#### hexagon

• 192
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #80 on: June 11, 2018, 11:41:20 AM »

Combination of spotlight effect and upward curving of sunlight:

I think the spotlight effect is an unnecessary complication. One should just focus on the light, that is bound upwards. And quite naturally they exists in this scenario. In the OP the earth's surface is a tangent for the rays at 6 am/pm. Any light ray emitted under a larger angle will have its lowest point above the earths surface.

Any observer of this light will consequently see the light approaching from below. And there we have the big problem. The EA model explains the apparent position of the sun by a linear extrapolation of the path of the light rays under the angle they approach your eye. The further away you're from the sun, the flatter is the angle the light rays approach your eye and therefor the apparent position of the sun in the sky is lower.

So if the rays approach the eye from below, also the sun will appear to be below you. So either it will appear as shining from inside the earth or it appears to be between the earth's surface and the observer.

It is also a bit hard to imagine how a observer at the 6am/pm would see the sun. If the angle is 0° then the sun would be just at the horizon. In the next moment the sun is a bit further away. So the light is now bending upwards, but it is still visible. So the sun would appear to sink, but not vanish. But at some point, all the light would go over my head. So I guess, it would appear like the sun is fading away.

I'm also wondering, if only celestial light from the sun, moon, stars, etc is affected by the EA. Otherwise light from points far away but below me, the objects at that points should sink more and more the further the point is away. E.g. the horizon should sink more an more below eye level the further it is and the higher I am...

#### Pete Svarrior

• e
• Planar Moderator
• 10819
• (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #81 on: June 11, 2018, 11:44:41 AM »
One should just focus on the light, that is bound upwards.
Why would we focus on the light that nobody can see?

Any observer of this light will consequently see the light approaching from below.
No, this is quite simply not the case.

*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

#### hexagon

• 192
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #82 on: June 11, 2018, 12:43:18 PM »
Why is it impossible to see that light? Look at the sketch above, if you go to a place where the upward bound light is going, why is it not visible?

Light going up is a consequence of the continuous upward acceleration.

#### Pete Svarrior

• e
• Planar Moderator
• 10819
• (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #83 on: June 11, 2018, 01:08:00 PM »
Why is it impossible to see that light? Look at the sketch above, if you go to a place where the upward bound light is going, why is it not visible?
Because the light rays that are actually relevant are both more numerous and luminous.

*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

#### Bobby Shafto

• 1390
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #84 on: June 11, 2018, 01:51:19 PM »
Any observer of this light will consequently see the light approaching from below.
No, this is quite simply not the case.
Because the light rays that are actually relevant are both more numerous and luminous.
If I wasn't confused before, I surely am now. What rays are "actually relevant?"

#### Pete Svarrior

• e
• Planar Moderator
• 10819
• (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #85 on: June 11, 2018, 02:02:40 PM »
If I wasn't confused before, I surely am now. What rays are "actually relevant?"
The ones that end up producing the image of the Sun on your optical device of choice's retina.

*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

#### Bobby Shafto

• 1390
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #86 on: June 11, 2018, 02:12:21 PM »
If I wasn't confused before, I surely am now. What rays are "actually relevant?"
The ones that end up producing the image of the Sun on your optical device of choice's retina.
Those are the ones that are curving upward, I thought.

I've removed the confusing (for me) rays. This depicts the cross section of day and night, ignoring twilight distinctions.  At about 6AM, the earth is obstructing the light from the sun, which is curving due to EA.  Earllier than 6AM it is still night and the sun is still hidden by the obstructing earth. But someone on a high mountain in the 4AM time zone is seeing a sunrise. Where does that sunrise appear to be? The edge of that light envelope is composed of "rays" curving upward. Where are there more numerous and luminous rays reaching that observer's retinas coming from?

#### hexagon

• 192
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #87 on: June 11, 2018, 02:13:37 PM »
Why is it impossible to see that light? Look at the sketch above, if you go to a place where the upward bound light is going, why is it not visible?
Because the light rays that are actually relevant are both more numerous and luminous.

So light rays have different intensities depending on the angle under which they are emitted from the sun? Or does it mean the angular dependence of the light emitted from the sun is not homogeneous?

