Concave Earth Thesis by WildHeretic
Material originally sourced from the oldWildHeretic website which no longer in operation
This page is part of a 3 part series
Concave Earth Thesis Part 1 of 3 by WildHeretic (Recovered)
Concave Earth Thesis Part 2 of 3 by WildHeretic (Recovered)
Concave Earth Thesis Part 3 of 3 by WildHeretic (Recovered)
All material below is credit to WildHeretic and has been recovered to share with the world. The data below is the opinion and research of an individual which may or may not be in agreement with the common concave earth understanding.
Introduction to CET
The following 8 article thesis is based on two premises which have been taken as facts:
- We live inside a concave Earth.
- The Sun has a bright side and a dark side.
The Sun as a sulfur lamp is only relevant for the Electric Sun – mechanism article yet to be published.
The gist of this entire thesis is largely speculative with the exception of Bendy light – the evidence which does not require any model of the Earth to be correct and therefore is the hardest to rebut.
There is even a “hidden” article (not in the side menu) on an electromagnetism hypothesis which attempts to connect the magnetic H-field of the holes near the poles and the Sun. This is purely hypothetical is merely a curiosity not to be taken seriously. It also needs badly updating.
Update 2: I had planned on completing the article “Gravity – anomalies and speculation”, but a revision of the first few articles is more urgent. I’ll start with NASA’s weird and wonderful orbiting machines as new important information has come to light which solves any possible issues and completes the circle.
I hope you get something useful out of what is posted so far, whether you agree with them or not. The journey is not yet finished.
Enjoy.
Wild Heretic
Equinox
The basic framework of the theory put forward here is the observations of the path of the Sun as it moves in the sky dome above our heads. We know some of the observed paths (arcs) of the Sun at different latitudes on Earth; and thanks to timeanddate.com we know at least the sunrise and sunset angles which deviate from East or West, and the angle of the Sun from the ground at noon (zenith), at any location and at any date. This data can give us the arc (path) of the Sun.
How does an internal half light, half dark Sun move in a concave Earth to give us its observed paths? Let’s start with the easiest observation which is the Sun at the equator on the equinoxes (March 20th and September 20th) and compare the position of the Sun in the sky mathematically to where the Sun should be in the Earth cavity.
Noon
Sun arc at the equator
On the equator on the equinoxes, an observer sees the Sun rise directly in the East and follow a path directly overhead so that at noon the Sun is vertically over the head of the observer and then sets directly in the West as the diagram below shows.
At the equator on the equinoxes, the Sun is seen to rise exactly East and travel directly overhead setting exactly West. 
A simple illustration showing the same effect. The equivalent in degrees would be sunrise: 90°, sunset: 270°, with a noon zenith at 90°.
This is verified by the website timeanddate.com by checking the Sun co-ordinates with the closest city to the equator, which is Pontianak in Indonesia at -0.02 latitude (practically bang on the equator). The location of other cities according to latitude can be found on this really helpful list. The latitude co-ordinates on this list are degrees/minutes/seconds (DMS) which I have converted to decimal and then verified using other sources. Occasionally, these other websites gave slightly different latitudes for New York, Pontianak and Punta, which have been used instead; and Dhaka and Sao Paulo have been rounded up to the nearest second decimal place. This DMS to decimal conversion is necessary so as to correspond to timeanddate. The ground co-ordinates on timeanddate are North(0°), East(90°), South(180°), and West(270°). The vertical noon position of the Sun ranges from 0° to 90°, with 90° being on the axis straight up vertically above the head of the observer and 0° being either on the southern horizon or northern one.
On March 21st 2013 at Pontianak, the Sun rose at 90°, set at 270°, and was 89.7° high at noon; but reaches it’s highest point of 89.9° the day before on March 20th (and still maintain the 90° and 270° for sunrise and sunset). This highest path is practically straight up with only 0.1° in the southern sky. This means that in a concave Earth model with the Sun possessing a dark and light side, the Sun must be positioned anywhere along the horizontal axis, but just about bang at the middle of the vertical one as the diagram below shows.
The Sun must be positioned somewhere on the horizontal axis if the midday Sun is seen straight overhead (90°) on the equator at the equinoxes.
However, at this time and at any position on Earth, day and night are very close to being equal in length – 12 hours each. This means that the Sun must be in or around the central axis as shown below.
Because the Earth receives just about 12 hours of night and day on the equinoxes, the Sun must be positioned at or near the center of both the horizontal and vertical axis of the Earth space.
The movement of the Sun on march 20th would be very similar to a spinning coin or an object in the center of a vortex as seen here:
The Sun spins at, or around, the center at the time of the equinoxes much like this matchstick revolving around the core of a water vortex, but without moving quickly downwards. (Click to animate) 
Perhaps a more accurate analogy would be a coin quickly and tightly spinning close to its axis. (Click to animate)
Merely for the sake of curiosity, I’ve also added a rough calculation below for the actual size of the Sun in the center of the Earth cavity.
The Sun’s apparent size in the sky is claimed to be between 0.52° and 0.54° of the total 180° of the sky “dome” above our heads. We are looking for its average size of 0.53° at the equinoxes. This is 1/339.62 of the 180° sky dome. The vertical diameter of the Earth is 6356.762km x 2 = 12713.524km (WGS84 ellipsoid model) which would make the Sun (12,713.524 / 339.62) = 37.434km or 23.26 miles in diameter (assuming of course that apparent size is in an any way accurate relationship to its actual one – this assumption is a huge one).
Sun arc at all other latitudes
The location of the Sun in the sky at noon also corroborates with the all other latitudinal positions if the Sun were at, or very close to, the center of the Earth space. The fact that the noon Sun position was 89.9° on March 20th 2013 (just in the southern sky) for Pontianak with a -0.02° latitude means that the Sun is shining 0.12° below the center of Earth space (-0.10° away from -0.02°). It looks to be the southern sky because the Sun is south of Pontianak during winter where it increases its angle by 0.4° per day around March 20th. If it were 0.6° difference then that 89.9° would be in the northern sky.
However, timeanddate only go to one decimal place. This unfortunately gives us a 0.09° leeway, e.g. the noon Sun could be 89.86° and rounded up to 89.9° right through to 89.94° and rounded down; or it could not even be measured to such a degree of accuracy at all. More importantly, the data from timeanddate is calculated (including the supposed refraction), not observed; therefore these figures can’t be taken as absolute gospel, especially when it comes down to hundredths of a degree. Let’s take the Sun at the -0.12° latitude and see the discrepancies.
If we look at a few of the other locations on the list such as New York City (40.71° latitude), we should see the Sun’s noon position at 49.17° in the southern sky (40.71° + 0.12° = 40.83°; 90° – 40.83° = 49.17°). The actual position on March 20th 2013 (the real equinox, when the Sun is at its highest point at the equator) was 49.4°, 0.23° further north than it would be if the Sun were close to being at the dead center.
It’s much easier to calculate (but not visualize) whether the Sun is further north or south than where it should be if it were in the center of Earth space by using the following diagrams:
For the northern hemisphere on March 20th, if the actual position of the noon Sun is higher than that calculated, then it is further north. This is because the Sun is always below you. 
This can be visualized in a different, albeit in a probably less easy way.
For the southern hemisphere on March 20th, if the actual position of the noon Sun is higher than that calculated, then it is further south. This is because the Sun is always above you. 
Again, using the “circle of the Earth” is another way of working it out, although probably harder to visualize.
Interestingly, this is the same way latitude (and longitude) is determined in the real world.
Latitude and longitude are angular measures: latitude tells us the angle to which a point is elevated above the plane of the equator, as measured from the center of the Earth. Taken together, the latitude and longitude do not uniquely define a point; they define a ray from the center of the Earth.
Latitude is defined by “a ray from the center of the Earth“.
You can see this pattern being corroborated with all other latitudes as the examples in the table below shows. (Data taken from timeanddate.com)
March 20th 2013 Latitude Location Sun at Noon Sunrise Sunset 82.5 Nunavut, Canada, Alert 7.7 84 278 64.84 Fairbanks, Alaska, USA 25.4 88 272 60.17 Helsinki, Finland 29.8 89 272 40.71 New York City, USA 49.4 89 271 23.7 Dhaka, Bangladesh 66.2 90 270 23.6 Muscat, Oman 66.4 90 270 10.66 Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago 79.4 90 270 10.50 Caracas, Venezuela 79.6 90 270 -0.02 Pontianak, Indonesia 89.9 90 270 -11.66 Lubumbashi, Dem of Congo 78.4 90 270 -23.55 Sao Paulo, Brazil 66.4 90 270 -41.28 Wellington, New Zealand 48.9 91 269 -53.15 Punta Arenas, Chile 36.8 91 269
Take Helsinki for example, at 60.17° latitude, the Sun at noon should be (60.17° + 0.12° = 60.29°; 90° – 60.29°) = 29.71° in the southern sky, making the actual position 0.09° further north instead (29.8°). Caracas is situated at 10.5° latitude. The Sun at noon should be (10.5° + 0.12° = 10.62°; 90° – 10.62°) = 79.38° in the southern sky, whereas its actual position is 0.22° further north (79.6°). Dhaka has a 23.7° latitude which puts the noon Sun at 66.18°, whereas its actual position is 66.2° which is 0.02° further north. Sao Paulo is (23.55° – 0.12° = 23.43°; 90° – 23.43°) = 66.57° where the actual noon Sun is 66.4°, which is 0.17° further north than it should be.
Also on its own, the 0-90° noon sun data doesn’t differentiate between the Sun traveling in a northern arc or a southern one; but we know already that the Sun is always in the southern sky as seen from the northern hemisphere on the equinoxes and vice verse for the southern hemisphere. This fact also further reinforces the Sun to be very near the center of the Earth space.
The Sun always travels in a southern arc when seen from the northern hemisphere on the equinoxes; and a northern arc when observed from the southern hemisphere.
