• 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

RichardT

Contributor
Sep 17, 2005
6,642
195
35
Toronto Ontario
✟30,599.00
Faith
Pantheist
Marital Status
Single
as this violates the Copernican Principle
So what? It's not like I accept the Copernican Principle, if I were to accept it I would have to reject Geocentricity.

Also, before you ask, I am aware of cosmic background radiation.

300px-WMAP.jpg
 
Upvote 0

BrainHertz

Senior Member
Nov 5, 2007
564
28
Oregon
✟23,340.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Not strangely, all the paper had to demonstrate was that in the case of a rotating universe objects can travel faster than C.

But does it demonstrate such a thing? That was my point; it depends on the value of the angular velocity.

There's a big difference between an angular velocity, of, say, 10^-11 radians per year (just a random pick, obviously...) and, say, one rotation per sidereal day.

You can do the math. But don't you find it just a little strange that the authors you cited should quote from a paper that seeks to answer such a question, but suddenly stop short when it comes to stating what result they actually provide?

What do you think the paper really has to say on the subject? Come on, I'm sure you can at least make an educated guess... do I need to provide some stronger hints?
 
Upvote 0

Atheuz

It's comforting to know that this isn't a test
May 14, 2007
841
165
✟24,141.00
Faith
Atheist
So what? It's not like I accept the Copernican Principle, if I were to accept it I would have to reject Geocentricity.

Also, before you ask, I am aware of cosmic background radiation.

300px-WMAP.jpg

You accept Background radiation because you can show a picture of it? What kind of screwed up logic is that D=
 
Upvote 0

Lucretius

Senior Veteran
Feb 5, 2005
4,382
206
37
✟5,541.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
So what? It's not like I accept the Copernican Principle, if I were to accept it I would have to reject Geocentricity.

Also, before you ask, I am aware of cosmic background radiation.

300px-WMAP.jpg
So the fact that the CBR demonstrates that the universe is isotropic and homogenous to one part in one-hundred thousand is simply a validation of what for you?

There is absolutely no physical (Biblical answers are not valid in scientific inquiries) reason to accept the Earth as any sort of special location in the universe. The CBR validates this position. Without physical reasoning behind the Earth being some sort of specialized location, any argument for a geocentric universe falls flat on it's face. The Copernican Principle is the most logical conclusion we can come based upon the evidence we have attained. It's acceptance is a basic requirement for all of astronomy.
 
Upvote 0