9. Bendy light
Light must bend upwards in a concave Earth in order for both the horizon and the Sun’s position in the sky to make sense… and there is some evidence of that. This info is also found in the Bendy light – the evidence article.
(Source Rolf keppler’s website.) In Riedern A.S. in Klettgau on May 24 2001 between 11 and 12am, the engineer Wilhelm Martin (deceased since 2009) conducted on experiment (which was witnessed by Rolf Keppler) with a theodolite (leveling device) called a dumpy level.
No.1. (The control) Two measuring poles were placed 1000m from each other. The dumpy level was placed in the middle of these two poles at the 500m distance. The built-in plumb line (spirit level) was then used to make sure the device was absolutely level to within 1 arc second, which is an accuracy of 0.5cm to 1km. Wilhelm then looked through the telescope and with the cross-hairs marked the zero mark on the measuring pole. He then turned the dumpy level around 180° and did the same for the other pole. These marks are now used as a control for the future measurements.
The measuring poles are marked by the cross-hairs in the telescope viewed by Wilhelm.
No.2. Wilhelm then positioned the dumpy level 4m from the left measuring pole and adjusted the height of the theodolite so that it was level with the zero mark made previously when the dumpy level was located in the middle of the two poles. The dumpy level was then turned 180° and the cross hairs on the theolite were used to find its position on the right measuring pole 996m away. This was 12 to 14cm higher than the zero mark in the control.
No.3. The exact same procedure as no.2 above was carried out, but this time moving the dumpy level 4m from the right pole, sighting the zero mark, rotating the level 180° and sighting the position on the left pole 996m away. The result was nearly the same as the other pole with a deviation of over 14cm higher than the zero mark.
The right measuring pole is sighted 996m away.
The deviation between 11am and 12pm was 12 to 14cm for procedure no.2 and over 14cm higher than the zero mark for procedure no.3.
This experiment was then repeated for different times of the day, on sometimes different days in the year, at the same location with varied results between 0 and 18cm higher than the zero mark. These results are listed below:
According to Mr. Martin, this is a well-known phenomenon within the surveying community as surveyors always measure from the center if possible. The manufacturers also know about this as modern and expensive dumpy levels have built-in switches to compensate for this “error” in order to keep all readings the same as if light traveled in a straight line.
So, at 996m we have readings from 0-18cm above the zero location, which was the mark measured at 500m. This difference therefore is over the extra 496m. If the Earth were convex we would expect a drop over the distance which would also give higher readings than the zero mark on the other post. How much higher? The control 0 mark was carried out over 500m. Using method 3. from page 5, the Earth would dip 1.96cm over this distance.
The simple way to work out the distance from a straight line to a circle.
The dip over 996m is: R is the radius of the Earth which is 6378.1km; X is the distance of a straight line, e.g. light; and the funny squiggle is the difference between the straight line and the curve. Using our own numbers we calculate the square root of 40680159.61 + 0.992016 then subtract 6378.1 which gives us 7.78cm as the difference.
We have to cancel the 996m dip with the 500m dip because the 500m was the control (0 mark) with which we compare the 996m results. So we subtract the 1.96cm from the 7.78cm to the get the extra 496m dip after 500m which is 5.82cm (roughly 6cm). This is about the same result Rolf Keppler calculated. We have to add 6 cm to the light reading if the Earth were concave, and subtract if it were convex.
|Date and time||Actual (flat)||Convex||Concave|
|24 May 11am-12pm||12 to 14 and 14||6 to 8 and 8||18 to 20 and 20|
|7 April 6pm||16||10||22|
|7 May 12am to 2am||8 and 0||2 and -6||14 and 6|
|7 May 8-9am||8 and 12||2 and 6||14 and 16|
|5 July 5-6pm||16 and 18||10 and 12||22 and 24|
The overall actual physical height difference between the two measuring poles was only somewhere between 12 to 20cm, which eliminates standard refraction as a reason since the variation of air density over a few centimeters is non-existent. Of course, when standard refraction fails, super refraction is called into being.
Super refraction… again
There is a possibility that temperature/humidity differences are causing the light to bend (nearly always upwards, even on a convex Earth). It is said that the temperature difference needed is only 1°C in 100 cm for light to bend 6 cm over 1000m. Wilhelm Martin registered a 6 to 12 cm upward bend during the day, and at night a 2 cm upward bend in one direction and 6 cm downward bend in the opposite direction if the Earth were convex. Over land, there are two ways this temperature differential can occur: 1. wind; 2. a differential in the height of the ground away from the light rays.
1. Wind is very variable. On slightly to very breezy days looking out at the grasslands up to 500 m away behind my back garden, the long grass, shrubs and trees sway at varied speeds, height, directions and time. The breezes last from 1 to a few seconds. In places there is no breeze evident. Wouldn’t it be very hard, if not impossible to get a consistent reading if the variable wind were changing the light direction every few seconds? Also, nearly all these readings show consistently upward bending light (convex Earth) with the exact same reading on the 7 April and the 7 July three months later. Did the wind happen to be blowing consistently over those few minutes during both readings at the same temperature, direction, speed and location on those two dates? Sounds extremely improbable.
