Though even then, the sun would never go below the horizon, it would fly off in a stright line and disappear. Going below the horizon only works on a globe
“it doesn’t need to go over the horizon to disappear in the distance”, but the problem is that it does go over the horizon rather than disappearing, as anyone who’s seen a sunset can attest
so most visible stars are about 1000 light years away. And they’re still visible. And our sun obviously cannot travel at least over 1000 light years twice a day.
Though even then, the sun would never go below the horizon, it would fly off in a stright line and disappear. Going below the horizon only works on a globe
The idea is that the light is small and close. It doesn’t need to go over the horizon to disappear in the distance.
I’m not sure how they explain the random pattern the light would need to travel for different seasons or why it looks so massive as it rises or sets.
“it doesn’t need to go over the horizon to disappear in the distance”, but the problem is that it does go over the horizon rather than disappearing, as anyone who’s seen a sunset can attest
Following their own logic, you should be able to see the sun with enough magnification.
Well that’s your problem right there: you’re using logic.
deleted by creator
Maybe not truly logical, but there is definitely an attempt at logic as well as experiments.
The documentary Beyond the Globe was kinda funny, sad and interesting all at once.
The magic word is refraction. It explains everything.
so most visible stars are about 1000 light years away. And they’re still visible. And our sun obviously cannot travel at least over 1000 light years twice a day.
For reference a light year is about 63241 times further than the distance between the earth and sun.