THR APPERENT SIZE OF AN OBJCT MAY DISSAPPEAR TO YOUR EYES BECAUSE OF INBILTY TO FOCUS ON IT

That’s true! That’s because of the size of the object and the receptor density, just as i explained! You don’t seem to understand what the diffraction limit / angular resolution limit is or what causes it. I can help if you let me!

If the object is larger, or the receptor density is greater - you can resolve it - regardless of its distance to you (assuming of course, its light can reach you and is bright enough when it does!)

THERE ARE STILL 2 OTHER DIMENSIONS U CAN PERCIEVE, THOSE BEING LENGTH AND WIDTH

You are positively obsessed with “depth”. Depth is in no way required to see the angular size of objects distant or very close. Why on earth do you think it is?

Imagine a picture. A 2 dimensional picture. No depth, right? Now imagine, in that same picture, you are looking at a car and a bus that are in the far distance one driving in front of the other - perhaps a view from a mountain - which are both much further than the distance to the visible horizon ( a few miles ). Do you really believe that you won’t be able to tell if the bus is larger than the car in the picture? The angular size that is apparent when viewing distant objects does not suddenly stop existing when you lack depth or when things are beyond the distance of the visible horizon. I cannot understand why you think they would, could, or ever do.

APPERENT SIZE ANF DIFFACTION LIMIT ARE NOT THE SAME THING

Noone said they were! The diffraction limit / angular resolution limit is the point at which you can no longer resolve an object of a given size - because it is too small (apparent size) for the receptor density in your eye. It (diffraction limit/angular resolution limit) is the distance limit where the view of distant objects shrink to a dot (then becoming a fuzzy dot) and then disappear.

THE DIFFRACTION LIMIT ENDING WOULD NOT CAUSE AN OBJECT FROM 10 MILES AWAT TO SHINK, IM NOT SAYING THAT, YOU ARE

You seem to be misunderstanding me. The diffraction limit is the distance at which objects of a particular size (dependent on your receptor density) can no longer be seen AFTER they have shrunk to a dot. The “cause”, if you like, of the apparent shrinking is perspective.

ONCE AN OBJECT IS ACTUALLY OCCULTED, THE ONLY WAY TO BRING IT BACK IS TO RAISE YOUR VIEWING HEIGHT

Right, because the light from the “occulted” object is no longer reaching the observer. What is blocking the light? Why can’t the object be zoomed back in upon, like you can with the boats which have disappeared due to being beyond the diffraction limit of the naked eye? If your view were correct, you ought to be able to do that - right?

THR APPERENT SIZE OF AN OBJCT MAY DISSAPPEAR TO YOUR EYES BECAUSE OF INBILTY TO FOCUS ON IT

That’s true! That’s because of the size of the object and the receptor density, just as i explained! You don’t seem to understand what the diffraction limit / angular resolution limit is or what causes it. I can help if you let me!

If the object is larger, or the receptor density is greater - you can resolve it - regardless of its distance to you (assuming of course, its light can reach you and is bright enough when it does!)

THERE ARE STILL 2 OTHER DIMENSIONS U CAN PERCIEVE, THOSE BEING LENGTH AND WIDTH

You are positively obsessed with “depth”. Depth is in no way required to see the angular size of objects distant or very close. Why on earth do you think it is?

Imagine a picture. A 2 dimensional picture. No depth, right? Now imagine, in that same picture, you are looking at a car and a bus that are in the far distance one driving in front of the other - perhaps a view from a mountain - which are both much further than the distance to the visible horizon ( a few miles ). Do you really believe that you won’t be able to tell if the bus is larger than the car in the picture? The angular size that is apparent when viewing distant objects does not suddenly stop existing when you lack depth or when things are beyond the distance of the visible horizon. I cannot understand why you think they would, could, or ever do.

APPERENT SIZE ANF DIFFACTION LIMIT ARE NOT THE SAME THING

Noone said they were! The diffraction limit / angular resolution limit is the point at which you can no longer resolve an object of a given size - because it is too small (apparent size) for the receptor density in your eye. It (diffraction limit/angular resolution limit) is the reason for the phenomenon of distant things shrinking to a dot (then becoming a fuzzy dot) and then disappearing.

THE DIFFRACTION LIMIT ENDING WOULD NOT CAUSE AN OBJECT FROM 10 MILES AWAT TO SHINK, IM NOT SAYING THAT, YOU ARE

You seem to be misunderstanding me. The diffraction limit is the distance at which objects of a particular size (dependent on your receptor density) can no longer be seen AFTER they have shrunk to a dot. The “cause”, if you like, of the apparent shrinking is perspective.

ONCE AN OBJECT IS ACTUALLY OCCULTED, THE ONLY WAY TO BRING IT BACK IS TO RAISE YOUR VIEWING HEIGHT

Right, because the light from the “occulted” object is no longer reaching the observer. What is blocking the light? Why can’t the object be zoomed back in upon, like you can with the boats which have disappeared due to being beyond the diffraction limit of the naked eye? If your view were correct, you ought to be able to do that - right?

