Solar Eclipse

[tim_from_pa]

11 hours ago, Jedi4Yahweh said:

The point is not to replicate the Sun and Moon but to prove you can not get a smaller shadow than the object being projected upon...in any situation.   

Actually, it depends on the geometry of the situation. Fortunately the sun is out this morning so I managed to get photos before it goes away. They are calling for clouds and rain.  In the first photo I hold a ruler up close to the paper - I traced lines on the paper the width of the ruler and you can see a sharp shadow.  About 6 feet away from the paper the shadow is "about the same size" but about half of it is penumbra (this otherwise makes a "fuzzy" shadow I was talking about).  The actual dark area is only half the width of the lines and I would expect that as geometrically speaking the triangle made by the width of this ruler would come to a point 12' away. The penumbra actually expands which is why the "fuzzy shadow" looks roughly the same size (see dotted line area of my drawing in the next post memory was too large).  I was about half that distance thus half the size for the umbra.  I included a diagram to show the triangles (next post) I am talking about.  An eyeball within that triangular area  would not see the sun at all. The penumbra region one would see a partial blockage of the sun and beyond that the sun is not blocked at all.  Now, all that said, if the light was a point source (see my second drawing) the shadow would get larger. 

[tim_from_pa]

11 hours ago, Jedi4Yahweh said:

The point is not to replicate the Sun and Moon but to prove you can not get a smaller shadow than the object being projected upon...in any situation.   

Here's the drawings:

[Jedi4Yahweh]

11 hours ago, tim_from_pa said:

Actually, it depends on the geometry of the situation. Fortunately the sun is out this morning so I managed to get photos before it goes away. They are calling for clouds and rain.  In the first photo I hold a ruler up close to the paper - I traced lines on the paper the width of the ruler and you can see a sharp shadow.  About 6 feet away from the paper the shadow is "about the same size" but about half of it is penumbra (this otherwise makes a "fuzzy" shadow I was talking about).  The actual dark area is only half the width of the lines and I would expect that as geometrically speaking the triangle made by the width of this ruler would come to a point 12' away. The penumbra actually expands which is why the "fuzzy shadow" looks roughly the same size (see dotted line area of my drawing in the next post memory was too large).  I was about half that distance thus half the size for the umbra.  I included a diagram to show the triangles (next post) I am talking about.  An eyeball within that triangular area  would not see the sun at all. The penumbra region one would see a partial blockage of the sun and beyond that the sun is not blocked at all.  Now, all that said, if the light was a point source (see my second drawing) the shadow would get larger. 

I would advise not using a ruler.  The ruler could be slightly tilted or angled to make it thinner where the sun hits it.  I would recommend using two quarters or two tennis balls or something similar where we can actually compare them side by side.

Edited April 6 by Jedi4Yahweh

[Jedi4Yahweh]

9 hours ago, tim_from_pa said:

Here's the drawings:

This is how light and shadows work in reality:

...but this is what they want to feed us about the eclipses, to explain why the moon's shadow is so much smaller than the moon, because this can not be reproduced in any real experiment where the shadow is smaller than the object.

Edited April 5 by Jedi4Yahweh

[tim_from_pa]

On 4/5/2024 at 6:52 PM, Jedi4Yahweh said:

This is how light and shadows work in reality:

...but this is what they want to feed us about the eclipses, to explain why the moon's shadow is so much smaller than the moon, because this can not be reproduced in any real experiment where the shadow is smaller than the object.

No, that's wrong because the checked one shows a point source which I also showed. What about points of light from the top or the bottom of the sun (a disk source)?  We can reverse this. Hold your hand over a distant object.  If you move your hand closer the object, it covers less.  If you move your hand closer to your eyes, it will cover more.   What your drawing effectively shows is as I move further from my hand (or moving it closer to the object) that it covers MORE of the objects in the distance. That's clearly wrong. The sun is a half degree in angular size, so anything covering that must also be that same size or larger from your vantage point. I don't understand what you don't understand about that.  My experiment with the ruler shown clearly about the umbra.  And BTW, what do you mean "What they feed us"?  In that case, I am one of the "theys" because I am geometrically correct on this.  I'm telling ya, I am into astronomy, navigation and make sundials (and I can make them work anywhere on this spherical earth by calculation) and shadows are a big thing when considering them.  Now I know what I am talking about.  Why? because they work.