So there is more light emitted in the 1pm direction compared to the 4 pm direction? But even then it is difficult to understand. At 5.30pm and even at 5.55 pm the sun is still quite bright. But 10 minutes later, the intensity drops suddenly down, so that it is basically invisible?

Anyway, even if there are less numerous and luminous light beams under that angle, either there is light, or this no light. And if there is light, I can detect it...

#### Pete Svarrior

• e
• Planar Moderator
• 10819
• (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #88 on: June 11, 2018, 03:16:03 PM »
Those are the ones that are curving upward, I thought.
Oh. I see. You're asking about the little bit of light you'll see shortly after a sunset, or immediately before sunrise.

Of course, it would take a pretty tall mountain for you to be able to see sunrise 2 hours in advance (you're looking at about 180km!), but I'll humour you and your little space elevator. The answer is: yes, you will see this fairly frequently. Nearly every day, dare I say. The Sun will indeed appear to be hiding behind the Earth, and the light will be coming from somewhere down-ish.

So light rays have different intensities depending on the angle under which they are emitted from the sun? Or does it mean the angular dependence of the light emitted from the sun is not homogeneous?
No. As I'm sure you remember, I've asked you bear in mind that we're not dealing with lasers here. Light disperses.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2018, 03:19:32 PM by Pete Svarrior »

*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

#### hexagon

• 192
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #89 on: June 11, 2018, 03:34:47 PM »
Those are the ones that are curving upward, I thought.
Oh. I see. You're asking about the little bit of light you'll see shortly after a sunset, or immediately before sunrise.

Of course, it would take a pretty tall mountain for you to be able to see sunrise 2 hours in advance (you're looking at about 180km!), but I'll humour you and your little space elevator. The answer is: yes, you will see this fairly frequently. Nearly every day, dare I say. The Sun will indeed appear to be hiding behind the Earth, and the light will be coming from somewhere down-ish.

So light rays have different intensities depending on the angle under which they are emitted from the sun? Or does it mean the angular dependence of the light emitted from the sun is not homogeneous?
No. As I'm sure you remember, I've asked you bear in mind that we're not dealing with lasers here. Light disperses.

The question is, if the angular dependence of the light flux emitted from the sun is homogeneous or not. If it is homogeneous, it would mean that the same amount of light is emitted in each direction. So the amount of light reaching your eye at 1pm is the same as at 4pm, 5pm, 6pm and also 5 minutes after 6pm.

No one is talking about 2 hours before sunrise, but what about 5 minutes or 10 minutes before sunrise? Even 1 second before sunrise the light would reach the eye from below, if sunrise defines the point where the earth's surface is tangential to the bound light ray.

And this upward pointing light rays are coming directly from the sun, its not about the diffuse scattered light that illuminates the sky and earth after sunset/before sunrise. If you take the illustration in the OP somehow serious, you're directly looking at the sun if you point your eye in the direction of the bended light rays, so you would also look directly into the sun if the rays are pointing upwards. And because the light at every point of the sun is emitted in any direction you will always see the unobstructed full sun.

#### Pete Svarrior

• e
• Planar Moderator
• 10819
• (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #90 on: June 11, 2018, 03:37:14 PM »
I'm sorry, but none of this actually applies. You continue trying to insert your own bits into the theory, but I won't entertain them.

In instances where you actually get high enough to see the sun below eye level, the horizon would also be below eye level. There is no contradiction here. Bobby's 180km example is just taking this to an extreme conclusion, and I can see why he'd do that.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2018, 03:38:57 PM by Pete Svarrior »

*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

#### Bobby Shafto

• 1390
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #91 on: June 11, 2018, 05:23:50 PM »
If I wasn't confused before, I surely am now. What rays are "actually relevant?"
The ones that end up producing the image of the Sun on your optical device of choice's retina.
Those are the ones that are curving upward, I thought.
Oh. I see. You're asking about the little bit of light you'll see shortly after a sunset, or immediately before sunrise.
I'm asking about your relevant rays that are more luminous and numerous. Are those the little bit of light seen shortly after a sunset or immediately before sunrise? Whatever that is? I've seen thousands of sunsets and never seen any little bit of sun after sunset. Hence, it wouldn't be sunset.