THR APPERENT SIZE OF AN OBJCT MAY DISSAPPEAR TO YOUR EYES BECAUSE OF INBILTY TO FOCUS ON IT

That’s true! That’s because of the size of the object and the receptor density, just as i explained! You don’t seem to understand what the diffraction limit / angular resolution limit is or what causes it. I can help if you let me!

If the object is larger, or the receptor density is greater - you can resolve it - regardless of its distance to you (assuming of course, its light can reach you and is bright enough when it does!)

THERE ARE STILL 2 OTHER DIMENSIONS U CAN PERCIEVE, THOSE BEING LENGTH AND WIDTH

You are positively obsessed with “depth”. Depth is in no way required to see the angular size of objects distant or very close. Why on earth do you think it is?

Imagine a picture. A 2 dimensional picture. No depth, right? Now imagine, in that same picture, you are looking at a car and a bus that are in the far distance one driving in front of the other - perhaps a view from a mountain - which are both much further than the distance to the visible horizon ( a few miles ). Do you really believe that you won’t be able to tell if the bus is larger than the car in the picture? The angular size that is apparent when viewing distant objects does not suddenly stop existing when you lack depth or when things are beyond the distance of the visible horizon. I cannot understand why you think they would, could, or ever do.

APPERENT SIZE ANF DIFFACTION LIMIT ARE NOT THE SAME THING

Noone said they were! The diffraction limit / angular resolution limit is the point at which you can no longer resolve an object of a given size - because it is too small (apparent size) for the receptor density in your eye. It is the cause of distant things shrinking to a dot (then becoming a fuzzy dot) and then disappearing.

THE DIFFRACTION LIMIT ENDING WOULD NOT CAUSE AN OBJECT FROM 10 MILES AWAT TO SHINK, IM NOT SAYING THAT, YOU ARE

You seem to be misunderstanding me. The diffraction limit is the distance at which objects of a particular size (dependent on your receptor density) can no longer be seen AFTER they have shrunk to a dot. The “cause”, if you like, of the apparent shrinking is perspective.

ONCE AN OBJECT IS ACTUALLY OCCULTED, THE ONLY WAY TO BRING IT BACK IS TO RAISE YOUR VIEWING HEIGHT

Right, because the light from the “occulted” object is no longer reaching the observer. What is blocking the light? Why can’t the object be zoomed back in upon, like you can with the boats which have disappeared due to being beyond the diffraction limit of the naked eye? If your view were correct, you ought to be able to do that - right?

THR APPERENT SIZE OF AN OBJCT MAY DISSAPPEAR TO YOUR EYES BECAUSE OF INBILTY TO FOCUS ON IT

That’s true! That’s because of the size of the object and the receptor density, just as i explained! You don’t seem to understand what the diffraction limit / angular resolution limit is or what causes it. I can help if you let me!

If the object is larger, or the receptor density is greater - you can resolve it - regardless of its distance to you (assuming of course, its light can reach you and is bright enough when it does!)

THERE ARE STILL 2 OTHER DIMENSIONS U CAN PERCIEVE, THOSE BEING LENGTH AND WIDTH

You are positively obsessed with “depth”. Depth is in no way required to see the angular size of objects distant or very close. Why on earth do you think it is?

Imagine a picture. A 2 dimensional picture. No depth, right? Now imagine you are looking at a car and a bus that are in the far distance one driving in front of the other - perhaps a view from a mountain - which are both much further than the distance to the visible horizon ( a few miles ). Do you really believe that you won’t be able to tell if the bus is larger than the car in the picture? The angular size that is apparent when viewing distant objects does not suddenly stop existing when you lack depth or when things are beyond the distance of the visible horizon. I cannot understand why you think they would, could, or ever do.

APPERENT SIZE ANF DIFFACTION LIMIT ARE NOT THE SAME THING

Noone said they were! The diffraction limit / angular resolution limit is the point at which you can no longer resolve an object of a given size - because it is too small (apparent size) for the receptor density in your eye. It is the cause of distant things shrinking to a dot (then becoming a fuzzy dot) and then disappearing.

THE DIFFRACTION LIMIT ENDING WOULD NOT CAUSE AN OBJECT FROM 10 MILES AWAT TO SHINK, IM NOT SAYING THAT, YOU ARE

You seem to be misunderstanding me. The diffraction limit is the distance at which objects of a particular size (dependent on your receptor density) can no longer be seen AFTER they have shrunk to a dot. The “cause”, if you like, of the apparent shrinking is perspective.

ONCE AN OBJECT IS ACTUALLY OCCULTED, THE ONLY WAY TO BRING IT BACK IS TO RAISE YOUR VIEWING HEIGHT

Right, because the light from the “occulted” object is no longer reaching the observer. What is blocking the light? Why can’t the object be zoomed back in upon, like you can with the boats which have disappeared due to being beyond the diffraction limit of the naked eye? If your view were correct, you ought to be able to do that - right?