Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Here we have the ๐˜Š๐˜ข๐˜ฏ๐˜ช๐˜จ๐˜ฐ๐˜ถ ๐˜”๐˜ฐ๐˜ถ๐˜ฏ๐˜ต๐˜ข๐˜ช๐˜ฏ๐˜ด observed from over ๐Ÿ๐Ÿ”๐ŸŽ ๐ฆ๐ข๐ฅ๐ž๐ฌ away at an observer height of ๐Ÿ,๐ŸŽ๐ŸŽ๐ŸŽ ๐Ÿ๐ž๐ž๐ญ. The ๐ญ๐š๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ž๐ฌ๐ญ peak in the range stands at ๐Ÿ—,๐Ÿ๐Ÿ‘๐Ÿ” ๐Ÿ๐ž๐ž๐ญ. According to the globe earth model, these mountains should be hidden behind over ๐Ÿ—,๐Ÿ—๐Ÿ”๐Ÿ– ๐Ÿ๐ž๐ž๐ญ of curvature. In fact, this...

43,766 views โ€ข 1 year ago โ€ขvia X (Twitter)

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Do you think that by the folly of man, the glory of God can be diminished? . I tell you, no kingdom of this earth, no rebellion of heart, no blasphemy of tongue can ever tarnish the majesty of the Almighty. His glory is not made by the hands of men, nor is it undone by their defiance. . Consider the arrogance of those who refuse to kneel, who claim that their disbelief can unmake the Creator. They are like madmen in a darkened cell, scratching the word โ€˜darknessโ€™ upon the walls as though, by their crude mark, they could blot out the sun. But tell me, does the sun diminish because it is unseen by the blind? Does its light falter because a lunatic curses its name? No, my friend. The sun remains, burning with relentless brilliance, giving life to all who dwell beneath it, whether they acknowledge it or not. . So it is with God. His glory is eternal, unshaken by the denial of men. He is the architect of the heavens, the One who breathed life into dust and set the stars upon their courses. His majesty does not depend on our worship, yet it is we who are diminished when we turn away. For in refusing to see His light, we do not extinguish itโ€”we only cast ourselves into the shadow of our own making. . Know that to deny God is not an act of power but of despair. It is the rejection of hope, the refusal to see the beauty written into the very fabric of existence. A man who scribbles darkness upon the walls of his soul does not conquer the light, he only blinds himself to it. Yet even in his rebellion, Godโ€™s glory shines undimmed. For the sun does not cease to rise because a man refuses to look upon it. And God does not cease to reign because His children wander from His embrace. . If you ever find yourself in doubt, remember this: the defiance of man is but a whisper against the roar of eternity. The glory of God is as unyielding as the mountains and as boundless as the sea. It is woven into the sunrise, the turning of the seasons, the song of creation itself. You cannot destroy it. You cannot unmake it. You can only choose whether to bask in its light or to linger in the shadows. . Take heart, then and do not be swayed by the noise of those who mock the divine. For their words are as fleeting as the wind but the glory of God is eternal. Acknowledge Him not because He needs your praise but because your soul needs His light. Worship Him not as a favor to the Almighty but as a declaration that you see, that you understand, that you are humbled by the grandeur of the One who crafted all that is and all that ever will be. . Godโ€™s glory is not diminished by denial, nor is it amplified by praise. But you, my friendโ€”you are elevated when you bow before the Eternal. You are strengthened when you trust in the One who holds the stars in place. And you are transformed when you abandon the shadows of pride and step into the radiance of His truth. . Remember this always: the lunatic may scrawl his defiance but he cannot extinguish the light. The doubter may deny the sun but he cannot halt its rise. And the world may rage against the King of Kings but it cannot dethrone Him. Stand firm, therefore, as one who walks in the light of God. Let your life be a testimony that His glory endures forever, unshaken, unyielding and undeniable. . For in the end, my friend, it is not God who is diminished by our defiance. It is we. And it is not the sun that falters when we turn awayโ€”it is the world that grows colder in its absence. #ChristIsKing #WeAreTheStorm