[tim_from_pa]

Here's photos I took to entertain the OP this time using a tennis ball, but I did not tilt the ruler earlier. When the ball is near, it's about it's real size 2.5", when far, the umbra is closer to 2". Yes, I know my deck railing needs a paint job. LOL

[Sower]

1 hour ago, tim_from_pa said:

Yes, I know my deck railing needs a paint job. LOL

I disagree. It took a long time to get the nice patina, aged wonderfully.
People pay big money to get that nice aged look today.
Even new clothing with 'old aged' holes now costs more.....
A home.

Nice post Tim..   

[JohnD]

All I know is it's totally weird to see the little half circles of light under trees (projected on the ground through the leafs) during a partial eclipse and the major darkness drop in a total eclipse (or super tall thunder storm for that matter). It's unnatural. 

I do recall during a partial eclipse looking at the sun (with eye protection USE EYE PROTECTION [like a welder's mask] if you look ! ! ! or you'll lose your eye sight). And it gave me a strong sense of depth of field (me to moon,  moon to sun). Almost like looking over the moon's shoulder at the sun.

But other than that it was no more spectacular to actually see than looking at a photo of it online.

Be safe (and and all who are in the path of the eclipse today) ! ! !

[JohnD]

On 4/5/2024 at 5:52 PM, Jedi4Yahweh said:

This is how light and shadows work in reality:

...but this is what they want to feed us about the eclipses, to explain why the moon's shadow is so much smaller than the moon, because this can not be reproduced in any real experiment where the shadow is smaller than the object.

One must also remember that the sun is a giant ball at its source but is in fact a star as luminous as the distant stars we see over trillions and trillions of miles away. The sphere of the sun's influence is many times greater than its actual source, and that sphere cannot be totally blocked out by the moon which can only block the source temporarily.

I call it the right-angle of light.

Light is strange in that sense. In the vast darkness of space, you can look across that sphere of influence and see the darkness beyond and look to a planet or other body further away from the light source to see the reflection of the light source within that greater sphere of influence. One would think (using our monkey brains) that the entire sphere of influence should be lit up like a room with a lamp turned on. It has something to do with the nature of light (mixture of particle and wave) but also the vastness of space.

Let's the last bit of air out of the flat earth belief.

 

 

[JohnD]

Curved space-time is peculiar.

It is curved and has a compressing effect on all things from that curved state (which produces gravity) ← I've gone round and round with physicists / armchair cosmologists on this who can never quite accept that the universe pushes back against the mass and energy that displaces it producing what we call gravity.

They can't explain gravity. They just believe I'm wrong / what I teach can't be true. Period.

Curved space-time also invokes equatorial plains (the rings around Jupiter and Saturn for example). And the flatness of spiral galaxies. 

Add in the right-angle of light, the upwelling of curved space-time causing it to expand over the universe... and the rarity of the precise conditions necessary for life to exist on this one infinitesimally small planet... and it all adds up to an intricately designed cosmos (meaning a Designer exists, who designed and created it) for a very specific purpose. And we have only to read the divinely inspired Bible to learn what the purpose is. For this Grande Designer Creator of the unimaginable greatness and vastness of all that exists is completely capable of communicating with the human  race. And by God's traits, his ability to see the future before it happens / and to inspire 40 different authors on 3 different continents over 1500 + years to write the same narrative (and each using their own communication skills without deviating from the overall theme) assures us that the Judeo-Christian Bible is in fact the very Word of God. 

Read it, study it under the tutelage of the Holy Spirit who wrote the Bible through the prophets (2 Peter 1:20-21) with a vengeance. A time is coming when the Bible will be taken from us or we will be kept from it (Revelation 12:17 / Revelation 13:7).