[UPDATED] Bendy Light (Tom Bishop, where are you?)

  • 24 Replies
  • 6580 Views
*

Perfect Circle

  • 734
  • You are a pirate!
[UPDATED] Bendy Light (Tom Bishop, where are you?)
« on: December 02, 2008, 03:41:06 PM »
First of all, what causes bendy light? According to the laws of physics, light cannot bend. It can appear to bend in two cases:

1) Moving between mediums that have different indices of refraction.
2) Space-path bent by gravity.

Since gravity does not exist in FET theory, we can throw out that explanation. On to the remaining explanation:

Light appears to change direction when passing through mediums with different IOR's because photons are sped up or slowed down by these mediums, changing their angle to the normal. For light to bend in a curved path (as required by FET), there must be a gradient IOR, layered mediums with different IOR's or mediums that have increasing or decreasing IOR's in a certain direction. Therein lies the problem: 'bendy light' is observed everywhere in the world at any time, which means that light is being bent in a practically infinite amount of directions. For gradient IOR to work in this case, there must be multiple IOR gradients in every possible direction and location, and these would overlap, destroying the effect. Therefore, there is no valid way to explain 'bendy light': it is an invalid theory.

If you manage to explain your way out of that, here's my next situation (assuming bendy light somehow exists):

According to FET (Tom Bishop), sunrise and sunset can be explained by 'bendy light', as shown in this diagram:

But what about the stars? You can see stars near the horizon at night, when there is no sun visible. So why can't you see any sunlight? With the sun being much brighter and closer, and the atmosphere being so 'thick', there would surely be some (a lot) of visible diffuse light.

Why can the same set of stars be seen on opposite sides of the southern hemisphere? If light could bend that much, than once again, why can you not see the sun? Why can't you see northern-hemisphere stars, since they are much closers?

These arguments should also applies to the moon's 'cold light'.

Also, explain how/why 'bendy light' changes during the annual cycle as shown here (only appears to affect the sun): http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=24827.msg556818#msg556818

Please feel free to answer my quoted question while you're at it: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=25098.msg553548#msg553548 - it seems that Rowbotham is accurate to a degree he shouldn't be, yet is very vague and uses estimations only when it helps his flat earth theory.
« Last Edit: December 02, 2008, 08:34:08 PM by Perfect Circle »
Like the sun, the stars are also expanding and contracting their diameter as they spin around the hub every six months.

*

Perfect Circle

  • 734
  • You are a pirate!
Re: 'Bendy sunlight' vs. 'bendy celestial light' and the shape of sunlight
« Reply #1 on: December 02, 2008, 04:36:58 PM »
I'm still hoping that Tom Bishop shows up, since he ultra-failed five times in my last thread and I think he might still be on a streak.
« Last Edit: December 02, 2008, 04:38:39 PM by Perfect Circle »
Like the sun, the stars are also expanding and contracting their diameter as they spin around the hub every six months.

?

len

  • 53
Re: 'Bendy sunlight' vs. 'bendy celestial light' and the shape of sunlight
« Reply #2 on: December 02, 2008, 04:59:31 PM »
FE THeory of bendy light is such an abortive mess it makes the Baby Jesus cry. I think it was invented by Robosteve when he was resitting a relativity module. He just kept saying it til it stuck. Watch

Bendy light.

See

Let me try.

Bendy light.
Bendy light.
Bendy light.

Oh crap, I just did that facing a mirror inside my bathroom with the lights off and it came on.

But we shall call this the "Dorothy Theory" or DT.

*

Perfect Circle

  • 734
  • You are a pirate!
Re: [UPDATED] Bendy Light
« Reply #3 on: December 02, 2008, 06:32:17 PM »
Updated for more lulz.
Like the sun, the stars are also expanding and contracting their diameter as they spin around the hub every six months.

*

Perfect Circle

  • 734
  • You are a pirate!
Re: [UPDATED] Bendy Light (Tom Bishop, where are you?)
« Reply #4 on: December 02, 2008, 08:46:30 PM »
Come on Tom. You Zetetic, you:
Quote
Showing evidence is unconvincing is not grounds for completely  dismissing it. If a critic asserts that the result was due to artifact X, that critic  then has the burden of proof to demonstrate that artifact X can and probably did  produce such results under such circumstances.
Straight from a commentary by Marcello Truzzi himself. In other words, defend your position, or you fail under your own system of reasoning, and RE remains victorious.
Like the sun, the stars are also expanding and contracting their diameter as they spin around the hub every six months.