You’ll have noticed that all the cities in our sample showed an actual position of the Sun to be further north which could be an indication that the Sun was not really -0.12° below the center on March 20th 2013, but a bit further north instead. Below is a table noting the differences for a -0.12° latitude Sun, and one at 0.00° (dead center). A (+) symbol under the tilt columns means that the actual Sun is further north than its calculated noon position shows it should be, and vice verse for (-).
March 20th 2013 latitude Latitude Location -0.12° Sun 0.00° Sun 82.5 Nunavut, Canada, Alert +0.32 +0.20 64.84 Fairbanks, Alaska, USA +0.36 +0.24 60.17 Helsinki, Finland +0.09 -0.03 40.71 New York City, USA +0.23 +0.11 23.7 Dhaka, Bangladesh +0.02 -0.10 23.6 Muscat, Oman +0.12 0.00 10.66 Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago +0.18 +0.06 10.50 Caracas, Venezuela +0.22 +0.10 -0.02 Pontianak, Indonesia 0.00 -0.12 -11.66 Lubumbashi, Dem of Congo +0.06 -0.06 -23.55 Sao Paulo, Brazil +0.17 +0.05 -41.28 Wellington, New Zealand -0.06 -0.18 -53.15 Punta Arenas, Chile +0.17 +0.05
Comparing the figures from above shows the -0.12° latitude of the Sun to be probably too far south as all but Wellington show the actual position of the Sun to be further north. This very small sample indicates that the Sun is probably 0.00° on the vertical axis of the Earth cavity, or bang in the middle.
Possible discrepancies
1. Longitude
As well as timeanddate.com calculating and not observing, and only to one decimal place, there is another possible variable: the constantly moving Sun. Because the Sun is always on the move,locations at different longitudes should show different discrepancies in their noon Sun positions, and of course those cities near enough on the same longitude should show similar differences… but do they? Let’s have a look at a quick sample of cities at similar longitudes if the Sun were at 0.00° latitude.
March 20th 2013 Longitude(DMS) Latitude(decimal) Location Noon Sun Calculated Difference 18°04’E 59.33 Stockholm 30.7 30.67 +0.03 18°21’E 43.85 Sarajevo 46.1 46.15 -0.05 18°25’E -33.93 Cape town 56.1 56.07 -0.03 18°33’E 54.5 Gdynia 35.5 35.5 0.00 18°35’E 4.37 Bangui 85.6 85.63 -0.03
March 20th 2013 Longitude(DMS) Latitude(decimal) Location Noon Sun Calculated Difference 2°11’E 41.38 Barcelona 48.6 48.62 -0.02 2°21’E 48.85 Paris 41.2 41.15 +0.05 2°26’E 6.37 Cotonou 83.6 83.63 -0.03 2°36’E 6.5 Porto-Novo 83.5 83.5 0.00 2°39’E 39.57 Palma 50.4 50.43 -0.03
March 20th 2013 Longitude(DMS) Latitude(decimal) Location Noon Sun Calculated Difference 61°05’W 14.6 Fort-de-France 75.5 75.4 +0.10 61°14’W 13.15 Kingstown 76.9 76.85 +0.05 61°23’W 10.5 Chaguanas 79.6 79.5 +0.10 61°23’W 15.3 Roseau 74.8 74.7 +0.10 61°28’W 10.28 San Fernando 79.8 79.72 +0.08
March 20th 2013 Longitude(DMS) Latitude(decimal) Location Noon Sun Calculated Difference 81°01’W 46.48 Sudbury 43.6 43.52 +0.08 81°03’W 34 Columbia 56.1 56 +0.10 81°18’W 28.42 Orlando 61.6 61.58 +0.02 81°23’W 19.3 George Town 70.8 70.7 +0.10 81°38’W 38.35 Charleston 51.8 51.65 +0.15
March 20th 2013 Longitude(DMS) Latitude(decimal) Location Noon Sun Calculated Difference 108°19’E 22.82 Nanning 67.1 67.18 -0.08 109°20’E -0.02 Pontianak 89.9(S) 89.98(N) -0.12 110°21’E 1.6 Kuching 88.3 88.4 -0.10 110°22’E -7.8 Yogyakarta 82.3 82.2 -0.10 110°25’E -6.97 Semarang 83.1 83.03 -0.07
The first 2 tables are all tightly centered around zero difference at -0.05° to +0.03°; the third is even closer together at +0.05° to +0.10° (which may have something to do with the close latitudes), as well as the fifth at -0.07° to -0.12°, with the fourth table being the least close at +0.02° to +0.15°. So does longitude have a bearing on the discrepancies? Probably.
2. Earth ellipsoid
Yet another possible cause for the discrepancies in timeanddate’s figures could be the fact that the Earth is supposedly not a perfect sphere but a very slightly squashed one. The difference between the vertical (minor axis) and the horizontal (major) one is supposed to be less than 0.34%. There is hardly any difference in this shape and a perfect sphere.
How do they know the Earth is wider at the equator? Did they travel vertically up to one of the poles and back down the other side with a measuring instrument? No, all they did was measure the angle of the noon Sun and the stars in the sky relative to the horizon at different latitudes and fill in the blanks. For example, the Bessel Earth ellipsoid measures the angle of 38 stars and the noon Sun at 10 different latitudes.
The problem is, the Earth is a very lumpy ellipsoid and so one particular model (reference ellipsoid) is chosen which best fits the topography of a particular region, such as Bessel being used for Europe and Japan. Even then, it isn’t absolutely 100% accurate in all places as it is a mathematical generalization. Also data sets (i.e. computer software) which reference global latitudes use the average mean. This is probably one of the reasons when looking for the latitudes of the cities in the tables of this article, you will find Google to be slightly off most of the time compared to other websites, with even one or two websites differing amongst themselves. (Where possible, I’ve consistently chosen the consensus latitude from other websites rather than Google in these tables). For these two reasons, there are sometimes bound to be discrepancies between latitude and the noon Sun data from timeanddate.com.
Lastly, there is also another possible reason for these differences: refraction, that good old excuse whipped out for any anomaly. In a concave Earth (or a convex one for that matter) does refraction of the sunlight actually occur at all, and if it does, how and when? Before addressing this issue, we need to look at the path of sunlight from the Sun.
Noon bendy light
Working out the position of the noon Sun in the sky relative to the Sun’s central location is all very well and accurate mathematically, but does it describe sunlight paths in reality? There are three serious problems with sunlight traveling in a straight line from the center.
1. Sun’s constant round shape
The Sun is observed to be the same size and shape regardless of the latitude of the observer. An observer in Pontianak sees the same circular Sun as an observer in New York. If the Sun were in the center and its light traveled in a straight line, then the New York observer would be looking “down” onto the Sun. This would make the Sun considerably more elliptical across the Sun’s horizontal axis (a squashed Sun). Look down at a coin from the top to see this effect.
The Sun at Noon during winter on the Scottish isle of Islay (about 55.57°N) 
The Sun at Noon from Pensacola Beach, Florida during the winter solstice (about 30.33° N).
There are exceptions. Above +66.5° (Arctic Circle) and below -66.5° (Antarctic Circle), the polar Sun is occasionally photographed or filmed as being elliptical. This ellipses however is usually vertical, i.e. squashed from the sides, not the top. Very occasionally the Sun appears as a cross, squashed on both sides. Often, there is no ellipse at all and the Sun is perfectly round like on the equator. What is sometimes causing this ellipse effect is unknown to me. Obviously there is some varying factor involved.
2. Rectilineator contradiction
In a nutshell, the rectilineator was an extremely straight and right-angled device which was initially leveled and then extended in a straight line, measuring itself against a tideless ocean over a few miles. The readings showed that the Earth is curving upwards because this very straight device “sunk” lower and lower into the ocean in exact relationship to the size of the Earth.
Because the rectilineator was straight and initially level, its right-angle to the level, i.e the angle pointing upwards towards the sky, must always have been pointing at the center of the Earth. If it were not, then it couldn’t have got the readings of a concave crust.
The right angle of the rectilineator pointed towards the center of the Earth (at the start only) because it was 1. level at the start, and 2. when extended showed the crust to curve upwards in accordance with the size of the Earth.
Because the Sun is in the center of the cavity and straight up is always pointing towards the center, which is what the rectilineator experiment showed, the Sun should always be seen above our heads (90°) no matter the latitude of the observer. As we have seen this isn’t the case. We can see that on the equinoxes, the very far north (82.5° N) Nunavut in Canada has the Sun appearing 7.7° above the horizon in the southern sky at noon. The higher we go towards the north pole, the lower the Sun towards the south.
3. Compass orientation
For a person standing on the crust in a concave Earth, where is north and south? North curves upwards along the crust towards the north pole and south curves downwards along the crust towards the south pole. This means that for the Sun to be seen near the south horizon, the sunlight must be near level with the crust coming from that perfect south direction.
The further the Sun appears to be south at noon, the closer sunlight has to be level with the crust coming from the south.
Bendy light
The Sun has been mathematically deduced to be at (or very near) the center of the Earth cavity. Therefore, this can only mean that light must bend at varied angles depending on latitude. There is no bend at all for observers at the equator, but sunlight must increasingly bend the further north and south the observer is situated. There is no other option because the Sun is at the center of the cavity.
Except at the equator, on the equinoxes the Sun at noon is seen at different angles than straight overhead. 
Sunlight must bend at varied angles depending on latitude because the Sun is at the center.
Sunlight that misses the crust must bend fully around and travel into the back of the Sun as can be seen below.
Sunlight that doesn’t hit the crust will bend all the way round into the back of the Sun.
Now let’s look at refraction for all these varied angles.
Refraction
1. Straight line light
In this model, the sunlight emanating from the center is only near enough straight on the equinox at the equator.
Sunlight is only straight when pointing directly at the equator on the equinoxes.
Does light refract through mediums of different densities when shined directly from the center onto a spherical concave surface? Direct vertical light shows no refraction as the diagrams below show:
Direct vertical light through two mediums of different density shows no refraction. 
