|
|
Post by bxjetfan on Mar 30, 2017 16:17:22 GMT -5
I believe the equation D=1.22 x square root H, gives the distance, D, in miles that a person can see to the horizon from a height ,H, in feet. When the math comes in I get lost. Apparently the flat earth people point to this as proof that the earth is flat. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bedford_Level_experiment I don't know what to make of it though. The Bedford river is flat and things were supposed to go "over" the horizon at 6 miles. Accusations of cheating flew and apparently it was quite the controversy. The flat earthers are supposed to have videos where they prove the earth is flat with laser levels but I haven't watched any. |
|
|
|
Post by Trades on Mar 30, 2017 19:54:41 GMT -5
See, here's what I don't understand. I asked why we couldn't get a picture of the earth where the buildings in Australia and the planes would be upside down. Someone, it might have been you said when you get so high up you wouldn't be able to make out features. What you just linked to were pictures taken from the space station and it flies about 249 miles above the earth. Clearly you can make out features in those pictures. Why can't they take pictures of the earth like a pizza pie, a slice at a time and put them together. Then it would show the bottom half of the earth with the buildings "hanging off" the earth. What am I missing? Do you think you could see a building from 249 miles away with any clarity? The Earth is relatively huge when compared with a space stations and any of the man made objects on it. Trying to get a picture that shows that would be just you holding a picture of a building upside down. As I said, in space there is no "up" and there is no "bottom half of the Earth because for the people in the southern hemisphere we are the ones that are up side down. |
|
|
|
Post by bxjetfan on Mar 30, 2017 20:09:32 GMT -5
See, here's what I don't understand. I asked why we couldn't get a picture of the earth where the buildings in Australia and the planes would be upside down. Someone, it might have been you said when you get so high up you wouldn't be able to make out features. What you just linked to were pictures taken from the space station and it flies about 249 miles above the earth. Clearly you can make out features in those pictures. Why can't they take pictures of the earth like a pizza pie, a slice at a time and put them together. Then it would show the bottom half of the earth with the buildings "hanging off" the earth. What am I missing? Do you think you could see a building from 249 miles away with any clarity? The Earth is relatively huge when compared with a space stations and any of the man made objects on it. Trying to get a picture that shows that would be just you holding a picture of a building upside down. As I said, in space there is no "up" and there is no "bottom half of the Earth because for the people in the southern hemisphere we are the ones that are up side down. Dude, you just posted to a link with pictures of the earth that were taken from the space station and it's clear that you would be able to identify buildings and other landmarks. Now picture an 8 or 12 slice pizza. Now cut the earth into 8 or 12 "slices" if you will and take a picture of all of them. Then fit them back together and you should have a picture of the complete earth. The bottom should have buildings upside down, like spokes on a wheel. On top of the earth they will be upright, no? |
|
|
|
Post by Trades on Mar 30, 2017 20:28:32 GMT -5
See, here's what I don't understand. I asked why we couldn't get a picture of the earth where the buildings in Australia and the planes would be upside down. Someone, it might have been you said when you get so high up you wouldn't be able to make out features. What you just linked to were pictures taken from the space station and it flies about 249 miles above the earth. Clearly you can make out features in those pictures. Why can't they take pictures of the earth like a pizza pie, a slice at a time and put them together. Then it would show the bottom half of the earth with the buildings "hanging off" the earth. What am I missing? You can't see buildings with any clarity or frame of reference that would show that. for a building to look as though it were hanging off of the Earth it would have to be at the horizon line. This is a picture from that page with the curvature of the Earth. You think you could see a building at the curvature? The distance is too great to see even the tallest building (2717' tall) from that distance and even if you could you would still be just holding a picture that would look like you were holding it up side down since there is no frame of reference. Tell me is the first picture below of the northern or southern hemisphere? How do you know?  How about this picture? Is the next picture below of the northern or southern hemisphere? How do you know?  or this one:  |
|
|
|
Post by bxjetfan on Mar 30, 2017 20:38:11 GMT -5
Ok, instead of 12 pictures you take 1200, or 12000. This pic was from that link you posted and you can clearly see they are buildings, plus if you rap it you can zoom in.  |
|
|
|
Post by Trades on Mar 30, 2017 20:45:51 GMT -5
Ok, instead of 12 pictures you take 1200, or 12000. This pic was from that link you posted and you can clearly see they are buildings, plus if you rap it you can zoom in. Yes and what is the perspective of that picture? Straight down relative to the Earth. If you look straight down on anything will it every look like it is hanging off of something? Try it. None of those buildings look like they are coming up at you either. |
|
|
|
Post by Trades on Mar 30, 2017 20:51:31 GMT -5
For more understanding the earth's atmosphere is 300 miles wide, the tallest building is about 1/2 a mile tall. Do you think you could discern a 1/2 mile building in a picture where a 300 mile atmosphere looks like it is about 1/2 an inch as it does in the 3 pictures I just posted?