?

trig

  • 2240
Re: [UPDATED] Bendy Light (Tom Bishop, where are you?)
« Reply #5 on: December 03, 2008, 02:07:18 AM »
You must remember at least two other challenges to this "theory":

  • Refraction causes chromatic aberration, which means that every celestial object would be seen as a line with the different colors of the rainbow separated
  • The size of the celestial objects would change dramatically as they approach the horizon, since light has to travel a much longer path, even if the bending is not produced by refraction.
  • There is not even an hypothesis on how the Southern constellations, many of which can be seen from the Northern hemisphere, are seen without strange distortions or movements. The sky has been seen as an apparent sphere with the stars on it since the Mayas and Babilonians or earlier, and there is no explanation for this in FE "theory".
  • The "bendy light" should not only bend light on a vertical plane, as the diagram from Tom Bishop shows, but also on a horizontal plane, making celestial objects appear further South than they are.
  • There is no mathematical model that even approximates the properties of space, air or whatever we have above our heads. It should be a magical substance or field that "knows" where the observer is and bends light accordingly.

Well, they were not two after all.

?

trig

  • 2240
Re: [UPDATED] Bendy Light (Tom Bishop, where are you?)
« Reply #6 on: December 03, 2008, 02:34:45 AM »
By the way, Robosteve tried to make a proper theory about this, but could not get very far. Meanwhile, every desperate FE theorist began to push it as fact, even at the same time they pushed other incompatible "theories".

No "theorist" apart from Robosteve was honest enough to say "bendy light" is just a preliminary hypothesis that has not even reached the point where we "have the maths", or in other words have something more than an idea.

*

Perfect Circle

  • 734
  • You are a pirate!
Re: [UPDATED] Bendy Light (Tom Bishop, where are you?)
« Reply #7 on: December 03, 2008, 02:07:02 PM »
Thanks for that, I'll update the OP later. Doesn't matter: the fact that Tom is a no-show means that RE has won this battle. Back to the drawing board for FE'ers.
Like the sun, the stars are also expanding and contracting their diameter as they spin around the hub every six months.

?

len

  • 53
Re: [UPDATED] Bendy Light (Tom Bishop, where are you?)
« Reply #8 on: December 03, 2008, 02:14:42 PM »
Thanks for that, I'll update the OP later. Doesn't matter: the fact that Tom is a no-show means that RE has won this battle. Back to the drawing board for FE'ers.

Don't be so quick to shout victory my friend. LuLz

As I have seen, the tenacity and persistence of his idiocy never ceases to amaze me. He himself is as unpredictable as the FET.

?

len

  • 53
Re: [UPDATED] Bendy Light (Tom Bishop, where are you?)
« Reply #9 on: December 03, 2008, 02:40:03 PM »
Here are some information to support Perfect Circle.

These are our scientific theories that we support. FET'ist are encouraged to present their evidence.

    Snell's Law: In 1621, a Dutch physicist named Willebrord Snell (1591-1626), derived the relationship between the different angles of light as it passes from one transperent medium to another. When light passes from one transparent medium to another, it bends according to Snell's law which states:
    Ni * Sin(Ai) = Nr * Sin(Ar),

    where:
    Ni is the refractive index of the medium the light is leaving,
    Ai is the incident angle between the light ray and the normal to the meduim to medium interface,
    Nr is the refractive index of the medium the light is entering,
    Ar is the refractive angle between the light ray and the normal to the meduim to medium interface.

Some of the common refractive indices on the planet:

