Relativity is wrong...

Hi Coragyps, I was wondering if anyone had brought up this issue. It's worse than that, as the stars that do move against the background stars are not all moving at the same time, rather they follow the same pattern, but at different synchronizations to the annual calendar cycle. When one is at maximum deviation from the average position, another is only part way there, and a third is near the average position.Curiously the pattern of deviation synchronizations exactly matches what would be predicted from an earth in an elliptical orbit around the sun.Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

Hi Huntard, let's develop this scenario a little further. Lagrange point - Wikipedia

quote:

---

The Lagrangian points (pronounced /lrend’in/; also Lagrange point, L-point, or libration point), are the five positions in an orbital configuration where a small object affected only by gravity can theoretically be stationary relative to two larger objects (such as a satellite with respect to the Earth and Moon). The Lagrange points mark positions where the combined gravitational pull of the two large masses provides precisely the centripetal force required to rotate with them. They are analogous to geostationary orbits in that they allow an object to be in a "fixed" position in space rather than an orbit in which its relative position changes continuously.

​

A more precise but technical definition is that the Lagrangian points are the stationary solutions of the circular restricted three-body problem.[1] For example, given two massive bodies in circular orbits around their common center of mass, there are five positions in space where a third body, of comparatively negligible mass, could be placed which would then maintain its position relative to the two massive bodies. As seen in a rotating reference frame with the same period as the two co-orbiting bodies, the gravitational fields of two massive bodies combined with the centrifugal force are in balance at the Lagrangian points, allowing the third body to be stationary with respect to the first two bodies.[2]
A contour plot of the effective potential of a two-body system (the Sun and Earth here) due to gravity and the centrifugal force as viewed from the rotating frame of reference in which Sun and Earth remain stationary. Objects revolving with the same orbital period as the Earth will begin to move according to the contour lines showing equipotential surfaces. The arrows indicate the gradients of the potential around the five Lagrange points ” downhill toward (red) or away from (blue) them, but at the points themselves these forces are balanced.

---

A satellite camera in each of these 5 places will show the same thing: the rest of the solar system and universe will appear to revolve around a common center of the two objects in an annual cycle, which in the case of the sun and the earth will match the seasons perfectly, and the earth will be seen to spin on an axis tilted approximately 23.439281° in a daily cycle (except that L3 will have difficulty seeing the earth through the sun, and L2 will only see the corona of the sun around the spinning earth).The satellites will be locked in these positions and not need to expend any energy to remain in position, thus demonstrating that they are in fixed orbits that match the annual cycle against the background stars.The only object that matches the daily pattern will be the spinning earth. The mathematics of these positions is entirely and completely independent of any spin in either object, being the result only of their mass and relative position one to the other. The orbital period of these satellites around the common center must exactly match the orbital period of whichever is orbiting what.These satellite cameras can also exchange telemetric data that show their relative distances exactly, over the year adjusting as the earth and the sun move towards and away from each other due to the changing locations along their elliptical orbits. This will demonstrate that northern hemisphere experiences winter when the earth is closer to the sun and summer when it is farther, while the southern hemisphere will see the opposite seasonal patterns.In addition the axis of tilt of the earth relative to the earth\sun orbital plane will be seen to precess during the year but remain relatively fixed compared to the stellar background, with the north pole always pointing towards the north star. During the Northern hemisphere summer the pole region will be constantly lit. During the winter, constantly dark, while the southern pole will experience exactly the opposite pattern.The mathematics is determined by the relative masses of the two bodies, and in the case here, the sun must be many times more massive than the earth, as the 5 points form a pattern determined by the gravitational pull of each mass.The same can be done for each of the planets with similar results, as even Jupiter is small in mass compared to the sun.Either everything is manipulated by a joker god or the earth spins on it's axis while it orbits the sun.Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : little bear tale

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

Hey xongsmith, It could be done for the earth's moon, with all the forces of the universe exactly balancing to hang the earth motionless over one special place.What this means is that any one such transformation is no better than any other, and thus there is no proof that one could be correct. Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

and then again, xongsmith, what about tides and the shape of the earth? The tides are due to gravitational pull of sun and moon, each effect marching around the surface of the oceans with the movement of these objects.The oblate spheroid shape of the earth is due to the spin of the earth around it's axis, a shape that is constant except for the minor perturbations of the tides, which are minor by comparison.The average distance from the center of the earth to the sea surface at the equator is always larger than the average distance from the center of the earth to the sea surface at the poles.You need a uniform force in the plane of the equator to pull the earth into the shape it has. The sun cannot do this, the moon cannot do this, the rest of the solar system cannot do this, the relatively uniform distribution of the rest of the universe cannot do this.A spinning earth can do this. Water runs downhill, meaning it seeks equilibrium with gravitation and any other forces. What pulls water uphill at the equator? There is no source of gravitational pull outside the earth to cause this uniform distribution around the globe. Can your transformation solve the oblate spheroid riddle? We can measure the microgravitational flux on the surface of the ocean, and we find that gravity is stronger at the poles than at the equator, so some other force is holding the water at the equator so that it doesn't flow to the poles until surface gravity is equalized.Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : microgravitational flumox

