Yes, this is so, no matter how ridiculous it may seem to someone - in the Russian segment of the Internet there is a huge number of messages in which they seriously assert that the Earth is flat and covered with a dome, a small sun revolves above it, space programs are conspiracy. An impressive number of analytical "exposures" of the heliocentric system of the world are provided.
Friends, the Earth is round, the Earth revolves around its axis, the Earth revolves around the Sun, Yuri Alekseevich Gagarin flew into space. Below, I will explain why in the form of answers to the main statements of people interested in this topic. Moreover, I will not refer to any formulas in textbooks, official photographs and videos of Roscosmos, “buy a ticket to Antarctica or a place on the ISS”, etc. Not. As an example I will give facts that are verified by my own vision, observations and logic, experience with a lamp and a lantern, the Sun, a camera, anyone can contact a person living on another continent, talk and ask to show the sky through the window, this is not a ticket to Antarctica.
Before that, I would like to add one thought. I noticed a clearly traced thing - a person who begins to get involved in this topic - and it is undoubtedly attractive both for young men (overwhelmingly) and for mature people. After all, it is based on radical denial and maximalism, on the "touch" of mystery; and the people participating in all this are mostly interesting, intelligent, not crazy, charismatic personalities. So, interest in conspiracy theories and revelations in a fashionable fantasy about a flat earth and a dome necessarily leads to the final link in the logical chain, shaped into the main message: "the Russian leadership is also a participant in the conspiracy - Putin is a participant in the conspiracy - the system must be changed."
This wave began in the English-speaking segment of the Internet several years ago, and was mainly promoted by radical believers. It also subsided there, causing a scientific response wave. As the materials penetrated / translated into the Russian-speaking space, the wave accelerated with us. And the response (scientific) wave has not yet reached us.
And the last thing - what happens to the information about the flat earth reminds me very much of the scheme from Efimov's lecture: instead of choosing between truth and lies, people are shoved a choice between lies and lies. No one denies that there is much wrongly arranged in the world and a lot of injustice. Instead of seeing the essence and viciousness of geopolitical, economic and social processes, we are presented with a "flat earth".
So,
Statement # 1
Promotional video:
The Earth is a limited circular plane, above this plane rotates (along an oval trajectory) a small "sun" located at a low altitude (most say about ~ 5000 km). "Passing" over a certain area of the "plane", the "sun" illuminates it, determining the day, while over the rest of the "plane" - night.
Figure 1. Hypothetical model of the rotation of the "sun" and the “ moon ” over a flat earth.
Figure 2. A hypothetical plan for a flat earth. On this scale, Everest is not even visible
Rebuttal. Light travels in a straight line. The rectilinear propagation of light is easy to check by the most elementary experiments and experiments that do not require high-precision technical devices.
If those who are fond of alternative science will argue that light spreads according to other principles, this is already the basis for an even more extravagant teaching and a subject for another dispute.
Based on the fact of the rectilinear propagation of light, the change of day and night in the “flat earth” model is impossible. The "sun" and "moon" in a model such as in Figure 2 will be visible all the time.
Figure 3. If the Earth were flat, the "sun" would be visible from any point on the plane. Why? There is no such configuration for the “ sun ” and any point on the plane could not be connected with a straight line
Even if the "sun", moving away from the point of observation, would decrease and decrease in size to a barely noticeable point (which does not actually happen), all the same, the light rays emanating from it would reach the observation point located on the far edge of the "plane". Even if we take into account that most of the light from the "sun" would be scattered by clouds and the atmosphere, the night, such as we observe it every day, would never have come. This would be observed even if the hypothetical "sun" was at an altitude of 1000 km, even 500 km or 50 km. Moreover, even if the hypothetical "sun" moved at a height of 1 meter from the surface of the earth and most of the light rays emitted parallel to the earth were blocked at a distance by the irregularities of the landscape, all the same, the light emitted up and to the sides would illuminate the sky and reflect from the clouds. The nights would never be dark
Video 1. Inconsistency of the flat model of the Earth on the basis of inconsistency with the real principles of light propagation. Sorry, in English, duration 3 minutes
Statement # 2
The sun in the "flat earth" model is a source of concentrated light flux - in other words, an object like a searchlight. Therefore, on that area of the "plane" of the Earth, where the "ray" of the sun-searchlight falls, it is day, and outside the boundaries of the illuminated area - night. That is why such a "sun" is not visible from other edges of the "plane" at night.
Rebuttal. We still see (and can photograph) a directed light flux (even laser) from the side, because the light is reflected from the smallest particles of dust and vapor in the air.