2. During the day, the temperature of the air needs to be hotter closer to the ground by 1 to 2°C over 1 m (around where Wilhelm measured), which needs to fall away from the light ray in order for it to refract upwards. I.e. the light moves into hotter, less dense air, as it travels from the measuring stick to the dumpy level.
Light entering less dense air due to height differential moves upwards towards the dumpy level.
Is the air hotter though? Normally not.
Air near the ground will generally be cooler than the air higher up during the daytime, and warmer at night, with a crossover in the morning and evening… Assuming it’s one meter, there isn’t usually much difference between the air temperature near the ground and the air temperature one meter above the surface. The exception is found at night when difference in the air temperature between one meter and the surface can be 2°C (3.5°F). This difference explains how frost can be observed when the morning low temperature is as high as 3°C (38°F).
Not only is the air cooler nearer to the ground, there also isn’t much difference in air temperature over 1m, except at night. This nocturnal inversion could explain the 6cm downward bend on 7 May between 12am to 2am on a convex Earth, but not all the other readings. It’s also a bit of a stretch that the same temperature differences occurred on both 7 April and 7 July to get the exact same readings.
So how would light bend in a concave Earth without refraction? It isn’t supposed to happen.
Engineers have recently (2012) found otherwise:
The Stanford solution capitalizes on recent research into photonic crystals – materials that can confine and release photons. To fashion their device, the team members created a grid of tiny cavities etched in silicon, forming the photonic crystal. By precisely applying electric current to the grid they can control – or “harmonically tune,” as the researchers say – the photonic crystal to synthesize magnetism and exert virtual force upon photons. The researchers refer to the synthetic magnetism as an effective magnetic field. The researchers reported that they were able to alter the radius of a photon’s trajectory by varying the electrical current applied to the photonic crystal and by manipulating the speed of the photons as they enter the system. This dual mechanism provides a great degree of precision control over the photons’ path, allowing the researchers to steer the light wherever they like.
The concave Earth is very similar to the above set up. The Earth is a cavity made up of mostly silicates. There are electric currents running through the crust and atmosphere – telluric currents. The light was bent by these artificially induced magnetic fields.
A key postulate in physics, the time-reversal symmetry of light, was broken by the researchers after they introduced a charge on the photons that reacts to the effective magnetic field the way an electron would to a real magnetic field. What this means, for engineers at least, is that a photon travelling forward will have different properties than when it is traveling backward, opening a whole new spec of technical possibilities… A fundamental principle of electronics is the ability to maneuver electrons through a given path. When an electron is met with an magnetic field, it will travel along the lines where resistance is lowest, typically in a circular path around the field. In a similar manner, the Stanford researchers have successfully managed to send photons in a circular motion around the synthetic magnetic field.
This is a brand new property of light where the photon acts like an electron in a magnetic field, which is made effective by putting a weak current through cavities of silicon. Coincidence?
Electrons act in magnetic lines of force just like iron filings which is the same as the path of sunlight in the Earth cavity and that in the electrified cavities of silicon.
If we apply this piece of engineering to the concave Earth, then the amount of light bend varies according to the amount of electric current or charge of the crust and atmosphere. It is said that the atmosphere is less charged at night and more charged during the day. This would agree with what Wilhelm martin found that light bent upwards the least at night.
Interestingly, water was also found to fall at sunset and rise at sunrise according to the charge of the atmosphere.
In the field observations it was found that water level in the well rises during sunrise, when ionosphere is excited by solar radiation, and drops during sunset (relaxation process in ionosphere). Moreover, it was shown that the water level in well correlates with geomagnetic field perturbations during geomagnetic storms.
Why is this? Because water is attracted to charge.
(Click to animate). Static electricity from a comb bends flowing water towards itself.
Could light in a concave Earth operate on the same or a similar principle? It looks like it. Laser light however doesn’t seem to, at least at the 2km range (see page 5 – Laser between two posts). Why? Laser light doesn’t scatter much (coherent) and is amplified – Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation. Radio waves have a greater horizon, the greater the amplification (power). We could say this is because radio waves bend less at greater amplification. The same may apply to laser.
Bending light doesn’t work on a flat Earth as we have already seen on page 8 (at least I can’t get it to work). Upward bending light also doesn’t work on a convex Earth unless the air is hotter closer to the ground by up to 2°C over 1m during the day (and up to 1°C over 1m at night, for 3 out of the 4 readings). Neither is a reality. There is a very plausible theory for bending light in the concave Earth. So on those grounds, Wilhelm Martin’s evidence is 95% conclusive that the Earth is concave.