#### Pete Svarrior

• e
• Planar Moderator
• 10567
• (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #120 on: June 12, 2018, 10:04:11 AM »
If the light is bent such that it comes at me in an upward direction then I see it below me.
Yes. In Bobby's extreme outer space scenario, the Sun will appear either next to or behind the Earth, and largely downwards from you.

Consider the sun reflected in a puddle of water. The sun looks like it's below me, in the puddle.
This is precisely because the inexplicable straightening you just proposed does not occur. If your proposed change were implemented, you'd see the Sun in some completely unpredictable location.

As Parsifal already pointed out, all reflected light would accelerate just the same.

*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

#### AllAroundTheWorld

• 2902
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #121 on: June 12, 2018, 10:19:00 AM »
Right. So is your objection to the diagram the amount of bending?
So the light does bend and the sun's apparent position isn't its real position, but it isn't as pronounced as in that diagram, yes?
Maybe when you have time you can show a diagram explaining the reality in your model.
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

#### hexagon

• 192
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #122 on: June 12, 2018, 10:27:38 AM »
Are you able to fix the diagram?
The dotted line would overlap the solid line, and the Sun would appear to be exactly where it is.

That's interesting... How would you transfer this to the picture in in the OP? Where would be the apparent position of the sun for an observer at every point in time marked in the diagram?

#### Parsifal

• 5893
• Professional computer somebody
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #123 on: June 12, 2018, 10:30:30 AM »
Not what I'm doing nor describing. If light from the sun has curved past parallel to the flat earth's surface, and I'm seeing it, where does the sun appear to be?

This is a vague question, but since we were talking about its position relative to the horizon, I'll assume that's what you mean. The Sun appears to be above the horizon.
when you try to mock anyone while also running the flat earth society. Lol

#### hexagon

• 192
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #124 on: June 12, 2018, 10:40:00 AM »
Not what I'm doing nor describing. If light from the sun has curved past parallel to the flat earth's surface, and I'm seeing it, where does the sun appear to be?

This is a vague question, but since we were talking about its position relative to the horizon, I'll assume that's what you mean. The Sun appears to be above the horizon.

Does this mean, the apparent position is the same compared to the case the light reaches the eye under same the same absolute angle, but from above instead of from below?

Still I have the impression it needs a bit of clarification where the apparent position of the sun would be for all the light rays shown in the OP sketch.

#### Bobby Shafto

• 1390
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #125 on: June 12, 2018, 02:08:52 PM »
Are you able to fix the diagram?
The dotted line would overlap the solid line, and the Sun would appear to be exactly where it is.

The entire point of this diagram:

...is to provide a flat earth explanation for why the sun doesn't appear to be exactly where it is.

#### Bobby Shafto

• 1390
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #126 on: June 12, 2018, 02:14:16 PM »
Not what I'm doing nor describing. If light from the sun has curved past parallel to the flat earth's surface, and I'm seeing it, where does the sun appear to be?

This is a vague question, but since we were talking about its position relative to the horizon, I'll assume that's what you mean. The Sun appears to be above the horizon.
How can that be?

#### Pete Svarrior

• e
• Planar Moderator
• 10567
• (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #127 on: June 12, 2018, 02:35:59 PM »
The entire point of this diagram:

...is to provide a flat earth explanation for why the sun doesn't appear to be exactly where it is.
No.

*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

#### Bobby Shafto

• 1390
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #128 on: June 12, 2018, 02:44:21 PM »
The entire point of this diagram:

...is to provide a flat earth explanation for why the sun doesn't appear to be exactly where it is.
No.
High content post there. Care to elaborate? Parsifal? Is Pete right? Maybe your "no" is in response to my use of the phrase "entire point" because there are other useful points to be drawn from the diagram in addition to showing why the sun doesn't appear to be exactly where it is?

#### AllAroundTheWorld

• 2902
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #129 on: June 12, 2018, 02:45:44 PM »
Pete and the Wiki are consistently and annoyingly vague about what the point of this theory is

https://wiki.tfes.org/Electromagnetic_Accelerator

There seems to be no empirical evidence that this effect even exists.

If it's to explain sunset then it works a whole lot better than perspective. If it isn't then what evidence do you have for it and what phenomena does it explain?
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

#### hexagon

• 192
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #130 on: June 12, 2018, 02:54:35 PM »
Here is an old one. The theory of the Electromagnetic Accelerator states that there is a mechanism to the universe that pulls light upwards. All light curves upwards. This is an alternative to the perspective theory proposed in Earth Not a Globe. Sunset happens as consequence of these curving light rays, as well as limited visibility of objects and the sinking ship effect.

Somehow it seems that the "no" is a bit of a contradiction to the OP...

Regarding empirical evidence: There is no evidence that light is bended upwards. It's pure speculation and in contradiction of everything we know about light.

