[Tom Bishop]

Sandokan made a decent argument in this thread here on theflatearthsociety.org that the Bessel and derivatives are actually using a FE North Azimuthal projection or something similar which amounts to the same projection when put together.

We've pointed out in the past that when the eclipse path are mapped out on the Northern Azimuthal projection that the twisted paths on the RE globe coincidentally turn into symmetrical arcs.

https://wiki.tfes.org/Solar_Eclipse

Solar Eclipse Path Comparison

It is of interest that on the globe the paths of the Solar Eclipse look rather odd:



Source

On the Flat Earth map the paths appear to be symmetrical arcs:



From A Text-Book of Astronomy by George C. Comstock (p.113)

  “ Fig. 36.—Central eclipses for the first two decades of the twentieth century. Oppolzer.

Future eclipses.—An eclipse map of a different kind is shown in Fig. 36, which represents the shadow paths of [pg. 114] all the central eclipses of the sun, visible during the period 1900-1918 A. D., in those parts of the earth north of the south temperate zone. Each continuous black line shows the path of the shadow in a total eclipse, from its beginning, at sunrise, at the western end of the line to its end, sunset, at the eastern end, the little circle near the middle of the line showing the place at which the eclipse was total at noon. The broken lines represent similar data for the annular eclipses. This map is one of a series prepared by the Austrian astronomer, Oppolzer, showing the path of every such eclipse from the year 1200 B. C. [pg. 115] to 2160 A. D., a period of more than three thousand years. ”

In the theflatearthsociety.org thread linked above Sandokhan argues that Oppolzer actually used the Besselian Elements in his derivation of his maps, and I am inclined to agree.

However, regardless of method of creation, considering that the North centered map is the only map which makes symmetrical arcs and other variants such as the RE version or the Mercator version have a spaghetti of different shadow directions, it suggests that the earth is flat and a Northern centered map is correct for at least for the Northern Hemiplane area.

The coincidence cannot be simply dismissed as random, and suggests a geometric importance.

[Tom Bishop]

I've circled the 2026 eclipse over Greenland on the RE "Fifty years of solar eclipses" image above. If the shadow path is moving Southwards so fast that the eclipse goes almost straight downwards over a period of one and a half hours, why don't the other shadow paths exhibit this behavior?

If this was expected inherent geometry then we should see the eclipses all move vertically like that, moving Northward or Southward at a rapid pace.

It is clearly a bogus explanation that the Southwards trajectory of the Moon over the period of a Lunar Month causes this behavior. Many of the other eclipses travel relatively horizontal for long stretches of time. The one in 2031 is even traveling both Southwards and then Northwards at different times of its duration.

[flannel jesus]

Sandokan made a decent argument in this thread here on theflatearthsociety.org that the Bessel and derivatives are actually using a FE North Azimuthal projection or something similar which amounts to the same projection when put together.

We've pointed out in the past that when the eclipse path are mapped out on the Northern Azimuthal projection that the twisted paths on the RE globe coincidentally turn into symmetrical arcs.

https://wiki.tfes.org/Solar_Eclipse

Solar Eclipse Path Comparison

It is of interest that on the globe the paths of the Solar Eclipse look rather odd:



Source

On the Flat Earth map the paths appear to be symmetrical arcs:



From A Text-Book of Astronomy by George C. Comstock (p.113)

  “ Fig. 36.—Central eclipses for the first two decades of the twentieth century. Oppolzer.

Future eclipses.—An eclipse map of a different kind is shown in Fig. 36, which represents the shadow paths of [pg. 114] all the central eclipses of the sun, visible during the period 1900-1918 A. D., in those parts of the earth north of the south temperate zone. Each continuous black line shows the path of the shadow in a total eclipse, from its beginning, at sunrise, at the western end of the line to its end, sunset, at the eastern end, the little circle near the middle of the line showing the place at which the eclipse was total at noon. The broken lines represent similar data for the annular eclipses. This map is one of a series prepared by the Austrian astronomer, Oppolzer, showing the path of every such eclipse from the year 1200 B. C. [pg. 115] to 2160 A. D., a period of more than three thousand years. ”

In the theflatearthsociety.org thread linked above Sandokhan argues that Oppolzer actually used the Besselian Elements in his derivation of his maps, and I am inclined to agree.

However, regardless of method of creation, considering that the North centered map is the only map which makes symmetrical arcs and other variants such as the RE version or the Mercator version have a spaghetti of different shadow directions, it suggests that the earth is flat and a Northern centered map is correct for at least for the Northern Hemiplane area.

The coincidence cannot be simply dismissed as random, and suggests a geometric importance.

