Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total)
11 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,463 Year: 3,720/9,624 Month: 591/974 Week: 204/276 Day: 44/34 Hour: 1/6


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Movie - "The Principle"
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 47 of 120 (761289)
06-30-2015 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by Suzanne Romano
06-30-2015 11:42 AM


Re: wrong in wrong out
How's everybody doing?
Good, I'm just sitting here waiting for you to provide that argument for geocentricism that you said you would in Message 16.
All you've provided so far is arguments that are anti-current-science, but that's not an argument for geocentricism anymore than anti-evolution arguments are for creationism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Suzanne Romano, posted 06-30-2015 11:42 AM Suzanne Romano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Suzanne Romano, posted 06-30-2015 12:58 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 50 of 120 (761302)
06-30-2015 1:02 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by Suzanne Romano
06-30-2015 12:58 PM


Re: wrong in wrong out
Hi Cat! I just started a new thread in the education section. I am now uploading synopses for the GWW scenes.
So, we come here to converse with the other members. We don't come here to watch videos and read copy-n-pastes.
I can find all kinds of geocentric nonsense on the internet by myself, I don't need you for that. We're here to read what your own thoughts are on the matter, and that's what we need you here for, to share what you, personally, think. We're not here to read the text from other websites, we'd just go to those websites ourselves if we wanted that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Suzanne Romano, posted 06-30-2015 12:58 PM Suzanne Romano has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 59 of 120 (761324)
06-30-2015 2:58 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by Suzanne Romano
06-30-2015 1:44 PM


Cat Sci, I wrote the synopses just last week after studying the DVD. You want my thinking? You get it in the synopses.
Well, what does the synopsis talk about? Do you provide any argument at all for the Earth being in the center of the solar system? If so, what is that argument?
Or, as i've seen so far, is all the time spent trying to debunk current heliocentric science?
Because an argument that the sun is not at the center of the solar system is not an argument that the Earth is.
Also, the whole "motion is relative" stuff is totally irrelevant to providing evidence for a geocentric model. Its kinda like "the sky is not green" is not an argument that the sky is, in fact, blue.
Understand that I believe that the universe is geocentric because the Scriptures say that the Sun moves and the Earth does not.
Is there anything, at all, that is capable of convincing you otherwise?
You engage in a logical fallacy when you dismiss out of hand something a person has posted just because it came from a promotional website.
I didn't dismiss anything. I simply explained, what is in the rules that you agreed to when you created your account, that we are here to read your own written words and not those of others that you copied and pasted here.
Even if you, yourself, wrote a whole bunch of stuff on another website, we still expect you to explain it in detail here and then just provide links to where the original came from.
I'm sure, Cat Sci, that if you actually read them, there is something in the synopses for you to tear apart.
And if you actually watch the DVD's, you might be able to take Ricker to task for anything misrepresentative he has included in his review.
I don't think we even need to get that far. But first off, let me ask you again:
Is there anything at all that you can conceive of that would be capable of convincing you that the Earth revolves around the Sun?
Here is my first argument:
The Sun is over 300,000 times the mass of the Earth. It is physically impossible for something that massive to revolve around something as small as the Earth.
Even if the Earth started at the center of the solar system, the mass of the Sun would quickly pull it into either itself, or into an orbit around it.
Therefore, it is impossible for the Earth to be at the center of the solar system. There is simply to much mass out there around the Earth for it to sustain those masses in an orbit around it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Suzanne Romano, posted 06-30-2015 1:44 PM Suzanne Romano has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 69 of 120 (761361)
06-30-2015 4:45 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by Suzanne Romano
06-30-2015 4:19 PM


Re: Galileo Was Wrong...about circular planetary orbits
Any thoughts on the mass of the sun being waaay too huge for it to revolve around the Earth? See Message 59.
Added by Edit:
In Message 72, JonF explains that some people think that the sun actually isn't that massive. They seem to be making that assessment based on some calculations of the gravitation pull on observations here on Earth.
We know that can't be the case, because we've actually sent a probe out to orbit the sun and make direct measurements. It turns out that the sun really is really freakin' huge. I mean, they had to send the probe around Jupiter just to get enough velocity to get up and over the sun.
Ulysses (spacecraft) - Wikipedia
.
Edited by Cat Sci, : added link to message
Edited by Cat Sci, : see Added by Edit