I can talk about round earth and distant sun in which a visual sunset isn't coincident with astronomical sunset due to refraction, so that when you see the sun at the horizon, it's actually lower and I'm just seeing the sun higher because it's light is bending around the curve of the earth.

But I simply am not deciphering what you're talking about on a flat earth with sunlight that's bending in the opposite direction, away from earth. I understand how that works with atmospheric temperature inversions where refraction will work to bend light away from the surface of earth, but that causes inferior mirages. You can see that with a setting sun in which a "mirror" of the sun's lower limb will appear to rise from a false horizon and join with the setting sun. I've seen sunsets in which bent light distorts the appearance of the sun. (example)

But I've never seen any little bit of light of the sun that appears after sunset. (Reflected/scattered light of twilight, of course, or illuminating clouds...but the rays of the sun? They're gone at the moment of sunset.)

Of course, it would take a pretty tall mountain for you to be able to see sunrise 2 hours in advance (you're looking at about 180km!), but I'll humour you and your little space elevator.
Thank you, Pete. That's very kind of you to humor me in using a cartoon diagram that isn't to scale and that I never meant to suggest was a practical depiction of real world details. But I'm just trying to apprehend this EA concept and how it is so obvious to you but my dense brain isn't getting it. Appreciate your patience.

The answer is: yes, you will see this fairly frequently. Nearly every day, dare I say. The Sun will indeed appear to be hiding behind the Earth, and the light will be coming from somewhere down-ish.
You lost me again. The sun appears to be hiding? Can the sun be seen or not? We're not talking about sunlight illuminating other things. We're talking about the sun itself. Can we see it or can't we? That's what sunset is. The earth is obstructing our view of the sun. Is it because the earth is curved and its rotation is putting the sun behind the curve? Or is the earth flat and upward bending light gets obstructed at the point where it is tangent to the earth's surface?

Light "coming from somewhere down-ish." Huh? No. You're not getting it. I'm not talking about the sun after sunset and, oh, hey, it's still light in the sky that appears to be coming from over the horizon. No. I'm talking about seeing the sun still, even after it's supposedly "hiding." If light "rays" from the sun are bending upwards, and I'm able to get my retina in the path of those rays that were, say, tangent, but not obstructed, then I'm going to see the sun itself NOT appearing to be hiding. I will see the sun, or some upper portion of it at least, and it will not only be "down-ish," but below the horizon. It will appear in front of the earth's surface.

Here's a real world example, that doesn't require hyperbole of "space elevators" or 2 hour time differences.

I can watch a sunset on the beach at Del Mar, CA.
At 7:58pm, I see the "green flash" and the sun is gone. There's no little bit of it still there. It's gone.
At that same time, 1000 feet up and 1 mile to the east, occupants of a hot air balloon are still seeing the sun. For them they see the sun disappear at 8:00pm. Not only that, but the pilot give the guests a 2nd viewing of sunset by climbing another 1000', bringing the sun back into view so that they can see it slip away again.

Is that the effect of the upward curving light of EA over a flat earth? The upward curving rays from the sun were obstructed by the flat earth, but rise in elevation puts you back in the path of the curving rays so you see the sun again, unobstructed. Yes?
« Last Edit: June 11, 2018, 05:28:43 PM by Bobby Shafto »

#### Pete Svarrior

• e
• Planar Moderator
• 10819
• (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #92 on: June 11, 2018, 06:07:27 PM »
That comment was based on a misunderstanding of your position. That's why I moved on from it.

But I've never seen any little bit of light of the sun that appears after sunset. (Reflected/scattered light of twilight, of course, or illuminating clouds...but the rays of the sun? They're gone at the moment of sunset.)
So you haven't, but you also have. Fascinating.

Thank you, Pete. That's very kind of you to humor me in using a cartoon diagram that isn't to scale and that I never meant to suggest was a practical depiction of real world details. But I'm just trying to apprehend this EA concept and how it is so obvious to you but my dense brain isn't getting it. Appreciate your patience.
Well, the problem is that you can either take it to your 180km extreme, or admit that you're worrying yourself with things like "sometimes the horizon appears 1 degree below eye level". One of these things is comically irrelevant, and the other is entirely unsurprising. A true Catch-22.

