NavList:

   

Reply

Bruce,
I find George's argument more convincing.
Let me try to rephrase it in a short and
more abstract form.

Consider two observers, one of height h (small)
another of height H (large).
Let L be the line from the eye of H,
tangent to the sphere, that is the line from her
eye to her horizon.
Now we can place the shorter observer h so
that his line from his eye to his horizon is
a PART of the line L.

Then whatever uncertainty in the dip h experiences
will also affect the H's sight PLUS H will have additional uncertainty
which comes from the additional segment of L from h's eye to H's eye.

I like this argument very much because of its very
general character. (No particular low of refraction is
assumed here).

Alex.

On Mon, 6 Dec 2004, Bruce Stark wrote:

> Thanks, Alex,
>
> I hope people will continue to look for more information. The crux of my
> argument, which I don't think has been addressed yet, was in the last paragraph:
>
> "Set a prism between you and a line on the wall. Put the prism near the wall
> and look at the line from across the room. You'll see the line not far from
> its true position. Bring the prism close to your eye and you'll see the line a
> considerable distance out of place."
>
> Bruce
>

   

Reply