it isnt an experiment AT ALL.

Hanshan

npub1lxzaxzge0jq9u9cecucctdt5lslwgp7hcxmp2l0wn8r2ecjenwasu6svxa

hex

00009bdc9b778ee10ae669d76b3f0675837008fa2409951befcef8eb52f9e28b

nevent

nevent1qqsqqqymmjdh0rhpptnxn4mt8ur8tqmsprazgzv4r0hua78t2tu79zcprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuem4d36kwatvw5hx6mm9qgs0npwnpyvheqz7zuvuwvv9k460c0hyqlturds40hhfn34vufvehwcd6wckg

Kind-1 (TextNote)

2026-04-22T22:37:51Z

↳ Reply to Event not found

dc0edb054ae4e23295d1bb2772facbe9d82b13d82b1153ccde8cf387d82b54ed...

it isnt an experiment AT ALL.

its an alternative explanation that claims atmospheric refraction doesn't exist and observed star position is the true position and ties itself in knots trying to make a dome over a flat earth fit the observable data.

because the data shows that the observed occultation of star S over mountan A for two observers at different elevations and distances is NOT explained by simple trigonometry on a flat surface. it matches what you'd expect to find on a curved surface.

and if theres no refraction or terrestrial curvature, what causes the difference?

apparently they think we should just adjust the dome geometry or something.... theyre understandably silent on this point and only provide single observer measurements.

anyway its not an experiment that tests a hypothesis. they just say "refraction doesn't exist and observed star positions are the true positions."

Raw JSON

{
  "kind": 1,
  "id": "00009bdc9b778ee10ae669d76b3f0675837008fa2409951befcef8eb52f9e28b",
  "pubkey": "f985d309197c805e1719c73185b574fc3ee407d7c1b6157dee99c6ace2599bbb",
  "created_at": 1776897471,
  "tags": [
    [
      "e",
      "7bc79190494135955a7253af91fbce117de56788da14cfb3e281e1578bd1b110",
      "wss://relay.primal.net/",
      "root"
    ],
    [
      "e",
      "dc0edb054ae4e23295d1bb2772facbe9d82b13d82b1153ccde8cf387d82b54ed",
      "wss://nostr.wine",
      "reply"
    ],
    [
      "p",
      "3bcc5632a4e750953a2016f991ad8caeb18ce7537b82f25e22c0bd3b9003d8b8"
    ],
    [
      "client",
      "Wisp"
    ],
    [
      "nonce",
      "22163",
      "16"
    ]
  ],
  "content": "it isnt an experiment AT ALL.\n\nits an alternative explanation that claims atmospheric refraction doesn't exist and observed star position is the true position \nand ties itself in knots trying to make a dome over a flat earth fit the observable data.\n\nbecause the data shows that the observed occultation of star S over mountan A for two observers at different elevations and distances is NOT explained by simple trigonometry on a flat surface.\nit matches what you'd expect to find on a curved surface.\n\nand if theres no refraction or terrestrial curvature, what causes the difference?\n\napparently they think we should just adjust the dome geometry or something....\ntheyre understandably silent on this point and only provide single observer measurements.\n\nanyway \nits not an experiment that tests a hypothesis.\nthey just say \"refraction doesn't exist and observed star positions are the true positions.\"",
  "sig": "f53f8f21bdae38fd4632ea0e9251ddda0dbb095286767679d1ead1264cd942dec4afe39a995c4249c29daa571fdd10e9989a9927cc872484a56514a648bdebdc"
}