|
|
|
|
Post by bxjetfan on Mar 30, 2017 21:01:25 GMT -5
Ok, instead of 12 pictures you take 1200, or 12000. This pic was from that link you posted and you can clearly see they are buildings, plus if you rap it you can zoom in. Yes and what is the perspective of that picture? Straight down relative to the Earth. If you look straight down on anything will it every look like it is hanging off of something? Try it. None of those buildings look like they are coming up at you either. Yeah but it's not straight down the earth curves. If you glued pawns in a line on a basketball and stood over it you would be able to tell that the ball was curved right? And the pawns farther down the curve would appear smaller no? |
|
|
|
Post by bxjetfan on Mar 30, 2017 21:05:47 GMT -5
For more understanding the earth's atmosphere is 300 miles wide, the tallest building is about 1/2 a mile tall. Do you think you could discern a 1/2 mile building in a picture where a 300 mile atmosphere looks like it is about 1/2 an inch as it does in the 3 pictures I just posted? The picture of the coastline that I posted came from the link you gave and it comes from the space station. It was taken from 260 miles away so obviously you can make out buildings. Plus you can enlarge it. As the earth curves away you wouldn't see the entire roof of buildings you should see the side and some of the roof, no? |
|
|
|
Post by Big L on Mar 30, 2017 21:18:06 GMT -5
You can see the buildings in trades picture. You just need a very big magnifying glass.
|
|
|
|
Post by Trades on Mar 30, 2017 21:22:29 GMT -5
Yes and what is the perspective of that picture? Straight down relative to the Earth. If you look straight down on anything will it every look like it is hanging off of something? Try it. None of those buildings look like they are coming up at you either. Yeah but it's not straight down the earth curves. If you glued pawns in a line on a basketball and stood over it you would be able to tell that the ball was curved right? And the pawns farther down the curve would appear smaller no? and you think that pawns are the same relative size to a basketball that a building is to the Earth? A standard NBA basketball is 9.43 to 9.51 inches in diameter, or 29 5/8 to 29 7/8 inches in circumference. I will use 10" as the round number approximation of the diameter of a basketball. The average chess pawn is what, an inch to an inch and a half high? So the pawn is about 10% of the height of the basketball and gluing a pawn to both sides would add 20% to the diameter if you drew a circle around the entire structure. 20% is a big difference _______________________________ The mean radius of Earth is 3,959 miles (6,371 kilometers). However, Earth is not quite a sphere. The planet's rotation causes it to bulge at the equator. Earth's equatorial diameter is 7,926 miles (12,756 km), but from pole to pole, the diameter is 7,898 miles (12,714 km) — a difference of only 28 miles (42 km). The circumference of Earth at the equator is about 24,874 miles (40,030 km), but from pole-to-pole — the meridional circumference — Earth is only 24,860 miles (40,008 km) around. I will use the shortest distance to help your arguement for the diameter of the Earth, so 7,898 miles. Again the tallest building in the world is slightly taller than a half mile. (2707') So for the ease of math I will use .5 miles for the building giving us a building that is approximately 0.00006% the height of the Earth and similar to the basketball if there were buildings on opposite sides of the Earth at the same height the circle around it would be 0.00012% larger than the Earth was which is basically nothing relative to the original size of the Earth. ________________________________ Does that give you the perspective of why we can't see buildings "hanging off of the Earth"? They are a zit on the ass of the planet. The pawn analogy is bad because for it to work for a 1 inch pawn as I used in the calculation above the baskeball representing the Earth would have to be 1316 feet in diameter to give you a realistic representation of the model which just happens to be the size of the Empire State Building. Now picture a pawn glues to the top of the Empire State Building. |