    Acetone  1.36
    Actinolite  1.618
    Agalmatoite  1.550
    Agate  1.544
    Agate, Moss  1.540
    Air  1.0002926
    Alcohol  1.329
    Alexandrite  1.745
    Aluminum  1.44
    Amber  1.546
    Amblygonite  1.611
    Amethyst  1.544
    Anatase  2.490
    Andalusite  1.641
    Anhydrite  1.571
    Apatite  1.632
    Apophyllite  1.536
    Aquamarine  1.577
    Aragonite  1.530
    Argon  1.000281
    Asphalt  1.635
    Augelite  1.574
    Axinite  1.675
    Azurite  1.730
    Barite  1.636
    Barytocalcite  1.684
    Benitoite  1.757
    Benzene  1.501
    Beryl  1.577
    Beryllonite  1.553
    Brazilianite  1.603
    Bromine (liq)  1.661
    Bronze  1.18
    Brownite  1.567
    Calcite  1.486
    Calspar  1.486
    Cancrinite  1.491
    Carbon Dioxide (gas)  1.000449
    Carbon Disulfide  1.628
    Carbon Tetrachloride  1.460
    Cassiterite  1.997
    Celestite  1.622
    Cerussite  1.804
    Ceylanite  1.770
    Chalcedony  1.530
    Chalk  1.510
    Chalybite  1.630
    Chlorine (gas)  1.000768
    Chlorine (liq)  1.385
    Chrome Green  2.4
    Chrome Red  2.42
    Chrome Yellow  2.31
    Chromium  2.97
    Chrysoberyl  1.745
    Chrysocolla  1.500
    Chrysoprase  1.534
    Citrine  1.550
    Clinozoisite  1.724
    Cobalt Blue  1.74
    Cobalt Green  1.97
    Cobalt Violet  1.71
    Colemanite  1.586
    Copper  1.10
    Copper Oxide  2.705
    Coral  1.486
    Cordierite  1.540
    Corundum  1.766
    Crocoite  2.310
    Crystal  2.00
    Cuprite  2.850
    Danburite  1.633
    Diamond  2.417
    Diopside  1.680
    Dolomite  1.503
    Dumortierite  1.686
    Ebonite  1.66
    Ekanite  1.600
    Elaeolite  1.532
    Emerald  1.576
    Emerald, Synth flux  1.561
    Emerald, Synth hydro  1.568
    Enstatite  1.663
    Epidote  1.733
    Ethanol  1.36
    Ethyl Alcohol  1.36
    Euclase  1.652
    Fabulite  2.409
    Feldspar, Adventurine  1.532
    Feldspar, Albite  1.525
    Feldspar, Amazonite  1.525
    Feldspar, Labradorite  1.565
    Feldspar, Microcline  1.525
    Feldspar, Oligoclase  1.539
    Feldspar, Orthoclase  1.525
    Fluoride  1.56
    Fluorite  1.434
    Formica  1.47
    Garnet, Almandine  1.760
    Garnet, Almandite  1.790
    Garnet, Andradite  1.820
    Garnet, Demantoid  1.880
    Garnet, Grossular  1.738
    Garnet, Hessonite  1.745
    Garnet, Rhodolite  1.760
    Garnet, Spessartite  1.810
    Gaylussite  1.517
    Glass  1.51714
    Glass, Albite  1.4890
    Glass, Crown  1.520
    Glass, Crown, Zinc  1.517
    Glass, Flint, Dense  1.66
    Glass, Flint, Heaviest  1.89
    Glass, Flint, Heavy  1.65548
    Glass, Flint, Lanthanum  1.80
    Glass, Flint, Light  1.58038
    Glass, Flint, Medium  1.62725
    Glycerine  1.473
    Gold  0.47
    Hambergite  1.559
    Hauynite  1.502
    Helium  1.000036
    Hematite  2.940
    Hemimorphite  1.614
    Hiddenite  1.655
    Howlite  1.586
    Hydrogen (gas)  1.000140
    Hydrogen (liq)  1.0974 
    Hypersthene  1.670
    Ice  1.309
    Idocrase  1.713
    Iodine Crystal  3.34
    Iolite  1.548
    Iron  1.51
    Ivory  1.540
    Jade, Nephrite  1.610
    Jadeite  1.665
    Jasper  1.540
    Jet  1.660
    Kornerupine  1.665
    Kunzite  1.655
    Kyanite  1.715
    Lapis Gem  1.500
    Lapis Lazuli  1.61
    Lazulite  1.615
    Lead  2.01
    Leucite  1.509
    Magnesite  1.515
    Malachite  1.655
    Meerschaum  1.530
    Mercury (liq)  1.62
    Methanol  1.329
    Moldavite  1.500
    Moonstone, Adularia  1.525
    Moonstone, Albite  1.535
    Natrolite  1.480
    Nephrite  1.600
    Nitrogen (gas)  1.000297
    Nitrogen (liq)  1.2053
    Nylon  1.53
    Obsidian  1.489
    Olivine  1.670
    Onyx  1.486
    Opal  1.450
    Oxygen (gas)  1.000276
    Oxygen (liq)  1.221
    Painite  1.787
    Pearl  1.530
    Periclase  1.740
    Peridot  1.654
    Peristerite  1.525
    Petalite  1.502
    Phenakite  1.650
    Phosgenite  2.117
    Plastic  1.460
    Plexiglas  1.50
    Polystyrene  1.55
    Prase  1.540
    Prasiolite  1.540
    Prehnite  1.610
    Proustite  2.790
    Purpurite  1.840
    Pyrite  1.810
    Pyrope  1.740
    Quartz  1.544
    Quartz, Fused  1.45843
    Rhodizite  1.690
    Rhodochrisite  1.600
    Rhodonite  1.735
    Rock Salt  1.544
    Rubber, Natural  1.5191
    Ruby  1.760
    Rutile  2.62
    Sanidine  1.522
    Sapphire  1.760
    Scapolite  1.540
    Scapolite, Yellow  1.555
    Scheelite  1.920
    Selenium, Amorphous  2.92
    Serpentine  1.560
    Shell  1.530
    Silicon  4.24
    Sillimanite  1.658
    Silver  0.18
    Sinhalite  1.699
    Smaragdite  1.608
    Smithsonite  1.621
    Sodalite  1.483
    Sodium Chloride  1.544
    Sphalerite  2.368
    Sphene  1.885
    Spinel  1.712
    Spodumene  1.650
    Staurolite  1.739
    Steatite  1.539
    Steel  2.50
    Stichtite  1.520
    Strontium Titanate  2.410
    Styrofoam  1.595
    Sulphur  1.960
    Synthetic Spinel  1.730
    Taaffeite  1.720
    Tantalite  2.240
    Tanzanite  1.691
    Teflon  1.35
    Thomsonite  1.530
    Tiger eye  1.544
    Topaz  1.620
    Topaz, Blue  1.610
    Topaz, Pink  1.620
    Topaz, White  1.630
    Topaz, Yellow  1.620
    Tourmaline  1.624
    Tremolite  1.600
    Tugtupite  1.496
    Turpentine  1.472
    Turquoise  1.610
    Ulexite  1.490
    Uvarovite  1.870
    Variscite  1.550
    Vivianite  1.580
    Wardite  1.590
    Water (gas)  1.000261
    Water 100'C  1.31819
    Water 20'C  1.33335
    Water 35'C (Room temp)  1.33157
    Willemite  1.690
    Witherite  1.532
    Wulfenite  2.300
    Zincite  2.010
    Zircon, High  1.960
    Zircon, Low  1.800
    Zirconia, Cubic  2.170

