Any sailors here? How can a 243ft. Lighthouse be visible 44 miles away?
(en-wikipedia-org.turbopages.org)
Comments (42)
sorted by:
Assuming a 50ft tall ship or boat.
https://en-wikipedia-org.turbopages.org/en.wikipedia.org/s/wiki/Calcanhar_Lighthouse
According to the curvature formula, https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/?d0=44&h0=50&unit=imperial the 243ft tall Calcanhar lighthouse should be ~590ft below the horizon at 44 miles.
For the tallest ship https://www.ship-technology.com/projects/msc-oscar-container-ship/ in the world, at 239ft, the lighthouse is ~139ft below the horizon at 44 miles out.
https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/?d0=44&h0=239&unit=imperial
And then.... when looking at Pictures of the Lighthouse, suddenly it dawns on you that the BASE is ~~ 150Feet ABOVE Sea Level...
https://en-wikipedia-org.turbopages.org/en.wikipedia.org/s/wiki/Calcanhar_Lighthouse
Look at it again. No base.
243Ft focal height. 44 mile visibility.
I just want to see a photo or video of what that looks like at night.
The BASE specifically means the FOUNDATION....
Buildings DO NOT STAND without a Foundation or "BASE"....
There is a Picture of it, on top of a small hill or knoll...
The picture shows the Waterline...
From the height of the Tower, you can estimate the height of the Knoll....
It is about Half of the height of the Tower....
And I'm highly unimpressed with the Fact that you are FUNCTIONALLY ILLITERATE...
https://nl.pinterest.com/pin/360639882633279400/
He's not illiterate, he's a troll. Stop feeding it.
Ok.....
All the examples show the focal length height.
There are many lighthouses without a base.
WOW!!!
You really don't understand what you've read, do you??
Thanks for proving to all of us, that you're not really educated in the use of Math, and that you are only good at repeating things that you don't clearly comprehend...
Focal Length and Flying Height are Two Separate Mathematical equations, and you don't understand either one of them...
It does NOT include the LAND that the Tower sits upon.....
You have to ADD that part in LATER....
The Whole Tower, and ONLY the Tower, is 293 feet tall, Bottom to top of ONLY the FUCKING TOWER!!! You FOOL!!!
The knoll it sits on is ANOTHER ADDED height.... YOU MORONIC REPEATER!!!!
I estimate, from the Picture Link I posted, that the ADDED Height is about 150 Feet....
Stop with the stupid shit.... You keep using the right WORDS, but then you STUPIDLY throw in your own definitions....
There’s not much light pollution in the ocean when you’re miles out. I remember reading about how effective signaling mirrors are and it blew my mind, so i dunno.
What is the angle of the light?
The calculation is: visible distance to horizon of the lighthouse + visible distance to horizon of the eye above the deck above the waterline.
distance = 1.17 * square root of height in feet
for lighthouse = 1.17 * sqrt (243) = 1.17 * 15.58 = 18.22
for man on deck, est 45 feet = 1.17 *sqrt(45) = 7.85
total = about 26 miles
A bit short. But then we need to account for refractive effects that might bend light. I don't have a computation for that right now. But atmospheric lensing can happen and extend range.
If the light beam is horizontal it doesnt work according to the curve model.
I want to see photo or video of 40 miles out.
To see the angle of the light.
Or personal testimony.
It's not the full model. What looks to you like a straight beam of light is actually not that at all. It can be refracted, which in effect curves it. Nearly all light, even laser beams, is the radiation of wave emissions from a source. The nature of waves is that they spread as they travel. A laser spreads little but it does spread. A lighthouse beam in reality is somewhat spreadier than you might think. An ocean is colder than the air above, usually. This causes the air near the ocean to be denser; the air a little above gradually less dense. This forms a lens that can bend light beams. It's like the desert mirage effect caused by hot ground and air at a different, graded, temperature.
In my case I see mirages too but it's from the cheap whiskey.
Thats a good explanation. Thanks.
Refraction.
I still want to see photos or video or descriptions from sailors but appreciate your response.
