Geocentricity and Stellar Parallax

[RichardT]

I would like you to explain how the rotation rate of the universe changes with seasons and how it can be instantly changed out to the farthest star by massive earthquakes.

Sun's revolution. Not to be confused with the daily rotation of the universe.

 

[lemmings]

Sun's revolution. Not to be confused with the daily rotation of the universe.

If they are unrelated, why do they take the same period of time?

 

[RichardT]

If they are unrelated, why do they take the same period of time?

The sun's revolution, where it would go all the way down the helix and back up again, takes 365 days. The daily rotation of the universe, where the sun would bring the background around the earth everyday, takes one day. The X is the first day of summer while the location of the sun on the image is the first day of winter.

 

[Dragar]

Have you heard of massive superstrings?

"By magic!" would have sufficed.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

If they are unrelated, why do they take the same period of time?

Actually a sidereal day is slightly shorter than a "solar day" because the earth revolves around the sun in a prograde manner.

 

[Lucretius]

Is it just me, or does Tycho's model fail at the basic notion of obeying gravity?

The formula used for calculating the center of mass of an object is really simple if we assume a one dimensional model (just place the sun and the Earth on a line in space).

Thus we find, to calculate the center of mass, we simply plug in the masses of the sun and Earth, and their respective distance (as long as you know the distance between the sun and the Earth, you can choose a starting point anywhere on the line and it won't affect your calculations)

When you do this, you find that the center of mass is 550 km away from the Sun (having treated it as a point particle.) The distance between the Sun and the Earth is 93 million miles (about 165 million km). The center of mass for these two objects is practically inside the sun. (in fact, taking into account the Sun's actual size, the barycenter (center of gravity) IS well-inside the Sun. It is very hard to see the Sun wobble.)

Since, every objects we know obeys Newton's Universal Law of Gravitation (that's why it's universal), we see that the geocentric system is flawed. The center of gravity is somehow nearer to the object over 330,000 times lighter than the other object in the system.

While it may appear as if the Sun orbits the stationary Earth, gravitational considerations show that it is indeed the other way around (the Sun isn't actually stationary, wobbling a bit (ignoring it's own motion throughout the galaxy))

This is, of course, ignoring other flaws — the orbits in Tycho's model are circular, when we have known for several hundred years that they are elliptical. Others have already pointed out other fatal errors.

 

[Chalnoth]

In your airplane example, there is no known mechanism for how the earth can go around the plane. There is a mechanism for why the plane would be moving relative to the earth.

As E. Mach, H. Thirring, J. Lense, P. Gerber, A. Einstein et. al. have shown, there is really no known mechanism for the earth's motion which cannot be taken as the universe's rotation.

- A. Einstein

Yes, but Occam's Razor rejects such a conclusion, and I presume he goes on to argue something similar shortly thereafter.

 

[Chalnoth]

The sun's revolution, where it would go all the way down the helix and back up again, takes 365 days.

Parallax doesn't respond to an up/down motion. It's a motion perpendicular to that direction.

 

[RichardT]

Parallax doesn't respond to an up/down motion. It's a motion perpendicular to that direction.

It works.

 

[lemmings]

It works.

How does it work?

 

[RichardT]

How does it work?

Revolution of the sun takes 365 days. Parallax measurements are taken 6 months apart.

The following is an .avi video of the yearly / daily motions. At first it will show you the yearly motion, then it will show you the yearly / daily motions combined.

http://www.geocentricity.com/bibastron/research/orrery/mechano/motion.avi

 

[lemmings]

Revolution of the sun takes 365 days. Parallax measurements are taken 6 months apart.

The following is an .avi video of the yearly / daily motions. At first it will show you the yearly motion, then it will show you the yearly / daily motions combined.

http://www.geocentricity.com/bibastron/research/orrery/mechano/motion.avi

Orbits don't behave like that. It is called an orbital plane for a reason.

 

[RichardT]

Orbits don't behave like that. It is called an orbital plane for a reason.

Of course orbits don't behave like that. When did I say it had to resemble orbits?