The earth is comprised of five atmospheric levels. (These are the gradient levels that Perfect Circle is talking about.)
    1. Exosphere
    2. Ionosphere + Thermosphere
    3. Mesosphere
    4. Stratosphere
    5. Troposphere



These are the elements in a dry atmosphere:


So you can do the math with the formula above and your indices along with your atmopheric levels. You will see that the gradient level to create a curve such as the picture in the OP, needs to be more than 5 gradient levels. In fact even as altitude increases, about 50% of the density of elements decreases up to 18,000ft. But the decrease isn't linear or constant. This pressure drop is approximately exponential, so that pressure decreases by approximately half every 5.6 km (whence about 50% of the total atmospheric mass is within the lowest 5.6 km) and by 63.2 % (1 − 1 / e = 1 − 0.368 = 0.632) every 7.64 km, the average scale height of Earth's atmosphere below 70 km. However, because of changes in temperature, average molecular weight, and gravity throughout the atmospheric column, the dependence of atmospheric pressure on altitude is modeled by separate equations for each of the layers listed above.

As you can clearly see, a light curve like that requires more gradient levels.



*

Perfect Circle

  • 734
  • You are a pirate!
Re: [UPDATED] Bendy Light (Tom Bishop, where are you?)
« Reply #10 on: December 03, 2008, 03:11:44 PM »
Thanks for that, but IOR doesn't even need to come into effect. Photons cannot be split and sent in hundreds of directions at once, so unless they throw gravity back into the equation, bendy light just fell apart. Even if bendy light worked the way they said it does, that doesn't answer any of my other challenges.
Like the sun, the stars are also expanding and contracting their diameter as they spin around the hub every six months.