Those two pictures clearly have nothing to do with each other. You're presenting them like one is how a globe represents the paths of eclipse and the other is how it's presented on a flat earth, but those maps very clearly, to anyone who looks closely, aren't displaying the same paths as each other. Those aren't the same eclipse paths displayed two different ways. Those are two entirely different maps with two sets of entirely different paths. There's no point comparing those pictures except to fool people too lazy to look at the details.

Show a like for like comparison of the paths and it will be worth looking at.

[flannel jesus]

why don't the other shadow paths exhibit this behavior?

If this was expected inherent geometry then we should see the eclipses all move vertically like that, moving Northward or Southward at a rapid pace.

Because not all eclipses happen under the same conditions. That seems almost so obvious it's not worth saying.

And of course some of the other shadows do look similar. That's quite clearly not the only one with a heavy north south direction.

[Tom Bishop]

Those two pictures clearly have nothing to do with each other. You're presenting them like one is how a globe represents the paths of eclipse and the other is how it's presented on a flat earth, but those maps very clearly, to anyone who looks closely, aren't displaying the same paths as each other. Those aren't the same eclipse paths displayed two different ways. Those are two entirely different maps with two sets of entirely different paths. There's no point comparing those pictures except to fool people too lazy to look at the details.

Show a like for like comparison of the paths and it will be worth looking at.

The eclipses repeat themselves every 18 years, shifted in longitude, so this not really that relevant that the time span is not the same.

Here is the Oppolzer eclipse map for 2008 to 2030, which includes the 2026 path over Greenland. Browsing through the collection of maps in the site's directory the eclipse paths are, as expected, symmetrical arcs.

why don't the other shadow paths exhibit this behavior?

If this was expected inherent geometry then we should see the eclipses all move vertically like that, moving Northward or Southward at a rapid pace.

Because not all eclipses happen under the same conditions. That seems almost so obvious it's not worth saying.

And of course some of the other shadows do look similar. That's quite clearly not the only one with a heavy north south direction.

They do happen under the same geometrical conditions within the Earth-Moon system. According to what you claimed earlier, the Southward and Northward movement is caused by the Moon going down or up this ramp of its inclined tilt over the lunar month. As you also pointed out, due to the circular nature of the Moon's orbit, it would be moving faster on a Northward or Southward trajectory closer to the intersection with the earth center/ecliptic, painted below in red. But this is not what we see.



If the 2026 Greenland path is a gauge for the rapid vertical movement, it is certainly not increasing further down. According to what you have suggested is happening we should see the steep vertical movement all over the place in all eclipses.

None of this is seen with consistency and is therefore insufficient as an argument.

[flannel jesus]

Notice how none of those flat earth maps of the eclipse show those southward-going eclipses that happen over Australia.

The conditions are not always the same. YES the moon is always going north south or south north during these eclipses, but that is only one variable. You must expand your mind so that you can think of more than one variable at a time. As hard as that may sound to you, it's necessary.

Other variables include tilt of earth relative to sun, which changes throughout the year, and North-South position of the moon relative to the plane of earth's orbit.

Earth's tilt is such that at some points of the year, the north pole is more pointed towards the sun, other points the south pole, and other points the tilt isn't pointing to the sun at all. You haven't thought about that, but it's a variable you must be able to imagine. All of us globies can imagine it.

And the moon shadow isn't always starting on the very-north side of earth, or the very-south side. It's clearly, obviously, sometimes starting more central.

So these are two variables you have not been considering that will affect the shape of the path of the shadow.

[AATW]

So these are two variables you have not been considering that will affect the shape of the path of the shadow.

This stuff is complex. You have the earth orbiting the sun, the moon orbiting the earth.
The earth is also rotating and its axis of rotation is tilted with respect to the sun.
The moon's orbit is elliptical which means it's not at a constant distance from the earth - which is why we get annular eclipses - and the plane of its orbit is also tilted with respect to the sun/earth line - which is why we don't get an eclipse every month.
Then you have the fact that the earth is a globe but slightly oblate

All of this has to be taken into account when calculating the path of totality.
Tom routinely conflates him not understanding something with the something not being possible. And it's notable that he hasn't shown how eclipses work on a Flat Earth or how the details of the path of totality are calculated. The link he provided explained how projecting the shadow on to a flat plane is done to make the maths simpler, but it also explained (in a part he didn't quote, strangely) how it then has to be projected back onto a globe and the oblateness taken into account in order to get useful results and calculate the eclipse path to the accuracy which is now possible. Only when you do that do you get results which match observations - it's a vindication of the globe model.
There is no FE way of doing this and no agreed FE map. A thought for future FE research is to use historic eclipse paths to try and make a working FE map.

