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
-
9:56
Anti-Disinfo League
11 days ago24 Hour Sun in Antarctica on Flat Earth?
1.26K1 -
3:56:44
Alex Zedra
8 hours agoLIVE! Trying to get achievements in Devour
120K15 -
2:00:43
The Quartering
11 hours agoThe MAGA Wars Have Begun! Vivek & Elon Get Massive Backlash & Much More
116K38 -
1:25:53
Kim Iversen
3 days agoStriking Back: Taking on the ADL’s Anti-Free Speech Agenda
89.2K50 -
49:35
Donald Trump Jr.
15 hours agoA New Golden Age: Countdown to Inauguration Day | TRIGGERED Ep.202
171K189 -
1:14:34
Michael Franzese
13 hours agoWhat's Behind Biden's Shocking Death Row Pardons?
76.6K46 -
9:49
Tundra Tactical
12 hours ago $21.16 earnedThe Best Tundra Clips from 2024 Part 1.
116K10 -
1:05:19
Sarah Westall
12 hours agoDying to Be Thin: Ozempic & Obesity, Shedding Massive Weight Safely Using GLP-1 Receptors, Dr. Kazer
104K24 -
54:38
LFA TV
1 day agoThe Resistance Is Gone | Trumpet Daily 12.26.24 7PM EST
70.5K12 -
58:14
theDaily302
21 hours agoThe Daily 302- Tim Ballard
67.4K11