Keeping a small dot over one mile distance

[srow]

Why do lasers beams end in the sky? They appear like light sabers. I realise now that it is due to perspective and I'm not the only one who thinks that. See this thread http://laserpointerforums.com/f44/why-does-beam-end-sky-75315-2.html

This is relevant to my experiment because this I thought the beam ended due to lack of power but that's not the case. The beam is still there but it has become invisible after a certain point due to perspective. You can all see this with your own lasers. Perspective explains why light and objects become invisible past a certain point. Excellent!!

 

[BowtieGuy]

Check this Link out for some interesting ideas on that subject. If you want, skip to - "Part 2 - Why does the beam from a green laser appear to "end" in the sky as compared to just going on forever?", that's where the pertinent info. starts.
Interesting reading at the very least.

 

[kcarlson]

I haven't done the experiment yet. To be honest I don't know as whether I need to. After realising the Coriolis effect is so bogus (thanks to this thread) I don't know whether this experiment is necessary. I was only doing it to demonstrate to myself which isn't necessary now.

how did you discover that the Coriolis effect was shit. i haven't seen anything on here yet indicating so.

 

[Gabe]

Yeah, only one who "proved" it was bogus was srow lol...

 

[srow]

how did you discover that the Coriolis effect was shit. i haven't seen anything on here yet indicating so.

We've talked about this at length already.

Snipers not adjusting their rifles every time they change direction = Coriolis effect being SHIT! BOGUS! FAKE! SHAM! We really have to move on from this.

 

[srow]

So why is it that I can point a pulsed laser at the Apollo 14 landing site (where they placed retroreflectors) and have photons of the same wavelength return in ~2.6 seconds, confirming that the moon is ~239,000 miles away? (The speed of light is a well established fact, you can even measure it at home) So how can the sun be only a few thousand miles away, and the moon can be MEASURED to be 239,000 miles away, and yet the moon can pass in front of the sun during a solar eclipse?

Have you seen how brightly the moon supposedly reflects the Sun? It shines really brightly considering it's just rock and dust. I'm surprised you need to bounce your laser off any retroreflectors when the moon seems to be reflecting light perfectly well on it's own!

 

[kcarlson]

We've talked about this at length already.

Snipers not adjusting their rifles every time they change direction = Coriolis effect being SHIT! BOGUS! FAKE! SHAM! We really have to move on from this.

Snipers don't take it into account because they aim for center mass. so a few inches either way from the center of a torso won't make two shits of difference. So considering a center mass shot while taking in coriolis drift of around 5in at they would either hit a lung (with east/west drift), or gut or upper torso.

either way that's a kill shot.

spin drift & Coriolis effect - Page 2 - Long Range Hunting Online Magazine

 

[kcarlson]

Have you seen how brightly the moon supposedly reflects the Sun? It shines really brightly considering it's just rock and dust. I'm surprised you need to bounce your laser off any retroreflectors when the moon seems to be reflecting light perfectly well on it's own!

i really must ask. where did you attend school?

 

[H2Oxide]

Have you seen how brightly the moon supposedly reflects the Sun? It shines really brightly considering it's just rock and dust. I'm surprised you need to bounce your laser off any retroreflectors when the moon seems to be reflecting light perfectly well on it's own!

You're avoiding the question.

Most experiments use a laser that can spit out a few joules in a matter of femtoseconds, and usually only get 2-5 photons back using a massive lens or parabolic mirror, and that's only if bounced off the retroreflectors. They do this so they can measure how far away the moon is with accuracies down to an inch.

 

[srow]

spin drift & Coriolis effect - Page 2 - Long Range Hunting Online Magazine

I've read the first so many pages of that thread and it's just a forum of varying opinions. Some say the Coriolis effect changes with direction and some say it doesn't. There seems to be some sort of clash between those that understand the coriolis effect and those that say it's insignificant and don't worry about it when, sometimes, every inch counts. One chap basically says that firing at 1000 yards in high winds at a large target makes the Coriolis effect insignificant which is true but doesn't mean you can just ignore it if it exists. This is not a factual information site, it's just opinions like this thread. Laser chick's links were factual sites that specifically stated that snipers don't need to adjust for direction, just latitude, when it comes to the coriolis effect.

You will have to come up with something more factual that just conflicting and confused opinions.

 

[srow]

You're avoiding the question.

Yes, I was avoiding the question but I was also making a point .

Most experiments use a laser that can spit out a few joules in a matter of femtoseconds, and usually only get 2-5 photons back using a massive lens or parabolic mirror, and that's only if bounced off the retroreflectors. They do this so they can measure how far away the moon is with accuracies down to an inch

Flat earth theory has no explanation for this and I can't really repeat this experiment myself so I'm forced to take their word for it. This experiment kills two birds with one stone. It proves we landed on the moon.......right? and that the moon is where it should be according to globe earth theory......right? A very productive experiment indeed.

 

[Gabe]

.
You will have to come up with something more factual that just conflicting and confused opinions.

As will you.

 

[RB astro]

Yes, I was avoiding the question but I was also making a point .

Also did you see my lunar eclipse photos and questions a few posts back?
Can you explain why this happens from a FE viewpoint?

Andrew

 

[srow]

i really must ask. where did you attend school?

I went to the same brainwashing type institution as everyone else. The taught me just enough about perspective so not to conflict with globe earth. If they had spent just 1 hour extra teaching us about perspective this would have destroyed their globe Earth model and we can't have that.

 

[H2Oxide]

Flat earth theory has no explanation for this and I can't really repeat this experiment myself so I'm forced to take their word for it. This experiment kills two birds with one stone. It proves we landed on the moon.......right? and that the moon is where it should be according to globe earth theory......right? A very productive experiment indeed.

Can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.

The reasons you gave were not what the retroreflectors were placed there for. They are used to try and find flaws with the theory of general relativity. They have also been used to calculate how far the moon drifts.

Not really sure what point you were trying to make either. The moon reflects usually less than a tenth of the sun's light, which is still a lot, but not enough to bounce a laser off of. If you shine a flashlight on a white rock the rock isn't going to just absorb all the light, it's going to reflect quite a bit of it.

 

[srow]

Also did you see my lunar eclipse photos and questions a few posts back?
Can you explain why this happens from a FE viewpoint?
Andrew

Yes, but I've got to study it first. The moon is an extremely interesting topic to me and I'm gasping to get onto it. When you look at the moon with a clear sky it shines so bright it's very hard to believe that it is just reflecting light from the sun. If you held a grey rock up to a bright light would it really shine like the moon do you think? Of course, flat earth theory says that the moon is a self illuminating and not reflecting the suns light.