An attempt to answer like that will get your fingers smacked by the judge. As you said, you know the colloquial answer. You also show you understand why that answer is in fact correct by showing that you understand the mechanics that make it correct. The mechanics behind it are (usually) not relevant to the question at hand, and you haven't been asked to testify about them so you're just attempting to obfuscate the issue. That's not your job as a witness, that's what they pay the lawyers to do.

NB: the correct answer is "Yes.". To a person sitting watching the horizon, the sun does indeed rise above it while he remains stationary. That this is due to the effects of his particular frame of reference is interesting, but not relevant at the moment because we're working in a frame of reference fixed relative to the Earth's surface and unless the case involves a Foucault's pendulum or something like that the Earth's rotation doesn't become a significant factor.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

• Samsung's Claims of Juror Misconduct Revealed in Unredacted Filings ~pj Updated - Authored by: Wol on Thursday, October 04 2012 @ 11:44 AM EDT
• Samsung's Claims of Juror Misconduct Revealed in Unredacted Filings ~pj Updated - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 04 2012 @ 01:50 PM EDT