Figure 4. Photo of the Lantern Beam
Figure 5. Photo of the lighthouse beam
Figure 6. Photo Laser Beam
Any concentrated light source consists of two basic things - a light source that emits on ALL sides (filament, gas) and a reflector that concentrates and directs the light. However, the reflector does not concentrate 100% of the light flux, therefore, even if we are outside the zone of the light beam, if the plane of the reflector outlet is at an angle to us, we will see not only the light beam itself, but also its bright base (reflector outlet) (Figure 7).
Figure 7. If the observer is inside the plane of the reflector outlet, he will see the bright base of the beam
If the hypothetical "sun searchlight" were located at an altitude of 5000 km, from the most distant point on the plane, both the searchlight beam and the light source (the "solar reflector" hole) would still be visible, which, moreover, changed its shape depending on the slope and distance (Figure 8).
Figure 8. The greater the viewing angle in relation to the reflector, the more distorted its shape. If the shape is round, then at a large angle it will be seen as oval
If the "searchlight-sun" were located at a lower height (10-50 km), then to illuminate half of the "plane" on which the day is observed, the diameter of the reflector hole must be huge, or the light source must be located very close to the hole, significantly increasing the viewing angle or brightness from the side (Figure 9).
Figure 9
In addition, from a point located on the border of the area illuminated by the ray of the "searchlight-sun" and unlit, when looking at the sky, a clear boundary between the illuminated and unlit parts would be observed. In other words, there would be no twilight.
Figure 9.a. Even if the Sun were a “ spotlight ”, we would still see the light source, being in an unlit area.
Statement # 3
Sometimes it can be seen in photographs and videos that the rays of the sun diverge at an angle ("crepuscular rays"). This suggests that the sun is not millions of kilometers away, but "located close to the surface of the Earth."
Figure 10. Photo of Twilight Rays at Sunset. The impression that the sun is directly behind the clouds
Figure 11. Photography Twilight rays at sunrise. The impression that the sun is directly behind the tree
Rebuttal. Light travels in a straight line. All light rays coming from the Sun, located at a distance of millions of kilometers, to the Earth are parallel. Twilight rays are an optical effect caused by the passage of light through dense (opaque) objects - clouds, tree branches, etc. Passing through gaps in opaque objects, light is divided into separate, clearly visible, light beams. When viewed from the ground, from the area where these beams fall, due to the visual effect of perspective, it seems that the rays are emanating in different directions from one point, which is very close (tens of kilometers, kilometers, and even meters).
For example, in these photos, the Sun appears to be located directly behind the tree crowns:
Figure 12 Photography Twilight rays in the forest
Figure 13 Photography Twilight rays in the forest
Schematically, the following is observed - if you look from the side (Figure 14, left block), you can understand that the rays falling on the place "A", where the person is standing, are parallel. However, due to perspective, if we look at the sky from point "A" (Figure 14, right block), the rays appear to diverge.
Figure 14
This can be explained even more clearly by the example of railway rails. Seen from the side, it is obvious that they are parallel:
Figure 15 Photography
However, due to the perspective, when viewed from the position between the rails, it seems that they converge. The same is observed when looking up at a tall building - it seems that the top of the building is narrower than its base:
Figure 16 Photography
Figure 16 Photography
Figure 17 Photography
This video (Michael Stevens, Vsauce), starting at 05:21, explains the effect of twilight rays (by the way, I recommend watching the video in full, it's quite interesting):
Video 2. Michael Stevens, Vsauce
Statement # 4
In some photos and videos, clouds can be seen passing in front of and behind the sun or moon. This suggests that the sun and moon are not millions of kilometers away, but "located close to the surface of the Earth."
For example, in this video:
Video 3
Rebuttal. The sun is a very bright object. So bright that it is recorded by most of the available photo and video cameras at the maximum brightness limit that photosensitive equipment can perceive.
If a cloud that is transparent enough to transmit a large amount of light enters the camera lens in front of the Sun, the brightness of the Sun in the area covered by this cloud will decrease. However, if the cloud is too transparent for the rays of the Sun, it will not be able to reduce its brightness so much that it will be recorded by the camera's light sensor. Therefore, the brightness of the open area of the Sun and the area covered by a cloud will still be higher than the maximum recorded limit of the camera, the brightness of these areas will be perceived as the same.
If the density of the cloud is sufficient to reduce the brightness of the Sun so that it falls below the maximum limit of the camera, the device will record the difference in the brightness of the open area of the Sun and the covered by the cloud.
Figure 18 Photo. For example, in this amateur photo, cloud A goes “ behind ” Sun, and clouds B and C are in front of the Sun
In the photo above, cloud "A" has a density that is insufficient to reduce the brightness of the Sun and it seems that it is behind the Sun, while clouds "B" and "C" reduce it to a degree sufficient for perception.
