Flat Earth debunks - The Sun

{{pseudoastronomy}}
{{ArticleSeries|Flat Earth|the Flat Earth}}
Flat-Earthers have made several incorrect observations to claim the Earth is flat. This article refutes claims made by flat-Earthers about the Sun.

==The Sun's apparent size stays almost constant year-round in analemmas==

[[File:Analemma-Matthew-Chin-Hong-Kong-e1419419139733.jpg|thumb|left|An analemma with interval of one photo per week.]]

[[File:Sun-position-acid-picdump-36.jpg|thumb|right|Another analemma that's a composite of 80 photos taken over a year (roughly 4-5 photos a week).]]

An {{wpl|Analemma|analemma}} is a diagram that shows the position of a celestial object on the sky at the same time of the day, every '''n''' days. The diagram can be created as a composite image that combines individual photos of the Sun, taken at the same time over a year. The movement of the Sun in the analemma is caused by the Earth tilting on its axis, shifting the position of the observer relative to the sun.

In the flat Earth model {{wpl|Wilbur_Glenn_Voliva#Flat_Earth_and_other_views|the Sun is 32 miles in diameter, and 3000 miles high|.}} With a little bit of math we learn that the Sun moving from one tropic to the other, would change the angular size of the Sun by 45.23%.

However, as can clearly be seen from the timelapses, the Sun remains fairly the same size over the course of a year. This alone debunks the flat Earth model.

In reality, the Sun's diameter is 865,000  miles,<ref>NASA. [https://science.nasa.gov/sun/facts/ "Our Sun: Facts"]. Via nasa.gov.</ref> and its closest distance (perihelion) is {{wpl|Apsis#Other_planets|91,400,000 miles|,}} and farthest distance (aphelion) is {{wpl|Apsis#Other_planets|94,500,000 miles|.}} This results in the size change of roughly 3.85%, which is consistent with the observations of small changes in Sun's size in the composite images.

{{collapse|The sun's angular size change math for flat Earth|width=500}}
'''1. The {{wpl|Angular_diameter#Formulation|Angular size formula}} is'''

[[File:Angular size math for sun on flat earth 1.svg|160px]]<!-- <math>\theta = 2 \times \arctan\left(\frac{d}{2h}\right)</math> -->

Where '''d''' is diameter of the Sun (32 miles) and '''h''' is distance from the observer to the Sun.

'''2. The distances:'''

[[File:Angular size math for sun on flat earth 2.svg|160px]] <!-- <math>d_{\text{close}} = 3000 \, \text{miles}</math> --> (directly above one tropic)

[[File:Angular size math for sun on flat earth 3.svg|275px]] <!-- <math>d_{\text{far}} = \sqrt{3000^2 + 3222^2} \approx 4402 \, \text{miles}</math> --> (directly above the opposite tropic [https://earthscience.stackexchange.com/questions/13747/what-is-the-distance-between-the-tropics 3222 miles] away.)

'''3. Angular size difference:'''

[[File:Angular size math for sun on flat earth 4.svg|300px]] <!-- <math>\theta_{\text{close}} \approx 2 \times \arctan\left(\frac{32}{2 \times 3000}\right) \approx 0.61^\circ</math> --> (closest point)

[[File:Angular size math for sun on flat earth 5.svg|300px]] <!-- <math>\theta_{\text{far}} \approx 2 \times \arctan\left(\frac{32}{2 \times 4402}\right) \approx 0.42^\circ</math> --> (farthest point)

4. Difference in angular size between 0.61° and 0.42° is roughly

[[File:Angular size math for sun on flat earth 6.svg|225px]]<!-- <math> \frac{0.61 - 0.42}{0.42} \times 100 \approx 45.23\% </math> -->
{{collapse end}}

{{collapse|The Sun's angular size change math for globe earth|width=500}}

'''1. The {{wpl|Angular_diameter#Formulation|Angular size formula}} is'''

[[File:Angular size math for sun on flat earth 1.svg|160px]]<!-- NOTE THIS IS THE SAME AS WITH FLAT EARTH CALCULATIONS<math>\theta = 2 \times \arctan\left(\frac{d}{2h}\right)</math> -->

'''2. The Sun's angular size at perihelion:'''

[[File:Angular size math for sun on globe earth 2.svg|350px]]<!-- <math>\theta_{\text{peri}} \approx 2 \times \arctan\left(\frac{865{,}000}{2 \times 91{,}400{,}000}\right) \approx 0.54^\circ</math> -->

'''3. The Sun's angular size at aphelion:'''

[[File:Angular size math for sun on globe earth 3.svg|350px]]<!-- <math>\theta_{\text{aphe}} \approx 2 \times \arctan\left(\frac{865{,}000}{2 \times 94{,}500{,}000}\right) \approx 0.52^\circ</math> -->

'''4. Angular size change is'''

[[File:Angular size math for sun on globe earth 4.svg|375px]]
<!-- <math>\frac{\theta_{\text{peri}} - \theta_{\text{aphe}}}{\theta_{\text{aphe}}} \times 100 \approx \frac{0.54^\circ - 0.52^\circ}{0.52^\circ} \times 100 \approx 3.85\%</math> -->

