-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Geocentricity and Stellar Parallax
- Thread starter RichardT
- Start date
The thing wrong with your head is that you unendingly defend the indefensible, then wonder why we think youre slightly nuts.
Upvote
0
MoonLancer
The Moon is a reflection of the MorningStar
Is it rational to assume the universe revolves around the earth?
Think about, How can all the universe revolve around the earth? What kind of force has that kind of uniform strength to pull distant stars and close planets?
Why would we not feel this force? how does earth produce gravity to draw us to the surface and let the entire universe revolve around it? How does this not crush us? why do planets not crash into earth?
this model has no respect for the relation matter and energy have.
Its not logical to believe something and then find evidence for it
Upvote
0
Ampoliros
I'm my own wireless hotspot
- May 15, 2004
- 1,459
- 111
- 39
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Ugh.
Okay, look: The earth and sun both rotate about the center of mass of the system, rather than rotating specifically around one body or another. We know the mass of the earth, and of the sun, and the distance between them. We can easily determine the location of the center of mass, which happens to be very close to the center of the sun. Problem solv-ed.
Okay, look: The earth and sun both rotate about the center of mass of the system, rather than rotating specifically around one body or another. We know the mass of the earth, and of the sun, and the distance between them. We can easily determine the location of the center of mass, which happens to be very close to the center of the sun. Problem solv-ed.
Upvote
0
I think you're being deceived.
I would like to gently suggest that you look at other sources on the specifics besides the one website (that of Dr. Bouw) just to check his facts. I also hope that you read what I wrote in my last few posts in response to some of that particular site's claims. I'll be more than happy to provide clarification on request.
Upvote
0
I tried this line of reasoning with them a few pages back. Apparently gravity works, except in that case.
Upvote
0
Thanks, Amazon resellers had a cheap copy available. After seeing the quote again, I'm pretty sure that Hoyle isn't saying what you think he is saying; especially with regard to this modified geocentric system. But I'll know for sure when the book comes in. Thanks for the link.
Upvote
0
I think it's a big hint when people who study the universe for a living and use heliocentric systems every day look at you like you've grown a third head.
To follow up, is it some kind of worldwide conspiracy that every single person is in on? In your opinion, why has heliocentrism been favored by everyone everywhere for the last few centuries?
Upvote
0
Actually, what occurs is that, in measuring the value of one, we alter the other paired value. In terms of the energy/time relationship; the more accurately we measure the energy, the less accurately we measure the time, because measuring one fundamentally changes our exactness of the other. From the relationship Heisenberg has provided, we also find that it is impossible to measure a quantity exactly. This would imply the uncertainty of a given value is zero. This would make any product of it's uncertainty with another uncertainty 0. But the term on the other side of the equation is non-zero, and thus we get a mathematical falsity.The uncertainty principle says that it isn't possible to measure both of certain linked pairs of properties of bodies or events to greater than some resolution.
One of those pairs is time and energy. As a result, it is possible for particles of a particular energy to appear for a very short period of time and then disappear again, because the energy is still zero within the resolution with which it is possible to measure it.
Not sure if I explained that very well...
Try here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_foam
Applying this to quantum fluctuations, measuring the energy at a given instant in time (the energy that gave rise to the quantum fluctuations) is impossible to do in the amount of time it takes them to arrive and disappear, because of the relationship Heisenberg has provided. Thus, one cannot jump to the conclusion that this is a violation of the conservation of energy law, because it is impossible to ever tell how much energy was used. Measuring it within the time interval that these particle pairs exist is fundamentally impossible.
Upvote
0
The only reason they think that I'm crazy is probably because of their billion straw men. They completely misrepresent my position, I repeat it many times and they have the nerve to call me nuts. I've been patient.
Yeah, why don't you send me to a loony bin, I might teach my ignorance to your children.
Yeah, why don't you send me to a loony bin, I might teach my ignorance to your children.
Upvote
0
How would you know that? Are there any astronomers on this forum? The astronomers would know that the field equations can be solved from any reference frame.
No. I don't believe in any conspiracy.
Upvote
0
Yes, there are astronomers in this forum. Ask Kerrmetric, for instance, what he thinks about geocentrism (this is not recommended for the easily offended.)
If not a conspiracy of some type, why are you the only person I've ever heard of who takes geocentrism seriously? What is the reason for the widespread acceptance of heliocentrism the world over?
Upvote
0
I've asked you this before, but as far as I know, you've never answered.
Are you planning on going to college?
If so, where do you want to go?
What do you plan to study?
Upvote
0
You're correct. The reference frame used doesn't matter much, either the position of the earth or sun could be used. BUT this doesn't mean that the helio and geo models are equivalent (as I seem to remember you stating). There is simply no hand-waving that will resurrect geocentricism.
I wish that I played the lottery. If I were to win a few thousand playing, I would send you a really good telescope so that you could make you own measurements and understand that the structure of the solar system has been correctly known for the past 300 years. Keep studying. I'm a school teacher and most students your age have never even considered the the level of math and physics that you have.
Upvote
0
Richard,
this seems like a rather invented persecution. I don't see anybody constructing strawmen around your position (it would be sort of redundant, frankly) or calling you some sort of loony (but, honestly, can you expect not to get even a little bit of that kind of reaction?).
Many people have done their best to respond fairly and as helpfully as possible to what you're saying. If you think that isn't the case, then point it out and I'm sure we'll do our best to explain better.
You don't strike me as being stupid, or insane. However, you seem to have put an awful lot of (misplaced, from what I see) trust in one person's writings on a website (oh, and by the way, he is a nutcase. Sorry). He seems to do a very good line in misrepresenting the science, handwaving and pseudo-mathematical smokescreens.
Please, please, just take the time to read a few other sources of information on the subject. I (and others) have posted a few links that should be a start. If you want more, just say so.
Upvote
0
Just look at the about 50 posts dealing with misunderstanding of the MTBS, some of the same people think I'm nuts.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Poll