#### AllAroundTheWorld

• 2902
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #131 on: June 12, 2018, 03:10:43 PM »
It is described as a "proposal" in the Wiki. The equation is given with no real explanation as to how it was derived, how it has been tested and what evidence exists for this effect even existing.
As an explanation for sunset it kinda works, the sun is really 3,000 miles above the earth but its light is bent so we see it coming at us horizontally and eventually shoots over our heads so it's dark. Works quite well to explain clouds lit from below and noctilucent clouds too.

Only problem is I've seen no evidence presented that it actually exists as an effect.
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

#### hexagon

• 192
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #132 on: June 12, 2018, 03:47:37 PM »
Only problem is I've seen no evidence presented that it actually exists as an effect.

There can't be an evidence, because it does not exist... Look at the sketch and add some real numbers to it. It would be a quite strong effect (a horizontal beam shoots 3000 miles up on a distance of around 6000 miles), nothing that could have been overlooked up to now.

#### Pete Svarrior

• e
• Planar Moderator
• 10567
• (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #133 on: June 12, 2018, 03:52:16 PM »
It would be a quite strong effect (a horizontal beam shoots 3000 miles up on a distance of around 6000 miles), nothing that could have been overlooked up to now.
That's perfectly consistent with your own model. A horizontal beam on a Round Earth would hypothetically "shoot up" 3000 miles away from the Earth's surface over the distance of 6000 miles (though, of course, the calculation will not be very useful at such extreme distances). Not only has this not been overlooked, it's already well known and well understood.

*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

#### Parsifal

• 5893
• Professional computer somebody
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #134 on: June 12, 2018, 04:44:51 PM »
How can that be?

I have already explained that, to which you responded by claiming that you weren't making the misinterpretation that you are now making again. I doubt I would be any more successful the second time.
when you try to mock anyone while also running the flat earth society. Lol

#### Bobby Shafto

• 1390
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #135 on: June 12, 2018, 05:15:09 PM »
How can that be?

I have already explained that, to which you responded by claiming that you weren't making the misinterpretation that you are now making again. I doubt I would be any more successful the second time.

You're probably right.

How the upper diagram (yours) can be correct but the lower diagram (mine) be a misinterpretation, I may just not have the mental capacity to understand.

#### AllAroundTheWorld

• 2902
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #136 on: June 12, 2018, 05:23:05 PM »
It would be a quite strong effect (a horizontal beam shoots 3000 miles up on a distance of around 6000 miles), nothing that could have been overlooked up to now.
That's perfectly consistent with your own model. A horizontal beam on a Round Earth would hypothetically "shoot up" 3000 miles away from the Earth's surface over the distance of 6000 miles (though, of course, the calculation will not be very useful at such extreme distances). Not only has this not been overlooked, it's already well known and well understood.

That’s a bit of a silly comparison.
Nothing is making the light shoot anywhere in the round earth model. The light goes in straight lines and the earth is curved so over distance yes, a light which starts parallel ground will “rise”, but it’s not the light that is rising, it’s the ground that is curving away. Hence the result in the boat and laser experiment. But this is all well understood and that experiment is verification of it.
There is no law of physics that says that ALL light is deflected upwards by some force. This is just a FE attempt to fudge things to explain observations. And it’s fair enough to make a hypothesis which explains observations but you have to follow that up with experiments. What experiments have been done which show this is a real effect?
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

#### Bobby Shafto

• 1390
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #137 on: June 12, 2018, 05:27:14 PM »
It would be a quite strong effect (a horizontal beam shoots 3000 miles up on a distance of around 6000 miles), nothing that could have been overlooked up to now.
That's perfectly consistent with your own model. A horizontal beam on a Round Earth would hypothetically "shoot up" 3000 miles away from the Earth's surface over the distance of 6000 miles (though, of course, the calculation will not be very useful at such extreme distances). Not only has this not been overlooked, it's already well known and well understood.

That’s a bit of a silly comparison.
Nothing is making the light shoot anywhere in the round earth model. The light goes in straight lines and the earth is curved so over distance yes, a light which starts parallel ground will “rise”, but it’s not the light that is rising, it’s the ground that is curving away. Hence the result in the boat and laser experiment. But this is all well understood and that experiment is verification of it.
There is no law of physics that says that ALL light is deflected upwards by some force. This is just a FE attempt to fudge things to explain observations. And it’s fair enough to make a hypothesis which explains observations but you have to follow that up with experiments. What experiments have been done which show this is a real effect?
I think this is the comparison/equivalency Pete was trying to make:

#### Parsifal

• 5893
• Professional computer somebody
##### Re: The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« Reply #138 on: June 12, 2018, 06:30:56 PM »
How the upper diagram (yours) can be correct but the lower diagram (mine) be a misinterpretation, I may just not have the mental capacity to understand.

Both diagrams are correct. Neither one shows a light ray corresponding to the horizon. Draw that, with the same curvature as the one from the Sun, and then see where the Sun is in relation to the horizon.
when you try to mock anyone while also running the flat earth society. Lol

• 1390