[flannel jesus]

And it's notable that he hasn't shown how eclipses work on a Flat Earth or how the details of the path of totality are calculated.

To Tom's credit, he's one of the few flat earthers who actually commits to a map. Of course, the map he commits to is explicitly falsified - it's the Gleason map, which is falsified by observing the southern celestial pole overnight from 2 countries - south african and brazil (you could of course use argentina or chile or any other number of southern-hemisphere countries, those are just the first that come to mind).

[AATW]

And it's notable that he hasn't shown how eclipses work on a Flat Earth or how the details of the path of totality are calculated.

To Tom's credit, he's one of the few flat earthers who actually commits to a map. Of course, the map he commits to is explicitly falsified - it's the Gleason map, which is falsified by observing the southern celestial pole overnight from 2 countries - south african and brazil (you could of course use argentina or chile or any other number of southern-hemisphere countries, those are just the first that come to mind).

I think Tom now favours the bi-polar model. The issue is there is on FE map which works with movements of the sun, known distances between places, flight times and so on. Obviously the reason for that is any flat earth map has to be a projection of the reality of a globe, that necessarily distorts things. But as I said maybe historic eclipse paths can be used to construct a FE map which does work.

[flannel jesus]

And it's notable that he hasn't shown how eclipses work on a Flat Earth or how the details of the path of totality are calculated.

To Tom's credit, he's one of the few flat earthers who actually commits to a map. Of course, the map he commits to is explicitly falsified - it's the Gleason map, which is falsified by observing the southern celestial pole overnight from 2 countries - south african and brazil (you could of course use argentina or chile or any other number of southern-hemisphere countries, those are just the first that come to mind).

I think Tom now favours the bi-polar model.

Weird considering the images he's been posting of flat earth eclipse paths on this thread, which are all Gleason based.

What happens to the sun in the bipolar model? How does it go from west to east? I've heard people talk about teleporting, like we live in pacman world. Is that the state of the art of bipolar flat earth? Is the globe so unacceptable that they'd rather go with pacman world than a would that fits with literally all of known physics?

[AATW]

Weird considering the images he's been posting of flat earth eclipse paths on this thread, which are all Gleason based.

Indeed. Tom has never been troubled by the thought that one should be logically consistent

What happens to the sun in the bipolar model? How does it go from west to east?

Literally no idea. Does it spend 6 months circling the north pole and then 6 months circling the south each year? I don't think there's any pacman stuff going on. But for me while the bi-polar FE model does solve some problems in the southern "hemisphere" it creates a load of new ones which are bigger problems for a coherent FE model. It would be interesting to see eclipse paths mapped on to the bi-polar map.

[flannel jesus]

. It would be interesting to see eclipse paths mapped on to the bi-polar map.

By my reckoning, they would look remarkably similar to the paths shown on the globe, with one notable exception: eclipse paths happening over the Pacific Ocean would leap inexplicably from East to West.

[Longtitube]

As has been said, these things are complex, so here's an interesting animation of the August 12, 2026 eclipse looking at the globe from the Moon.  (https://eclipsewise.com/solar/SEprime/2001-2100/SE2026Aug12Tprime.html)




The Moon's shadow is seen both descending North to South and moving West to East, consistent with its observed behaviour at a descending node. The small black shadow of totality (full eclipse) moves at a consistent speed in a straight line across the field of view during the roughly 1½ hrs of its track over the globe. The larger, slightly shaded circle shows where a partial eclipse will be seen. Projecting this eclipse path animation on to a Mercator map of the world will show the contorted path I showed on page 1 of this thread, and the OP's illustration. Perhaps this will help explain his difficulty.

[flannel jesus]

Amazing, I was hoping to find something similar to this (thinking of finding something just like this but from the sun's perspective, but this is just as good). This is just perfect.

[flannel jesus]

Notice anything odd? During the eclipse the shadow of the Moon will be moving vertically in a North-South direction. This is quite odd, considering that the Moon is said to travel around the Earth in a East-West direction (or West-East, if you want to argue about rotating earth semantics).

The best excuse you can expect for this typically amounts to "you haven't considered that the Earth is tilted", without expanding further. But any possibility of a coherent explanation can be easily dismissed, since in the Round Earth Theory the Moon is traveling in the same plane of the Sun, and only misaligned by 5 degrees. They are essentially on the same plane. The tilted Earth effect must also occur with the Sun. Reviewing the path that the Sun makes over the Earth, it is difficult to see how the Moon's shadow can move in this direction.

