*

Offline alex

  • *
  • Posts: 83
  • Always Curious
    • View Profile
Sunrise and Sunset II
« on: May 20, 2015, 06:37:56 AM »
I need to reopen my question, as it has been closed.

The observation os a sun going below the horizon is explained in the FAQ as a perspectivic effect. However, this cannot be true.

When standing on a very high mountain, one can clearly see the sun vanishing below the horizon. If this would be a perspectiviv effect the sun would get very close to the horizon, but never able to go below the horizon.

Am I wrong? Please explain!

Offline dave

  • *
  • Posts: 20
    • View Profile
Re: Sunrise and Sunset II
« Reply #1 on: May 25, 2015, 04:43:27 AM »
the sun only seems to go below the horizon....it's spotlight brightness is only leaving your viewing perspective.

Offline Oliver

  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Sunrise and Sunset II
« Reply #2 on: August 10, 2017, 11:42:58 AM »
Hello,

I am very interested by the sunset on flat earth, because I don't understand how perspective works with the sun.

From this page : http://wiki.tfes.org/Distance_to_the_Sun
The sun is 2400 miles above flat earth.
At midnight in New York, the sun is above the Philippines, approximatively 8500 miles from New York (https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/sunearth.html?day=10&month=8&year=2017&hour=0&min=0&sec=0&n=179&ntxt=New+York&earth=0)
If I apply the same calculation that the "Distance to the Sun" page, I get an angle from the horizon to the sun seen from New York = tan^-1(2400/8500) = tan^-1(0.282352941) = 15.76 degrees

What is wrong in this reasoning?
I don't figure out because I applied the same trigonometry that the one of the "Distance to the Sun" page.
I get the same result if I draw a scale model on a page, a right triangle with adjacent side of 8.5 inches and opposit side of 2.4 inches have an angle of approx 15 degrees, so what is different with the sun, which explained how it gets below the horizon?

Offline Hmmm

  • *
  • Posts: 144
    • View Profile
Re: Sunrise and Sunset II
« Reply #3 on: August 10, 2017, 12:24:16 PM »
I personally assume that  [/b]suns[/b](every region of earth has its own sun/suns) are rising from and set to a specific/varying location, e.g underwater, underground pit, ground. But this could mean: that specific location becomes very heated. If it's ground, where sun is setting down, then that ground would be deserted and almost lifeless. If it's water, then all the fish and living organisms around would likely die from irradiance and incredible amount of heat.
Or, maybe, the sun "changes its mode" to become much less hot, when setting down, so that fish won't die, when getting close to sun.
« Last Edit: August 10, 2017, 03:11:49 PM by Hmmm »
As you will notice, there are some extremely vile, insulting and disruptive individuals on the forums. It's not just their words, it's the repulsive toxic energy they emit, and their tangible vicious burning hatred for the truth. Everyone just a bit intuitive can sense that. Let's be clear about the obvious, they are not human.
And they get so panicked and aggressive over some topics, because they see their food source threatened.

Offline Oliver

  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Sunrise and Sunset II
« Reply #4 on: August 10, 2017, 02:51:41 PM »
Ok, but if the sun rise/set from/to a specific location, this is not compatible with this animation : http://wiki.tfes.org/File:SunAnimation.gif, and if the sun disapear below the earth surface, all the countries should be in the night at the same time, which is not the case, as we can see with TV show from abroad and phone call to people living across the ocean.

Offline Hmmm

  • *
  • Posts: 144
    • View Profile
Re: Sunrise and Sunset II
« Reply #5 on: August 10, 2017, 03:10:09 PM »
Oliver,
Quote
Ok, but if the sun rise/set from/to a specific location, this is not compatible with this animation : http://wiki.tfes.org/File:SunAnimation.gif,
It should be, if there could be multiple suns on earth?
« Last Edit: August 10, 2017, 03:16:35 PM by Hmmm »
As you will notice, there are some extremely vile, insulting and disruptive individuals on the forums. It's not just their words, it's the repulsive toxic energy they emit, and their tangible vicious burning hatred for the truth. Everyone just a bit intuitive can sense that. Let's be clear about the obvious, they are not human.
And they get so panicked and aggressive over some topics, because they see their food source threatened.

Re: Sunrise and Sunset II
« Reply #6 on: August 10, 2017, 03:21:59 PM »
I personally assume that  [/b]suns[/b](every region of earth has its own sun/suns) are rising from and set to a specific/varying location, e.g underwater, underground pit, ground. But this could mean: that specific location becomes very heated. If it's ground, where sun is setting down, then that ground would be deserted and almost lifeless. If it's water, then all the fish and living organisms around would likely die from irradiance and incredible amount of heat.
Or, maybe, the sun "changes its mode" to become much less hot, when setting down, so that fish won't die, when getting close to sun.