?

len

  • 53
Re: [UPDATED] Bendy Light (Tom Bishop, where are you?)
« Reply #11 on: December 03, 2008, 03:16:15 PM »
Thanks for that, but IOR doesn't even need to come into effect. Photons cannot be split and sent in hundreds of directions at once, so unless they throw gravity back into the equation, bendy light just fell apart. Even if bendy light worked the way they said it does, that doesn't answer any of my other challenges.

Tis true, I forgot that one common assumption. I'm having a difficult time understanding the "gravity" issue. I apologize.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36114
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: 'Bendy sunlight' vs. 'bendy celestial light' and the shape of sunlight
« Reply #12 on: December 03, 2008, 03:23:23 PM »
FE THeory of bendy light is such an abortive mess it makes the Baby Jesus cry. I think it was invented by Robosteve when he was resitting a relativity module. He just kept saying it til it stuck. Watch

Bendy light.

See

The term "bendy light" was invented by REers to make the Electromagnetic Accelerator theory sound less plausible. Speaking of REers making stuff up, why do people automatically assume that refraction is responsible for the bending of light? It's caused by Dark Energy, according to the EA theory, and I have outlined it several times already.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

Perfect Circle

  • 734
  • You are a pirate!
Re: [UPDATED] Bendy Light (Tom Bishop, where are you?)
« Reply #13 on: December 03, 2008, 03:24:20 PM »
Thanks for that, but IOR doesn't even need to come into effect. Photons cannot be split and sent in hundreds of directions at once, so unless they throw gravity back into the equation, bendy light just fell apart. Even if bendy light worked the way they said it does, that doesn't answer any of my other challenges.

Tis true, I forgot that one common assumption. I'm having a difficult time understanding the "gravity" issue. I apologize.
It's similar to this:
Light always travels in a straight line in three dimensions. Gravity does not bend light, it bends the space through which light travels which means the geodesics (paths) that light follows appear curved. It's similar to drawing a straight line on a curved surface: the line itself is straight in 2D dimensions, but it follows the three-dimensional curve. With gravity we start in three dimensions and are bending that space, like bending a piece of paper with two dimensional shapes to make them appear curved.
Like the sun, the stars are also expanding and contracting their diameter as they spin around the hub every six months.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36114
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: [UPDATED] Bendy Light (Tom Bishop, where are you?)
« Reply #14 on: December 03, 2008, 03:28:11 PM »
It's similar to this:
Light always travels in a straight line in three dimensions. Gravity does not bend light, it bends the space through which light travels which means the geodesics (paths) that light follows appear curved. It's similar to drawing a straight line on a curved surface: the line itself is straight in 2D dimensions, but it follows the three-dimensional curve. With gravity we start in three dimensions and are bending that space, like bending a piece of paper with two dimensional shapes to make them appear curved.

Please don't talk about things you don't understand. You just make yourself appear foolish.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

Perfect Circle

  • 734
  • You are a pirate!
Re: [UPDATED] Bendy Light (Tom Bishop, where are you?)
« Reply #15 on: December 03, 2008, 03:31:28 PM »
FE THeory of bendy light is such an abortive mess it makes the Baby Jesus cry. I think it was invented by Robosteve when he was resitting a relativity module. He just kept saying it til it stuck. Watch

Bendy light.

See

The term "bendy light" was invented by REers to make the Electromagnetic Accelerator theory sound less plausible. Speaking of REers making stuff up, why do people automatically assume that refraction is responsible for the bending of light? It's caused by Dark Energy, according to the EA theory, and I have outlined it several times already.
So the undetectable dark energy is defying all other laws of physics and bending light in multiple directions both horizontally and vertically at once, which somehow consistently matches predicted RE observation at any location on the earth, AND it can differentiate between different light sources. Hmm...

Quote from: Tom Bishop
The burden is actually on you to present proof for the unobservable and unexperienced.
Where's your evidence? How do you address my other points, like southern hemisphere stars?
Like the sun, the stars are also expanding and contracting their diameter as they spin around the hub every six months.