|
|
|
Post by Trades on Mar 30, 2017 21:24:13 GMT -5
For more understanding the earth's atmosphere is 300 miles wide, the tallest building is about 1/2 a mile tall. Do you think you could discern a 1/2 mile building in a picture where a 300 mile atmosphere looks like it is about 1/2 an inch as it does in the 3 pictures I just posted? The picture of the coastline that I posted came from the link you gave and it comes from the space station. It was taken from 260 miles away so obviously you can make out buildings. Plus you can enlarge it. As the earth curves away you wouldn't see the entire roof of buildings you should see the side and some of the roof, no? The Earth is so large that it makes the curvature of the Earth VERY negligible in a picture of that size. |
|
|
|
Post by bxjetfan on Mar 30, 2017 21:38:19 GMT -5
Yeah but it's not straight down the earth curves. If you glued pawns in a line on a basketball and stood over it you would be able to tell that the ball was curved right? And the pawns farther down the curve would appear smaller no? and you think that pawns are the same relative size to a basketball that a building is to the Earth? A standard NBA basketball is 9.43 to 9.51 inches in diameter, or 29 5/8 to 29 7/8 inches in circumference. I will use 10" as the round number approximation of the diameter of a basketball. The average chess pawn is what, an inch to an inch and a half high? So the pawn is about 10% of the height of the basketball and gluing a pawn to both sides would add 20% to the diameter if you drew a circle around the entire structure. 20% is a big difference _______________________________ The mean radius of Earth is 3,959 miles (6,371 kilometers). However, Earth is not quite a sphere. The planet's rotation causes it to bulge at the equator. Earth's equatorial diameter is 7,926 miles (12,756 km), but from pole to pole, the diameter is 7,898 miles (12,714 km) — a difference of only 28 miles (42 km). The circumference of Earth at the equator is about 24,874 miles (40,030 km), but from pole-to-pole — the meridional circumference — Earth is only 24,860 miles (40,008 km) around. I will use the shortest distance to help your arguement for the diameter of the Earth, so 7,898 miles. Again the tallest building in the world is slightly taller than a half mile. (2707') So for the ease of math I will use .5 miles for the building giving us a building that is approximately 0.00006% the height of the Earth and similar to the basketball if there were buildings on opposite sides of the Earth at the same height the circle around it would be 0.00012% larger than the Earth was which is basically nothing relative to the original size of the Earth. ________________________________ Does that give you the perspective of why we can't see buildings "hanging off of the Earth"? They are a zit on the ass of the planet. The pawn analogy is bad because for it to work for a 1 inch pawn as I used in the calculation above the baskeball representing the Earth would have to be 1316 feet in diameter to give you a realistic representation of the model which just happens to be the size of the Empire State Building. Now picture a pawn glues to the top of the Empire State Building. Forget about the scale of the pawn and the basketball. Someone posted earlier a formula about the earths curvature and I read that something would disappear after six miles over the horizon. If you took a picture from the space station and the camera was directly over the first row of homes, if you zoomed in to the houses at the end of the pic you would just see the front of the building. The earths curvature would make the building appear as if it was leaning back and you wouldn't see the roof, no? |
|
|
|
Post by bxjetfan on Mar 30, 2017 21:44:54 GMT -5
The picture of the coastline that I posted came from the link you gave and it comes from the space station. It was taken from 260 miles away so obviously you can make out buildings. Plus you can enlarge it. As the earth curves away you wouldn't see the entire roof of buildings you should see the side and some of the roof, no? The Earth is so large that it makes the curvature of the Earth VERY negligible in a picture of that size. That's why I said take a lot of pictures. |
