NASA = fake shit and lies

Wonder what their rockets really go up to study.

"Yeah, we bought the heatshields for the Challenger from Autozone."

Challenger makes me so frustrated. Richard Feynman summarized my feelings on the subject in Appendix F of the Rogers commision report.

In any event this has had very unfortunate consequences, the most serious of which is to encourage ordinary citizens to fly in such a dangerous machine, as if it had attained the safety of an ordinary airliner. The astronauts, like test pilots, should know their risks, and we honor them for their courage.

Indeed it's a serious issue.

It is the sense of Congress that the presence of counterfeit electronic parts in the NASA supply chain poses a danger to United States government astronauts, crew, and other personnel and a risk to the agency overall.

The supply chain for a spacecraft is so long and complex that it's hard to stamp this sort of stuff out completely. But I'm glad it's being addressed. The contractor responsibilities could help, although I'm worried about the proliferation of paperwork causing even more red tape than already exists.

Interesting. So in your model, how far away is the moon?

 

 ^{metric units bot | feedback | source | stop | v0.2.2-beta}

You can work out the distance of the moon fairly easily (independent of its size) if you can check what angle it appears at from two places on Earth. Imagine drawing a triangle between point A on Earth, point B on the moon, and point C on Earth. If you know the angles and the distance between A and C you can work it out with trigonometry.

At close distances between A and C, assuming the Earth is flat doesn't change the result much (because the curvature is so slight).

We can start with the flat earth if you want. What's the distance between two points directly north/south in your model? Like say, 1 deg N to 1 deg S latitude, and again for 5 and 10 deg N and S?

And also, for a different calculation we can use for comparison, what is the speed of light?

I want to make sure we agree on as much as possible before we start, so there's no confusion in what we're using as a basis.

Ok. Let's try to work some of that out.

What's the greatest distance across Earth you have measured or know for yourself?

Have you tried to measure the speed of light for yourself? There are various simple experiments for doing so. If not, the scientific consensus is about ~3x10⁸ m/s. Do you disagree with that? If so, based on what evidence?

I am not at liberty to disclose that information.

You live somewhere classified? Curious that you know for sure the Earth is flat yet don't know anything else about it.

I have estimated the size of Earth itself using both this and eratosthenes's similar experiment with the sun.

You didn't answer the question about the speed of light.

There are other ways of proving that it is. The moon bounce experiment is the one I've done.

Don't forget to answer the other questions.

No. They use different models.

Don't forget to answer the other questions.

As you know, larger objects can be seen from farther away than smaller objects. There is a simple mathematical description for this. We should calculate the angular diameter:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_diameter

Delta=2arctan(d/(2D))

For d=50 miles and D=238,000 miles, Delta=0.012 degrees (not radians)

That's above the limit for those with sharp eyes to distinguish one feature as separate from another (0.01 degrees).

It's equivalent to seeing a human hair (0.04 mm) from 190 mm away (19 cm).

Now, can you answer my other questions?

The questions:

Do you dispute the speed of light? If so, based on what evidence?

Do you agree that, for example, Cuba and Florida are closer together than Panama and South Carolina? Regardless of the actual distances between them, just closer. You can substitute any other set of four places significantly north and south of each other that you like.

Sad, but not unexpected, that you don't have an answer.

You admitted here that one cannot!

No. In order to see something it has to be greater than the minimum angular diameter. 0.012>0 01, which is why I said:

above the limit

And even provided a comparison with a smaller, closer object. Do the math yourself if you don't believe me.

You can check that this mathematical relationship works for yourself. Get something of a known diameter like a penny and measure at what distance you can no longer see it. Or better yet, measure it's apparent angular diameter at various distances. Then do the same for an object of another size like a quarter. Compare the results with the calculations.

In this way you can check for yourself to see if Delta=2*arctan(d/(2D)) is correct!

How about you calculate why I cannot see any curve over 30 miles when math says I should.

You are asking a new question without first answering the ones I have posed. Let's take turns here.

No response. Figures.

Still no actual response... I assume since you chose not to answer the question, that you agree with, or can't refute, how angular diameter works.

First off, the Earth's circumference is a bit under 25,000 miles. The diameter is 7,900 miles or so.

The horizon will depend on your height from the surface of course, this is why you can see farther from higher up, such as on top of a mountain or skyscraper.

Still no actual response. Ok. Glad you agree.

Yet at sea level I can see 30 miles. Explain that.

Proof? :)

No proof, I see.

You have not given any proof, I'm afraid. You claim to be able to see 30 miles but have no evidence of this. I think I know why you don't.

For another comparison, you mentioned a 5" hole (diameter of 7.891*10^-5 miles) 238 miles away. That has an angular diameter of:

Delta=2arctan(7.89110^-5/(2*238))

Which is:

Delta=1.8997*10^-5 degrees or (rounding 1.8997 to 2) 0.00002 degrees. Much, much smaller in angular diameter and this not discernible to the unaided eye.

So a 5" diameter hole is, visually, much smaller at 238 miles away than a 50 mile diameter hole is at 238,000 miles. You can see the latter but not the former.