The Redeemed

56,357 views โ€ข 1 year ago

Norwayโ€™s fjords look like rivers cutting through the mountains. Theyโ€™re actually valleys carved by glaciers and later flooded by the sea. Once you know that, the landscape starts to make a little more sense. During the ice ages, glaciers pushed through Norwayโ€™s mountains over enormous stretches of time, grinding out deep valleys as they moved. When the ice eventually retreated, seawater filled many of those valleys. Norway ended up with more than 1,000 fjords. Geirangerfjord is probably the one Iโ€™d show someone who had never seen one before. The mountains rise almost straight out of the water. Waterfalls drop down the cliffs, including the Seven Sisters, and old farms sit on steep slopes in places that seem strangely difficult to reach. Geirangerfjord and nearby Nรฆrรธyfjord are protected together as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Nรฆrรธyfjord feels completely different. It narrows dramatically in places, putting you much closer to the mountains on either side. Sognefjord gives you a better idea of just how enormous these landscapes can be. It stretches more than 200 kilometers inland and reaches roughly 1,300 meters at its deepest point. Then you start finding the others. Hardangerfjord runs through orchard country, where apples and cider are part of the local culture. Lysefjord has Pulpit Rock rising high above the water. Farther north, Trollfjord is much shorter and tighter, with steep mountains closing in around the boats passing through it. After a while, โ€œseeing the fjordsโ€ starts to sound a little ridiculous. There are too many of them, and they arenโ€™t interchangeable. If I were going for the first time, Iโ€™d probably start with Geirangerfjord. It gives you the huge mountain-and-water view most people associate with Norway. But Iโ€™d want to see one of the quieter ones too. One where you get on a boat, watch the shoreline disappear behind you and realize the mountains youโ€™re looking at continue far below the surface of the water. Thatโ€™s the kind of thing I like writing about in the Timeless Traveler newsletter. Not just where somewhere is or what to see, but the detail that makes you look at it differently once you get there. Subscribe if that sounds like the way you like to travel too.

The Timeless Traveler ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ

28,493 views โ€ข 8 days ago

[Heo Seongbeom Youtube] 260305 Jin - Moon ๐ŸŒ•๐ŸŒ (part1) ๐Ÿ‘จโ€๐ŸซItโ€™s a solo song by Jin, and BTS are also preparing for a comeback in March. Iโ€™m really looking forward to it. Iโ€™m the moon, and you are the Earth. So it becomes a kind of love triangle. Earlier the sea loved the moon, but who does the moon love? The moon loves the Earth. That idea is reflected in this song, so letโ€™s try interpreting it. Since when have the moon and the Earth been together like this? Weโ€™ve been together for so long, but when did it start? About 4.51 to 4.53 billion years ago. Scientists figured this out through radioactive isotope analysis, which showed that the Moon is about 4.51 to 4.53 billion years old. โ€œShining just by existing.โ€ This line is directed at the Earth. But does the Earth actually shine just by existing? No. Because the Earth is a planet and does not produce its own light. If the Earth appears to shine, itโ€™s probably because of artificial lights made by humans. โ€œCan I stay by your side and protect you?โ€ It sounds shy, but in reality the moon canโ€™t help staying there, because itโ€™s bound by gravity. And here we see the main line of the song. โ€œYou are my Earth, and to you Iโ€™m just a moon. Your small star that lights up your heart.โ€ Itโ€™s poetic, but is the moon actually a star? No. Celestial bodies are generally divided into two categories. First, there are stars (stellar bodies). These produce their own light. Second, there are planets. Planets do not produce their own light. Instead, planets usually orbit around a star. The Earth is a planet. From our perspective, the star in our system is the Sun. So when you look at the night sky and see stars, those lights are actually other suns, each producing their own light. But sometimes when you see a particularly bright โ€œstar,โ€ it may actually be a planet like Mercury, Venus, Mars, or Jupiter. Then you might ask: if planets donโ€™t produce their own light, why do they shine? Because they reflect sunlight. The Moon also appears bright because it reflects the Sunโ€™s light. #JIN #๋ฐฉํƒ„์†Œ๋…„๋‹จ์ง„ ๋ฐฉํƒ„์†Œ๋…„๋‹จ