{{collapse end}}

Dubay has [https://youtu.be/WQlfi3nRxgs?si=Sxa-0-Xq2revGLHa&t=91 claimed] there are analemmas that have varying size Suns, but he was only able to provide a [https://ideograma.com/images/2022/05/05/fam_analemma_1920x1080.jpg CGI rendering] that was used as concept art to [https://ideograma.com/en/component/content/article/18-tipo-de-sector/servicios/90-?Itemid=147 produce the logo and branding for Fiesta Americana hotels]. This can easily be told from 1) the low pixel scenery at the bottom of the image with obvious touch up marks and 2) from the fact the analemma's Suns are [https://earthsky.org/astronomy-essentials/earth-farthest-from-sun-for-year-in-early-july/ smallest during July when Earth is furthest away from the Sun],<ref group=note>Dubay [https://youtu.be/WmqE2cRFbPU?si=huz_KGdBaeKr-RvG&t=1018 knows] this.</ref> and during late June and early July, the Sun is at its highest on the sky. Ideograma's analemma has Suns largest in the front, and smallest in the back, just like the [https://ideograma.com/images/2022/05/05/fam_firma_1920x640.jpg hotel logo]. In reality, this never happens.

The second image was a heavily compressed image of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analemma#/media/File:Analemma_fishburn.tif this] raw file, that shows individual Suns vary from roughly 24 to 30 pixels, nowhere near the expected 24 to 35 pixels required for 45% scale differences that the trigonometry proved would be expected. It's also the case the smaller suns are all more hazy, meaning they were photographed through clouds.

The third analemma by Steve Irvine also shows the especially winter months' photos as blurry. As Irvine himself tells about the project in his [https://www.steveirvine.com/analemma2.html home page] "''This winter was cloudy as well. Keppel Henge is surrounded by the Great Lakes — lakes so huge that they generate their own weather systems — and lake effect clouds are common during the winter months.''" Every noticeably smaller Sun in the photo is a hazy one, i.e. they're photographed through some cloud coverage.

Dubay also claimed [https://www.flickr.com/photos/cwchin/16051022666/ SciManDan's analemma] (same as the top-left one in this article) was CGI, because 
# The Sun in the photo from Dec. 22 appears over the tree's branches. This is easily explained with the fact the tree branch may have had heavy snow pushing the branches down, and
# The Sun in the photo from July 5. appears slightly over the building's edge. What Dubay failed to realize was analemmas are taken by repeatedly placing the camera to the same spot, month after month. The place will never be exactly the same, and if the single photo of the background was taken on any other day, the frames will with overwhelming probability not align perfectly.

=="But Scientists have changed their answer about the distance to the Sun!"==

Lies [https://youtu.be/Z2xlfx8Hqdo?si=cc9OjC01mWl25j5E&t=165 Eric Dubay] by omission. The world is complex, and the tools to make observations evolve over time, and so, the accuracy of our knowledge improves. The article "[https://www.universetoday.com/117843/how-did-we-find-the-distance-to-the-sun/ ''How Did We Find the Distance to the Sun?'']" by Morgan Rehnberg gives a good explanation on why it was so hard. In the 2nd century BCE, The Greek astronomer Hipparchus invented parallax, and he calculated the distance to Moon with an accuracy of 7%. As shown [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urgYWNCN-RA here], the Greek astronomer Aristarchus used used nothing but basic trigonometry to calculate the size of Earth, Moon, and Sun, as well as their distances. The error was large, but the exact angle to Sun during half-moon could not be determined with the tools of the period. Over time the accuracy improved by almost 250x. The next improvement had to wait until 1761, when the very rare occurrence of Venus transiting between Earth and the Sun would finally happen. The resulting distance to the Sun was off only by 3%. Bob the Science Guy explains the topic [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2o2otqL3Uc4 here]. Radar was wasn't invented before 1935, and since it was a military thing, it was kept in secret until the WW2 ended. {{wpl|Radar_astronomy|Radar astronomy}} became a thing in the 1960s, and it has then been used to improve on the measurements. Michael Toon has linked to multiple papers [https://mctoon.net/sun/ here] if you want a deep dive.

Still, unfortunately modern science can't possibly compete with the flat Earth model where there is only one definitive truth of the Sun's altitude being [https://youtu.be/5WemOn1pqrU?si=Pmk94aOELXcYIlaj&t=68 
2,400
] [https://wiki.tfes.org/Sun 
several thousand
] [https://wiki.tfes.org/Distance_to_the_Sun 
6000
] [https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/danny-faulkner/2020/12/18/eratosthenes-reconsidered/ 
3,110
] [https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/danny-faulkner/2020/12/18/eratosthenes-reconsidered/ 
less than 4000
] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7aQktHTP0-U 
5000-7000
] {{wpl|Modern_flat_Earth_beliefs|3000}} miles.<ref group=note>Flerfs [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2xlfx8Hqdo&t=102s claim] to have a functioning method to calculate the distance of the Sun with basic trigonometry, but so far nobody's figured out how to run the numbers.</ref> Or, perhaps the highest flying {{wpl|Noctilucent_cloud|noticulent clouds}} determine Sun's altitude to be at most [http://www.cas.manchester.ac.uk/resactivities/cloudphysics/background/classification/ 280,000 feet (53 miles)], as some flerfs have claimed —