This pet hypothesis of yours is quite possibly the craziest I've heard yet. I'm not even sure where to begin taking it apart to be honest. Let's start with asking what you think your video shows? Because what's shown is exactly what RE says should happen, so I'm not quite understanding the purpose of the video being linked.

Ok, but if the sun rise/set from/to a specific location, this is not compatible with this animation : http://wiki.tfes.org/File:SunAnimation.gif, and if the sun disapear below the earth surface, all the countries should be in the night at the same time, which is not the case, as we can see with TV show from abroad and phone call to people living across the ocean.
This is one of the issues with the 'plate' of the flat Earth. Unfortunately the times I've seen it brought up to FE'ers they don't seem cognizant of the issue the circular motion of the sun represents.
FET - A few old books making claims and telling you how things must be based on the words contained therein. This sounds familiar....

The triangle doesn't work

Offline Oliver

  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Sunrise and Sunset II
« Reply #7 on: August 10, 2017, 03:58:31 PM »
So, back to my initial question : where am I wrong with my computation with expected distances to get a sun position at midnight 15 degrees above the horizon?
« Last Edit: August 10, 2017, 04:01:08 PM by Oliver »

Re: Sunrise and Sunset II
« Reply #8 on: August 10, 2017, 04:05:17 PM »
So, back to my initial question : where am I wrong with my computation with expected distances to get a sun position at midnight 15 degrees above the horizon?
No where. The FE hypothesis postulates refraction bends light more than we've ever measured, enough to allow the sun to appear to set at the time RE says it should. The sun rays are in fact bending into a sort of curved "V" shape so they can no longer strike your eyes. This creates the optical illusion of the sun setting behind the horizon. I'm not going to pretend to understand how it functions beyond that, as it doesn't make any sense to me.
FET - A few old books making claims and telling you how things must be based on the words contained therein. This sounds familiar....

The triangle doesn't work

Offline Hmmm

  • *
  • Posts: 144
    • View Profile
Re: Sunrise and Sunset II
« Reply #9 on: August 10, 2017, 04:06:12 PM »
Curious Squirrel, are you related to curiousjoe in any way?
Quote
This pet hypothesis of yours is quite possibly the craziest I've heard yet. I'm not even sure where to begin taking it apart to be honest. Let's start with asking what you think your video shows? Because what's shown is exactly what RE says should happen, so I'm not quite understanding the purpose of the video being linked.
I see in that video what i wrote in my older post:
Quote
The Maori myth about Maui demi-god and the sun gave me a clue.
I assume that the sun(suns) might be stopping in some location at a time of sunset. What could be happening next is it's re-calibration and its possible maintenance. I mean the sun could be literally going under the ground or underwater at sunset or going from at sunrise. Maybe, such locations are where the sun "charges up", because it possibly might need an external power source at the end of its activity.
Remember the sun looking orange and less bright at sunset? It could be an indication it's going out of "battery life".
i Allso assume, that different regions of our planet(if i can say so) have different suns with different "dimming modes" with different "looping" paths at varying in time heights. And core of any sun is made from different or similar material (unknown-known metal alloys).

This goes for the MOON: it could be the same type of "lantern" the sun is with changed irradiance, "dimming mode" and other parameters!!!





The first 10 seconds of this video are strange!


And even islamic religion has place of the sun setting(for calibration/re-calibration/de-calibration?), just as Maori. WOW! CANNOT BE A COINCIDENCE!
And why is this crazy? Is it crazy, that when you go out to a street at night, you see many local lights everywhere. The sun/suns, moon/moons, stars are similarly hanging/rotating/moving in the skies.

The hypothesis doesn't belong to me, i've simply retranslated it with additional, i believe at least, proof for people to analyze and evidence(somewhat) to accumulate. I myself don't know right now is my hypothesis true or false.
As you will notice, there are some extremely vile, insulting and disruptive individuals on the forums. It's not just their words, it's the repulsive toxic energy they emit, and their tangible vicious burning hatred for the truth. Everyone just a bit intuitive can sense that. Let's be clear about the obvious, they are not human.
And they get so panicked and aggressive over some topics, because they see their food source threatened.

