[JohnAdams1145]

Tom Bishop claims to be a Zetetic, but then asserted in the FE Q&A forum that "the stars are not light-years away". Luminous intensity and parallax measurements agree with the hypothesis that stars are light-years away; they do not agree that they are little specks of dust in space that somehow glow (and there's a problem with energy too). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_distance_ladder

I'm sure none of the top Flat Earth people can understand most of that Wikipedia article (I know I can't), but the section on parallax is quite descriptive. Anyone can perform these calculations with the stars or even the Sun to conclude that they are pretty far away. This is the method RE people have tried with varying degrees of success about ascertaining the distance of the Sun.

What's the FE response to the cosmic distance ladder? To parallax measurements?

I found a link http://www.eso.org/public/outreach/eduoff/aol/market/collaboration/solpar/ that describes how the parallax calculation is done on a round Earth; for a flat Earth, the distances are mostly the same, but you just need to not tilt the triangles.

[Macarios]

The best cheap tool for angles is sextant.
For now they can be found on eBay for as low as $22.
If people start buying price will slightly increase, but $30 is still affordable.
Paired with artificial horizon it can be used to even measure horizon dip.

If you don't have artificial horizon, use bowl of molasses.
Make molasses soft, but not completely liquid.
Leave it minute or two to make sure it is horizontal.

If you don't have clear horizon and want to measure sun angle above horizontal,
measure angle between sun and artificial horizon reflection, and divide by 2.
Something like this:

[Tom Bishop]

Tom Bishop claims to be a Zetetic, but then asserted in the FE Q&A forum that "the stars are not light-years away". Luminous intensity and parallax measurements agree with the hypothesis that stars are light-years away; they do not agree that they are little specks of dust in space that somehow glow (and there's a problem with energy too). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_distance_ladder

I'm sure none of the top Flat Earth people can understand most of that Wikipedia article (I know I can't), but the section on parallax is quite descriptive. Anyone can perform these calculations with the stars or even the Sun to conclude that they are pretty far away. This is the method RE people have tried with varying degrees of success about ascertaining the distance of the Sun.

What's the FE response to the cosmic distance ladder? To parallax measurements?

I found a link http://www.eso.org/public/outreach/eduoff/aol/market/collaboration/solpar/ that describes how the parallax calculation is done on a round Earth; for a flat Earth, the distances are mostly the same, but you just need to not tilt the triangles.

You answered your own question. In the second link we see that the method relies on the assumption that the earth is round.

[garygreen]

In the second link we see that the method relies on the assumption that the earth is round.

as i've pointed out numerous times, spectroscopy does not.  you can do it in a lab.  it's a pretty common lab assignment in a first-year astronomy course.  probably in chemistry, too.  they use spectroscopy a lot.

[JohnAdams1145]

Tom, you're being very dishonest here. If you actually took the time to read and understand how parallax measurements work, instead of just handwaving and sitting in ignorance, you could do the calculation yourself and would realize that the distance doesn't change much even if you assume observers on a plane.

Elementary geometry would tell you instead of taking the distance between observers as the great circle length and adjusting it to chord length (A small difference), you'd take the distance as given and use it.

[Tom Bishop]

In the second link we see that the method relies on the assumption that the earth is round.

as i've pointed out numerous times, spectroscopy does not.  you can do it in a lab.  it's a pretty common lab assignment in a first-year astronomy course.  probably in chemistry, too.  they use spectroscopy a lot.

Please show us how the color of the stars tells us how far away they are.

Tom, you're being very dishonest here. If you actually took the time to read and understand how parallax measurements work, instead of just handwaving and sitting in ignorance, you could do the calculation yourself and would realize that the distance doesn't change much even if you assume observers on a plane.

The distance changes a lot if you assume that the earth is a plane, as described here.

[inquisitive]

In the second link we see that the method relies on the assumption that the earth is round.

as i've pointed out numerous times, spectroscopy does not.  you can do it in a lab.  it's a pretty common lab assignment in a first-year astronomy course.  probably in chemistry, too.  they use spectroscopy a lot.

Please show us how the color of the stars tells us how far away they are.

Tom, you're being very dishonest here. If you actually took the time to read and understand how parallax measurements work, instead of just handwaving and sitting in ignorance, you could do the calculation yourself and would realize that the distance doesn't change much even if you assume observers on a plane.

The distance changes a lot if you assume that the earth is a plane, as described here.

As explained many times before do the measurements from more than 2 locations.  Why do you not understand this and do the experiment?

[Tom Bishop]

As explained many times before do the measurements from more than 2 locations.  Why do you not understand this and do the experiment?