The sun appears to be hiding? Can the sun be seen or not?
In the particular scenario you posited, the Sun would appear to be partially hidden behind the Earth. Neither answer you've suggested is correct.

Light "coming from somewhere down-ish." Huh? No. You're not getting it. I'm not talking about the sun after sunset
You're talking about the Sun after sunset when observed from space. Of course it will appear to be somewhere roughly down from you. You're hundreds of kilometres away from the Earth.

No. I'm talking about seeing the sun still, even after it's supposedly "hiding."
That, quite simply, is not a consequence of EAT.

I can watch a sunset on the beach at Del Mar, CA.
At 7:58pm, I see the "green flash" and the sun is gone. There's no little bit of it still there. It's gone.
At that same time, 1000 feet up and 1 mile to the east, occupants of a hot air balloon are still seeing the sun. For them they see the sun disappear at 8:00pm. Not only that, but the pilot give the guests a 2nd viewing of sunset by climbing another 1000', bringing the sun back into view so that they can see it slip away again.

Is that the effect of the upward curving light of EA over a flat earth? The upward curving rays from the sun were obstructed by the flat earth, but rise in elevation puts you back in the path of the curving rays so you see the sun again, unobstructed. Yes?
Not quite, but it's the least wrong thing you've said so far. I have a sneaking suspicion that you're about to try and interpret the perceivable "bottom" of the Sun as its "top", but let's see where you take it.

*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

#### Bobby Shafto

• 1390
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #93 on: June 11, 2018, 06:50:35 PM »
I can watch a sunset on the beach at Del Mar, CA.
At 7:58pm, I see the "green flash" and the sun is gone. There's no little bit of it still there. It's gone.
At that same time, 1000 feet up and 1 mile to the east, occupants of a hot air balloon are still seeing the sun. For them they see the sun disappear at 8:00pm. Not only that, but the pilot give the guests a 2nd viewing of sunset by climbing another 1000', bringing the sun back into view so that they can see it slip away again.

Is that the effect of the upward curving light of EA over a flat earth? The upward curving rays from the sun were obstructed by the flat earth, but rise in elevation puts you back in the path of the curving rays so you see the sun again, unobstructed. Yes?
Not quite, but it's the least wrong thing you've said so far. I have a sneaking suspicion that you're about to try and interpret the perceivable "bottom" of the Sun as its "top", but let's see where you take it.
I can't take it anywhere until you provide the right answer, and not affirm that my proposed answer is the "least wrong thing."

Explain how that happens and how, if not fully quite then at least partially quite, EA is a factor.

Then you can see where I'm taking this.

#### Pete Svarrior

• e
• Planar Moderator
• 10819
• (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #94 on: June 11, 2018, 07:57:29 PM »
I'm sorry, the concept has been explained many times, and I just don't have all that much to add. You're trying to get me to concede on a misrepresentation so you can build yourself a little strawman to fight. I will not assist you in this.

*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

#### Bobby Shafto

• 1390
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #95 on: June 11, 2018, 08:02:19 PM »
Stop acting like everything's a trap. Link to where it's been explained if you can't be bothered to explain it yourself.

#### Пардисфла

• 6015
• Professional computer somebody
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #96 on: June 11, 2018, 10:19:09 PM »
Shall I number the rays for you so you can understand my word soup?

If that would help you to convey your point, then go right ahead. I would also be satisfied with you writing coherent English.

Tangent means the ray isn't obstructed. Tangent means the ray continues on and continues to curve.

That isn't what "tangent" means, and that doesn't follow from what "tangent" means in the case where a flat approximation of the Earth doesn't account for hills, trees, buildings and other obstacles.

Sunrise and sunset points are where the earth obstructs the sun, are they not?

In theory, no. In practice, yes, because something parallel and very close to the Earth's surface is almost always going to hit some sort of structure or object. None of this makes very much difference, however.

Okay. So it's the flat earth that's tangent to those two rays, which are then not obstructed, by definition of what it means to be tangent.

That's not correct, but I'll address your later points anyway since this isn't relevant.

But the tangent rays do continue unobstructed, curving away from the earth. Which means that from a vantage point above the flat earth's surface, beyond the point of sunset/sunrise, one can see the rays.

Correct. The same prediction is made by RET. You can even observe this yourself, if you'd care to take an aeroplane ride around sunset.