The same, but through a semi-circular glass block.
Here, the light is refracted more vertically and then stays at this angle as it leaves the glass on the circular edged side.
The probable reason for this lack of exit refraction is that because the light ray inside the glass is coming from the center of the circle, the curved outside line of the glass block is always directly perpendicular to the incoming light ray which means that the light is always shining at a vertical angle out of the glass, hence the lack of refraction and displacement.
This means that in a concave Earth, the noon Sun on the equinox at the equator only shows no refraction, magnification or displacement whether traveling through glass or the atmosphere. But what about the other latitudes with their various angles of bend?
2. Bendy light
Let’s start with the glass. We don’t live in the glass. We live in the atmosphere. That might sound obvious, but it is important for refraction. The glass layer 100km high may refract light a lot, but it is only a certain thickness and so strictly speaking the glass displaces the light, rather than refracts it. Light leaving the glass is refracted back to the same angle before it left. The amount of displacement depends on the thicknesses. How thick is the glass? Completely unknown. If the space shuttle was breaking through, then not very thick at all. Meteorites are most certainly melting through and some of them are very small. 30cm, 1m, 5m thick? Even if it were 1000m thick and impenetrable, this wouldn’t be too much displacement at 100km altitude. At a few meters thick, the displacement is for practical purposes non-existent.
The amount of displaced light depends on the thickness of the glass.
What about the atmosphere? How much does extreme bending light refract through air? The atmosphere is 100km thick, but varies in density and is only air which at standard pressure (0°C at 1 atm) has a refractive index of 1.000277. The website endmemo.com shows that light coming in at 90° (noon at the poles on the equinoxes) gives us 88.65°. Other websites give slightly different angles however. So the noon Sun refracts by 1.35° at the north and south pole. 88° gives us 87.59° – 0.41° refraction. 80° gives 79.9° refraction, 60° gives 59.97°, 40° gives 39.98° and 20° is 19.99°. So for all latitudes under 80°, refraction is merely in the few hundredths of a degree. This gives us another reason for any discrepancy in timeanddate.com’s data set.
That is the noon Sun dealt with. What about dawn and dusk?
Dawn and dusk
Dawn and dusk bendy light
As we have seen in the above table (reproduced again below), the Sun is seen to rise at 90° and set at 270° at every latitude on the Earth (with minor deviations for those locations closer to the poles) at the time of the equinoxes.
March 20th 2013 Latitude Location Sun at Noon Sunrise Sunset 82.5 Nunavut, Canada, Alert 7.7 84 278 64.84 Fairbanks, Alaska, USA 25.4 88 272 60.17 Helsinki, Finland 29.8 89 272 40.71 New York City, USA 49.4 89 271 23.7 Dhaka, Bangladesh 66.2 90 270 23.6 Muscat, Oman 66.4 90 270 10.66 Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago 79.4 90 270 10.50 Caracas, Venezuela 79.6 90 270 -0.02 Pontianak, Indonesia 89.9 90 270 -11.66 Lubumbashi, Dem of Congo 78.4 90 270 -23.55 Sao Paulo, Brazil 66.4 90 270 -41.28 Wellington, New Zealand 48.9 91 269 -53.15 Punta Arenas, Chile 36.8 91 269
For what it is worth, timeanddate.com have a illustration to show this 90°/270° angle as seen below. Using Photoshop’s handy 3D sphere effect, you can see how this straight angle fits nicely on to a globe. It is the same effect whether the Earth is convex or concave.
The Sun rises and sets in a straight vertical line (90° and 270°) across the map of the Earth at the equinoxes. Also regarding the position of the noon sun, even timeanddate.com say “The Sun’s position is marked with this symbol: Sun symbol. At this location, the Sun will be at its zenith (directly overhead) in relation to an observer.” 
The same 2d image transformed by Photoshop’s “globe” 3d effect to show a more accurate 3d presentation of dawn and dusk at the equinoxes. The effect is equally valid whether concave or convex.
Exactly like the noon Sun at the poles, sunlight at dawn and dusk must be running nearly parallel to the crust to get the Sun coming up at 90° just above the east horizon and setting at 270° just above the west one. At the equator only, sunlight bends less towards noon until it is straight at noon, and then increases its bend away from noon towards dusk. The sunlight paths along the equator east to west (longitude) are the same as the paths sunlight travels in the north/south direction (latitude) which we have already seen.
At the equator only, sunlight bends less towards noon, and bends more away from noon.
Bendy light in 3D
The combination of dawn and dusk at the equator and the north-south sunlight bend forms a shape like the four legs of a coat stand. Now fill in the spaces between the four legs and we get the “top of a circus tent”.
These four curved legs of coat stand are a similiar shape to the four paths of bending light. 
When the rest of the light is added, we get varying degrees of bend, making light project in a “top of a circus tent” shape.
Steve has a good illustration of this shape (except his sun is nearer to the crust than my model).
Light bending in 3D, like a circus top.
It is very hard to visualize the 90°/270° angles at higher latitudes, near the poles for example, with the circus top model, but it works because the Earth is a concave ball. Imagining a circle band going around the Earth at high latitude near the poles makes it a lot easier. If I am standing 80° north I will still observe the Sun on the equinoxes to come and leave around the 90°/270° angle. However, the angle of sunlight from the Sun disk will be just° 10 off the vertical 90° angle, i.e. also 80°.
Imagine the above longitude circle band is near the poles. Sunlight still appears and leaves at roughly 90°/270° at the circle despite it being projected from the Sun at an angle not much further out than vertically up.
In the concave Earth model, the arc of the Sun is NOT a physical ball rising up above the horizon and around the convex ball/flat Earth (geocentric model) or the ball Earth turning on its axis in relation to the ball Sun (heliocentric model). The arc is caused by the differing amounts of bend of sunlight, with dawn and dusk having a purely horizontal (90°) bend and the Sun’s light at noon having the least amount of bend for that particular latitude.
That bendy light shape sure looks familiar.
Sunlight and magnetism
Both the 2D and 3D version of the bending light is very similar to how iron filings act in a magnetic field around a magnet.
2D Iron filings look exactly like sunlight fields when the poles (of this gramm magnet) are flatter than the norm. 
The magnetic B-field is the traditional squashed vortices alignment. The above diagram shows a current loop (ring) that goes into the page at the x and comes out at the dot.
(Click on video to animate.) Iron filings suspended in oil show that they align themselves in loops. 
The same would-be loops demonstrated with magnetite.
Because the Sun in a concave Earth is disk-like and pointing at the equator on the equinoxes, the above diagram of a loop of wire is a very good representation of the Sun itself. It also demonstrates how the Sun’s magnetic B-field is on its side pointing at the equator and is the same path its sunlight follows. Could the Sun be magnetic in this theory? Yes. Due to the content of meteorites, the Sun has been theorized to be made out of a permalloy of low nickel content (30% to 50%), probably Invar (36%). All nickel/iron alloys are soft magnets, i.e. very easily magnetized.
Notice how the suspended iron filings are curving around the poles in 3D in a ball shape. This ball shape is actually called a horn torus. The Sun’s magnetic field and its light path are a “horn torus on its side” pointing at the equator on the equinoxes. The nearest real world device is an electronic transformer with loads of wire windings, but even this isn’t an exact analogy.
The horn torus is the one shape to describe the path of sunlight. 
More accurately, it is the horn torus on its side pointing at the equator which describes the path of sunlight at the equinoxes. It is also layered just like sunlight.
(Click to animate). A 2D horn torus with rotation demonstrates the path of sunlight perfectly. 
A doughnut transformer is said to have lots of advantages over the traditional shape. The above photo isn’t the ideal analogy because 1. it isn’t a horn torus; 2. there needs to be “infinitely” more windings and; 3. the windings need to be perfectly circular.
Light isn’t supposed to be affected by magnetism alone because it isn’t a dipole (two poles). However, engineers have bent light in a cavity of electrified silicon similar to the way electrons follow the magnetic field lines. In essence they have created mini-Earth’s.
It’s not over yet. The amount of daylight on the equinoxes at the equator and refraction of the dawn and dusk Sun’s rays in a concave Earth can reveal an interesting clue as to the exact location of the Sun in the Earth cavity.
Exact Sun location
If the Sun is in the dead center of Earth space, then there should be either exactly (if there is no refraction) or very slightly less (with refraction) than 12 hours of daylight on March 20th at the equator. However, Pontianak (at the equator) experienced 12 hours 6 minutes and 29 seconds of daylight on March 20th 2013 according to timeanddate.com. On the face of it, this would mean that the Sun would be somewhere behind the dead center of Earth space on the horizontal axis. This info is from timeanddate.com, not to be confused with dateandtime.info which funnily enough give us a slightly higher number of 12 hours 6 minutes and 49 seconds showing us that all data is calculated and not observed.
However, various websites say that it takes exactly 12 hours for the geometric center of the Sun to disappear below the horizon and the same for it to rise above the horizon on March 20th. How much of the Sun is below its geometric center when it disappears below the horizon and how much above it when it rises to give us these extra minutes of daylight over 12 hours? The Sun is 0.53° at its average (equinox) size at noon; this apparent size may be misleading in a concave Earth, but it is the only measurement available to us. We want half of this below the horizon and half above, so we take the entire 0.53°. Does 0.53° give us the extra 6 minutes and 29 seconds?
The extra 6 minutes 29 seconds of daylight over the 12 hours on March 20th is an extra 389 seconds. 12 hours is 43200 seconds. If we divide this by 389 we get 111.05. This means that the extra 6 min 29 seconds is 1/111.05 of the 90° along the horizontal axis behind the dead center, which is 0.81°. This means that we have an extra 0.28° (0.81° – 0.53°) of daylight behind the center on the horizontal axis, which is where the Sun must be if there were no atmospheric refraction. Or, according to dateandtime.info, 409 seconds. 43200 / 409 = 105.62. 1/105.62 of 90° is 0.852°. 0.852° – 0.53° = 0.32°, an extra 0.32° along the horizontal.
