Rob Skiba's Second Balloon Launch - Image Analysis at 95,733 feet

Rob Skiba's Second Balloon Launch - Image Analysis at 95,733 feet (29179 meters)

I've been vaguely aware of this for a while but I haven't really had a chance to go look at it before now:



I gotta say, huge thanks to Rob Skiba for proving the Earth is a globe -- so I'm going to keep this one fairly short and simple.

It's a shame that they didn't use something like the Canon 11mm lens on a real camera (126° FOV!) -- but we will have to make do with their tiny 47° Field of View 7.2mm GoPro "non-fish-eye lens".

So around 1:48:30 in the video we are treated with the following view from 95,733 feet up -- according to Rob Skiba and friends:

Figure 1. Rob Skiba YouTube video circa 1:48:30

There is very clearly about 10 pixels of what I call the 'apparent horizon Sagitta'.  The horizon is curved, it matches what we expect on a Globe of approximately 3959 miles radius.

Flat Earth is DONE... Right? (LOL if you think Flat Earthers will believe their OWN evidence you are INSANE!)

But WHY would we expect this on the Globe?

If you recall back from my post describing what the Horizon IS, it is a circle formed where your line-of-sight hits tangent to the Spheroid of the Earth -- aside from terrain differences (almost irrelevant from this high up unless you are looking at high mountains) it is roughly equidistant from you all the way around.

This example figure would be a height of roughly a thousand miles up and the Green Circle would be the horizon.  If the Earth were smooth you wouldn't be able to see any of the Earth past this circle (but mountains and tall buildings can stick up past it).

So the Apparent Sagitta here is a small section of this arc being viewed nearly on edge (a true Sagitta is the arc formed by a chord on a circle, I call this "Apparent Sagitta" because we're viewing it sharply rotated).

You can also see how this works in Walter Bislin's Horizon rendering tool, which will we revisit below.

Figure 2. Horizon geometry

Since your height here in a balloon, even at 100k feet, is VERY SMALL.  For comparison here is the view from the ISS, 400 kilometers up.

Figure 3. Horizon to Scale for ISS (4x higher than this balloon)

Here is what we get from Walter Bislin's site for 29179 meters and a 47° field of view:


Figure 4. Walter Bislin's Horizon Rendering


And here is the overlay with Rob Skiba's video -- an incredible match for all that "fake Globe math"?

Figure 5. Overlay of Rob Skiba video with Walter Bislin's horizon

Conclusion:

So this is pretty much EXACTLY the amount of horizon droop (or Apparent Sagitta) we would expect on the Globe.


See Also:

Sly Sparkane's analysis video, which covers Skiba's first Balloon launch which they apparently lost.


Teme Wilson also did an Earth rendering in Blender to compare the horizon:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Pic Gaspard (3880m)/Grand Ferrand (2758m) from Pic de Finestrelles (2826m) in the Pyrénées

Image
I have some new toys to share in this installment of 'Yes, the Earth really is Curved even though you can see one distant mountain peak from another', so this should be fun! This time we're going to look at a view of two distant mountains from Pic de Finestrelles (2826m) in the Pyrénées , taken by Marc Bret of Beyond Horizons (see also the Flickr album ). Pic Gaspard (3880m) in the Massif des Écrins range at a distance of 443 km. Grand Ferrand (2758m) at a distance of 392.48 km. Our view is right around 42.414466°N, 2.132839°E at about 2826 meters elevation, looking right along the coast. Pic Gaspard/Grand Ferrand from Pic de Finestrelles in the Pyrénées, image by Marc Bret The EXIF metadata shows this image was taken by a Panasonic DMC-FZ72 with a focal length of 215mm -- given the 5.62 crop factor of the 1/2.3" sensor in this camera, this gives you a 35mm equivalent focal length of 1200mm giving a full frame view of 1.644° wide and 1.215° high. Since 1521 x 101...
Read more

Flat Earth Follies: Planes would have to constantly pitch down to fly!

Image
Flat Earth Claim Planes would have to constantly pitch down to fly! Short Version In the Globe model "LEVEL" follows a sphere of uniform gravity potential. Feel free to disprove that is the case if you can but that is the model. In an airplane, Elevator Trim simply controls the RATE of pitch of an aircraft - not the actual pitch of the plane. A 747 flying at 35,000' would have a flight circumference of  about 2π*(3959+(35000/5280)) ≈ 24916 miles Flying at 570 miles per hour, this plane would fly a fraction of the 360° around given by 360*570/24916 Since that's 1 hour we can divide by 60 to get the degrees per hour: 360*570/24916/60 ≈ 0.137°/minute That is down in the noise since pitch rate is affected by temperature, density, power, and control settings on the plane you simply trim the plane for as close to ZERO vertical speed as you can and you've automatically compensated for all of them at once.  Of course, on a 747 computers do that.  In a small plane the pitc...
Read more

Fort Myers to Naples - Flat Earth failures continue

Image
No amount of curvature is enough for a Flat Earther.  We can SEE the shoreline disappear, and then the bottoms of buildings.  But since they don't understand the geometry of what they see they cannot properly evaluate it. Flat Earth once again fails to understand WHAT the horizon even is. @captscorch @ColdDimSum @nicholaspitts @CobraElDiablo @UnCastellsMes @twatterfull @sciencegecko @skeptropolis @FlatEarthReal Still waiting on my curve pic.twitter.com/zh2zFXmMVi — JACK (@Adidas68Jack) April 24, 2017 And a copy of the image from Jack just in case (which Jack now deleted). I'm going to admit right here at the start that I do not know the EXACT location from which this photo was taken.  Neither does 'Jack'.  However, we both know the APPROXIMATE location to within a few miles because we can see the nearby buildings and at least their rough orientation. But without a higher resolution image I cannot positively identify the distant buildings, and neither can Ja...
Read more