Movie - "The Principle"

I vaguely remember this from last year, didn't pay any attention to it then, but I just now watched the trailer and I gotta say, "Wow!", that is one heck of a trailer! I admire the talent it took to produce, and the money. Kate Mulgrew earns $35,000 per episode on Orange is the New Black, hiring her voice over talents can't be cheap.It does seem possible that Suzanne Romano is a spammer promoting the movie and not a new member eager to discuss geocentrism, but while most of her post is cut-n-pasted from the movie ads she did go the trouble to tailor it to this site where she says, "Now this worldview is founded upon what amounts to religious faith in the Copernican Principle, the core dogma underpinning the evolutionist origins paradigm."--Percy

We can calculate the force of attraction between Earth and Sun by using this equation: Plugging in the values we get: The nearest star is Alpha Centauri, a binary star system, at about 4 light years away. Plugging in the values for Earth and Alpha Centauri we get: The force of attraction between the Earth and Alpha Centauri is 11 orders of magnitude smaller, so negligible as to be safely ignored for calculating orbits within the solar system to even a third level of accuracy. It would take roughly a hundred billion Alpha Centauris at 4 light years away to equal the force of attraction of the sun. There are certainly at least that many stars in the Milky Way galaxy, but Alpha Centauri is the closest one, so the gravitational attraction of the rest is proportionally less by the inverse square of the distance and can again be safely ignored for calculations within the solar system. Also, while we're in the outer part of an arm, we're still surrounded by stars on all sides whose gravitational effects will tend to cancel out.This is not to say that the remote effects of gravity of all the stars and gas in the galaxy amount to nothing, just that its effects are too small to be bothered with for calculations within the solar system. The gravitational effects of the stars and gases and dark matter that comprise our galaxy are what give it its shape and structure and rotation. The Milky Way is apparently a barred galaxy with two arms.--PercyPS - Math corrections welcome, I dashed through looking up the values, getting them in the right units, and doing the calculations. Distances are m, mass is kg.Edited by Percy, : Grammar.Edited by Percy, : Clarify final paragraph.

Sure you are, and sure it is. And if you want to tell us that you believe in geocentrism out of faith (and you have) then that's fine. But you're also telling us that geocentrism has scientific support, and since this thread has been placed in a science forum then that's what you have to prove. And they at you, so just propose a new thread targeted for the Is It Science? or Faith and Belief forums. A crank and a cook! What a wonderful combination! The only criterion for membership is acceding to the registration agreement. We do have a goodly number of members knowledgeable about science, which makes sense since this site exists to examine creationist claims that their ideas are supported by science. I think what more distinguishes you from others here is that they write about what they know while you write about things you don't know. The Forum Guidelines do not disallow cutting and pasting:

6. Avoid lengthy cut-n-pastes. Introduce the point in your own words and provide a link to your source as a reference. If your source is not on-line you may contact the Site Administrator to have it made available on-line.

But you've relied upon extremely lengthy cut-n-pastes that still exceed in magnitude your own words by quite a margin. The Forum Guidelines make clear that lengthy cut-n-pastes are discouraged. We want your own words written as direct responses to what others have written to you in the same manner. Each generation of scientists builds on what came before. There's no need to reestablish what has already been scientifically established, though of course there's always the responsibility to never consider any scientific finding sacrosanct (the property of falsifiability). I don't see what reviewing the MM experiment and then posting a synopsis has to do with the current discussion. I think you'd be better off just moving on to the last step, forthrightly answering the replies posted to you. So far you've replied to only 37% of those replies.--Percy

Unsurprisingly, we're interested in what the evidence indicates is likely true. Gee, what a surprise, you're a promoter, exactly what the evidence indicated!I get email all the time (I'm the webmaster for this site) from honest promoters asking if they can promote this or that. You could have asked, you know. The answer would have been no, but at least you would have been honest.But dishonesty has served you well as now your promotions are plastered all over a couple threads here, and we are very hesitant about deleting threads.--Percy

Now you're channeling Faith. You should really stick around so you two can meet. Uh, no you didn't. In your proposal for a discussion thread you said you wanted to provide information, presumably as the starting point for a discussion, since that's the only reason people compose thread proposals. Did you perhaps not understand that this is a discussion board? Did you perhaps not read the last sentence of the registration agreement that reads: --Percy

Uh, no, that wasn't the point. Let me explain again.You had argued that the masses of the stars must be taken into account when solving the N-Body problem within the solar system. I went through the math and showed that the force of attraction of Alpha Centauri, the next nearest star, is 11 orders of magnitude less than the Sun and can be ignored, and that therefore the forces of all other stars, which are even further away, can also be ignored. I also pointed out that the gravity of the nearest stars that surround us (the ones that exert the greatest force on the solar system even though that force is tiny) tend to cancel anyway. And we're surrounded by the rest of the universe on all sides, and that gravity tends to cancel, too.In other words, the rest of the universe is irrelevant to solving the N-Body problem within the solar system.--Percy

It's high school physics involving no more than multiplication, division and a single square. I'm not arguing from authority, just presenting the actual math and making some simple logical arguments. If you have questions about anything just ask.--Percy

There's no need to write a synopsis of the Michelson-Morley experiment, I can fill you in here. MM is a very famous part of the story of relativity. Probably all historical accounts of Einstein's development of his theory of relativity relate the story of MM's attempt to detect the luminiferous ether. No doubt your sources will tell you the experiment failed to detect the ether not because there is no ether, but because the Earth isn't moving.Were our atmosphere opaque with the stars and planets forever hidden from our view then we would have no evidence that the Earth is moving, and one of the possibilities that would have to be considered after the failure of the MM experiment would be that the Earth isn't moving. But our atmosphere isn't opaque and we have copious evidence of the Earth's motion, so the failure of the MM experiment must be for some other reason. That reason turns out to be that there's no such thing as the luminiferous ether. Relativity explains the negative results.I'm leaving out a great many details, ask any questions you wish, lots of people here can answer them.--PercyEdited by Percy, : Typo.