R Lang & Associates

          HOME                      ABOUT                      SPACE & AVIATION                     MEDICAL SCIENCE

 Atmospheric Lensing and Its Effect on Astronomy
Rule of Relativity

December 4, 2025

Often times, sky viewers express their enthusiasm over what they see in the sky at night.  During this month of December, attention has been given to the last “Super Moon” of the year, at which time the Full Moon is set in the horizon, and for some reason, it appears very large.  This is considered unusual because the Moon is practically the same distance from Earth regardless of its position in orbit.  The Moon’s apogee (farthest) and perigee (closest) only account for about 14 percent of an apparent size difference, and a Super Moon has a size many times than the Moon seen overhead.  So why does the Moon appear so big when seen at the horizon ?

A “Super Moon” as viewed at the horizon is seen many times larger than when viewed overhead.  The apogee and perigee of the Moon account for about a 14 percent change in the apparent size.  The photo above shows the Moon eight times larger (800 %).  {Stockphoto.com}

They have been attempting to  explain this as the “Moon Illusion” and claiming it has to do with how our brains compare the Moon to familiar objects (trees, buildings) which cause us to perceive it as much larger than when it is overhead in the sky.  Article upon article go on about this “Moon Illusion” and how it has to do with how we “perceive things”.  But this is not really a scientific explanation, nor is it any explanation at all.  In fact, the theory of the “Moon Illusion” misses the explanation by a country mile. 

Some have given consideration to a lensing effect of the atmosphere, but then they dismiss it saying it actually squashes the Moon down in size and then continue on again saying it is the brain’s interpretation which is influenced by some kind of “Moon Illusion”.

It is plain to see this has gone too far.  Lets settle this fair and square.  First, simply look at a diagram of the Earth and its surrounding atmosphere:

.. what do we know about a transparent medium that is thicker in the middle and thinner at the edges ? The answer is a convex lens, ..

From elementary geometry, from a point on Earth, the uniformly surrounding atmosphere is thicker when viewed towards the horizon compared to looking straight up (b >> a).

 

It is easily observed that when you are on Earth and looking straight up towards the sky, the layer or thickness of atmosphere, a, is much less than the layer or thickness of atmosphere when looking towards the horizon, b.  This is elementary geometry.  The medium of air is thicker at b and thinner at a.  And what do we know about a transparent medium that is thicker in the middle and thinner at the edges ?   The answer is a convex lens, and a convex lens is a  lens which magnifies.  This easily explains the larger appearance of the Moon at the horizon.  It is magnified by the atmosphere which acts as a convex lens, just like a magnifying glass.  That’s the explanation in one paragraph, and I barely had to try.  If it is explained in one paragraph, what is rest of the scientific community thinking ?  Why can’t they agree on this one explanation ?

To remain fair and square about settling this issue, apparently a little more is needed to be said.

If we zoom in a little closer, and add an observer on Earth, we have:

                                           

Although the atmoshphere is uniform in thickness about the Earth, when the observer is viewing the Moon at the horizon, he is subjected to seeing it through an "atmospheric lens" which is thicker in the middle and thinner at the edges.  This is how a convex lens is designed to magnify objects.    

 

What is important to note is is the relative position of the observer in relation to the atmosphere and the Moon.  This is key:  It is the relative position of the observer.

What a new career scientist may be lacking in knowledge is that the basis or premise for any scientific undertaking is relativity.  For a new scientist, this concept may be a bit elusive since one usually thinks the basis of the scientific method is something concrete or absolute, such as mathematics, and can always be easily defined.  But the basis or premise of all scientific undertaking is actually relative.  This presents a paradox in which the basis or “foundation” is always changing - so how can it be the basis ?  It would be better to think of relativity as a premise rather than a foundation, and this could help matters.  There is nothing one can do to change this concept of relativity - you were immersed in it the day you were born.

There is nothing one can do to change this concept of relativity - you were immersed in it the day you were born.

One usually thinks of Albert Einstein when the subject of relativity is mentioned implying it is associated with such topics as the speed of light or large gravitational effects bending light.  But the concept of relativity is actually first introduced with elementary examples, such as the motion of an object within a frame of reference relative to another frame of reference.  An example is a driver in an automobile traveling along the freeway with another automobile in the adjacent lane traveling the same speed.  A second observer is standing on the roadside.  To the first observer at the wheel, the other automobile appears to be standing still, and this is all the first observer can see.  The second observer, however, will see the automobiles whizzing by at 60 mph and they will shortly be out of sight.  The event cannot be altered and nothing changes about the speed of the automobiles.  But the two observers see two different things.  This is relativity.  Although a simple example that most would take for granted, extending this concept further into the realm of physics begins to present profound results.

Going back to the explanation of atmospheric lensing, if it were not for the relative position of the observer, the explanation of a convex lens magnifying the Moon would not hold true.  But there is relativity in this particular circumstance the same that relativity is in all circumstances.  This is where the new scientists must have missed the point.  They only saw the uniform layer of atmosphere around the Earth and could not reason it as a convex lens.  But the relative position of the observer will cause a convex lens (overlayed in the diagram below) and therefore magnify the Moon just like a magnifying glass.

Due to the relative position of the observer, he will see the effect of a convex lens.  An equivalent overlay ¹ of a convex lens is given in the diagram above.

.. if it were not for the relative position of the observer, the explanation of a convex lens mag- nifying the Moon would not hold true.

Relativity is present in every observation ..

For other astronomical observations from Earth that are much farther in distance, their relative distance is out of purview of the magnifying glass effect of our atmosphere - which operates on only a single convex lens.  A telescope, on the other hand, uses two lenses to enlarge objects and operates on a different principle. 

Relativity is present in every observation and is not a figment of the imagination - it is what an observer actually sees due to circumstances of his location in space-time.  Relativity is the paradoxical premise of all things observed and all that exists.
 

Super Moon of December 4, 2025 rises behind the U.S. Capitol Christmas Tree in Washington DC.  It seems to beckon Man’s return to the Moon in the coming future.  {AP}

1.  The overlayed convex lens serves as a conceptual aid since the existence of a convex lens in this case is by definition.  The uniform atmosphere offers a continuous medium, it is transparent, and the lens is thicker in the middle and thinner at the edges.  Due to the observer's line of sight, only half of the convex lens is available but only half is needed to give the effect of a magnifying lens.  Also, the overlayed convex lens needs to be redrawn for each position of the Moon as it approaches the Horizon since the Moon is part of the relative scenario, and the middle of the overlayed lens will need to be redrawn thicker and thicker as the Moon sets in the horizon. 

2.  Another effect of relativity is the medium (material) of the magnifying glass which has an associated index of refraction, and is relative to the environment it is used in.  The Moon at the horizon is being magnified by the Earth's atmosphere but only because it has an index of refraction relative to outer space (or a vacuum).  If you have a glass magnifier that you use on Earth for reading fine print, and take it into Space, it will make the same fine print larger.  A magnifying glass used in Space will make things larger than when it is used on Earth because of the relative indices of refraction.