Złóż trójkąt w środku i na zewnątrz kulistej miski, i powiedz mi, co masz.
I have provided you with an experiment, and you have denied it can work without trying it ( posts#34-36-42-44). That's from Google translate by the way, so all you other folks can look up what I said. I figure maybe you are only pretending to understand English. All it says is that if you run your finger pressing down on the inside and outside of a spherical bowl to draw a triangle, you will prove to yourself that the triangle drawn inside is less than 180 degrees, but the one outside is greater. Then go take a boat around for a trip, and see what angles you get. This is as I posted to you earlier.
My experience with Polish is limited to being introduced to God by Catholic Polish nuns. You remind me of them. Fortunately, I did not remain a child forever.
Heliocentric and rotating are different. Those are arbitrary choices of scientists and cannot be proved.
Thank you very much! You have to be careful. For such statement you can be removed from this forum.
Since we can't prove it, why change was made!?
BTW. Nice Polish! Dobra robota.
Gong back to that triangle - here is a slightly modified version of the pic from the link you have provided.
That triangle from outside looks like line a convex but from inside looks like a concave. It's the same triangle and inside Earth - assuming that we are inside - we will do exactly the same journey. It's like traveling along of equator inside or outside the Earth. Exactly the same distance and journey. And nothing proven.
OK. Let's try with something serious, shall we?
Are you aware, that light does not travel in straight lines and bends up? It's designed like that and works perfectly inside Earth.
The proof is in any rectilineator or big binoculars or telescope.
[video=youtube;Wn0O_4ihADM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Wn0O_4ihADM[/video]
That's just a visual expression some ideas and it's very interesting fragment thy ere, where an egg simulating Earth is opened, and we could see how is to be inside Earth. Very interesting.
Of course the person who discovered bending of light is so smeared by almost everybody, but... his research can't be proven wrong. To the contrary - he is proven right again and again.
As I've said before in geodesy there are solid evidences not only that light bends up, but also that is well known is some circles, that Earth is concave, because
geodesy must work for us but will not if Earth is convex!
There is interesting calculation. Lets say you are on the shore of Indian Ocean and you feet are just touching the water.
So you are on the 0 see level.
Now your eyes if you are 175 cm would be an level 160 cm. Correct?
So here is the main point.
You horizon should be on the distance 4.5 km.
That means that you would be able to see up to 4.5 km and further is impossible because the Earth is a convex and objects are beyond the visibility point - beyond 4.5 KM!
For things to be even more interesting, the light is bending up so your horizon should even is shorter distance than 4.5 km.
But 4.5 km is not what we see, especially when we are using binoculars. Binoculars are reducing that light bent significantly and using them we see much further because the bent is gone.
Here is the solid proof.
That pic is made from height about 4m. Distance to city center of Perth from the Rottenest island is about 32-35 km.
If Earth is a convex such view would be absolutely impossible. But everybody, who are living in the shore city can observe what can be seen, how binoculars are working and what's the difference in viewing through binoculars or without them.
Difference in view in binoculars is the solid prof of light bending.
Such picture is a solid proof of Earth being a concave.
If Earth is convex, it's impossible to see what we see.
More interesting pictures in this link to my forum.
Wewn�trzny kosmos, pusta ziemia - gdzie mieszkamy? - www.zbawieniecom.fora.pl
Still today ANY rectilineator will show without any doubts, that light bends up and that's bending is hidden form the public.
There are more evidences available.
If you want to check for yourself that equation - how to calculate distance of horizon regards of height of observer, I will post it in the next post!