== "But the Sun is inside the clouds!" ==
[[File:Sunset Time Lapse 31-12-2009.ogv|right|200px|thumb|Flat Earth "proof" of a "sun is inside the clouds". No joke.]]
<!-- [[File:Sunset at Kumbharkhani.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Look! The Sun is inside this forest!]] Commented out as article is quite heavy and the image is slightly off-topic -->

In the search for any proof of a local small local sun, flat-earthers have encountered pictures and videos where the Sun appears to go through some clouds while also being partially covered by other clouds. This therefore proves the Sun must be as low as those clouds and inside them! Yes... They are serious about this.

Some clouds are thicker than others, thus, some clouds let more sunlight go through them. Thus, the illusion of the Sun being inside a cloud. Once again, flat-earthers are confused by the Sun glare and camera exposure.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2018-03-18 |title=The Illusion of Clouds Appearing ‘Behind’ the Sun or the Moon |url=https://flatearth.ws/clouds-behind-sun |access-date=2025-01-08 |website=FlatEarth.ws |language=en-US}}</ref> 

But even without analyzing these pictures, with just an itty bitty tiny amount of critical thinking, we can bring some more glaring problems than the Sun itself: 

# According to this claim the Sun would be approximately 10, at most 53 miles up. This contradicts with popular altitude estimates of 3,000 miles.
# At such small altitudes, why hasn't anything crashed to it? Do pilots swing and miss it on their routes?
# And, lastly, if the Sun is inside those clouds, '''''WHY DOESN'T IT EVAPORATE THEM INSTANTLY? IS THE SUN COLD???'''''

== "But the Sun is right above the clouds!" ==

[[File:Cloud specular reflection.png|thumb|200px|right|Specular cloud reflection caught by the DogCam weather balloon.]]

In his [https://youtu.be/U_bJYXS9p4A?si=uiPq28OT9dPk2RZr&t=1766 video] Eric Dubay tries to imply that during the DogCam weather balloon video, the Sun is close and that it hovers right above the clouds, casting a spotlight or "hot spot" down. This immediately begs the question, why is the Sun, that's supposed to be shining only down like a spotlight, shining really fucking brightly, 90° to the side, where the [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GMcMTV_prc high altitude balloon films it]? If the clouds are made of water, why are they glowing orange like molten steel? And again, why aren't they evaporating instantly?

The phenomenon is actually just a specular reflection that appears when the cloud coverage is smooth enough to create a hazy point reflection of the distant sun. Also a bit further down the video, the [https://youtu.be/_GMcMTV_prc?si=xrexOi7gUgvjsaXG&t=180 spot has disappeared], because the clouds are no longer reflecting the sunlight the same way to the camera. The sun is still bright, and neither its, or the clouds' altitude has time to vary greatly during the roughly two hour lifetime of a weather balloon, so it's obviously not a low orbiting Sun.

Moreover, the video that Dubay uses as proof was taken from Germany on 19 April 2017 at 7 am. At that moment the Sun was directly above Cambodia... Nowhere "nearby" at all.<ref>https://www.reddit.com/r/flatearth/comments/w8etiz/how_is_the_sun_directly_over_a_spot_about_9000_km/#lightbox</ref>

=="But there's no 24-hour Sun in Antarctica!"==

*Short answer: Yes there is.
*Longer answer: '''See [[The_Final_Experiment|The Final Experiment]].'''

Here’s a taste of what's in the article:

{{ev:youtube|in0B1OQG3-M}}
== See also ==

* [[Flat_Earth|Flat Earth]]

Flat Earth debunks

* [[Flat_Earth_debunks_-_The_Earth|The Earth]]

* [[Flat_Earth_debunks_-_The_Moon|The Moon]]

* '''[[Flat_Earth_debunks_-_Stars|Stars]]'''
* [[Flat_Earth_debunks_-_Celestial_mechanics|Celestial mechanics]]
* [[Flat_Earth_debunks_-_Celestial_objects|Celestial objects]]
* [[Flat_Earth_debunks_-_Astronautics|Astronautics]]
* [[Flat_Earth_debunks_-_Astrophotography|Astrophotography]]
* [[Flat_Earth_debunks_-_The_conspiracy|The conspiracy]]

==Notes==

{{reflist|group=note}}

==References==
{{reflist|2|80%}}

[[Category:Anti-intellectualism]]
[[Category:Conspiracy theories]]
[[Category:Denialism]]
[[Category:Flat Earth]]
[[Category:Pseudoscience]]
[[Category:Pseudoastronomy]]

Categories: Anti-intellectualism, Conspiracy theories, Denialism, Flat Earth, Pseudoscience, Pseudoastronomy