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Suzanne Romano, posted 06-30-2015 4:19 PM Suzanne Romano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by JonF, posted 07-01-2015 9:49 AM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 77 by RAZD, posted 07-01-2015 11:32 AM New Cat's Eye has not replied
 Message 79 by Suzanne Romano, posted 07-01-2015 12:10 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 76 of 120 (761429)
07-01-2015 11:31 AM
Reply to: Message 72 by JonF
07-01-2015 9:49 AM


Re: Galileo Was Wrong...about circular planetary orbits
Thanks JonF. I didn't realize people were making claims like that. I edited my message.
The video's calculations about the gravitational pull we see here on Earth has nothing on the direct measurements that the Ulysses spacecraft made when it was orbiting the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by JonF, posted 07-01-2015 9:49 AM JonF has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 80 of 120 (761441)
07-01-2015 12:29 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by Suzanne Romano
07-01-2015 12:10 PM


Re: Galileo Was Wrong...about circular planetary orbits
My thought is that this question is framed by Newtonian mechanics because it implies that only the forces caused by the mass of the two bodies stipulated - the Sun and the Earth - should be factored into the analysis. As framed, your question posits the Newtonian idea of Absolute Space, wherein the only things moving and exerting force are the bodies under consideration, the bodies plugged into a mathematical equation. IF the Sun and the Earth were the two bodies in a two-body system, indeed the mass of the Sun would be "waaaay too huge for it to revolve around the Earth."
Even with all the other planets in the equation, the sun is simply way to massive to revolve around the Earth.
And the other stars in the galaxy are too far away to have a non-negligible effect.
Forget the rest of the Universe for a second and just look at our solar system.
The sun is between 99.8 and 99.9 percent of the total mass of the solar system.
It is physically impossible for any one piece of that 0.1 - 0.2 percent of the total mass of the solar system to be at the center.
The other 99% of the mass, the sun, would pull too hard on that center piece for it to stay there.
According to Ernst Mach, though the huge mass of the Sun has a great force of gravity, the combined masses of the stars have a corresponding force of gravity, which influences other bodies in the universe.
Mach, whoever he is, is wrong.
The force of gravity on the Earth from the other stars is totally negligible in comparison to the force of gravity from the Sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Suzanne Romano, posted 07-01-2015 12:10 PM Suzanne Romano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Suzanne Romano, posted 07-01-2015 1:02 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 89 by kbertsche, posted 07-01-2015 3:56 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 85 of 120 (761450)
07-01-2015 1:07 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by Suzanne Romano
07-01-2015 1:02 PM


Re: Galileo Was Wrong...about circular planetary orbits
Suzanne, we don't debate by video and we don't debate by links. We type out our responses to each other. That was in the rules you agreed to when you signed up.
What does the video say? How is it relevant?
Do you have any thoughts on what I wrote?
The other stars in the galaxy have a negligible gravitational effect on the Earth compared to our Sun.
The Sun is way too massive to revolve around the Earth in our Solar System.
This has yet to be addressed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Suzanne Romano, posted 07-01-2015 1:02 PM Suzanne Romano has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 90 of 120 (761466)
07-01-2015 4:04 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by kbertsche
07-01-2015 3:56 PM


Re: Galileo Was Wrong...about circular planetary orbits
According to Ernst Mach, though the huge mass of the Sun has a great force of gravity, the combined masses of the stars have a corresponding force of gravity, which influences other bodies in the universe.
Mach, whoever he is, is wrong.
Maybe Mach was wrong on this, but I doubt it. I suspect he was talking about something like the effects of one star's gravity on nearby stars, and whoever quote-mined him for Suzanne distorted and misinterpreted what he said.
Yeah, I don't know where that came from. But the idea that the combined masses of the stars have a force of gravity on Earth that corresponds to that of our Sun is so wrong it is simply ridiculous.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by kbertsche, posted 07-01-2015 3:56 PM kbertsche has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024