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

Hi cavediver (can I borrow your helmet to knock my head against the wall?) Up where there are men who moil for gold?Combine your midnight sun with the water on the surface of the earth forming an oblate spheroid and you have(1) a mysterious force that pulls the water away from the center of the earth at the equator in comparison to the poles, a force that is always in the plane of the ecliptic, and(2) a mysterious force that lifts the sun entirely up from this plane, but somehow doesn't move a drop of water.Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : better

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

Hey xongsmith Now add in the forces that lift the sun above this plane, without lifting the oblate eccentricity of the surface of the earth.Tide - Wikipedia

quote:

---

The theoretical amplitude of oceanic tides caused by the Moon is about 54 cm at the highest point, which corresponds to the amplitude that would be reached if the ocean possessed a uniform depth, there were no landmasses, and the Earth were not rotating. The Sun similarly causes tides, of which the theoretical amplitude is about 25 cm (46% of that of the Moon) with a cycle time of 12 hours. At spring tide the two effects add to each other to a theoretical level of 79 cm, while at neap tide the theoretical level is reduced to 29 cm. Since the orbits of the Earth about the Sun, and the Moon about the Earth, are elliptical, the amplitudes of the tides change somewhat as a result of the varying Earth-Sun and Earth-Moon distances. This causes a variation in the tidal force and theoretical amplitude of about 18% for the Moon and 5% for the Sun. If both the Sun and Moon were at their closest positions and aligned at new moon, the theoretical amplitude would reach 93 cm.

---

Or about 3 ft.The maximum tides known on earth, taking in depth, synchronous basin configurations, etc. is on the order of 55 feet:

quote:

---

The exact time and height of the tide at a particular coastal point is also greatly influenced by the local bathymetry. There are some extreme cases: the Bay of Fundy, on the east coast of Canada, features the largest well-documented tidal ranges in the world, 16 meters (53 ft), because of the shape of the bay.[30] Ungava Bay in northern Quebec, is believed by some experts to have higher tidal ranges than the Bay of Fundy, but it is free of pack ice for only about four months every year, whereas the Bay of Fundy rarely freezes.

---

The earth shape however shows much greater difference from pole to equator.Earth - Wikipedia

quote:

---

The shape of the Earth is very close to that of an oblate spheroid, a sphere squished along the orientation from pole to pole such that there is a bulge around the equator.[53] This bulge results from the rotation of the Earth, and causes the diameter at the equator to be 43 km larger than the pole to pole diameter.[54]

---

That's about 141,100 feet, or ~2,660 times the largest known tidal difference, and there is another difference:Tidal bulges are along a line pointing to the approximate location of the sun or moon (albeit with a time delay). The oblate spheroid bulge is the same all around the equator, and never varies up or down from that location. It's the opposite shape of a tidal bulge.Now put a new moon together with a midnight sun while standing near the north pole - the moon and the sun stay suspended above the horizon plane, the same plane defined by the oblate spheroid's extended waist, and yet ...... the (combinations of transformed) force/s that holds them so uniquely suspended above the earth for several days, weeks, months, on end, has, curiously, no visible effect on the surface of the water, the equator is still 43 km wider all around a 360° circle than the distance along the line from pole to pole. Let's do the Time Warp again....Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