star_jin

19,019 views โ€ข 5 months ago

Thought experiment for people regarding the concept of Absolute Time. Absolute means NO EXCEPTIONS. We are NOT looking back in time when we see galaxies and stars. We are NOT looking back in time 1.25 seconds when we see the moon. We're Not looking back in time 3 minutes when we see Mars. We're Not looking back in time 8.33 minutes when we see the Sun. If an astronaut lit a matchstick on Mars, the distant observer would see predator heat waves at the top of the matchstick in real-time while the matchstick started to blacken towards the astronaut's fingers. But there would be no orange light from that chemical reaction or flame seen. If the matchstick burnt out before the packet of orange light from that particular chemical reaction made it to Earthโ€ฆ then the distant observer would just see a disembodied orange flash of light with a lag. But the Earth-bound observer would never actually see the flame associated with the orange wavelength it put out. The wavelength of color emitted by the flame is not a recording of reality. If the orange light is 650 Thz, that means there are 650 trillion individual and separate bursts of orange light pulsating in 1 second. NOT that "the same light" is "waving" 650 trillion times a second and that light is a recording of reality. There are 650 trillion brand-new lights flashing in 1 second. Each Hertz is a brand-new emission and packet unto itself. Time does not re-emit 650 trillion times a second, nor is a photon a particle or a packet of reality acting like the frame of a reel of footage. The orange light that already left the flame will continue to propagate out until it meets the electrons making up the distant observer. But remember, it is never the same light within that packet. And the electrons making up the observer will absorb all of those different lights within that packet and re-emit brand-new lights that produce the product of illumination. A photon is a massless packet of energy, spherically expanding at the rate of c from the source it comes from. Illumination is the result of that energy being absorbed and RE-emitted by any other electrons that did not output that primary packet. But time is not associated with the same light. It's never the same light and time does not re-emit between packets. Time is not relative. Do NOT allow your mind Carte Blanche to think along the lines of relative time. DROP IT for this thought experiment. We are thinking along the lines of ABSOLUTE TIME/ Galilean VARIANCE. What does absolute time mean? It means time is constant in ALL frames of reference. Any frequency shifts between atomic clocks IS a literal change in the speed of light. But relativity forbids the speed of light from Ever changing, so relativity (Lorentz INVARIANCE) invented the concept of the 4th dimension and space-time. Because Relativity doesn't allow light speed to shift.. they interpret the same frequency shift between atomic clocks as being conclusive, irrefutable evidence that time and reality itself shifts. Rather than say it's just that ONE clock being affected by Earth's gravity and the oscillation of that ONE cesium clock is being altered compared to other clocks. People don't realize that in relativity... time dilation is SYMMETRICAL! Not even most relativists know their own theory. If Clock A and Clock B are synchronized and together... and then they accelerate apart... Einstein said Clock A would see Clock B as being slower itself. And Clock B would view Clock A as slower than ITself. NOT that only one observer would see back in time and the other would see forward or not at all. No... BOTH observers are supposed to see each other BACK in time relative to each other according to Einstein and the consequence of the math. It doesn't make ANY sense!! But relativists toss that part of time dilation under their 4th dimensional rug. The rug is woven from threads of gold that only the smart people can see apparently. So... here's a thought experiment/ Gedankenexperiment for absolute time. NO paradoxes... no nonsense or confusion. What do you see in a club? You see disco lights changing and a color wheel effect. You see everyone in REAL-TIME. Not just because they are so close to the lights. Light is not a recording of reality. Light is simply color. Illuminating reality in a certain color. Just because you can't see something yet or the color hasn't reached you doesn't mean it isn't happening in real-time. Zoom out and look at the people in the club through binoculars a mile away. You are still looking at them in real-time. The colors are shifting with a delay in the club. Now look at the club through a telescope from the surface of the moon. You're still looking at the people in real-time. But now there is a lag of the colors shifting by 1.25 seconds because it takes light 1.25 seconds to travel from the Earth to the moon. Now look at the club through an even bigger telescope from the surface of Mars. You're still looking at the people in real-time, but now there is a lag of the colors shifting by 3 minutes because it takes light 3 minutes to travel from Earth to Mars. fr you are a third hypothetical observer zoomed out and watching the person from Mars AND seeing the club on Earth... you're still seeing everything happening in real-time as well. But you see the colored wavepackets traveling with a delay to the observer on Mars. And the disco color wheel effect is just lagging before it affects the observer from Mars and the observer on the Moon. It doesn't matter how far you zoom out! There is only now to observe. But there WILL be a lag and delay for a given color/wavepacket to reach distant observers. But all points in space are already illuminated by other starlight. So if you're too far away... you'll just see the club in real-time but without any disco lights. Just see them in white light because that's the source already illuminating the scene. This is where it gets the most difficult because people think light itself is a recording of reality that replays a scene from where it came from. But another punch in the gut of relativity