Because it's a weird concept. Does my diagram illustrate the concept too? (It's one of the "all" but maybe you meant all, excluding mine?

I did mean to include yours. The specific curvature in yours is wrong (I have no idea why you have solar rays arbitrarily meeting again at some point over the night zone), but it is accurate as it pertains to EA's model of sunrise and sunset.

Are there more rays than that last ones that are tangent to the earth, marking as you say sunrise and sunset?

I don't understand the question. There are of course more such rays arranged in a roughly circular formation because the Earth is three-dimensional, but within the plane of this diagram, there are no more than the ones you have drawn.

Are the more that are not tangent, that don't reach the earth's surface but keep curving upward?

Well, any light rays emitted in an upwards direction from the Sun will obviously never reach the Earth. Some emitted downwards will also curve away before they ever reach the Earth.

Like in my diagram?

Yes.
when you try to mock anyone while also running the flat earth society. Lol

#### Bobby Shafto

• 1390
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #97 on: June 11, 2018, 10:24:23 PM »
Here's a real world example, that doesn't require hyperbole of "space elevators" or 2 hour time differences.

I can watch a sunset on the beach at Del Mar, CA.
At 7:58pm, I see the "green flash" and the sun is gone. There's no little bit of it still there. It's gone.
At that same time, 1000 feet up and 1 mile to the east, occupants of a hot air balloon are still seeing the sun. For them they see the sun disappear at 8:00pm. Not only that, but the pilot give the guests a 2nd viewing of sunset by climbing another 1000', bringing the sun back into view so that they can see it slip away again.

Is that the effect of the upward curving light of EA over a flat earth? The upward curving rays from the sun were obstructed by the flat earth, but rise in elevation puts you back in the path of the curving rays so you see the sun again, unobstructed. Yes?

From early in this topic:

There are also rays which miss the earth and make a u-turn back into space. The illustration in my first post only shows those rays which hit the earth. There will also be rays which miss the earth slightly. This is what causes clouds to appear to be lit from below after the sun is below the horizon in some photographs. This is also what causes the tops of mountains and skyscrapers to be illuminated, while the base is in shadow.

Per twilight after the sun sets, that is caused by light reflecting off of the atmosphere.

All of these phenomenons are explainable under this theory, and trivially so.

Like this:

#### Bobby Shafto

• 1390
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #98 on: June 11, 2018, 10:31:03 PM »

But the tangent rays do continue unobstructed, curving away from the earth. Which means that from a vantage point above the flat earth's surface, beyond the point of sunset/sunrise, one can see the rays.

Correct. The same prediction is made by RET. You can even observe this yourself, if you'd care to take an aeroplane ride around sunset.

Done. Never seen this phenomenon happen.

#### Bobby Shafto

• 1390
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #99 on: June 11, 2018, 11:04:59 PM »
Shall I number the rays for you so you can understand my word soup?

If that would help you to convey your point, then go right ahead. I would also be satisfied with you writing coherent English.
I shall, then, because neither of us is comprehending the other.

Sun ray labeled #2 reaches the surface of the earth at some angle of elevation greater than 0° and is obstructed.

Sun ray labeled #1 never reaches the surface of the earth and is never obstructed by anything, not buildings, not trees, not mountains before it continues it's upward curve.

There are many (infinite) rays between #1 and #2. Somewhere between #2 and #1 is the last ray that can emanate unimpeded by the earth's surface or any obstacles there upon.

Is that coherent enough for you?

Now, if this curving light is responsible for the appearance of the sun "setting" phenomenon on a flat (but irregular) surface, then at an elevation above the obstructions of that surface, I should be able to intercept some rays that have gone past parallel to the earth and are now propagating along a path that would cause the sun to appear below the horizon.

Never happens. At altitude, whether 2000 feet in a hot air balloon, or 30,000 feet from a jet aircraft, the sun never appears below the horizon* and is always eclipsed by the earth during sunset. There's no such point as that to which the red arrow points on ray #1

*Note: mirage phenomenon caused by atmospheric conditions and not EA can create the illusion of a portion of a distorted "mirror" sun below the astronomical horizon.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2018, 11:10:58 PM by Bobby Shafto »