If you are claiming that a specific observation that favors your model of the earth will be seen if some specific experiment is performed simultaneously from three different location on earth, it is your responsibility to organize that experiment. Why would you expect me to do your work for you? Are you funding me?

[AATW]

As explained many times before do the measurements from more than 2 locations.  Why do you not understand this and do the experiment?

If you are claiming that a specific observation that favors your model of the earth will be seen if some specific experiment is performed simultaneously from three different location on earth, it is your responsibility to organize that experiment. Why would you expect me to do your work for you? Are you funding me?

Hang on. The burden of proof lies with the person making the claim. The accepted explanation of the stick experiment is that the sun is distant and the earth is therefore spherical.
You are the one making the claim that the earth is in fact flat and the sun is much closer. The burden of proof lies with you. And it's a relatively easy thing to prove.
All you have to do is take some measurements of the sun or the moon from a few cities, measure the angles, do the maths and you can triangulate to find the sun or moon's distance.
Do that and if the maths works out how you think it will then congratulations, you've won yourself a Nobel prize.

[inquisitive]

As explained many times before do the measurements from more than 2 locations.  Why do you not understand this and do the experiment?

If you are claiming that a specific observation that favors your model of the earth will be seen if some specific experiment is performed simultaneously from three different location on earth, it is your responsibility to organize that experiment. Why would you expect me to do your work for you? Are you funding me?

There is only one model of the earth so it is strange you are not interested in measurements to determine it.  You agree that timeanddate.com is correct so what's the problem?

[garygreen]

Please show us how the color of the stars tells us how far away they are.

it's not the color of a star or galaxy that tells us how far away it is.  it's the position of missing wavelengths in a star/galaxy spectrum.



Notice the dark line that appears in the rainbow (spectrum) made by the prism when the light from the projector passes through the sodium vapor.  these lines always appear in the same position on the spectrum for each element in the periodic table.

when we point our telescopes at stars/galaxies and pass their light through prisms, we can make similar spectra, and we notice the same dark lines at the same positions as those of laboratory spectra.  this is how we know what those things are made of.



finally, we notice that for some objects, all of their spectral lines are shifted and systematically appear at lower wavelengths.  for lots of reasons, we can use that systematic shift to tell us how far away the object is.

i'm happy to go into more detail on any of this, just ask.

[JohnAdams1145]

In the second link we see that the method relies on the assumption that the earth is round.

as i've pointed out numerous times, spectroscopy does not.  you can do it in a lab.  it's a pretty common lab assignment in a first-year astronomy course.  probably in chemistry, too.  they use spectroscopy a lot.

Please show us how the color of the stars tells us how far away they are.

Tom, you're being very dishonest here. If you actually took the time to read and understand how parallax measurements work, instead of just handwaving and sitting in ignorance, you could do the calculation yourself and would realize that the distance doesn't change much even if you assume observers on a plane.

The distance changes a lot if you assume that the earth is a plane, as described here.

Tom, the experiment on the wiki is junk. I wish you'd put more effort into understanding the science that you love to trash and discredit. First, not enough precision is reported; parallax measurements require extremely precise techniques, down to fractions of a degree. You give figures measured to the nearest ten. Second, you cannot use only two points if you dispute the curvature of the Earth, since you're assuming the normal vectors are parallel, when this is in dispute; you'll find if you make multiple simultaneous measurements, there is no way to simply move the Sun close to the Earth to solve the constraints. The only explanation is that the normal vectors are not parallel; making a few more adjustments, you find the stars very far away and the Sun is also very far away.

I'll do the math later; right now I'm busy, but if anyone wants some Sun/Moon angle data here is a calculator:

http://aa.usno.navy.mil/data/docs/AltAz.php

Of course, with random sampling, you can verify that the calculated data line up with actual observations. Then from the calculated data you can do all of the nice parallax measurements.

Also, I suppose I erred in making this argument; I just realized that this requires that the distances between the observation points be known. However, FE believers don't agree with measured distances on the Earth.

[Tom Bishop]

As explained many times before do the measurements from more than 2 locations.  Why do you not understand this and do the experiment?

If you are claiming that a specific observation that favors your model of the earth will be seen if some specific experiment is performed simultaneously from three different location on earth, it is your responsibility to organize that experiment. Why would you expect me to do your work for you? Are you funding me?

Hang on. The burden of proof lies with the person making the claim.

Yes. He claims that if a certain experiment is performed, it will give a certain result. His claim, his burden.

There is only one model of the earth so it is strange you are not interested in measurements to determine it.  You agree that timeanddate.com is correct so what's the problem?

