Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Flat Earth Society
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 69 of 119 (819233)
09-08-2017 4:57 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by Porkncheese
09-08-2017 1:02 AM


Re: Crepuscular rays
quote:
Their counter argument is that vertical objects such as the fence posts in the train track picture do not converge up at angles, they still appear vertical.
I think that understanding this point would help you a good deal.
Why do they say that this is a relevant point ?
Do you understand why the fence posts don't seem to converge ?
Think about it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Porkncheese, posted 09-08-2017 1:02 AM Porkncheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by Porkncheese, posted 09-08-2017 7:00 AM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 71 of 119 (819240)
09-08-2017 7:44 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by Porkncheese
09-08-2017 7:00 AM


Re: Crepuscular rays
quote:
Because they are perpendicular to the observer as in this picture
That's not the whole reason. The height is also relevant. (It all comes down to distance - if the difference in height between bottom and top makes the distances to them significantly different then you should see convergence - or divergence)
But then we come to another question ARE the crepuscular rays perpendicular to the observer ? It sure doesn't look like it in your picture with the buildings.
As for the experiment I'll just point out that false assumptions about the conditions will lead to false conclusions.
quote:
If there was a tower on the right and a tower on the left which way would their shadows be cast?
By the looks of it, toward the observer.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Porkncheese, posted 09-08-2017 7:00 AM Porkncheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by Porkncheese, posted 09-08-2017 8:16 AM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 73 of 119 (819246)
09-08-2017 8:42 AM
Reply to: Message 72 by Porkncheese
09-08-2017 8:16 AM


Re: Crepuscular rays
quote:
The crepuscular rays don't appear perpendicular to the observer but they are in fact perpendicular from what I understand. Or parallel at leasT
The main body appears to be parallel and slanting down from right to left.
quote:
Can you please elaborate on what exactly is being assumed?
I don't watch videos on mobile so I can't say for sure, but the geometry is vital. And, in fact, if the geometry is known the experiment is probably redundant. I can't think of any other relevant factors they could easily include.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Porkncheese, posted 09-08-2017 8:16 AM Porkncheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by Porkncheese, posted 09-08-2017 9:36 AM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 76 of 119 (819252)
09-08-2017 9:57 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by Porkncheese
09-08-2017 9:36 AM


Re: Crepuscular rays
quote:
Well, dissmissing or criticising an experiment without even viewing it is hardly objective is it. In fact its an assumption in itself.
I haven't done either yet, simply raising an important caution - especially in the light of the mistake with the fenceposts. And if this experiment is actually important you should be describing it.
quote:
But this one argument they present regarding crepuscular rays, the experiment and examples they give against the "perspective" explination is a very good one.
So far that doesn't seem to be true. The objection about the fenceposts was irrelevant and the two photographs you produced in Message 70 tend to support the perspective explanation.
quote:
And even if we simply dissmiss their evidence as garbage or whatever I don't think perspective can account for such a wide spread of rays covering almost 180 degrees as shown here
Don't you ? The rays are heading straight for the observer, just like the railroad tracks. Doesn't the fact that you've picked an example where the perspective effect would be very strong seem rather relevant ? Compare with your cityscape where there is no sign of the light spreading.
In fact it certainly could be due to perspective. To say it isn't you'd have to start arguing about the distances and the geometry. And you haven't said a word about that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Porkncheese, posted 09-08-2017 9:36 AM Porkncheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by Porkncheese, posted 09-08-2017 10:57 AM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 77 of 119 (819255)
09-08-2017 10:55 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by Porkncheese
09-08-2017 9:36 AM


Re: Crepuscular rays
OK now I've wasted nearly fifteen minutes watching that worthless video.
The experiments don't even try to address the question.
The dismissal of perspective is just plain wrong - and I've already explained why.
Just useless.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Porkncheese, posted 09-08-2017 9:36 AM Porkncheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by Porkncheese, posted 09-08-2017 11:00 AM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


(1)
Message 80 of 119 (819258)
09-08-2017 11:06 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by Porkncheese
09-08-2017 10:57 AM


Re: Crepuscular rays
quote:
Thats not possible in the last picture I posted as the sun is beyond the horizon
You do realise that actually supports my point ? It's not possible to get anything further away from being directly overhead and still get sunlight. Even the guy who made that dumb video realised the importance of the sun being overhead.
quote:
Again... This is their view not mine. Im just trying to understand, not debunk
Then I am afraid that you are doing a very poor job.
Again you need to consider the actual geometry, the angles and the distances if you are going to get to the truth. That's where the video failed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Porkncheese, posted 09-08-2017 10:57 AM Porkncheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Porkncheese, posted 09-08-2017 11:17 AM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


(1)
Message 81 of 119 (819259)
09-08-2017 11:07 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by Porkncheese
09-08-2017 11:00 AM


Re: Crepuscular rays
quote:
What question?
The question of whether the appearance of crepuscular rays is due to perspective or not. That is the only real question here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Porkncheese, posted 09-08-2017 11:00 AM Porkncheese has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 83 of 119 (819261)
09-08-2017 11:31 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by Porkncheese
09-08-2017 11:17 AM


Re: Crepuscular rays
quote:
The rays in the picture are not heading straight for the observer at all.
They aren't ? Go on, explain. Do you think they are coming from directly overhead ?
quote:
U dissmissed the question before seeing it.
Which question ?
quote:
U then dissmiss the experiment and examples without any explination
The experiment doesn't address the question of perspective as I said. I explained why the arguments against the perspective explanation are worthless.
Again to refute the perspective explanation you need to deal with the actual geometry. The video never attempted that.
quote:
Obviously ur here for one thing only which is not what im here for
Obviously I am trying to help you understand. If you were truly neutral on the issue you wouldn't be so upset that I disagree with the arguments and point to their flaws. And you certainly wouldn't keep ignoring the substantive points that I make.
It is increasingly obvious that you are here to troll.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Porkncheese, posted 09-08-2017 11:17 AM Porkncheese has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024