Ok as I write this I will try to restrain my enthusiasm:
This is an OUTSTANDING article. I completely agree with the author's analysis and direction, and if this is an example of the very latest Epicurean scholarship then we are definitely moving in the right direction.
The writer builds IMHO a very strong case that the summary viewpoint "The sun is the size that it appears to be" is an Epicurean "litmus test" of a proper understanding of the philosophy, akin to "Death is nothing to us" or "nothing can be created from nothing."
As we are currently discussing in the podcast, reaching conclusions about things we see in the sky presents a difficult issue of limited evidence, and the worst thing we can do is to affix ourselves to a single position when multiple options are possible.
The statement that the size of the sun is what it appears to be does not give a single answer, but emphasizes that any or all answers must be based on "appearance" (the senses) which is what EVERY conclusion in life must also be based upon.
The concluding section of the essay goes into this in much more detail and I highly recommend it. I think the position he advocates is where many of us are already on this topic, but this article goes further than Bailey or even Sedley and really nails down a position that I think will serve most of us very well going on into the future. It will also nail us more firmly into the position that the senses are the foundation for all our conclusions about reality, and in fact that is very likely the intended purpose of the formulation.
We may have to designate someone every Twentieth to start the session saying:
"The Size Of The Sun Is As It Appears To Be!"