The Sun could be 0.28° or 0.32° behind the center of Earth space on March 20th if the geometric center of the Sun takes precisely 12 hours to rotate from dawn till dusk and there is no refraction.
The direction of refraction is the opposite to a convex Earth. Instead of light reaching further out along the crust, light falls short instead.
Light coming in at ±90° on a convex Earth would “reach out” further along the crust. 
Light coming in at ±90° on a concave Earth would fall short instead.
So refraction would put the Sun further behind the center even more depending on how refractive the light is. For example, if the light refracted by an extra 0.5° degree, then the Sun must be 0.28° + 0.5° or 0.78° behind the center of Earth space in order for Pontianak to experience the extra 6 minutes and 29 seconds (i.e. the extra 0.81° behind the center on the horizontal axis). This is because sunlight is falling short by 0.5° due to refraction in a concave Earth. For dateandtime.info’s figure of 0.32°, the Sun would be 0.82° behind.
We can’t say for certain that the Sun is positioned at either 0.78° or 0.82° or some other location as 1. we don’t know the exact angle of refraction, only an estimate, and 2. the exact observed amount of extra sunlight at the equator on March 20th is unknown (only calculated)… unless a reader who lives on the equator can record it for us. However, the solstice article strongly points to the figure really being 0.78° at the March equinox.
September Equinox
What about the September equinox? Is it the same as March? On September 20th 2013 Pontianak experienced 12 hours 6 minutes and 27 seconds. These 2 seconds less than the March equinox equates to 0.806° as opposed to March’s 0.81° (43200 / 387 = 111.63; 90° / 111.63 = 0.806°). This means the Sun is (0.81° – 0.806°) = 0.004° less than 0.78° on September 20th – 0.776°, which makes it practically the same as the March equinox.
Sun precession
So far, this would mean that the Sun would be revolving around the center of Earth space similar to a cylinder shape on March and September 20th, shining somewhere behind the center in a tight cylinder shape as drawn below… unless the actual observed amount of equatorial daylight is really less then 24 hours by an amount of atmospheric refraction minus the 0.53° of the top/bottom halves of the Sun. E.g if the refraction is 0.53° short, then this would cancel out the extra 0.53° of the Sun’s two halves of its diameter and so the equatorial daylight would have to register less than 24 hours if the Sun were to be in front of the center – highly unlikely. Interestingly, this tight cylinder shape is the same movement as a fast spinning gyroscope, or gyroscopic precession. The difference is that the face of the Sun is pointing horizontally at the equator, and not upwards like a gyroscope.
On the equinoxes the Sun revolves about +/-1° tightly around the dead center of Earth space – continually shining through the center. The shape of its revolution would be that of a cylinder. 
(Click to animate). A fast spinning gyroscope can move around its axis in an upright cylindrical shape.
This precession solves the final issue. Timeanddate.com say they accommodate convex Earth refraction in their noon Sun calculations. (Altitude means the angle of the noon Sun in the sky.):
“The altitude takes into account typical refraction in the Earth’s atmosphere.”
As we have seen convex Earth refraction is the opposite of concave Earth refraction. This fact would make the noon Sun figures a little less accurate for a concave Earth. Luckily, the position of the Sun behind the center of the earth cavity creates a rough equivalent of convex refraction.
We have just determined the position of the equinox Sun to be roughly somewhere around 1° behind the horizontal axis of the Earth cavity. What effect would this have on the noon Sun angles? The Sun at the equator would show no discrepancies (just as if there were no refraction), but these differences would gradually increase until their maximum at the poles. The exact figures are unknown as I am not a mathematician, but we can work out a rough guide.
Firstly, the further back away from the center the Sun is, the less its angle. For example, at 20° latitude the noon Sun would be positioned at 70° up in the sky. If we moved the Sun 90° across the horizontal axis (the furthest it can go) where the crust is, the noon Sun angle would only appear to be 10° or 80° up in the sky. This is demonstrated below using the software illustrator to find the angles (accurate to 1°).
The further back the Sun is along the horizontal axis, the lower the angle and therefore the higher the Sun is seen in the sky.
What about a 45° latitude or 70° etc.? When the Earth is 90° across the horizontal (double the horizontal distance across from center) from the center, the relationship is half and so a higher latitude away from the center means a higher angle as can be seen below:
The higher the latitude, the greater the angle. If the Sun were twice the distance along the horizontal axis from the center, the angle is always half what it would be if the Sun were in the center.
This means that the angle would be more vertical the higher the latitude either side of the equator. This means from the northern hemisphere the south gradient of the meridian would be reduced causing the sun to appear further north towards the zenith (directly overhead) than it would be if it were at the dead center. So if the Sun were double the distance across from the center, a 70° latitude would appear in the sky in the same position as it would at 35° latitude if the Sun were in the absolute center of Earth’s cavity.
The Sun isn’t twice across from the center though. It is somewhere around +/-1° behind the center. What is the relationship now? Using the software illustrator, when halving a circle we reach one and half times the distance across (45°) the horizontal axis. Half it again and again for a total of six times, we get 1.4° behind the center. Seven times would get us 0.7°, but this is too fine to measure with illustrator. The difference between 1.4° behind the center and the center itself is about 1° when drawing a line straight to the North Pole. Illustrator can only go to 1° accuracy and looked to be less than 1° when drawing it, so the relationship is somewhere around 1.4, 1.5 or 1.6 to one maybe.
The relationship between 1.4° across to the vertical is around 1.5 or 1.6 to 1 perhaps.
1.6/1 for 1° is 0.625° off at the North pole (its highest deviation) than it would be were the Sun directly at the absolute center. So we have 0° deviation at the equator all the way up to 0.625° maybe at the North Pole. Strangely enough, this 0.6° deviation is roughly the same as the refraction of light from a vacuum to air when traveling at 89° (practically horizontal) to the air line, according to endemol.com.
Both the supposed refraction of the noon Sun on a convex Earth and the deviation of a “behind the center” Sun on a concave one, cause the Sun to appear higher in the sky than it actually is or would-be, and roughly at the same amount. The figures wouldn’t tally exactly with each other and so we would expect some very small discrepancies with timeanddate’s data.
Summary
- Due to the approximate 12 hours of daylight on the equinoxes at the equator and the position of the Sun in the sky on the equinoxes at various latitudes, the Sun is deemed to be roughly at the center of the Earth cavity at these times of the year.
- The Sun is calculated to be approximately 37.434km in diameter.
- On the equinoxes, the Sun is spinning East to West like a coin.
- Latitude is traditionally measured as a point from the equator as measured from the center of the Earth. Both latitude and longitude are defined as a ray from the center of the Earth.
- The variables looked at so far between timeanddate.com’s arc of the Sun data and latitude coordinates are: 1. the data is only calculated, not observed; 2. there is no second decimal place in the sun arc data, unlike latitude; 3. Varied longitudes change the noon Sun data due to the Sun’s rotation in the Earth cavity; 4. The Earth as an ellipsoid is a mathematical generalization, i.e. a calculation, which makes latitude also a calculation; 5. Refraction through the atmosphere in a concave Earth, adding a few hundredths of a degree to the inaccuracy.
- The displacement of sunlight by the glass layer 100km high is reasoned to be extremely small due to the relatively small thickness of the glass.
- The atmosphere does refract the sunlight at dawn and dusk by about 0.4° to 1°; but this refraction makes sunlight fall short in a concave Earth, which is the opposite to a convex one.
- Mathematically sunlight must originate from the center in a concave Earth, but realistically this is impossible due to 1. the Sun’s constant round shape at all altitudes; 2. the initially leveled Rectilineator proving a concave; Earth; and 3. the actual physical north/south orientation when on the crust.
- For the Sun to be in the center and these three contradictions to be reconciled, light must bend at varied angles from 0° at noon on the equator to 90° at dawn and dusk and at the north and south pole.
- Sunlight in 3D shines on the Earth as a curved cone, or circus tent top.
- Sunlight travels in the exact same shape as both a 2D and 3D magnetic B-field around a current carrying loop.
- The Sun on both equinoxes is estimated to be about 1° behind the central axis of the Earth cavity, shining through it. The reasons are based on the apparent size of the Sun in the sky, the amount of refraction of incoming 90° sunlight, and the amount of daylight experienced at the equator on the equinoxes.
- The Sun precesses anti-clockwise around the center of the Earth cavity.
- The Sun’s position behind the center of the north-south axis in a concave Earth roughly equates to noon Sun refraction on a convex Earth, which timeanddate.com include in their data.
Finally, the equinox is finished. Now let’s look at the solstice and see how that works in a concave Earth.
Solstice
This is not an easy article to follow. It is similar to the mathematical part of the Equinox article, but on steroids. Unfortunately it is necessary to do the math, even though I am not a mathematician. If you can follow my thought process through the numbers then more power to you. I’ve done my best to make it as presentable and easy to understand as possible, but it still requires effort. Let’s start with the simpler stuff first.
General
June Solstice at noon
The summer solstice data (June 21st for the northern hemisphere) differs to the equinoxes in the following way. (source: timeanddate.com)
June 21st 2013 Latitude Location Sun at Noon Sunrise Sunset 82.5 Alert, Canada 30.9 - 64.84 Fairbanks, Alaska, USA 48.6 15 345 60.17 Helsinki, Finland 53.3 34 326 40.71 New York City, USA 72.7 58 302 23.7 Dhaka, Bangladesh 89.7 64 296 23.6 Muscat, Oman 89.8 64 296 10.66 Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago 77.2 66 294 10.50 Caracas, Venezuela 77.1 66 294 -0.02 Pontianak, Indonesia 66.5 67 293 -11.66 Lubumbashi, Dem of Congo 54.9 66 294 -23.55 Sao Paulo, Brazil 43 65 295 -41.28 Wellington, New Zealand 25.3 59 301 -53.15 Punta Arenas, Chile 13.5 50 310
Looking at the noon position first, we see that Pontianak is exactly 66.5°. The sun is seen to travel in a northern arc by an observer on the equator on June 21st. This means the Sun is seen at 23.5° from the 90° (which is directly overhead) in the northern sky.