Re: Sunrise and Sunset II
« Reply #10 on: August 10, 2017, 04:41:10 PM »
Curious Squirrel, are you related to curiousjoe in any way?
Quote
This pet hypothesis of yours is quite possibly the craziest I've heard yet. I'm not even sure where to begin taking it apart to be honest. Let's start with asking what you think your video shows? Because what's shown is exactly what RE says should happen, so I'm not quite understanding the purpose of the video being linked.
I see in that video what i wrote in my older post:
Quote
The Maori myth about Maui demi-god and the sun gave me a clue.
I assume that the sun(suns) might be stopping in some location at a time of sunset. What could be happening next is it's re-calibration and its possible maintenance. I mean the sun could be literally going under the ground or underwater at sunset or going from at sunrise. Maybe, such locations are where the sun "charges up", because it possibly might need an external power source at the end of its activity.
Remember the sun looking orange and less bright at sunset? It could be an indication it's going out of "battery life".
i Allso assume, that different regions of our planet(if i can say so) have different suns with different "dimming modes" with different "looping" paths at varying in time heights. And core of any sun is made from different or similar material (unknown-known metal alloys).

This goes for the MOON: it could be the same type of "lantern" the sun is with changed irradiance, "dimming mode" and other parameters!!!





The first 10 seconds of this video are strange!


And even islamic religion has place of the sun setting(for calibration/re-calibration/de-calibration?), just as Maori. WOW! CANNOT BE A COINCIDENCE!
And why is this crazy? Is it crazy, that when you go out to a street at night, you see many local lights everywhere. The sun/suns, moon/moons, stars are similarly hanging/rotating/moving in the skies.

The hypothesis doesn't belong to me, i've simply retranslated it with additional, i believe at least, proof for people to analyze and evidence(somewhat) to accumulate. I myself don't know right now is my hypothesis true or false.
I am not in any way related to or associated with curiousjoe. Naming similarity is pure coincidence.

Ok, fine then. Let's go through each of these videos quick.

1. This is normal, and exactly as predicted for RE. The sunset happens in a matter of minutes from when it first touches the horizon. It looks here like we've caught the last bit of it setting.

2. I'm not certain why he or you think clouds are going behind the sun here. Many of his shots you can still see the clouds as they are passing in front of the sun, the issue arising is the 'best' examples of are very thin clouds that barely block the sun and go nearly invisible while passing over it. Get a better camera.

3. This is really cool to watch actually, but it's just the camera underwater at sunset. The light is shining through the top of the water in interesting ways because of the waves and refraction. The first 10 seconds are just an 'illusion' created by setting the camera so that the bottom is 'looking' at the surface.

4. "WOW! CANNOT BE A COINCIDENCE!" No, completely can be. Cultures across the globe have dragons, yet most agree they don't and never existed. Religions all have gods that made the world in many different fashions, they can't all be correct can they? People attempt to explain the world around them as best they can at the time, two cultures of hundreds both coming up with the same idea for the sun isn't far fetched at all.

As for why a multitude of suns is crazy, someone already pointed out the amount of energy output by the sun and how hard/impossible it would be to match, not to mention the ability track the sun across vast distances with assistance.
FET - A few old books making claims and telling you how things must be based on the words contained therein. This sounds familiar....

The triangle doesn't work

Offline Hmmm

  • *
  • Posts: 144
    • View Profile
Re: Sunrise and Sunset II
« Reply #11 on: August 11, 2017, 09:32:08 PM »
Curious Squirrel,
Quote
someone already pointed out the amount of energy output by the sun and how hard/impossible it would be to match,
Why is it hard, if alien/gods/advanced civilization looking over' technology could be capable of making tons of suns with different irradiance. I know that aliens might not exist, but i've seen, heard too much information clues to point out their existence clearly.
Quote
not to mention the ability track the sun across vast distances with assistance.
What did you mean?
As you will notice, there are some extremely vile, insulting and disruptive individuals on the forums. It's not just their words, it's the repulsive toxic energy they emit, and their tangible vicious burning hatred for the truth. Everyone just a bit intuitive can sense that. Let's be clear about the obvious, they are not human.
And they get so panicked and aggressive over some topics, because they see their food source threatened.

Re: Sunrise and Sunset II
« Reply #12 on: August 19, 2017, 09:35:15 PM »
Properties of light have been well studied and although there is plenty we do not know, we know enough to predict how light will behave. We do this mathematically with high precision and it has little to do with what shape our planet is, these are just properties of light and matter.
If mathematical models used to describe behavior of light were inaccurate allot of existing technologies would not work, we are taking about computers, cellphones, cars etc technologies we use every day, so we can say with high degree of confidence that we can accurately predict how light behaves.

Considering what i said above, what is the mathematical model that describes behavior of light that would lead to sunset in a "Flat Earth"

I am not judging people exploring this concept although I disagree with them. However I keep seeing scientific method being abandoned in almost every discussion.

Videos contain unverified, unrepeatable, questionable information, and lack any mathematical or experimental basis.

Day and night cycle can be accurately explained and simulated with mathematical models within conventional model where earth is a sphere. I would like to see at least groundwork for mathematical basis that explains and models this cycle with "Flat Earth" approach.