It is generally believed, without evidence, that in the geocentric model the sun, moon, planets, and distant stars all orbit the earth once per day. There is no orbiting involved. What is happening is that the firmament is rotating. Now the nature of the firmament is such that it defines all the physics of the universe, both the local and the universal, protophysics (Chapter 11, page 116). This means that all the “laws” of physics are part and parcel of the firmament and that the firmament acts like a medium for the laws of science. So it is that in a geocentric model the sun, moon, and stars do not gravitationally orbit the earth daily any more than that a molecule in a top gravitationally orbits the center of the top. In the case of the spinning top it is the fibers and material of the top which carry the molecules around the axis of the top. By the same token, in the geocentric model it is the fabric of the firmament which carries the universe about it. A second common misconception is related to the first and that is that the geocentric universe requires that the sun orbit the earth once per year. Again, this is not the case. In a geocentric universe Newton’s (or Einstein’s) laws must be fulfilled just as in a heliocentric universe. Newton’s law of gravity states that from the sun’s perspective, the earth must be seen to revolve about it once per year. It matters not to the sun whether the earth actually does so or appears to do so; remember that we are talking about relative motion, not absolute. If the firmament were to possess a wobble (about which we will say later) which carries the sun, planets, and stars about the earth once a year in such a way that the earth seems to describe an orbit around the sun, then the sun and the universe are content that the law of gravity is being satisfied. Remember, the physics of the universe which specify the law of gravity is fastened to the firmament, not the earth or sun.

 

[lemmings]

Of course orbits don't behave like that. When did I say Geocentricity had to resemble orbits?

If it is not gravity holding the sun in place, then what force is?

 

[RichardT]

If it is not gravity holding the sun in place, then what force is?

"A second common misconception is related to the first and that is that the geocentric universe requires that the sun orbit the earth once per year. Again, this is not the case. In a geocentric universe Newton’s (or Einstein’s) laws must be fulfilled just as in a heliocentric universe. Newton’s law of gravity states that from the sun’s perspective, the earth must be seen to revolve about it once per year. It matters not to the sun whether the earth actually does so or appears to do so; remember that we are talking about relative motion, not absolute."

I'd have to understand massive superstrings to respond properly to that question.

 

[lemmings]

"A second common misconception is related to the first and that is that the geocentric universe requires that the sun orbit the earth once per year. Again, this is not the case. In a geocentric universe Newton’s (or Einstein’s) laws must be fulfilled just as in a heliocentric universe. Newton’s law of gravity states that from the sun’s perspective, the earth must be seen to revolve about it once per year. It matters not to the sun whether the earth actually does so or appears to do so; remember that we are talking about relative motion, not absolute."

I'd have to understand massive superstrings to respond properly to that question.

Answer the question

 

[RichardT]

Answer the question

All I can currently say is http://www.geocentricity.com/geocentricity/ft.html

 

[Chalnoth]

It works.

No, it doesn't. If the stars were "focused" on the Sun as you say, and the Sun moved as you claim, then parallax would be in the north/south direction. Instead, parallax occurs in the east/west direction.

 

[RichardT]

No, it doesn't. If the stars were "focused" on the Sun as you say, and the Sun moved as you claim, then parallax would be in the north/south direction. Instead, parallax occurs in the east/west direction.

You simplify it way too much. Watch the following video, it demonstrates the yearly motion, then the yearly and daily motions combined.

http://www.geocentricity.com/bibastron/research/orrery/mechano/motion.avi

 

[Chalnoth]

You simplify it way too much. Watch the following video, it demonstrates the yearly motion, then the yearly and daily motions combined.

http://www.geocentricity.com/bibastron/research/orrery/mechano/motion.avi

Yeah, that's exactly how I was thinking you were claiming it was. It's wrong. The yearly parallax in that model would, indeed, be in the north/south direction. It's not, it's in the east/west direction, so you're wrong.

Furthermore, the up/down movement isn't as dramatic as the daily movement of the Sun in that model, and, as a result, if your model were correct there should be a daily parallax that would be even more significant than the yearly one. There isn't, so you're wrong.