Anyone at the equator sees the Sun rise, peak and set in the northern hemisphere at about 23.5° away from a point straight above the observer’s head (90°).
At the equinoxes, the Sun at the noon position shows its real location if it were in the center of the Earth space. If this still holds true for the summer solstice data (above table), then the Sun could be 23.48° higher on the vertical axis towards the north pole (it is 23.48° rather than 23.50° because of Pontianak’s -0.02° latitude).
With the information so far, the Sun could be 23.48° above the horizontal axis on June 21st.
This 23.48° movement roughly computes for all the latitudes. Take New York for example where the Sun is 72.7° in the southern sky at noon on June 21st. NY’s latitude is 40.71°, so 40.71° from 90° is 49.29°. This means that at the equinoxes the Sun should be only 49.29° in the southern sky (actual position is 49.4°). Add 23.48° for the summer solstice position of the Sun and we get 72.77°. The actual noon position is 72.70°, 0.07° further south than it’s calculated one. (Remember, a lower degree in the southern sky is further south, away from the straight overhead angle – 90°).
Again, looking at Helsinki, the Sun is 53.3° in the southern sky at noon. Helsinki’s latitude of 60.17° from 90° is 29.83°. This means that at the equinoxes the Sun should be only 29.83° in the southern sky (actual position is 29.8°). Add 23.48° for the summer solstice position of the Sun and we get 53.31°. That is just about bang on the actual noon Sun position. Caracas‘s latitude is 10.5°, which puts it 12.98° south of the 23.48° Sun, which means the noon position should be 77.02° on the northern side of 90°. The actual location is 77.1° in the northern sky, putting it only 0.08° further south than it should be. Dhaka at 23.7° latitude should have a noon Sun position of 89.78° (23.7° – 23.48° = 0.22° away from 90°) in the southern sky. The actual position of 89.7° which is only 0.08° further south (although timeanddate don’t publish data to 2 decimal places so the true discrepancy, if any, is unknown).
Except for Helsinki, the other three examples above have a constant slightly further south (0.08°) noon Sun than calculated. Maybe the Sun is not at 23.48° after all. If we take Dhaka or Muscat as a reference point, then we get 23.40° instead. Maybe it is 23.43°, which is the heliocentric angle of the tilting Earth. Let’s compare those three angles and see which one makes more sense. A (-) symbol under the “Sun pos” columns means that the actual noon Sun position is further south than this calculated one, and vice verse for (+).
June 21st Sun pos Sun pos Sun pos Latitude Location Sun at Noon 23.48° 23.43° 23.40° 82.5 Alert, Canada 30.9 -0.08 -0.03 0.00 64.84 Fairbanks, Alaska, USA 48.6 -0.04 +0.01 +0.04 60.17 Helsinki, Finland 53.3 -0.01 +0.04 +0.07 40.71 New York City, USA 72.7 -0.07 -0.02 +0.01 23.7 Dhaka, Bangladesh 89.7 -0.08 -0.03 0.00 23.6 Muscat, Oman 89.8 -0.08 -0.03 0.00 10.66 Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago 77.2 -0.02 +0.03 +0.06 10.50 Caracas, Venezuela 77.1 -0.08 -0.03 0.00 -0.02 Pontianak, Indonesia 66.5 0.00 +0.05 +0.08 -11.66 Lubumbashi, Dem of Congo 54.9 -0.01 +0.01 +0.04 -23.55 Sao Paulo, Brazil 43 -0.03 +0.02 +0.05 -41.28 Wellington, New Zealand 25.3 -0.06 -0.01 +0.02 -53.15 Punta Arenas, Chile 13.5 -0.13 -0.08 -0.05
Although the examples above are very limited in number, we can see above that a Sun position at 23.48° north of the center of the Earth cavity gives an actual Sun position that is further south than this calculated one for all of the above latitudes bar Pontianak. For 23.40°, most latitudes show an actual Sun position that is further north than calculated. Only 23.43° gives a very narrow “bandwidth” around zero discrepancy between actual and calculated positions. This makes 23.43° the likeliest Sun position, especially as the mainstream claim the same angle for their heliocentric Earth tilt.
Four Sun arcs on June 21st.
Despite not being well depicted in the above illustration, the sunset and sunrise on June 21st are at increasingly northern angles because the northern hemisphere has a higher number of daylight hours the further north the latitude, until the Sun doesn’t set above +66.5° latitude at all – the midnight Sun; and vice verse for the southern hemisphere below -66.5° latitude – the polar night. This issue creates a problem if we put the rotating Sun at 23.43° north of the center of the Earth cavity on June 21st.
Sun’s wobble
As already stated, on the summer solstice the Arctic Circle is said to experience 24 hours of daylight (above 66.5° latitude) – the midnight Sun. Also, the Sun never appears at the South Pole during this same period either. In other words, the area below -66.5° (Antarctic Circle) is in 24 hour darkness on June 21st – the polar night.
The Sun never sets above 66.5° latitude on June 21st. (Click to animate)
This means the Sun cannot be 23.43° higher on the vertical axis. Instead, it must tilt at this angle at (or very near) the center of the Earth space and rotate around the vertical axis, but not the 23.43° one. In other words, the Sun rotates in a cone shape, i.e. a wobble.
The Sun spins (wobbles) on its axis around a “cone” shape with a 23.43° upward angle very near the center of the Earth space on June 21st. 
On the summer solstice, the Sun spins in a similar fashion to this matchstick in a water vortex with its shining side looking upwards at the water surface. Unlike the matchstick however, we will see later that as the Sun falls, its tilt angle increases. (Click to animate)
A much more appropriate comparison in both shape and the way the Sun tilts is a coin slowing down, wobbling on its axis. (Click to animate) 
(Click to animate). The precession of the Sun is in some way similar to a spinning gyroscope that has slowed down and tilted (the Sun’s face would be pointing horizontally, however).
With a bit of visualization, we can see how the Sun’s wobble accounts for both the midnight Sun/polar night as well as the increasing/decreasing amounts of daylight at the various latitudes. We can also see this when looking at the dawn and dusk angles.
June Solstice at dawn and dusk
Up to around the 23.5° latitudes in the above table the rising and setting angles are very roughly 23.5° off 90°. The higher the latitude, the more the rising and setting angles are further north, until we get to Alert in Nunavut where the Sun never sets at all. It’s easier to visualize these dawn and dusk angles of the Sun at the summer solstice with the below timeanddate illustrations.
The “bowl” shape of sunlight on June 21st on a 2D flat map, which is really a straight line at an angle which closes up at the South Pole and opens up at the North one. Also look at the position of the noon sun, “At this location, the Sun will be at its zenith (directly overhead) in relation to an observer.“ 
If we use Photoshop’s fantastic 3D globe effect we see that it is the same straight vertical line as at the equinoxes but at around the 23.5° angle. This illuminates the North Pole and puts the South one in darkness.
The Sun’s tilt upwards causes the Sun to rise and set in the northern part of the sky, as the sunlight angle at these times now always comes from the north above at dawn and goes back to the north at dusk. Now what about the December solstice?
December Solstice at noon
Because summer in the northern hemisphere is winter in the south, the December 21st solstice should be the exact opposite of the June one; and it is, almost:
December 21st 2013 Latitude Location Sun at Noon Sunrise Sunset 82.5 Alert, Canada -16 - 64.84 Fairbanks, Alaska, USA 2 155 205 60.17 Helsinki, Finland 6.5 141 219 40.71 New York City, USA 25.9 121 239 23.7 Dhaka, Bangladesh 42.9 115 245 23.6 Muscat, Oman 43 115 245 10.66 Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago 55.9 114 246 10.50 Caracas, Venezuela 56.1 114 246 -0.02 Pontianak, Indonesia 66.6 113 247 -11.66 Lubumbashi, Dem of Congo 78.2 114 246 -23.55 Sao Paulo, Brazil 89.9N 116 244 -41.28 Wellington, New Zealand 72.2 123 237 -53.15 Punta Arenas, Chile 60.3 133 227
If we take the Sun’s tilt by looking at the Pontianak noon Sun at the equator, we get (90 – 66.6 S) = 23.4°, and then add 0.02° for the extra tilt because Pontianak is just below the equator, we get a Sun tilt of 23.42°. If we look at Sao Paulo instead, where the noon Sun is directly overhead, we get the noon Sun at 89.9° in the northern sky above it. Take off the 0.01°, and the tilt of the Sun is 23.45°. Let’s compare these two possible tilts and also the heliocentric 23.43° angle to see which could be more likely, at least so far in this journey.
A (-) symbol under the “Tilt” columns means that the actual noon Sun position is further south than this calculated one, and vice verse for (+).
December 21st Tilt Tilt Tilt Latitude Location Sun at Noon 23.42° 23.43° 23.45° 82.5 Alert, Canada -16 no Sun no Sun no Sun 64.84 Fairbanks, Alaska, USA 2 +0.26 +0.27 +0.29 60.17 Helsinki, Finland 6.5 +0.09 +0.10 +0.12 40.71 New York City, USA 25.9 +0.03 +0.04 +0.06 23.7 Dhaka, Bangladesh 42.9 +0.02 +0.03 +0.05 23.6 Muscat, Oman 43 +0.02 +0.03 +0.05 10.66 Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago 55.9 -0.02 -0.01 +0.01 10.50 Caracas, Venezuela 56.1 +0.02 +0.03 +0.05 -0.02 Pontianak, Indonesia 66.6 0.00 +0.01 +0.03 -11.66 Lubumbashi, Dem of Congo 78.2 -0.04 -0.03 -0.01 -23.55 Sao Paulo, Brazil 89.9N -0.03 -0.02 0.00 -41.28 Wellington, New Zealand 72.2 -0.06 -0.05 -0.03 -53.15 Punta Arenas, Chile 60.3 -0.03 -0.02 0.00
We can see that the 23.45° tilt has the actual Sun further north than it is in the northern hemisphere and closer to the calculated figure in the southern one, albeit with only a few samples. The 23.43° tilt looks to be the most balanced with the least deviation around the calculated figure. It could be any of those numbers, but 23.43° is the probably the most likely. Does it have to be exactly the same as the summer solstice tilt? No, not at all. In fact, it is extremely unlikely that they are the absolute exact same figure to many decimal places, or possibly even that they are both 23.43° (accurate to one hundredth of a degree); although I’ll take the 23.43° as a rough best guess for the Sun’s tilt at both solstices when looking into the Sun’s position in more depth in the second half of this article.