You can make a mathematical transformation to explain the position, locations and movements, but that does not explain the causal forces. Remember, math is not the reality, it is a model of reality, and the better it explains reality the better the model is, however the math is incapable of making things behave in different ways.Thought experiments: a perfectly spherical ball centered inside a perfectly spherical container. The forces between the ball and the sphere are perfectly balanced, and this balance does not change if one or the other is spinning, as their shapes are fixed, the distances are fixed. Either could spin in any direction and the known forces of interaction between them would be unchanged.Now you make the inner ball flexible, malleable, and you spin it: the forces holding it together will try to make a perfect sphere, but the centrifugal inertia from the spinning causes the ball to take on the oblate spheroid shape to balance the forces on the different parts of it. Meanwhile the effect of the outer sphere on the inner ball are unchanged.So then you run the mathematical transformation, such that the inner ball is stationary, fixed, and the outer shell is spinning: what causes the inner ball to take on an oblate spheroid shape? The forces on the flexible malleable central ball are no different than they were on the original perfectly spherical ball.So the next thought experiment is then to make the shell a flexible, malleable material as well: it takes on an oblate spheroid shape as it spins, and as a result there is a flow of material from the poles towards the equatorial regions, making the shell thickest at the equator and thinnest at the poles. Aha, says the simple explanation seeker: the increased mass along the bulging equatorial shell causes more gravitational pull on the central ball, pulling it out into an oblate spheroid as well ...... but reality is not that simple. The force causing the oblate spheroid shape increase linearly with the radius and the spin rate, while the gravitational force decreases by the inverse square of the radius, so the oblate shell equator has less gravitational pull on the central ball than it's axial locations -- the central flexible malleable ball would be drawn out along the axial dimension rather than take on the oblate spheroid shape.So the next thought experiment is to run gravity in reverse - as a pushing force from the shell to the central flexible and malleable ball, greater at the poles than at the equator - and voila! an oblate spheroid!The problem is all those moons, asteroids, comets and planets orbiting other planets and the sun without being pushed into the earth. Putting a spaceship into orbit around the moon europa is not explained by the push force centered on the earth.The offset orbit of the midnight sun above the arctic circle is not explained by such a push force, because it needs a push force acting from one end of the axis, while the oblate spheroid earth needs one from both ends of the axis.The forces don't add up to match reality.Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

see new replyEdited by RAZD, : sigEdited by RAZD, : deleted

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

First, we take as an arbitrary initial frame of reference, a line between the sun and the earth projected onto the plane of the oblateness of the earth, the plane perpendicular to the axis of rotation (whether it be the earth or the shell, it's the same axis) and through the center of the earth. We ignore for now the issue of the rotation of the earth vs the rotation of the shell. From this frame of reference we see the sun rise and fall in an integrated continuous pattern - a nice simple harmonic pattern, like a spring, like a sine wave, like an elliptical orbit seen on one side. This is the first transformation.If you are at the pole point of the earth for either axis of the rotation - either the north pole axis point or the south pole axis point - the sun will rise and set in this simple harmonic pattern. A bass note resonating in the universe. If you floated in space anywhere around earth (ignoring the question of rotation of the earth) within this frame of reference you would see this same pattern of harmonic rise and fall, with the same amplitude and the same continuous motion.Next we fix the rotation of the earth, lock it in place. Our frame of reference is still a line projecting into space along the oblateness plane, but this time it is fixed to a point on earth, such as the arbitrary 0°N by 0°E of the modern globe. In the previous frame of reference this line sweeps around the earth once a day, while the line from the previous frame of reference when viewed from this new frame of reference sweeps around the earth once a day (in the opposite direction). This is the second transformation.Now if you are once again at either pole point of the earth for either axis of the rotation - either the north pole axis point or the south pole axis point - and spin to keep the sun directly before you, the sun will rise and set in this very same simple harmonic pattern, this bass note, as before. If instead you stand fixed and facing the line of the frame of reference, then each day the sun will travel in a ring around the axis of spin, and the ring will gradually rise and fall in complete harmony with the bass note of the first transformation. Here we can see the high and low oscillation of the daily counter melody to the bass note from the first transformation --- at one latitude on earth. I've rethought this issue for the second transformation. If I put a plane touching the earth at a point 5°, 10°, 15°, whatever, away from the pole, to show the horizon as seen from that vantage point, then the "ring orbit" over the pole will be seen from a canted angle, and the sun will appear to rise and fall. This matches the observations for the midnight sun and any other location on earth, with the "high" point occurring at local noon.

​

In this scenario the sun orbits the north south axis of the universe through the earth on a daily basis, and oscillates up and down along this axis on an annual basis. When it is at the north end of the oscillation, it is summer in the north, winter in the south, and when it is at the south end of the oscillation it is winter in the north and summer in the south. The radius of the daily ring orbit can also adjust diameter with height, but that involves a third transformation.

​

One could posit a "dark matter" anti-sun in orbit around the same axis with the same mass\gravity as the sun but 180° from it. This would explain the massive sun orbiting the puny little earth, however there would be many results expected from such an object that are not in evidence - such as a secondary sun tide when the sun is away from the plane of the oblateness.

