On
23 October I was running outdoors about 4 PM, the half Moon 30 degrees
high in the southeastern sky, and the Sun a bit lower in the west. Watch
for this in November. The upper right of the Moon is brightly lit, while
its lower left is dark.
Moon and Sun diameters are
exaggerated here about tenfold
Evidently (one would think)
the Sun is somewhere to the upper right to so illuminate that half of the
Moon. But look where the Sun really is: at substantially lower altitude!
How can this be? Is the Sun not on a straight line symmetrically passing
through the bulge of the Moon's brightness? Extricate a shoelace and pull
it taut between your outstretched arms. It is straight, and as expected
it also looks straight no matter where or how you hold it. Hold it across
the Moon's disk, symmetrically bisecting the bright half: the end near
your right hand does indeed go through the lowering Sun. This is
just as it seemed it must be, but how is this comforting observation
compatible with the upper right of the Moon being bright, and the Sun sinking
lower toward the western horizon??
This seems very perplexing.
A straight line pointing upward and westward seems to bend down to skewer
the Sun. Somehow this straight line appears to curve. Let's see if we can
figure out how that can be. What else is straight out here? Do any other
straight lines curve? The horizon also is straight: hold the string along
it, horizontally. Now hold the taut string higher, still horizontal, maybe
30 degrees above the horizon. Still straight, of course, and parallel to
the straight horizon... but look how high it is in the middle, and how
much lower at the extremities, as though it would intersect the parallel
horizon if extrapolated a little further! This string is clearly straight,
yet also clearly and acutely bowed upward in the middle.
 |
Whoa! And why don't I see
the horizon bowed down, as much as I see the parallel shoestring bowed
up? Are these two straight lines somehow not equivalent? Maybe this has
something to do with the fact that the horizon has no ends and so resembles
a circle in that respect, so it can't be straight even though it looks
so?
BTW, the sky presents you
this setup twice a month, not just once: at the opposite quarter-moon phase
(7-9 November in this case) things look about the same in the early morning,
with east and west interchanged.
Here's a related observation.
Someday when the air is humid and there are a lot of fluffy clouds around
the sunset, notice the rays fanning out from the west as seen in the Arizona
state flag. These have to be parallel lines in 3d, as the direction to
the Sun is not measurably different from one hole to the next in clouds
less than a mile apart. Yet they fan out, all radial from the Sun.
Worse than that, if the air is humid or dusty enough, you can follow them
overhead and watch them spread apart as they go, and then behold their
re-convergence in the dark far distant east!
Maybe this has something to
do with optics in the eyeball? The eye is indeed like a ball, and the retina
inside it is like a hemisphere, and the world is projected onto it that
curved surface through a little hole in the front. Actually it is a fairly
big hole, and there is a lens, but never mind: the essential fact is that
the world is projected onto a hemisphere. Clearly, straight lines end up
curved on the retina. Maybe parallel lines now curve together in this distortion.
But how can the physical distortion matter anyhow? We know that images
are even further distorted onto the visual cortex of the brain, in fact
diversely so on every successive mapping to various parts of the brain.
The whole business even starts with splitting the image from each eye as
though by a samurai sword stroke to separate it onto to disjoint hemispheres.
Yet the image "looks" seamless. Somehow none of this interfered with your
doing plane geometry in high school, nor with your present-day concept
and evaluation of "straightness". In fact, no one sees with the whole
retina anyway. We see mainly with the central fovea, the area that has
not just black-white rods but almost all of the eye's color cone cells,
and that area is only about 15 degrees wide. I see the bowing of my elevated
horizontal shoestring by foveating its middle, then by foveating its left
end, then its right end, not by taking it in all at once. I see straightness,
sure enough, but I only logically infer curvature by seeing violations
of Euclidean geometry in separate foveal fixations. Well, I logically infer
it and it does make the string seem curved to me even while it also
seems perfectly straight.
This riddle is fun to sort
out. I recommend it to your attention, and I will be back in a week's time
to make further comments. Maybe you will send me some in the interim.