The following experiment shows this optical effect. The lantern is located behind a thick piece of cardboard, in which a hole has been cut, covered with a white sheet of paper. Films of different densities are applied to the hole. This is how the model looks with the flashlight off (the film covers the "sun"):
Figure 19 Photography
When you turn on the flashlight, the film is not visible against the background of the "sun", it seems that it passes behind it:
Figure 20 Photography
If you apply the following, denser film, it seems that the "sun" is between the two films:
Figure 21 Photography
This video shows the experience in more detail:
Video 4
Statement # 5
The zenith point of the Sun corresponds to the day in the summer, but should correspond to the night in six months, since the Earth will make half a revolution around the Sun. But 12:00 noon at any time of the year corresponds to a day. This is clearer in this video:
Video 5. "Helio-deception" !!!
Rebuttal … The Earth rotates around its axis by 360 degrees in 23 hours 56 minutes and 4 seconds. If the Earth did not revolve around the Sun, then this rotation of 360 degrees would correspond to a solar day - that is, the period from the position of the Sun at its zenith in the sky to the next position of the Sun at its zenith. However, the Earth rotates around the Sun - that is, during the period while the Earth rotates around its own axis, it will move a short distance around the Sun. Thus, at the end of the 360 degree revolution (23 hours 56 minutes and 4 seconds), the Sun will not yet be at its zenith because the Earth has moved slightly. In order for the Sun to return to the zenith, it takes another 3 minutes 56 seconds. Thus, a solar day is 24 hours from the Sun at its zenith to the Sun at its zenith, and 12:00 noon at any time of the year corresponds to a day.
Figure 22. Astronomical and solar days
Statement # 6
There is a video on the network where an amateur rocket is "stuck" into the "dome" of the Earth at an altitude of 117 km. The rocket flew, spinning rapidly, and at a certain moment it sharply slowed down. Here is the video:
Video 6. The rocket hits the dome of the Earth! The "theory" of a round earth is defeated !!!
Refutation. Let's leave aside the reflections on why the rocket did not fly to pieces from the impact on the "dome". Let's read about a device called "yo-yo de-spin", the purpose of which is to reduce the rotation of satellites at launch.
practical.engineering/blog/2016/3/21/yoyo-de
And here is another "sensational" video of how the rocket "sticks" into the dome:
Video 7. Tests
In principle, there are many such videos on the network, and detailed information about the device can be found.
Statement # 7
The stars in the sky are light sources (unspecified) located on a dome that covers a flat earth.
Refutation. Being in different parts of the planet and observing the night sky, we see different stars. It is impossible on a plane (we will see all the "stars" on the "dome" AT THE SAME TIME).
Figure 22. Schematic observation of stars on our planet
Figure 23. Schematic observation of stars on a hypothetical flat Earth
In addition, the planet rotates on its axis, so it also rotates relative to the stars in the night sky. If you install the camera perpendicularly upwards and set the maximum shutter speed, you can fix the trajectories of the stars (the so-called star backs). Stars coinciding with the Earth's axis of rotation are motionless in the sky (in astronomy they are called the ecliptic poles of the world), and the stars around them form concentric circles in long exposure photographs.
Thus, in the northern hemisphere, the pole of the world is the North Star (bright), and in the southern hemisphere, Sigma Octantis (dim).
Figure 24. Photo: North Pole of the World
Figure 25. Photo: South Pole of the World
Accordingly, the poles of the world are not observed near the ecliptic equator, and the stellar trajectories have the shape of lines or semicircles.
Figure 26. Photo: Ecliptic Equator
Figure 27. Photo: Ecliptic Equator
In different hemispheres, stellar trajectories have different structures and rotate in different directions. With a rotating "dome" over a "flat earth", this is impossible. And, besides, the further from the hypothetical axis of rotation of the "dome" the camera directed perpendicularly upward would be located, the more flattened the trajectories (backs) of rotation would look (Figures 28, 29).
Figure 28
Figure 29
Statement No. 8
Limited visibility is due to perspective and visual acuity. With powerful optical devices, visibility on a flat surface (water surface) is unlimited. Using the most powerful optical instruments, you can see ships that have disappeared from the field of view over the horizon.
Refutation. Perspective is the effect that makes objects appear smaller and closer to each other with distance. An object that disappears in perspective is proportionally reduced until it turns into a point, and with the use of powerful optics, the object is proportionally enlarged.
On the basis of perspective, it is impossible to explain why objects disappear from the bottom up beyond the horizon and why the level of calm water rises between the observer and the object.
Video 8. The sailboat disappears over the horizon. Full video:
Video 9. Neither optical zoom nor parallax effect explains why objects disappear beyond the horizon
Figure 30
Figure 31. The perspective does not explain why when zoomed in, the bottom of the object is not visible
V. Lysov