December Solstice at dawn and dusk
Of course, the rising and setting times of the Sun on December 21st are the exact opposite of those at June 21st as these familiar timeanddate illustrations below show:
On December 21st, the North Pole is in complete permanent darkness with the South Pole never experiencing night. 
Photoshop’s 3d globe effect shows that the dusk/dawn line is tilted the opposite way to the June 21st solstice, downwards towards the left.
On December 21st, the Suns’ downward tilt creates the 90° sunlight angle at dawn and dusk to come from the south, thereby the Sun rises and sets in the southern part of the sky dome.
Four Sun arcs on December 21st shows the sun to rise and set in the southern part of the sky-dome.
So far, according to the calculations of timeanddate.com, we have the Sun tilted upwards at around 23.43° on June 21st and roughly the same angle downwards on December 21st. That’s the easy stuff over with. Is it possible to go into further detail and see where the Sun is on the Earth cavity’s vertical axis on the solstices? On June 21st, is the Sun below the central point or above it, or even on it?
There is a way to find this out, but it requires us to take a closer look at the midnight Sun and polar night; neither of which start to occur exactly at +66.5°/-66.5° latitude from either the north or south pole. This information is mostly not available from timeanddate.com, so the calculations from www.dateandtime.info has been used instead; although the two websites don’t match exactly, but close enough.
Exact
North pole midnight Sun – June 21st
It is said that on June 21st, the Sun never sets above 66.5° latitude, which should mean that the Sun tilts at 23.5°. This just about matches our estimate of 23.43° deducted from timeanddate’s information (not to be confused with the DMS figure of 23° 26′ 21”). However, when we actually check cities around the arctic circle (66.5°), we find that this isn’t the case.
For example, Kemi in Finland is located at 65.73° (24.27° away from the north pole) and yet has 2 days when the sun never sets (4 days according to dateandtime.info). With only 2 (or 4 days) of continuous daylight, Kemi must be just about situated very close to the maximum latitude of continuous daylight on the summer solstice. Akureyri in Iceland is situated at 65.69° latitude (24.31° away from the North Pole) and experiences 45 minutes of darkness on 20th/21st June (although dateandtime.info says it is 25 minutes 27 seconds). This means that the latitude where one day of 24-hour daylight occurs lies somewhere between these two latitudes, which is between 24.27° and 24.31° away from the north pole, not 23.5°!
Can we narrow it down any further? The only way is to calculate the difference in latitude and the number of days with 24-hour daylight against other cities and see if we can see a pattern and work on from there. The towns chosen hopefully are far enough and equally enough away from each other in latitude to give an average representation. Let’s go further north than Kemi and see if we can detect a pattern.
Kuusamo is at 65.97° latitude (24.03° from the North Pole) with 17 days of 24-hour daylight. The difference between Kuusamo and the further south Kemi is 0.018° per day of 24-hour daylight. Kemijärvi is at 66.73° latitude (23.27° from the North Pole) with 34 days of 24-hour daylight. The difference between Kuusamo and Kemijärvi is 0.045° per day of 24-hour daylight; Gällivare is at 67.14° latitude (22.86° from the North Pole) with 41 days of 24-hour daylight. Between Kemijärvi and Gällivare the ratio is 0.059° per day. Verkhoyansk in Russia at 67.54° (22.46° from the North Pole) experiences 46 days of 24-hour daylight. The difference between Gällivare and Verkhoyansk is 0.080° per day of 24-hour daylight.
If we put these differences in order of latitude we get 0.018°, 0.045°, 0.059°, and 0.080° which suggests the closer the location to the North Pole, the greater the difference. We can even break this down further and see the relationship between the distances:
Locations Difference per day Difference change (as a fraction of 1) Kemi and 24.28°??? 0.00216°??? 0.08??? Kuusamo and Kemi 0.018° 0.40 Kuusamo and Kemijärvi 0.045° 0.76 Kemijärvi and Gällivare 0.059° 0.74 Gällivare and Verkhoyansk 0.080°
We can see the difference in days per 24-hour sunlight increase the further towards the north pole we travel. Whereas the rate of difference increases dramatically the furthest from the north pole we are (Kuusamo and Kemis’ difference – 0.18° is less than half that of Kuusamo and Kemijärvis’ – 0.045°), but seems to stay the same-ish nearer the north pole.
We can take the same dramatic increase in rate of difference between Kuusamo and Kemi, and Kuusamo and Kemijärvi (although following this pattern, it is probably less), which is (0.76-0.40 = 0.36; 0.44-0.36) = 0.08; and apply it further from Kemi to the location where there is just one day of 24-hour daylight. This is 0.018° difference multiplied by 0.12 which is 0.00144°. There are 4 days of 24-hour daylight at Kemi (24.27° away from the north pole). In order to get one day, we would have to multiply 0.00144° by 3 and add it to 24.27° which is 24.27432°, or rounded down to 24.27°.
Of course, this means the Sun should tilt at 24.27° instead of 23.43°. However, it should also tilt at 23.43° in order to get the accurate noon Sun readings at all the different latitudes to around 0.1 of a degree. Obviously this is a contradiction. Now let’s look at the polar night at the south polar on June 21st and see if there is the same discrepancy.
South pole polar night – June 21st
It is said that on June 21st all latitudes above -66.5°, i.e. latitudes closer to the south pole, experience 24 hours of darkness. However, this isn’t so. Dumont d’Urville Antartic Research Station is based at a latitude of -66.66°, or 23.34° above the South Pole. It is 0.16° above 66.5° and so shouldn’t experience any daylight at all on June 21st… and yet there are 2 hours 2 minutes and 41 seconds of daylight on that shortest day of the year.
The next research station at a latitude further towards the South Pole is Rothera Research Station at -67.56° latitude, or 22.44° above the South Pole. This station experiences 13 days of 24-hour darkness. This means that the location where only one day of continual 24-hour darkness occurs exists somewhere between these two latitudes. The only way to be more specific is to see a pattern at higher latitudes and extrapolate from there. It isn’t great, but it’s the only option with the information available. All stations chosen are roughly one latitudinal degree away each other so as to get a good average.
Davis Station is at 68.58° latitude (21.42° from the South Pole) with 37 days of 24-hour darkness. The difference between
Rothera and Davis Station is 0.043° per day. Law-Racoviţă Station is at 69.39° latitude (20.61° from the South Pole) with 48 days of 24-hour darkness. The difference between these two stations is 0.074° per day of 24-hour darkness. Georg von Neumayer Station Station is at 70.62° latitude (19.38° from the South Pole) with 62 days of 24-hour darkness. The difference between Law-Racoviţă Station and Georg von Neumayer is 0.088° per day. Lastly, SANAE IV is at 71.67° latitude (18.33° from the South Pole) and experiences 72 days of 24-hour darkness. The difference here is 0.110° per day of 24-hour darkness.
Just like the North Pole and its 24-hours of daylight, if we put these differences in order of latitude, we get a consistent increase of degrees per day: 0.043°; 0.074°; 0.088°; and 0.110°.
Locations Difference per day Difference change Rothera and 22.61°??? 0.01376°??? 0.32??? Rothera and Davis Station 0.043° 0.58 Davis Station and Law-Racoviţă Station 0.074° 0.84 Law-Racoviţă Station and Georg von Neumayer 0.088° 0.80 Georg von Neumayer and SANAE IV 0.110°
Again, the rate of difference increases dramatically the furthest from the south pole, and is about the same nearer the south pole. Let’s take the same difference between Rothera and Davis Station, and Davis Station and Law-Racoviţă Station, in order to apply it to the one day of 24-hour darkness. That is (0.84-0.58 = 0.26; 0.58-0.26) = 0.32. Take that as a fraction of the difference 0.043° which is 0.01376° and multiply it by 12 to get one day of 24-hour darkness (as Rothera station has 13 days) which is 0.16512°. Add this figure to Rothera station’s distance from the south pole of 22.44° and we get 22.61°. This means that all latitudes up to 22.61° away from the south pole (-67.39° lat) experience at least 1 day of 24-hour darkness.
Sun’s location on June 21st
So far we have the Sun at the summer solstice (June 21st) shining at 23.43° above the equator with a full day of 24-hour daylight at around +/-24.27° below the North Pole (+65.73° lat) and a full day of 24-hour darkness at around +/-22.61° above the South Pole (-67.39° lat).
These three angles are a contradiction.
How can these angles be reconciled with each other? In a convex Earth they say it is refraction because there is 0.84° more light than there should be at the north pole and roughly 0.82° more light at the south pole. The total angle of the Sun discrepancy from pole to pole is (24.27° – 22.61° =) 1.66°; half that is 0.83° which we’ll take as the extra amount of light at each pole. The exact middle between 24.27° and 22.61° is 23.435°, which is remarkably close to the Sun’s tilt of 23.43°. The figure in the middle “should” be the Sun’s tilt. 24.27° is the most accurate figure because there are only 4 days of 24-hour daylight at 0.08° per day to extrapolate. It is so little that the angle can’t be any other than 24.27° away from the north pole where one day of 24-hour daylight is experienced. 24.27° – 23.43° = 0.84°. This is the real extra amount of sunlight at both poles. Of course this is only to 2 decimal places, and maybe the Sun tilts at 23.435° instead of 23.430°?