is that in order to see REFLECTED light... that would require a TWO-WAY transit. Which means the light would have to be sent out... record the scene of a distant event and then RETURN in order to REplay the event. Which means it would take 6 minutes to see the club from Mars by that logic and 2.5 seconds to see the club from the moon by that logic. The difference in tick rates between clocks has NOTHING to do with time dilation. Wait.. what?! How can that be? Because a clock itself doesn't represent all of time and reality. The difference between clocks is a "Transverse relative time shift." If the only light in the universe was from the lighterโ€ฆ the only way a distant observer would be able to see the astronaut on Mars is if the astronaut held down the button of the lighter for longer than 3 minutes. It takes 3 minutes for the packet of light to travel from Mars to Earth. The distant observer would never be able to see Mars, unless the light stretched from Mars all the way to Earth, and illuminated the path between Mars and Earth. And that would take 3 minutes for the boundary and first part of that wave packet to reach Earth. But if the distant observer wanted to observe Mars in real-timeโ€ฆ then that packet of light would have to be on for longer than 3 minutes. So if the astronaut on Mars flicked the lighter at 12:00, the distant observer on Earth wouldn't see anything until 12:03. If the light was on for 3 minutes and 10 seconds, and the distant observer is 3 light minutes away... ๏ฟผthe distant observer would be able to see Mars in real-time for 10 seconds starting at 12:03. In the 20 second video clip of the rotating planet with shifting colors... just imagine you're a couple light minutes or light seconds away. You're still seeing the planet spin in real-time. But there is simply a delay of switching colors. You are Not looking back in time. It's just a color wheel effect from a great distance away. That's it!! There are many major flaws which tarnish people's critical thinking on this thought experiment. 1. Light does NOT ricochet or bounce. Electrons absorb, emit and re-emit ALL electromagnetic radiation. The electrons, making up the glass of a mirror will absorb the incoming light and re-emit a brand-new light as an equal and opposite reaction. NOT that "the same light" bounced off the mirror and continued on within the same frame of reference. ๏ฟผ 2. Light is NOT a recording of reality. 3. It is NOT the same light being observed from a source. It's never the same light. Each Hertz is a new light. Think of half of a sine wave as being its own emission. On an oscilloscope, a stimulus generates a peak which initiates an equal and opposite trough. Or vice versa. That repeating process is not "the same light." If you cut and paste that sine wave to another sine wave, the boundary between the waves will always be in phase. (thus refraction) 4. The speed of light is NOT the same in ALL frames of reference, no matter what. 5. Light is NOT made of particles and waves that flip back-and-forth. 6. Time is NOT connected to the speed of light. Time remains constant regardless if you accelerate towards or away from a clock. The clocks themselves will indeed be off! But that's an affect on the electrons making up the atomic clock affecting the oscillation of the isotope which is ASSUMED to ALWAYS be the same. So ANY difference in oscillation is treated as a literal distortion in space-time. 7. Space and time are not linked at all. That is a mathematical artifice under Lorentz invariance. Time is relative under Lorentz invariance. But time is absolute under Galilean VARIANCE. When people hear or see the word GALILEAN... their brains switch to auto pilot to "aether theory" and "classical physics." What people don't realize is that aether theory used Galilean INVARIANCE. Rather than space-time being used as an excuse to explain the difference in frequencies between atomic clocks... it was originally aether being used as an excuse to keep the speed of light the same. But None of those things are valid! We are thinking under the framework of Galilean VARIANCE! Completely new revolutionary model returning to Isaac Newton and Classical physics but without the corpuscular theory (particle) theory for light... without a particle-wave duality... without an aether... without a 4th dimension. Just good ol elementary math within 3D Euclidean space. Everything happening in real-time, right now. This reformulation of Galilean transformations was offered by Dr. Edward Dowdye in 1991 called The Extinction Shift Principle. Effectivity as opposed to Relativity. If light required a two-way transit, in order to travel outโ€ฆ Record an event, and travel back to replay the recordingโ€ฆ ๏ฟผ then it would take 6 minutes to see the astronaut on Mars instead of 3. ๏ฟผ Rememberโ€ฆ They say the SAME light is a recording, and must travel there and travel back in order to REplay. Relativity says time is relative: t' โ‰  t time is NOT the same from all frames of reference) and t = tโ‚’ / โˆš1 - vยฒ/cยฒ but Galilean Variance says time is not relative: t' = t (Time IS the same from all frames of reference) and ฯ„_tr = ฯ„โ‚’ / โˆš1 - vยฒ/cยฒ Relativity says c' = c (The velocity of light is the same from all frames of reference) but Galilean variance says c' โ‰  c (The velocity of light is NOT the same from all frames of reference) and that c' = c ยฑ v (The velocity of light in one frame of reference is dependent upon the velocity of the light source relative to an observer in another frame of reference. Whether that light source is approaching or receding away from that observer) Relativity says E = mcยฒ (Energy and mass are universally equivalent and literally interchangeable under All conditions.) but Galilean variance says E = ฮ”mcยฒ = mโ‚’cยฒ (Energy changes in a system are the result from changes in mass. mโ‚’ represents the original mass. Mass and energy do not literally interchange. There is an equivalence, not an interchange.) The Rebirth of Classical Physics: Time, Light & Gravity Star light and illumination: Flicking a Lighter on Mars visual example:

TheRealVerbz (Jason Verbelli)

16,608 views โ€ข 1 year ago

"You can't explain 'day/night, Seasons, Equinox, and 24 hour daylight* on Flat Earth" Sure I can. *not sunlight The concept of day and night on a flat Earth involves several key ideas related to optics and perception rather than the presumption of physical rotation of a spherical Earth. [FlatGPT Explain sunlight and day/night as if to a child] On a flat Earth, the sun is often depicted as moving in a circular path above the plane. This movement is the cause of the cycle of day and night as different areas come into and out of the sun's light. As the sun sets, it's daylight is still visible for a time until it soon vanishes. Atmospheric conditions like refraction and diffraction affect how we perceive the sun's position and are a large contributing factor to the apparent position of the sun or moon. The idea is that the human eye has a limit to its angular resolution, which affects how we perceive distant objects. This limit could cause objects, including the sun, to become unresolvable at a distance, giving the illusion of setting or disappearing beyond the horizon. The perception of the sun moving across the sky and creating day and night is attributed to perspective. As the sun moves away, it appears to set. And as it approaches, it appears to rise. The sun's light only covers only a portion of the Earth at any given time, (this is true in both models) creating areas of light and darkness. Depending upon the season, and the corresponding height of the sun, the distribution of daylight changes accordingly. The areas of light and darkness are directly determined by the sun's position and height relative to the plane. IF you imagine the Earth as a flat plane with the North Pole at its center and Antarctica defining its boundaries, then it could be said the sun revolves around the Earth in a defined, limited, and cyclical path. During the northern hemisphere's summer, the sun moves closer to the Tropic of Cancer, illuminating the northern regions and creating longer days. As the sun moves southward towards the Tropic of Capricorn, it illuminates the southern hemisphere while the northern hemisphere experiences shorter days and cooler temperatures. The sun's continuous cycle and limited journey creates the familiar patterns of day and night, as well as the changing seasons. Due to the restricted reach of the sun's rays, only half of the Earth is illuminated at any given time, while the other half remains in darkness. In summary, day and night on a flat Earth are driven by the sun's cyclical movement around the Earth, illuminating different regions as it travels between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn. The limited reach of the sun's rays causes half of the Earth to be in daylight while the other half experiences night. Don't let math be your undoing after all those years of bragging and condescension globies. A cardioid in parametric representation: ๐‘ฅ(๐œ‘)=2๐‘Ž(1โˆ’cosโก๐œ‘)โ‹…cosโก๐œ‘ , ๐‘ฆ(๐œ‘)=2๐‘Ž(1โˆ’cosโก๐œ‘)โ‹…sinโก๐œ‘ , 0โ‰ค๐œ‘<2๐œ‹ ๐Ÿคทโ€โ™‚๏ธ and inpolar coordinates: ๐‘Ÿ(๐œ‘)=2๐‘Ž(1โˆ’cosโก๐œ‘). ๐Ÿ˜‚ Day/night + seasons: Seasons with Chad: Daylight distribution: Daylight Distribution is equal on ANY map projection: The FE Model The Parrot: Just to hammer this home. The Model. The Video and Model Description: Here is an interactive Flat Earth Model that can explain Sunrise, The model is stolen!: Bendy Light: Misunderstanding the model and lightrays: Starman the the claims of heliocentricity: Show me the code: Misunderstanding The sun and the 'distance' These scale ops are because the celestial coord of the sun and moon are expressed as unit vectors. You scale by the distance to get the position of the object in space in the hemispherical view of the observer. It's used when calc the moon phases well, after scaling by using scalar product of moon and sun direction vectors. If anyone makes claims you cannot answer, send them to me. Cant refute anything.

Shane St Pierre

18,951 views โ€ข 2 years ago