If you are so gung ho on this experiment, then perform it.

I don't know what your fascination with timeanddate.com is. We have discussed that calculator thoroughly here.

Tom, the experiment on the wiki is junk. I wish you'd put more effort into understanding the science that you love to trash and discredit. First, not enough precision is reported; parallax measurements require extremely precise techniques, down to fractions of a degree. You give figures measured to the nearest ten.

The wiki shows that we can use the same data that computed the sun to be millions of miles away, to be thousands of miles away. The data used is the same.

Second, you cannot use only two points if you dispute the curvature of the Earth, since you're assuming the normal vectors are parallel, when this is in dispute; you'll find if you make multiple simultaneous measurements, there is no way to simply move the Sun close to the Earth to solve the constraints.

If this is your claim, it is your burden.

[Tom Bishop]

Please show us how the color of the stars tells us how far away they are.

it's not the color of a star or galaxy that tells us how far away it is.  it's the position of missing wavelengths in a star/galaxy spectrum.



Notice the dark line that appears in the rainbow (spectrum) made by the prism when the light from the projector passes through the sodium vapor.  these lines always appear in the same position on the spectrum for each element in the periodic table.

when we point our telescopes at stars/galaxies and pass their light through prisms, we can make similar spectra, and we notice the same dark lines at the same positions as those of laboratory spectra.  this is how we know what those things are made of.



finally, we notice that for some objects, all of their spectral lines are shifted and systematically appear at lower wavelengths.  for lots of reasons, we can use that systematic shift to tell us how far away the object is.

i'm happy to go into more detail on any of this, just ask.

What controlled experiment backs up that assumption?

[garygreen]

What controlled experiment backs up that assumption?

can you be more specific?  what assumption are you referring to?

[Tom Bishop]

What controlled experiment backs up that assumption?

can you be more specific?  what assumption are you referring to?

The assumption that shift in spectrum = lightyears away.

[garygreen]

What controlled experiment backs up that assumption?

can you be more specific?  what assumption are you referring to?

The assumption that shift in spectrum = lightyears away.

oh word, i see what you mean now.  legit question.  we obviously can't run a tape measure out to a galaxy and check to see if we got the right answer.  btw just to clarify, the shifted spectral lines do not themselves give you distance.  they give you the velocity, and the velocity tells you something about the distance.

the first bit (that shifted spectral lines are a function of the velocity of the object) is verified every time a police officer writes a speeding ticket.

the second bit is more complicated, but the short version is basically this: we took spectroscopic measurements of basically every galaxy we could see and plotted the results.  for example, hubble noted that fainter galaxies had systematically higher redshifts.  then we compared that shit with other distance measurements and made a model.

these other distance measurements include way more than just parallax btw.  the most common thing to do is find objects whose intrinsic brightness you know and record how bright it appears.  this tells you how far away it is.

this one is particularly rad; they use light "echos" from supernovae to work out a distance geometrically: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/2005ASPC..343..452S

[Rounder]

If you are claiming that a specific observation that favors your model of the earth will be seen if some specific experiment is performed simultaneously from three different location on earth, it is your responsibility to organize that experiment. Why would you expect me to do your work for you? Are you funding me?

It has been done.  All over the world there are equatorial sundials erected in steel, stone, concrete, and wood.  These demonstrate the azimuth angle to the sun at not merely three cities but hundreds of cities, perhaps thousands, each at different latitudes.

Representing Steel is this stern piece from the socialistic era, at the Hungarian Geographic Museum in Érd, Hungary


Representing Stone is this five foot diameter granite specimen in Bloomington, MN, USA:



Representing Concrete is the Larkin Memorial Sundial in Claremont, CA, USA.  I particularly like this one for its inclusion of the analemma in the gnomon:


Representing Wood is the Equatorial sundial at the Blue Mountains Botanic Garden Mount Tomah in New South Wales, Australia:

[Tom Bishop]

If you are claiming that a specific observation that favors your model of the earth will be seen if some specific experiment is performed simultaneously from three different location on earth, it is your responsibility to organize that experiment. Why would you expect me to do your work for you? Are you funding me?

It has been done.

If this study has been done, where is it?

[inquisitive]

If you are claiming that a specific observation that favors your model of the earth will be seen if some specific experiment is performed simultaneously from three different location on earth, it is your responsibility to organize that experiment. Why would you expect me to do your work for you? Are you funding me?

It has been done.

If this study has been done, where is it?

Again, timeanddate.com gives you data you can use.  You agree it is correct for you location.