The straight-traveling light hitting a convex Earth could account for the 0.84° extra latitude of 24-hour daylight at both poles on June 21st. 
In a concave Earth refraction would cause light to fall a bit short causing more darkness at both poles – instead the opposite happens.
If not refraction, what is causing the difference in the 3 angles? In a concave Earth, the answer can only be that the position of the Sun in the Earth cavity is not dead center on June 21st. So where could it be? It can’t be in front of dead center because both poles would receive less light than 23.43°, the more the Sun moved right on the horizontal axis; whereas just the opposite occurs. It can’t be above dead center for the exact same reason. It isn’t behind dead center on the horizontal axis only, as although it would add more light to both poles, this position increases the 23.43° angle on the crust. It isn’t below the dead center on the vertical axis only for the same reason except the 23.43° angle on the crust is decreased instead. The only position that can work is taking a little bit of each of the last two positions, i.e. both below and behind the dead center. The Sun’s tilt angle can remain at 23.43° and increase the latitude of daylight at both the poles as observed.
On June 21st in a concave Earth, the Sun’s location is below and behind the dead center if it is to agree with observed pole daylight latitudes and its 23.43° tilt.
Using simple trigonometry calculated for us by this website, we can narrow the Sun’s location down even further. If AB = 1, then the ratio of the other sides of the triangle AC and CB are 0.918° and 0.398° respectively as long as the Sun’s tilt angle is 23.43°.
We can use a right-angled triangle to find how far the Sun is behind and below the dead center of the Earth cavity. The website freemathhelp.com gives us the correct ratios. 
Using the Sun angle of 23.43° and an example AB length of 1, the above ratios for the two other lengths are given.
But what is the AB figure in a concave Earth? If AB were to extend to the crust, then it would be the radius of the Earth. The Sun shines an extra 0.84° at the poles (not including refraction). How does this figure equate to the AB side of the triangle? If my maths is right, then we can use the simple math of a circle.
The circumference of a circle is π x the diameter. This means that half the circumference is π x the radius. If the radius is 1, then half the circumference is 3.14 and a quarter of the circumference is 3.14/2 = 1.57. This is the ratio between the extra sunlight angle at the poles and the AB side of the triangle. 0.84°/1.57 is 0.535° which is the length of the AB side. Now we can use this data to calculate the other two sides which make AC = 0.49088744° and CB = 0.21273111°. This means that without refraction, the Sun is 0.49° behind the dead center of the Earth cavity and 0.21° below it on June 21st.
The exact amount of refraction is unknown. Let’s take the same amount of estimated refraction at dawn and dusk that we used at the equinoxes, which was an additional 0.5°. If we add this to the 0.84° of extra sunlight we get 1.34°. So 1.34°/1.57° is 0.8535031847133758° which is the AB side. AC is now 0.78312895° and CB is 0.33937697°. So the Sun is roughly 0.783° behind the center and 0.339° below on June 21st.
On June 21st, the Sun is about 0.783° behind the dead center of the Earth cavity and 0.339° below it, if 0.5° refraction is added.
Like the equinoxes, the above figures are only an estimate because we don’t know the true refractive angle at dawn and dusk; it could be 0.7° instead of 0.5° for example.
Interestingly, when using timeanddate.com’s data of the amount of daylight on the equinoxes at the equator, and adding the same 0.5° refraction, the Sun’s position on the March equinox was calculated as 0.780° behind the center of the Earth cavity. The September equinox Sun position was calculated at 0.776°. This is very nearly the same figure as the one we have just estimated for June 21st.
Now let’s do the same for December 21st and compare.
North pole polar night – December 21st
Bodø in Norway is at the 67.28° latitude which is 22.72° from the North Pole, and yet experiences 53 minutes 17 seconds of daylight on December 21st 2013. Verkhoyansk in Russia at 67.54° (22.46° from the North Pole) experiences 12 days of 24-hour darkness. This means that the one day of 24-hour darkness lies between these two latitudes. As with the summer solstice data, we’ll have to extrapolate between other 24-hour darkness latitudes to estimate this location.
Let’s look at more examples with roughly equally spaced latitude that are located further towards the North Pole. The next town is Narvik at 68.43° latitude (21.57° away from the North Pole) with 33 days of 24-hour darkness. The difference between Verkhoyansk and Narvik is 0.042° per day of 24-hour darkness. Norilsk at 69.34° latitude (20.66° away from the North Pole) has 45 days of 24-hour darkness. The difference betwween Narvik and Norilsk is 0.076° per day of 24-hour darkness. Hammerfest at 70.68° latitude (19.32° away from the North Pole) has 59 days of 24-hour darkness; making this a 0.096° per day difference between Norilsk and Hammerfest. Tiksi at 71.58° latitude (18.4° away from the North Pole) has 68 days of 24-hour darkness. The last difference is 0.102° per day of 24-hour darkness.
If we put these differences in order of latitude we get 0.042°, 0.076°, 0.096°, and 0.102° which suggests the closer the location to the North Pole, the greater the difference.
Locations Difference per day Difference change Verkhoyansk and 22.60°??? 0.01302°??? 0.31??? Verkhoyansk and Narvik 0.042° 0.55 Narvik and Norilsk 0.076° 0.79 Norilsk and Hammerfest 0.096° 0.94 Hammerfest and Tiksi 0.102°
As before, the trend is an ever higher fraction of difference the further away from the north pole. Let’s take the last difference between Verkhoyansk and Narvik and between Narvik and Norilsk, which is 0.24. It is likely to be a lower figure than this because the trend is an ever increasing one; but unfortunately I can’t guess. The same difference gives us 0.31 (0.55-0.24) as a fraction of 0.042°. This is 0.01302°. Verkhoyansk at 22.46° has 12 days of 24-hour darkness, therefore one day is 22.46 + (0.0126 x 11) = 22.60° away from the north pole.
South pole midnight Sun – December 21st
At the other end of the cavity at the South Pole, Casey Station is 24 days in daylight around December 21st with a latitude of -66.28° (23.72° from the South Pole). The next station further away from the pole is Akademik Vernadsky Station at -65.24° latitude (24.76° from the South Pole) and has 1 hour 35 minutes of darkness on December 21st. This means so far that the one day of total daylight exists somewhere between 23.72° and 24.76° away from the South Pole (closer to the 24.76° than 23.72°). We will never know exactly where, but let’s jump into the calculated unknown anyway and fish around in the dark by extrapolating again.
Rothera Research Station at -67.57° latitude (22.43° from the South Pole) with 44 days of 24-hour daylight. The difference between Casey Station and Rothera is 0.061° per day of all-day sunlight. Davis Station at -68.58° latitude (21.42° away from the South Pole) has 55 days of 24-hour daylight. This difference between Rothera and Davis Station is 0.092° per day of 24-hour darkness. Leningradskaya Station at -69.50° latitude (20.50° away from the South Pole) has 64 days of 24-hour daylight. The difference between Davis Station and Leningradskaya is 0.102° per day. Neumayer Station at -70.65° (19.35° away from the South Pole) has 73 days of 24-hour daylight. The difference is 0.127° per day of 24-hour sunlight.
The differences in order of latitude are 0.061°, 0.092°, 0.102°, and 0.127°. Again this also suggests that the number of degrees per day increases, the closer the location to the South pole.
Locations Difference per day Difference change Casey Station and 24.31°??? 0.026°??? 0.42??? Casey Station and Rothera 0.061° 0.66 Rothera and Davis Station 0.092° 0.90 Davis Station and Leningradskaya 0.102° 0.80 Leningradskaya and Neumayer Station 0.127°
This data looks the same as June 21st’s with a steady differential nearer the poles and a sudden increase in change nearer its furthest point away from the south pole. Without guessing, let’s take the same difference between Casey Station and Rothera, and Rothera and Davis Station, which is 0.24 and multiply that as a fraction of 0.061°. This gives us a 0.02562° difference per day of 24-hour daylight from Casey Station (23.72° away from the south pole) with 24 days of full sunlight to the location where only one full sunlight day occurs. This location is at (0.02562° X 23) + 23.72° = 24.31°.
So we have a possible +/-22.60° away from the North Pole of 24-hour darkness and a possible +/-24.31° away from the South Pole of 24-hour daylight. This gives us a 1.71° difference between the two poles. Split in half, we come to 0.855° extra sunlight at both poles than there should be. 23.455° is the exact angle in the middle of 22.60° and 24.31°, which is also very close to 23.43°. But again, it should be 23.43° (to 2 decimal places), rather than 23.445°. The north pole has an estimated difference per day of 0.013° per day over 11 days and the other is 0.26° over 23 days, making the north pole a more accurate figure; however, not accurate enough. So let’s split the difference (23.445° – 23.43°) = 0.015° between the two poles. This gives us 1.695° instead of 1.71°. Half of that is 0.8475° instead of 0.855°, which is the extra amount of daylight at both poles – 0.0075° more than the summer solstice.
Sun’s location on December 21st
So where is the Sun calculated to be on December 21st? Using the same calculations, trigonometry website freemathhelp.com, and the 0.5° added refraction which we used before, the AB angle is 0.8582802547770701°. This makes the Sun 0.7875° behind the center and 0.341° above on December 21st.
On December 21st, the Sun is 0.7875° behind the dead center of the Earth cavity and 0.341° above it, if 0.5° refraction is added.
It must be stated that all this data is only based off dateandtime.info and timeanddate.com calculations (which very slightly differ between themselves) and not iron-clad observed reality. This is demonstrated by a Dutch travel photographer Jan Van der Woning who reported that Vernadsky Research Base has 24-hour daylight for a brief period in the winter (at least until December 23rd) instead of the 1 hour 35 minutes of darkness it is supposed to have on December 21st 2000, according to dateandtime.info.