Cheers.
It's not about "falling for it" it's a out guilt by association. When MSM refers to people with concerns about the real data of covid shots they say "on a conspiracy theorist website that also promote flat earth" it should tell you all you need to know.
If you really look into the history of geocentrism vs heliocentrism, you would find out you are the fool for believing the one your jewish masters taught you
How can a sun set on a flat earth?
It doesn’t set. It just goes around the earth like on the UN’s logo. That is what the world looks like. I truck goods up to the natives in Northern Canada, you can watch the glow of the sun in the distance after it sets proceed to the north, then the east and then “rise” again.
There are lakes up to 20 miles long that I cross all the time on the ice and can easily see the far shoreline. Earth does not curve 8”/mile^2.
So if I am to believe your theory I need to reject the evidence of my own eyes? Flat Earth 1984.
Your book report not withstanding, the sun still sets and rises.
That is what you have been told and makes sense when you don't know any other possibilities
It's literally what I observe with my own eyes. And I questioned it, and tested both theories, but only one holds water. If I can falsify a theory based on my own observation and common sense I do.
Both theories? What was the second theory you tested?
What you are seeing is the sun travel far away and disappear looking like it is going over the curve but its just travelling away until you cant see it. Like looking at train tracks and they eventually look like they come together.
That doesn't look like what I'm seeing at all. I see the sun set.
No, that's only for the heliocentric model. Funny you bring up 1984 though. When Winston is being tortured, the member of the party describes how their mathematicians can make the stars far away or very near depending on what they need at any given time. I'm on mobile atm but I'll post the passage for you.
Once you look into the history of geocentrism vs heliocentrism you realize the only "proof" heliocentrists have is NASA and "space flights", which are obviously faked.
Yes. I actually taught a class in globe earth and solar system at $100/hr (!!!) a few years ago.
But now i know.
Cool job btw. Do you deliver the herb to them too? :-))
The flatearth model map is similar to the map on the united nations flag.
Azimuth map.
In this model: Sun and moon are much closer and move in a circular pattern.
5Mb epub. Good intro. http://library.lol/main/F9AD6290D165874FD7D5C24762B9E142
That is just repeating the flat earth model. But that doesn't explain why I see the sun set. The UN flag doesn't explain that.
Its a big earth and a small sun.
Eric dubay's book goes into detail.
I will stick with the evidence of my own eyes and ears. Eric Dubay can have his explanation that fits his theory.
I agree. I feel the earth move.
Sometimes.
In fairness, a lot of what Dubay's book includes are observations that have been around since Copernicus and the pope switched from flat to ball circa 1500s.
You know. To a new normal for normies.
The fucking amazing thing is theyre so damm dumb it only takes two weeks to rope in 1/2 the herd.
It can't. Do you still trust pedivikia? Check other ligthouses with same focal height, and you will find that they have twice less range. Just dumb wikipedos don't check their "reliable sources" because usually can't even make a simple calculation. May be they find somhere a "reliable source" where was mentioned a diameter of covered area, and blindly copy that figures to pediwikia.
I have a Pdf book on lighthouses that quotes similar lighthouse height and light distance stats.
25Mb pdf http://library.lol/main/6FDEAF38C0F132578E3F67BBABEED88E
Autodissing wiki = Autoagreeing with wiki
Nice book, but there are only date and height for each lighthouse.
Found only
about Faros lighthouse, where range and height perfectly fit each other.
Yeah there are other more detailed lighthouse books. In the usual pirate zones. Anyway. The stats are referenced some with pdfs.
https://en-wikipedia-org.turbopages.org/en.wikipedia.org/s/wiki/List_of_tallest_lighthouses
The real question is the angle of the light and video photo evidence of what the light looks like from 44 miles out. Or more typically, they say 29 miles out.
Found interesting note on range in full pedowikia article - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calcanhar_Lighthouse#cite_note-2
OK, 22 nautical miles is 40km, not 37, but that range seems to be correct. But they still leave wrong range in characteristics section.