Premium Only Content

OPTICS? OR EARTH CURVE?
OPTICS? OR EARTH CURVE?
Have you ever seen Earth curve and distance dependent angular resolution in the same frame at the same time ? What if they are the same thing?
We all know there is an apparent drop proportionate to distance. The mainstream position is that this bottom up obstruction is caused by the geometric physical earth curve. The counter position has always been that his effect is optical in nature, and not due to physical earth curve.
What it comes down to is this: The loss of information at our horizon is either optical, or physical.
If it's physical, things will simply disappear over the horizon.
If it's optical, things will disappear by angular resolution limit of the observer.
We are trying to use math to distinguish which is true.
Our argument:
If earth curve is actually physical, why can I use the values of optical limits of perception to derive the supposed radius of earth to the 8th decimal place?
The loss of information at our horizon is either optical, or physical (or both).
Well lets look at the values we chose to use, and why we chose them.
These are the values we used.
Wavelength = 666 nm
Diameter = 2.16mm
Why did we choose these values?
Well, because they represent the most commonly experienced circumstances of course.
The diameter of the Pupil (typically) ranges from 2-4 nm to 4-8nm, and it narrows the further out you look.
Wavelengths of light vary on a scale, with atmospheric scattering scaling low to high with refraction scaling high to low with the wavelength.
We chose 2.16mm because the furthest field would be most dilated.
We chose orange/red because they are LEAST susceptible to refraction.
Since the angular resolution limit and the expected rate of drop due to distance are two factors that will ALWAYS yield the radius, how can we now conclude that this value is NOT based on optics?
It seems there is now a huge disparity in the amount of evidence for physical curvature VS optical curvature....
I wonder if anyone will ever find any?
I wonder if some glober will present some math to counter the derived the radius with a higher degree of accuracy than 8 decimal places?
I wonder which side is right?
https://publish.obsidian.md/shanesql2/Optics+Angular+Resolution+or+Earth+Curve
-
1:27:54
Anti-Disinfo League
5 days agoAddressing Jeran's 6 Globe Proofs
463 -
LIVE
The Quartering
2 hours agoTesla Psycho BEATS Elderly Woman, Wisconsin Supreme Court , USAID Shut Down, Daily Wire FIRINGS
41,321 watching -
1:28:57
Russell Brand
3 hours agoTESLA IN FLAMES: 17 Vehicles DESTROYED in Rome Dealership INFERNO! – SF557
117K73 -
LIVE
Dr Disrespect
4 hours ago🔴LIVE - DR DISRESPECT - PUBG - 5 CHICKEN DINNERS CHALLENGE!
4,989 watching -
1:35:39
Tucker Carlson
2 hours agoAndrew Isker: Building a Christian Refuge to Fight Wokeness, Transgenderism, and Paganism
50.3K35 -
54:39
Sean Unpaved
3 hours agoFinal Four Predictions! MLB Opening Weekend Recap, NFL Looking To Ban Tush-Push?
24.2K1 -
LIVE
Scammer Payback
2 hours agoCalling Scammers Live
240 watching -
17:28
Neil McCoy-Ward
2 hours ago🚨 BREAKING! It’s Worse Than We Could Have Imagined! (What They Just Did Today Was Shocking!)
14.1K14 -
2:55:42
The Dana Show with Dana Loesch
3 hours agoEQUAL STANDARDS FOR MILITARY COMBAT | The Dana Show LIVE On Rumble!
17.6K2 -
58:58
The Tom Renz Show
2 hours agoElection Fraud, the GOP, & Corruption w/ Liz Harris
15.8K5