Do you have any idea how many unsupported assumptions are in this paragraph. Light can travel through a vacuum. The speed of light is actually defined for a vacuum. When light travels through other media, like air or water or glass, its velocity changes. The experiment was done in air, not in a vacuum. The Earth travels and a very small experiment was done on a VERY large ball. It seems to me that the sensitivity of the experiment was insufficient to detect the movement.
The problem for you is that Einstein's theories have been proven to be correct. Much science has been done regarding his theories and they are right. Here are some
articles for you to review at your leisure.
This should be interesting.
Lets use these dimensions for the flat Earth and we'll use a 3,000 mile elevation for the sun above the Earth and we'll use Mt Everest peak elevation of 29,029 feet or 5.5 miles above sea level. Making some assumptions base on the Earth map above, it appears that the furthest an observer can be from Mt Everest is 12,500 miles (it's a guess but it will work for now.) The sun, following the equatorial path, is maybe another 3,500 miles past Mt. Everest. So, if we do a little sketch, that is not to scale at all, we get the following:
View attachment 26609
The observer looking at the peak of Mt. Everest, which is visible on a flat earth, can still see the sun! The sun would still be high in the sky and no where near setting when it is exactly opposite the observer. The next question then becomes, how far away would the sun have to be for it to be obscured by Mt. Everest. Since we are working with a flat Earth, good all Pythagoras is all we need to figure this out. Using the Pythagorean theorem, we calculate that the sun would have to 6,805,682 MILES beyond Mt. Everest to hidden by the mountain. Most mountains are nowhere near the height of Everest. Our tallest peaks here in Colorado are a little less the half that height so the sun would have to be even farther away to be hidden by our mountains.
Lets see you drawings and calculations to see if I'm wrong. I freely admit that I made many assumptions in distances in these calculations because I do not have a scaled flat Earth map to work from. If the observer is much closer to the mountain then things change quite a bit. Here is a little table and the equations I used based on the sketch above.
View attachment 26611
Okay, your turn to show us how the mountains hide the sun. You might also want to show us how the mountains hiding the sun explains why the sun sets into the ocean from the bottom up. You must be able to explain both observations.