“This is a sundown and rise, as in this part of the world and at this date the sun does set anymore and daylight stays for 24 hours. The picture was taken on 23 December 2000 at 12 at night just before it started to snow for 24 hours, from Winter Island in direction of Skua Island across the Skua creek. Camera was a Seitz Roundshot 220 VR camera equipped with a 35 mm perspective control Nikon lens and shot on Kodak Portra NC 160 film. Location: Faraday Base, Marina Point, Galindez Island, Argentine Islands, Antarctica. 65 15′ S 64 16′ W.” Photo link.
It could have been suggested that the Dutch photographer may have witnessed the geometric center of the Sun setting below the horizon, but not the whole Sun and so 24-hours of daylight were possible; but the above photo seems to show otherwise. Also note how extremely elliptical the Sun appears. However, an elliptical Sun at extreme latitudes only seems to be present in some photos and videos taken at these locations, such as the Top Gear video in Lapland (05:30 secs). Also, sometimes the ellipse is both horizontal and vertical.
There may be other Antarctic locations where this anomaly is present if readers wish to look further; however dateandtime.info seems to be accurate concerning the northern cities. For example, from Oulu in Finland the Sun has been observed to just dip below the horizon on June 21st, and Bodo in Norway has no observed polar night on December 21st.
Sun’s location overall
So far we have the following data as an estimation for the Sun’s location inside the Earth cavity.
Solstice Tilt *X-axis *Y-axis March 20th 0° -0.780° 0° June 21st 23.43° -0.783° -0.339° September 20th 0° -0.776° 0° December 21st 23.43°+ -0.7875° +0.341° *0.5° refraction added
This estimate of the degrees per day makes this particular info less accurate than when the equinox Sun position was calculated using the amount of daylight hours at the equator. We also don’t know how accurate the 23.43° tilt figure really is, as it is only to 2 decimal places. Then there is the latitude of cities, which has to be used for the solstices, unlike the equinoxes. Latitude relies on calculation models (see Earth ellipsoid) and may not be 100% accurate. Some cities have a large sprawl and may not have one exact latitude to two decimal places as well. What about longitude? Is the Sun at its absolute highest or lowest point for all longitudes? It seems to be. The Sun remains at a 23.43° tilt for a few days around the solstices as mentioned in the next article, so we can rule longitude out as a possible discrepancy.
What is the reason behind the plus (+) figure in 23.43°**+** tilt for December 21st? The December solstice will very likely tilt a touch more than the June one, because it is a touch more away from the center than the summer solstice Sun. This is later theorized to be caused by the stronger magnetic attraction/repulsion of the geographic south pole hole. So further out, means more tilt. This degree of tilt difference is in the thousandths, or even ten thousandths of a degree.
There is further support for these ratios, and that is the differing lengths of the solar day throughout the year.
Solar analemma
The length of a true solar day is normally not exactly 24 hours long. A day takes longer than 24 hours at the solstices and shorter at the equinoxes.
Earth’s rotation period relative to the Sun (true noon to true noon) is its true solar day or apparent solar day… Currently, the perihelion and solstice effects combine to lengthen the true solar day near December 22 by 30 mean solar seconds, but the solstice effect is partially cancelled by the aphelion effect near June 19 when it is only 13 seconds longer. The effects of the equinoxes shorten it near March 26 and September 16 by 18 seconds and 21 seconds, respectively.
The longest day is the December solstice at 30 seconds more than 24 hours, then the summer solstice at 13 seconds longer. The shortest day is the September equinox at 21 seconds less than 24 hours, closely followed by the March equinox at 18 seconds. The maximum difference from shortest to longest is 51 seconds.
In a concave Earth, the rotation of the Sun around the center of the Earth cavity is responsible for day and night. If we look at the Sun’s respective positions at the different times of the year, we can clearly see an approximate correlation with the distance behind the center point of the cavity and its speed of rotation.
Solstice Tilt *X-axis *Y-axis Day length March 20th 0° -0.780° 0° -18s (26th) June 21st 23.43° -0.783° -0.339° +13s September 20th 0° -0.776° 0° -21s (16th) December 21st 23.43°+ -0.7875° +0.341° +30s *0.5° refraction added
We can see now that the further the Sun is away from the center of the Earth cavity, the longer the solar day. This differing length of day is half responsible for the vertical figure of eight pattern that the Sun makes in the sky at noon throughout the year. This is the solar analemma.
A solar analemma graph. 
The figure of eight is usually seen in a photo at a slant because the photographer didn’t take the pictures of the Sun at the exact time of solar noon and of course used a wide angle lens to accommodate both the Sun’s highest point and the horizon.
The vertical movement is the height of the Sun in the sky, which in this theory is due to the tilt of the Sun, and varies by about 46.86° in total. The horizontal movement is the accumulation of the differing times of the apparent (true) solar day, which is the same as mainstream theory.
The ellipticity of Earth’s orbit causesthe actual solar time to first get ahead of, and then fall behind, mean solar time. This makes the Sun appear to slide back and forth across the vertical axis of the eight, forming the rest of the figure.
Notice that the solar day becoming shorter or longer doesn’t equate to the Sun being on the right or left side of the figure eight. Instead, the figure eight is due to an accumulation. The true solar day is exactly 24 hours around the end of May, half way through July, the start of November and at beginning of February – the edges of the figure of eight. From November to February the true solar day is more than 24 hours (slower) and hence moves to the left, although it slows down until December 22nd and then speeds up again, but it always more than 24 hours. From February to May it is always less than 24 hours, hence its movement to the right and so on. The figure of eight is fatter around December and does not intersect perfectly in the middle because the Sun is a full 17 seconds slower than its June counterpart.
Climate
The cause of climate and temperature differences around the world in a concave Earth is the tilt of the Sun rather than the heliocentric tilt of the Earth. The effect though is the same. The official reason for differing temperatures is based on the height of the Sun in the sky which is the same for everyone no matter what model explains it. The higher the Sun in the sky, the more direct the sunlight is shone on to the crust. This means there is more sunlight on less crust than there would be if the Sun were low in the sky.
The higher the Sun, the more sunlight hits less Earth.
Climate is more of an add-on to the article as there isn’t anything new for me to say on this subject.
Summary
- In the concave Earth model, on June 21st, the noon Sun is near 90° straight above our heads if viewed from Dhaka and Muscat. Also, its noon location as viewed from Pontianak on the equator is 66.5° in the northern sky. This means that the Sun is shining directly on the locations at 23.5° latitude.
- This has been narrowed down to 23.43° as that has the narrowest margin of error between observed noon Sun positions and those calculated from a hypothetical Sun location. This is also the mainstream tilt angle of the Earth.
- On June 21st, the 24-hour daytime within the Arctic Circle, and 24-hour night at the Antarctic Circle can only mean that the Sun tilts by 23.43° upwards and its rotational movement is a horizontal precession around the center of the Earth cavity, i.e it wobbles.
- This upward tilt causes the sunlight to always come from, and leave to, the north as observed at dawn and dusk on June 21st.
- The December 21st solstice is the exact opposite of the June one. The noon Sun figures coupled with the north polar night and south pole midnight sun as well as sunlight coming from, and leaving to, the south at dawn and dusk, show the Sun to tilt downwards by 23.43°.
- On June 21st, there is at least one day of 24-hour daylight up to 24.27° from the north pole, and one day of 24-hour darkness up to 22.61° from the south pole. This is a nearest estimate to within 0.005° accuracy, as 23.435° is the exact middle of the two latitudes and the Sun is tilting at 23.43°.
- On a convex Earth this extra sunlight is said to be caused by refraction. In a concave one, refraction causes light to fall short.
- The only way to reconcile the three angles – 24.27°, 22.61°, and 23.43° is if the Sun is below and behind the center of the Earth cavity.
- The exact position can be calculated using simple trigonometry by finding out the ratio of the curve of the crust on which the extra 0.84° of sunlight shines in comparison to a straight line (radius). With an estimated added refraction of 0.5° thrown into the calculation, the Sun is 0.339° below and 0.783° behind the center of the Earth cavity on June 21st.
- The equinox is 0° on the vertical axis and also calculated as 0.780° (March) and 0.776° (September) behind the center using the amount of sunlight on the equator (a previous article) and the same 0.5° of added refraction.
- On December 21st, there is at least one day of 24-hour daylight up to 24.31° from the south pole, and one day of 24-hour darkness up to 22.60° from the north pole. Similar to June 21st, this is a nearest estimate to within 0.015° accuracy as 23.445° is the exact middle of the two latitudes and the Sun is tilting at 23.43°.
- With an estimated 0.5° of refraction added, the Sun is calculated to be 0.341° above and 0.7875° behind the center of the Earth cavity on December 21st.
- The data comes from calculations for the year 2013 from dateandtime.info and dateandtime.com. The Sun wasn’t measured and observed at noon by an instrument to obtained this data. One anomaly was found by an observer in the Antarctic were the Sun was photographed fully above the horizon at midnight on December 23rd, 2000 to give 24 hour daylight. According to dateandtime.info, there should have been an hour and a half of darkness at this time and place.
- The Sun’s position behind the central vertical axis of the Earth cavity at the four times of the year matches the varied length of the apparent solar day at these times. The further away the Sun is behind the central point of the cavity, the longer the day.
- The figure-of-eight pattern (Sun’s analemma) made by the Sun in the sky at noon throughout the year is explained by its tilt (vertical axis) and its precessional (rotational) speed (horizontal axis).
- The reason for the varied climate is due to the height of the Sun in the sky which determines how direct it shines on to the crust – no different than what is taught today.
The Sun moving vertically as well as tilting 23.43° up and then down describes the observations, but it doesn’t explain why. What could be the mechanism behind this movement? First we need to explain how the Sun is powered and the rest will then fall into place. What is the power source of the Sun as a sulfur lamp? In a concave Earth, part of the answer looks to be magnetism flowing through the holes near the poles.