experiment can't distinguish between whether the light is going in a straight line or whether it's arcing around a dome like in your water bottle diagram. But that isn't how light behaves either in the RE model where light travels in straight lines or in the FE one where light bends upwards. In your diagram the sun's light would have to be bending up and over a hemisphere which is the opposite of what EA claims.
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

Re: Simple Experiments
« Reply #96 on: February 23, 2021, 09:57:46 AM »
On the "Ball Experiment" -
.........
Next I moved my position to below the ball and the top of the post, to get the ball to point upwards via a close range perspective effect. I could have done a better job at getting the phase to match, by moving the camera around. But it was easy to move the camera downwards to get the illuminated portion to point upwards:

Marvellous, you’ve actually done something! Or tried to give that appearance: you didn’t really try to get the ball to line up with the Moon, did you? Probably because that’s what clowns do, in your own words.

Why all the emphasis on pointing the camera up to photograph the ball being a problem? Haven’t you noticed the Moon is also up in the sky and you need to point the camera up to photograph it too?

This is enormously entertaining, reading your efforts to discount what your own work nearly shows, but is just sufficiently clumsy to avoid. Next thing you’ll be filming ships sailing for Hawaii and disappearing slowly over the horizon.  ;D
Once again - you assume that the centre of the video is the centre of the camera's frame. We know that this isn't the case.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 8252
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Simple Experiments
« Reply #97 on: February 23, 2021, 06:52:07 PM »
On the "Ball Experiment" -

So the argument is admitting that the ball experiment is a perspective effect, but the argument is now pointing out that when you align the ball to the Moon, the phase points in a similar direction. This is an argument that the Moon is undergoing a perspective effect.

If the Moon was aligning itself along on a surface of a sphere, it would also match the perspective effect. The perspective effect is unable to distinguish whether something is curving/aligning on a sphere around you, or if it is pointing upwards to perspective, because when you look around an object with this perspective effect the shifts in the perspective are making spherical shifts.

I created a semi-transparent wire-frame sphere with a purple cone inside of it:



Front View - Take note of the two rings that looks like an X:



Top View - Again, take note of the two rings that looks like an X:



Now when I aligned two of the rings which were angled like X's from the front and top views above the cone pointed upwards, matching the angle of the ring in the foreground and background.



View is from below the work plane. The purple cone basically matched the sphere around it.

There is no way to distinguish whether something is angled on the celestial sphere or not with this effect alone. Since this effect is orienting bodies in a spherical manner it will not distinguish whether something is truly angled as if on a sphere or not. Perspective causes similar shifts in a spherical manner simply because when you perform this effect you are looking at the object from a spherical direction around it. When viewing from spherical directions around an object it follows that it will shift in a spherical manner.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2021, 07:58:11 PM by Tom Bishop »
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

Re: Simple Experiments
« Reply #98 on: February 24, 2021, 01:13:52 PM »
So the argument is admitting that the ball experiment is a perspective effect, but the argument is now pointing out that when you align the ball to the Moon, the phase points in a similar direction. This is an argument that the Moon is undergoing a perspective effect.
Right. This isn't an admission, so much as an explanation. The phase you see on the moon depends on your perspective.
Of course it does. You have proved that with your pictures of the football. The phase you see on the ball depends on your perspective too. That's what my diagram shows and your pictures affirm.
In real life the ball and the moon are half lit and half dark at all times. But we don't always see the moon that way, we see a range of phases because of our changing perspective.
And the reason that you, living thousands of miles away from me, see the same phase of the moon as I do is because the moon is 250,000 miles away. In the context of that distance a few thousand miles doesn't change our perspective enough that there's any difference in what we see. Obviously with the ball you can move around it easily to see different "phases"

Quote
If the Moon was aligning itself along on a surface of a sphere, it would also match the perspective effect.

OK. So you're saying the light could be taking the path up and over the sphere you drew above



If you're standing at the bottom of the red triangle and performing the string experiment, the blue dotted line represents the string.
So you're saying that you can't tell whether the light is really going in a straight line parallel to the string or whether it's going up and over the "dome" in the curved line you've drawn.

I basically agree, but that's just not how light behaves.
It's not how it behaves in RE where it goes in straight lines, or in FE where it bends upwards.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2021, 03:38:20 PM by AllAroundTheWorld »
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

Offline scomato

  • *
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
Re: Simple Experiments
« Reply #99 on: February 24, 2021, 07:15:51 PM »
On the "Ball Experiment" -

Bay Area California, Feb 21st, 2021, pictures taken around 5:27 PM PST with a Google Pixel 3 XL Phone.

Image 2:

Viewpoint from behind the ball, looking at Sun:

Full Size: https://i.imgur.com/dahZJsy.jpg

Image 5:

Next I moved my position to below the ball and the top of the post, to get the ball to point upwards via a close range perspective effect. I could have done a better job at getting the phase to match, by moving the camera around. But it was easy to move the camera downwards to get the illuminated portion to point upwards:

Full Size:  https://i.imgur.com/rSV2mAx.jpg



Tom, I think it's fantastic that you did the experiment yourself.

In your photo #2 it perfectly demonstrates how the moon would be illuminated if you were to view it from the perspective of the far side of the moon facing the sun.

The below is a photo of the same experiment on a much grander scale, this shows how when viewed at the same angle, the Moon and the Earth are illuminated the same.



In your photo #5 it also perfectly demonstrates how, when a ball and the moon are viewed at the same angle, you see the same phase on the ball and on the moon. You have proved that both the Moon and the Earth, and the Ball, are all illuminated by parallel light rays, which is impossible in a geocentric model.

But your argument that by changing the perspective of the observer, so does change the shading of the ball. Of course it does, you are viewing it from a different angle. If you were to fly into space, and viewed the moon from an angle directly opposite the sun (such as in Photo #3), you would see a fully illuminated moon.