|
|
|
Post by Trades on Mar 30, 2017 21:55:36 GMT -5
and you think that pawns are the same relative size to a basketball that a building is to the Earth? A standard NBA basketball is 9.43 to 9.51 inches in diameter, or 29 5/8 to 29 7/8 inches in circumference. I will use 10" as the round number approximation of the diameter of a basketball. The average chess pawn is what, an inch to an inch and a half high? So the pawn is about 10% of the height of the basketball and gluing a pawn to both sides would add 20% to the diameter if you drew a circle around the entire structure. 20% is a big difference _______________________________ The mean radius of Earth is 3,959 miles (6,371 kilometers). However, Earth is not quite a sphere. The planet's rotation causes it to bulge at the equator. Earth's equatorial diameter is 7,926 miles (12,756 km), but from pole to pole, the diameter is 7,898 miles (12,714 km) — a difference of only 28 miles (42 km). The circumference of Earth at the equator is about 24,874 miles (40,030 km), but from pole-to-pole — the meridional circumference — Earth is only 24,860 miles (40,008 km) around. I will use the shortest distance to help your arguement for the diameter of the Earth, so 7,898 miles. Again the tallest building in the world is slightly taller than a half mile. (2707') So for the ease of math I will use .5 miles for the building giving us a building that is approximately 0.00006% the height of the Earth and similar to the basketball if there were buildings on opposite sides of the Earth at the same height the circle around it would be 0.00012% larger than the Earth was which is basically nothing relative to the original size of the Earth. ________________________________ Does that give you the perspective of why we can't see buildings "hanging off of the Earth"? They are a zit on the ass of the planet. The pawn analogy is bad because for it to work for a 1 inch pawn as I used in the calculation above the baskeball representing the Earth would have to be 1316 feet in diameter to give you a realistic representation of the model which just happens to be the size of the Empire State Building. Now picture a pawn glues to the top of the Empire State Building. Forget about the scale of the pawn and the basketball. Someone posted earlier a formula about the earths curvature and I read that something would disappear after six miles over the horizon. If you took a picture from the space station and the camera was directly over the first row of homes, if you zoomed in to the houses at the end of the pic you would just see the front of the building. The earths curvature would make the building appear as if it was leaning back and you wouldn't see the roof, no? That is if you are on land not in orbit. Brooklyn said "I believe the equation D=1.22 x square root H, gives the distance, D, in miles that a person can see to the horizon from a height ,H, in feet. " Working backwards if D=6 miles then the height to see that far would be H=(D/1.22)^2 so H =24 feet high. At 260 miles above the earth, assuming the formula still holds up at that height which I doubt it does, the horizon line is 19.6 miles That picture we are talking about is about what 20 miles across, max? Compared to the surface of the Earth I doubt that is even the size of a dimple on that basketball. There is no relative curvature over that small area of space. The circumference of the Earth is about 24,874 miles so 20 miles is 0.000804052 % of the earth's surface in a straight line around the Earth not of all of it's surface area. That is NOTHING. 0.000804052% of the surface of a basketball by comparison is 0.024121573 inches or 2 100ths of an inch. Go ahead and try to measure that. It would appear flat. Do some research in 3d modeling of spheres and you will see how large of an area can be flat and still produce a nice sphere visually depending on your resolution. Then think about the scale we are talking about. |
|