​

This still does not explain any forces necessary to result in this rather extraordinary pattern, nor does it explain the oblate spheroid shape of the earth.Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : mea culpa #1, new in red, old hidden

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

Hi DevelsAdvocate, just another tidbit. I've rethought this issue for the second transformation. If I put a plane touching the earth at a point 5°, 10°, 15°, whatever, away from the pole, to show the horizon as seen from that vantage point, then the "ring orbit" over the pole will be seen from a canted angle, and the sun will appear to rise and fall. This matches the observations for the midnight sun and any other location on earth, with the "high" point occurring at local noon.

​

In this scenario the sun orbits the north south axis of the universe through the earth on a daily basis, and oscillates up and down along this axis on an annual basis. When it is at the north end of the oscillation, it is summer in the north, winter in the south, and when it is at the south end of the oscillation it is winter in the north and summer in the south. The radius of the daily ring orbit can also adjust diameter with height, but that involves a third transformation.

​

One could posit a "dark matter" anti-sun in orbit around the same axis with the same mass\gravity as the sun but 180° from it. This would explain the massive sun orbiting the puny little earth, however there would be many results expected from such an object that are not in evidence - such as a secondary sun tide when the sun is away from the plane of the oblateness.

​

This still does not explain any forces necessary to result in this rather extraordinary pattern, nor does it explain the oblate spheroid shape of the earth.EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : mea culpa #2, new in red, old hidden

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

your last quote is from?

I've revised my post completely, after more thought on the matter.

I don't think equations will help the matter.Note that I've changed my previous response considerably after some further thought on the matter. See Message 333 or Message 366 for the changes. Yes, and my revised thinking shows that a midnight sun is possible with such a transformation -- it's just that there is no explanation for the necessary forces, without inventing new and more bizarre ad hoc counters.So, yes, you are right about it being a mathematical possibility - this still is not proof that it is true.Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : links

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

Hi cavediver, I've had some further thoughts on this problem. This is explained by the oscillation of the sun up and down during the year, while at the same time orbiting the earth daily. See Message 333. There are two different motions involved.Google Sites: Sign-in

quote:

---

The sun's path, fixed or "set" within the rotating firmament, spiral-orbits the Earth north-south and clockwise from the Tropic of Cancer to the Tropic of Capricorn in six months and then alters course laterally to spiral-orbit south-north and continues clockwise for the next six months. Seasons result from the yearly helical oscillation of the sun's path around the untilted stationary Earth.

​

​

​

Yearly spiral pathway of the sun as it orbitally revolves around the STATIONARY Earth daily.

---

Notice that on the summer solstice (~June 22) the sun is always ~23.44° above the equator, while on the winter solestice (~December 22) the sun remains ~23.44° below the equator, which also explains the seasons.They also have an explanation for the analemma.This is, of course, a purely mathematical hypothetical model, it does not provide a model of the forces involved (ie what causes the unique oscillation of the sun up and down), and thus it cannot predict forces between objects nor paths of travel for things like satellites as a result, especially geosynchronous satellites.This still does not explain the oblate spheroid shape of the earth, and now we have another tidbit of curiosity to add to the mix: how does this explain geostationary orbits:Below is the image at: The Celestia Motherlode: Satellites What holds them in place?Geostationary orbit - Wikipedia

quote:

---

A geostationary orbit (or Geostationary Earth Orbit - GEO) is a geosynchronous orbit directly above the Earth's equator (0 latitude), with a period equal to the Earth's rotational period and an orbital eccentricity of approximately zero. From locations on the surface of the Earth, geostationary objects appear motionless in the sky, making the GEO an orbit of great interest to operators of communications and weather satellites. Due to the constant 0 latitude and circularity of geostationary orbits, satellites in GEO differ in location by longitude only.

​

Geostationary orbits are useful because they cause a satellite to appear stationary with respect to a fixed point on the rotating Earth. As a result, an antenna can point in a fixed direction and maintain a link with the satellite. The satellite orbits in the direction of the Earth's rotation, at an altitude of 35,786 km (22,236 mi) above ground. This altitude is significant because it produces an orbital period equal to the Earth's period of rotation, known as the sidereal day.

---

And why is it easier to launch a satellite to the east than to the west? The escape velocity should be the same regardless eh?Enjoy.Note: how to tell when you are dealing with a nut -- in the middle of discussing something in a seemingly sane manner, a totally irrelevant conspiracy theory is introduced:

quote:

---

JFK Murder Solved - watch killer fire then ditch weapon.

---

LOL.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •