Jump to content

michel123456

Senior Members
  • Content Count

    5853
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

michel123456 last won the day on July 12

michel123456 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

508 Glorious Leader

2 Followers

About michel123456

  • Rank
    Genius
  • Birthday 06/08/1960

Profile Information

  • Location
    Athens Greece
  • Interests
    everything
  • Favorite Area of Science
    time & space
  • Occupation
    Architect

Recent Profile Visitors

66291 profile views
  1. It is also the begin of the hexadecimal system for measuring time. Less than a second are measured in /100. Which is completely bogus.
  2. Is the question related to UFO sightings?
  3. That is reminder that everything on the Net has an expiration date. I remember another Forum that closed suddenly. I was really angry to have lost all my discussions over several years. It would be great to make a backup copy of the entire Forum, or at least provide for each member the possibility to download a backup of his own activity.
  4. Eratosthenes thanks you. 1 is off topic indeed. But no, i haven't seen such videos. I have been told that relativistic transformations are "real", because there is no preferred FOR, and that perspective transformation are not "real" (see other thread). 2 I thank you. The boy is imaginary (and is not 12 year old) 3 is off topic I guess.
  5. To continue on the same stance: isnt'it weird that following the rules of Relativity, if I change my state of motion (if I accelerate) the measured dimensions of a remote object will change? (see length contraction). At the end, is it different from the weirdness we are living everyday?
  6. Thank you but for your information I have constructed perspective drawings for more than 20 years (by hand). Usually you put the projection panel on the other side (left of the crossing point) otherwise you get a reversed image (as happen in cameras & inside your eye, other weirdness) The point is not whether i understand perspective, the point is whether you understand how weird is the world as you see it around you everyday, at any moment, standing still or moving. One example is the rays of light coming from the sun: try to explain to a kid that when he draws a circular sun and rays all around, that the radial rays are parallel. You will need 12 years of education. One other example is the constant velocity that we almost never observe as constant (see the other thread). the only way to observe constant velocity is to make a train circulate all around you, and then the mathematician will explain that it is accelerating (because it changes direction constantly)! One 3rd example is that when you move your head, the world around you changes: we are so used to it that it looks trivial but it is not. We are victims of being embedded inside the geometry. We believe that it is "natural", "evident", "normal" but in fact it is baffling. If you are not baffled then you are not understanding anything. At the beginning of the 20th Century some artists were perturbated by the fact that you cannot represent in painting all the faces of reality. See Cubism. These were not scientist but at least they realized that the way we are apprehending the world is weird. The rays of light that we see are converging into our eyes, see Janus diagram above.
  7. It is not a difficult question: How are they received?
  8. Right, the rays are emitted and diverging. We all agree. How are they received?
  9. Maybe you looked early when I was editing. I posted: Interesting, I have never observed something like that. Usually I see the sunset at one side and (almost) black sky on the other side. Like in your fish eye picture. Editing again, I looked at your link where my display gives a better resolution of the fish eye. Again I have never observed anything like that. But we are not talking about the rays that do not reach the Earth. And the fact that the intensity drops down is irrelevant. However I understand that the square law is a result of geometry. (surprisingly because the geometry is plane, 2d, while the sphere is 3d). So intuitively it should be a cube law, contrarily to what is happening. (edited because irrelevant) Anyways I still hope that everybody (except 2 or 3 respected members of this Forum) consider that the sun rays that reach the Earth are parallel. As stated in Eise link: https://www.atoptics.co.uk/atoptics/anti1.htm
  10. Of course they don't radiate perpendicular to the Sun's surface, that's why I draw the orange ones in my sketch. The rays we receive are the ones between the orange triangle. My sketch is not wrong. I don't see we are disagreeing anywhere. The grey rays in my sketch are indicative. As I said, we are receiving rays from the entire surface of the Sun. Interesting, I have never observed something like that. Usually I see the sunset at one side and (almost) black sky on the other side. Like in your fish eye picture. Nonsense?? The discussion is about the direction of the rays, not about their intensity. And if you can draw "less than 1 pixel" be my guest.
  11. The sun's intensity is irrelevant. The rays would be divergent if the Sun was a point but the Sun is huge compared to the Earth. Since the Earth receives rays from the entire surface of the sun (not only from its center) in fact the surface of the Earth receives converging rays (the orange ones on the sketch below). But because the Sun is so far away (much more than in the sketch), the rays are considered reaching the surface in a parallel way. The grey rays on the sketch are spread around the Sun through the universe and do not reach the Earth. If you compare the sketch with the picture, you will see that what we are observing is exactly the contrary of what is happening.
  12. It has been closed. I was looking for a forum about Geometry. The meaning is to show that we are so deeply inserted into geometry to the point we don't even take notice of it.
  13. I couldn't find a better place. Of course there is an answer. It is not a theory.
  14. The rays of the sun that hit the planet Earth are parallel, we know that. Even ancient Greek Eratosthenes knew that because he used this particularity for measuring the Earth's radius. Then the question arises: why at the sunset do we see the sun rays converging towards the sun? (it is a sequel of an old thread I cannot find back)
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.