*

Perfect Circle

  • 734
  • You are a pirate!
Re: [UPDATED] Bendy Light (Tom Bishop, where are you?)
« Reply #16 on: December 03, 2008, 03:41:07 PM »
It's similar to this:
Light always travels in a straight line in three dimensions. Gravity does not bend light, it bends the space through which light travels which means the geodesics (paths) that light follows appear curved. It's similar to drawing a straight line on a curved surface: the line itself is straight in 2D dimensions, but it follows the three-dimensional curve. With gravity we start in three dimensions and are bending that space, like bending a piece of paper with two dimensional shapes to make them appear curved.

Please don't talk about things you don't understand. You just make yourself appear foolish.
If I make mistakes, feel free to correct me. However, since most observations in FET rely on the existence of 'bendy light', and 'bendy light' cannot be explained (and neither can several other observations), FET is incomplete and invalid as-is, which means a victory for RET (unless you'd like to introduce a new shape or FET-supporting theory).
Like the sun, the stars are also expanding and contracting their diameter as they spin around the hub every six months.

?

len

  • 53
Re: 'Bendy sunlight' vs. 'bendy celestial light' and the shape of sunlight
« Reply #17 on: December 03, 2008, 04:03:09 PM »
Speaking of REers making stuff up, why do people automatically assume that refraction is responsible for the bending of light? It's caused by Dark Energy, according to the EA theory, and I have outlined it several times already.

Automatically assume?

Ni * Sin(Ai) = Nr * Sin(Ar)

where:
Ni is the refractive index of the medium the light is leaving,
Ai is the incident angle between the light ray and the normal to the meduim to medium interface,
Nr is the refractive index of the medium the light is entering,
Ar is the refractive angle between the light ray and the normal to the meduim to medium interface

So what is the formula for Dark Enery causing the bending of light Robosteve?

*

Perfect Circle

  • 734
  • You are a pirate!
Re: [UPDATED] Bendy Light (Tom Bishop, where are you?)
« Reply #18 on: December 03, 2008, 04:06:13 PM »
Speaking of REers making stuff up, why do people automatically assume that refraction is responsible for the bending of light? It's caused by Dark Energy, according to the EA theory, and I have outlined it several times already.

Automatically assume?

Ni * Sin(Ai) = Nr * Sin(Ar)

where:
Ni is the refractive index of the medium the light is leaving,
Ai is the incident angle between the light ray and the normal to the meduim to medium interface,
Nr is the refractive index of the medium the light is entering,
Ar is the refractive angle between the light ray and the normal to the meduim to medium interface

So what is the formula for Dark Enery causing the bending of light Robosteve?
Whatever it is, it isn't a function since you'd get multiple directions as your result.
Like the sun, the stars are also expanding and contracting their diameter as they spin around the hub every six months.

?

len

  • 53
Re: [UPDATED] Bendy Light (Tom Bishop, where are you?)
« Reply #19 on: December 03, 2008, 04:27:54 PM »
Perfect Circle, this may have a tiny relevancy to the topic of hand but I found this in the US Army's Sniper training manual. How light can affect our perception of distance and that we cannot solely depend on our own eyes to give the proper distance.

    4-22. FACTORS AFFECTING RANGE ESTIMATION
    Three factors affect range estimation: nature of the target, nature of the terrain, and light conditions.

    a. Nature of the Target.

    (1) An object of regular outline, such as a house, appears closer than one of irregular outline, such as a clump of trees.

    (2) A target that contrasts with its background appears to be closer than it actually is.

    (3) A partly exposed target appears more distant than it actually is.

    b. Nature of the Terrain.

    (1) As the observer's eye follows the contour of the terrain, he tends to overestimate distant targets.

    (2) Observing over smooth terrain, such as sand, water, or snow, causes the observer to underestimate distant targets.

    (3) Looking downhill, the target appears farther away.

    (4) Looking uphill, the target appears closer.

    c. Light Conditions.

    (1) The more clearly a target can be seen, the closer it appears.

    (2) When the sun is behind the observer, the target appears to be closer.

    (3) When the sun is behind the target, the target is more difficult to see and appears to be farther away.

Because of these factors, they have to rely on their training and calculation to calculate true distance.

« Last Edit: December 03, 2008, 04:29:59 PM by len »

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39414
Re: 'Bendy sunlight' vs. 'bendy celestial light' and the shape of sunlight
« Reply #20 on: December 04, 2008, 05:26:19 AM »
The term "bendy light" was invented by REers to make the Electromagnetic Accelerator theory sound less plausible.