If you can not accurately mathematically describe the behavior of the sun in the sky, what would be the use? Spherical model(even if only a model) is able to do that with high accuracy and is logically more suitable for making predictions.

Given properties of light we have verified, it is not possible to mathematically model or simulate flat disk that would follow patterns of night and day we see on Earth. Again if you know of such a model, please share.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2017, 09:39:31 PM by magewave »

Offline Hmmm

  • *
  • Posts: 144
    • View Profile
Re: Sunrise and Sunset II
« Reply #13 on: August 20, 2017, 08:24:08 AM »
magewave, what if, as in many times i ask this, there are multiple, probably artificial, suns with varying and/or constant:
* paths from peroid of days, weeks, months to another peroid of days, weeks, months
* "dimming modes", like dimmible LED lanterns


* regular brightnesses
* regions of earth
* sun disk sizes
So in fact, we might be living in a world, that was deconstructed into a terrarium-like environment with portion of artificial nature.
As you will notice, there are some extremely vile, insulting and disruptive individuals on the forums. It's not just their words, it's the repulsive toxic energy they emit, and their tangible vicious burning hatred for the truth. Everyone just a bit intuitive can sense that. Let's be clear about the obvious, they are not human.
And they get so panicked and aggressive over some topics, because they see their food source threatened.

Offline StinkyOne

  • *
  • Posts: 290
    • View Profile
Re: Sunrise and Sunset II
« Reply #14 on: August 20, 2017, 10:07:13 PM »
Yes, this theory makes WAY more sense than the simple fact that we live on a globe orbiting a star. If you have to keep adding a bunch of unproven nonsense to your hypothesis to make it viable, you're probably wrong. Multiple suns, suns that sink into water or mud pits, get a grip on reality man.

As for the goofy dancing sun video, it looks like someone messing with the exposure levels on their camera. I'd bet money on it. (And I would win)
I saw a video where a pilot was flying above the sun.
-Terry50

Offline 3DGeek

  • *
  • Posts: 764
  • Path of photon from sun location to eye at sunset?
    • View Profile
    • What path do the photons take from the physical location of the sun to my eye at sunset
Re: Sunrise and Sunset II
« Reply #15 on: August 24, 2017, 10:53:24 AM »
I have recently debunked the "alternative" idea of perspective as a solution to sunrises and sunsets:

Read this:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6785.0

I've also debunked the "refraction" argument here:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6710.0

Neither of those "explanations" can possibly be correct.
Hey Tom:  What path do the photons take from the physical location of the sun to my eye at sunset?

*

Offline junker

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5856
  • Boom
    • View Profile
Re: Sunrise and Sunset II
« Reply #16 on: August 24, 2017, 12:52:34 PM »
I have recently debunked the "alternative" idea of perspective as a solution to sunrises and sunsets:

False.
Please make sure to check out these resources to ensure that your time at tfes.org is enjoyable and productive.

1. The Rules

2. The FAQ

3. The Wiki

You're doing God's work, junker.

*

Offline TomInAustin

  • *
  • Posts: 401
  • Round Duh
    • View Profile
Re: Sunrise and Sunset II
« Reply #17 on: August 24, 2017, 09:11:15 PM »
I have recently debunked the "alternative" idea of perspective as a solution to sunrises and sunsets:

False.

And why is it false?
The distance from New York to Paris is unknown.

de·lu·sion
noun
1.   an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder.

*

Offline junker

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5856
  • Boom
    • View Profile
Re: Sunrise and Sunset II
« Reply #18 on: August 24, 2017, 10:05:47 PM »
I have recently debunked the "alternative" idea of perspective as a solution to sunrises and sunsets:

False.

And why is it false?

Because he didn't debunk it.
Please make sure to check out these resources to ensure that your time at tfes.org is enjoyable and productive.

1. The Rules

2. The FAQ

3. The Wiki

You're doing God's work, junker.

Offline 3DGeek

  • *
  • Posts: 764
  • Path of photon from sun location to eye at sunset?
    • View Profile
    • What path do the photons take from the physical location of the sun to my eye at sunset
Re: Sunrise and Sunset II
« Reply #19 on: August 30, 2017, 11:19:15 AM »
I have recently debunked the "alternative" idea of perspective as a solution to sunrises and sunsets:

False.

And why is it false?

Because he didn't debunk it.

And on what point of either false information or broken logic did you think I failed?   Oddly, neither you nor any other FE'er bothered to deliver killer blow to my rather careful chain of reasoning in the actual thread.  If you would be so kind as to explain why my argument is false - I would be more than happy to either correct my argument or concede.

Hey Tom:  What path do the photons take from the physical location of the sun to my eye at sunset?