So, tying this back in with the OP, once it's visualized like the gif above, it actually becomes much easier to understand that the moon doesn't have to do anything bizarre in the globe model in order to create that shadow path on the surface of the earth. It turns out that considering the Earth's tilt IS important for fully understanding the globe model approach to this, and in fact the globe model DOES expand further by quite a bit. In fact the globe model is the only model that has expanded at all on the mechanics of a solar eclipse.

I think the implicit challenge of the OP - that we make it make sense with the globe model - is satisfied. Longitube for the win.

[Tom Bishop]

It still has the same problem. If the Moon's shadow is traveling at that steep of an angle then there should be steep Southward or Northward vertical shadow movement in all eclipse shadow paths. Yet we see many with relatively horizontal Eastwards paths for the same duration.

[flannel jesus]

Yet we see many with relatively horizontal Eastwards paths for the same duration.

For example? They all look sufficiently north/south to me.

It seems just obviously, intuitively false that all eclipse paths should look the same. Some eclipse paths happen more towards the edge. Some happen more towards the equator. Some start north and go south, some start north and go further north. Some start south and go north, some start south and go further south. And then all the different variations for ones that can start more near the middle.

There's just no good reason to assume they should ALL look the same. "Things happen differently sometimes, therefore this doesn't make sense" just isn't a compelling argument. Yes, things happen differently sometimes. That makes perfect sense.

[AATW]

It still has the same problem. If the Moon's shadow is traveling at that steep of an angle then there should be steep Southward or Northward vertical shadow movement in all eclipse shadow paths. Yet we see many with relatively horizontal Eastwards paths for the same duration.

Firstly, I can't find any horizontal ones.

https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEatlas/SEatlas3/SE2001-25T-2.GIF

But also one factor is the latitude. This is not a very good diagram and don't take the numbers that literally, this is just to illustrate the point:



The two red lines represent the start and end point of where it hits the earth in the "y" axis - up/down. With the same difference in "y" it causes an eclipse near the equator to have a difference of about 8.6 degrees. At a more northerly latitude it's nearly 12.3 degrees. And if it was more northerly or southerly still you can see it would be even more.
Because (all together now) we live on a globe.

This is complicated and you keep on conflating you not understanding that complication with it not being possible.

[Longtitube]

It still has the same problem. If the Moon's shadow is traveling at that steep of an angle then there should be steep Southward or Northward vertical shadow movement in all eclipse shadow paths. Yet we see many with relatively horizontal Eastwards paths for the same duration.

I get that you don't understand this, but I also don't get your thinking there should be "steep Southward or Northward vertical shadow movement in all eclipse shadow paths." Spoiler alert: the marked southern or northern movements occur when the eclipse shadow lands on the northern or southern polar latitudes. For your better understanding, have a look at the global eclipse animations at EclipseWise: they have dozens, if not hundreds, starting from AD2001 and running to at least AD2100 and they make sense of the convoluted paths on Mercator maps that have you baffled. You will find all the examples you've already referred to, so knock yourself out.

https://eclipsewise.com/solar/SEdecade/SEdecade2021.html      (this is for 2021-2030)

[WTF_Seriously]

I really wish this website wasn't so entertaining.  It seems everyone is making this harder than it is.

First off, this:

It is of interest that on the globe the paths of the Solar Eclipse look rather odd:

is nonsense.  If, Tom, you’re going to argue, “Gee, RE is silly.” you should use a reference that actually represents RE.  The map is a flat projection and has zero accurate representation of the reality that is the spheroid earth.

The mechanics of every eclipse are exactly the same.  The moon, at 238,000 miles away, crosses in front of the sun in a path across the entire diameter of the earth casting its shadow in various locations due to, well, geometry.  That’s it.  An eclipse path is that of the shadow cast, not the path of the actual moon.  As such, the path can travel differently in the same way  a 50ft. tree can cast a 75 ft. shadow.

Everyone here has been analyzing the situation using 2D maps with the north pole directly at the top.   That’s not reality.  Reality is a 3D object with the north pole tilting toward or away from the direct path of the sun.

The TimandDate website presents a rotatable 3D model of every eclipse.  Play with it a little and put the north pole in a realistic position and you get this:

Every eclipse path is a nearly (not exactly due to the tilted, rotating spheroid shape of the actual earth) straight line all running a horizontal path if the north pole is positioned such that it aligns properly with the inclined orbit of the moon.  It’s almost as if, and bear with me ‘cause this is crazy talk, the shadows are all being caused by an object moving at a consistent angle to N-S in a straight line between a spheroid and a distant light source.