it's not sliding across the ground

Objects could not be obscured on a flat plane, simple.
Angular resolution is about diffraction and aperture

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVJubKGYTdk

Well some people don't seem to understand

its possible on a flat earth

@Technomatrix show a reproducible experiment of buildings popping up above a curve in a scale model experiment

@Citizen Z angular resoltion is not teh angle between one object and another

@Citizen Z atmospheric lensing

@YouRYou angular resolution of the eye or lens

yep that's true

but as something gets far away it disappears all together, not bottom up

what if it went up away from you into the sky

would the bottom disappear first?

When the AR hits .02 in the eye, the light is no longer resolvable

right

It would disappear uniformly yes

the object will no longer be discernable

But in reality, it gets obscured while resolved well within angular resolution

@YouRYou bottom first because the bottom is closer to you than the top

wouldn't that make it disappear later? if it was closer?

The light is merging together with the surfac3

@YouRYou no

sso closer means it disappears first

how

The steeper the angle the more it will be resolvable

that's not the right angle when talking about angular resolution

that's the angle of view, not angle for angular resolution

angular resolution is the arc length of the object in the field of view

Angular resolution doesn't obscure anything, it becomes diffracted and depends on aperture of optics

Imagine those verticak lines are towers or buildings

i'd still be able to see the bottom no matter how far

Notice where the observer height is

until the object itself disappears

this is a top view anyway

@YouRYou side view

Says top view right there

Cross sectional representation

shows that light from the bottom of the object would always hit my eye

Imagine the lines being 10 miles long

ok