I came up with an idea on the new FES, that I thought of posting here because most of the serious discussion seems to happen on here.

Basically, I considered a second UA, one that passes through solid objects (so that we are not shielded from it by the Earth), but that only affects electromagnetic radiation. This "Electromagnetic Accelerator" (EA) would cause significantly greater acceleration than the UA does, such that light accelerates upwards relative to the surface of the Earth. This would explain a couple of phenomena:

Day/night

When the sun is too far away, all its rays are bent upwards in a parabolic arc before they reach us.

Horizon

Light from objects too far away either hits the ground or is bent upwards before it reaches us.

Shoo shoo little troll.

Um...  Goldstien, RoboSteve is saying that he developed the concept of the EA bending light, however RE'ers are the ones that actually coined the term "bendy light".
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5179
Re: [UPDATED] Bendy Light (Tom Bishop, where are you?)
« Reply #21 on: December 04, 2008, 05:30:00 AM »
Gravity does not bend light, it bends the space through which light travels which means the geodesics (paths) that light follows appear curved.
...That means "gravity" (accurately, gravitation) does bend light.  :-\

EDIT: also, gravitation doesn't bend space or space-time. Curvature of space-time is gravitation. Curved space-time affects the path of a photon, thereby causing a phenomenon known as gravitational lensing.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2008, 05:46:00 AM by Jack076 »

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39414
Re: 'Bendy sunlight' vs. 'bendy celestial light' and the shape of sunlight
« Reply #22 on: December 04, 2008, 06:57:58 AM »
Um...  Goldstien, RoboSteve is saying that he developed the concept of the EA bending light, however RE'ers are the ones that actually coined the term "bendy light".

Oh it's a derogatory term is it? Like "Afro-Caribean" and "n*gger"? Well it certainly seems Robosteve has taken that word and made it his own, perhaps in an ironic reflection of his communities defiant stance against prejudice and ignorance.

Maybe FE'ers can say "bendy light" but RE'ers can't...

I didn't say that, and I don't think that Steve said that either.  All I'm saying is that Steve invented the concept, RE'ers coined the term and both sides seem to be running with it (although RE'ers are more likely to use it to mock FET).
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

?

trig

  • 2240
Re: 'Bendy sunlight' vs. 'bendy celestial light' and the shape of sunlight
« Reply #23 on: December 04, 2008, 07:23:38 AM »
FE THeory of bendy light is such an abortive mess it makes the Baby Jesus cry. I think it was invented by Robosteve when he was resitting a relativity module. He just kept saying it til it stuck. Watch

Bendy light.

See

The term "bendy light" was invented by REers to make the Electromagnetic Accelerator theory sound less plausible. Speaking of REers making stuff up, why do people automatically assume that refraction is responsible for the bending of light? It's caused by Dark Energy, according to the EA theory, and I have outlined it several times already.
This makes me ask again: If the "bendy light" is caused by acceleration of some sort, how come it changes the path that light travels in both a vertical plane and a Southward direction, making the azimuth of sunsets and sunrises move several degrees South?

What kind of acceleration will move the apparent place of the Sun at sunset and the apparent place of the Sun at sunrise change in opposite directions? How can it be that people in Asia and people in America see, at the same time, the light being "accelerated" in opposite directions so that while one sees the sunset "moved" in one direction, the other sees the sunrise "moved" in the other?

There is no right solution for this "bendy light" or accelerated-something theory to work. If you fix it for some, you have to un-fix it for others. Or we are all accelerating into a black hole in the North Pole but inexplicably never get there.

*

Perfect Circle

  • 734
  • You are a pirate!
Re: [UPDATED] Bendy Light (Tom Bishop, where are you?)
« Reply #24 on: December 04, 2008, 02:58:35 PM »
Gravity does not bend light, it bends the space through which light travels which means the geodesics (paths) that light follows appear curved.
...That means "gravity" (accurately, gravitation) does bend light.  :-\

EDIT: also, gravitation doesn't bend space or space-time. Curvature of space-time is gravitation. Curved space-time affects the path of a photon, thereby causing a phenomenon known as gravitational lensing.
Thanks for clearing that up. Although it does not improve the position of FET in this discussion.
Like the sun, the stars are also expanding and contracting their diameter as they spin around the hub every six months.