|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Relativity is wrong... | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
SO writes: I need soem tests that are not based on the idea that we are orbiting the Sun, or some evidence that we actually are. Just been scanning through this thread. Have I got this wrong or is SO actually asking for evidence that the Earth orbits the Sun.........? Is he a flat-earther or something? Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
For the answer to that question, simply look at his avatar. DOH!
He's a geocentrist. Well I fear that relativity may be beyond our solaristically challenged friend so I will leave others to fight that particular fight and just watch from the sidelines. Have fun......
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
Are you seriously advocating geocentrism? Yes I am. On what do you base this conclusion? How do you, for example, explain the seasons?
Nope, it's science. OK. Over to you then. On what science do you base your conclusion? And why has everybody else got it soooo wrong for the last 500 years? I am genuinely intrigued by your thinking.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
Oni writes: And btw, since when are you on the sidelines? I have sworn myself to a period of contemplation, self exploration and the acceptance of other points of view. In doing this I hope to transcend the limited material world, find inner peace and raise my spirituality rating. If I can maintain this quest for tranquility and spiritual enlightenment even in the face of head banging Heliocentric denial then I figure I can cope with anything. It is a test.
Oni writes: Has watching cricket softened you up a bit? Rest assured that normal service will be resumed at some point after the cricket.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
Hey Rahvin.
Tell the truth - every time you consider actually refuting geocentrism, a hypothesis that hasn't been seriously considered by any respected scientist in living memory, you begin laughing so uncontrollably that typing out a coherent post becomes impossible. The former "me" would have said 'yes'. But where before I sought only discord now I seek only harmony. My new fount inner peace demands that I respect all points of view. I will not be deterred from this path of enlightenment. Not by man, beast, geocentrist or even deist.
And since I've decided not to reply to SO, the racist douchenozzle from Stormfront, sitting back and laughing as he trolls his insanity across the forum is entirely acceptable If I participate in this thread at all it will be only to question, without disagreement, such that I can gain appreciation of all the points of view on display. For most other participants SO seems to meet what CS insightfully described as "Target Practise". Enjoy.......
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
Rahvin writes: That's a rather...zen...outlook Yeah well.....I am a very....Zen....kinda guy. You know that!!
In this case, I'm just going to sit back and laugh. Where is the Solistically challenged Smoothie? This enlightenment shit is killing me. I need a giggle.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
Do you believe in gravity? In a Newtonian sense that is.
Do you accept the concept of mass in terms of resistance to changes in motion (i.e. inertia)? Can you explain your concept of a fixed and static Earth orbited by more massive bodies in a manner that is consistent with your answers to the above?
I'm a geocentrist since last 6 months. And what were you prior to that? Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
So you accept Newtonian gravity. You also accept the concept of inertial mass. You also bewilderingly seem to accept that all of the other less massive bodies in the solar system orbit the Sun. Yet you still insist that the Sun orbits the Earth.....
1) Is the Earth or the Sun the most massive body in your version of the "solar" system? 2) Do you think the Earth is somehow static, fixed and unmoving at a point in space that lies at the centre of the Universe? If so how is it fixed in place? 3) Just out of interest do you think the surface of a sphere contains a point that can be described as the "centre" of that surface? I continue to be baffled but intrigued by your thinking.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
What a strange thread. Yep. I think Catholic Scientist's description of Smoothie as debating "Target Practise" is the best reason I have seen for it's ongoing existence. My own take is that by asking the right questions we should be able to make SO contradict himself so blatantly that even he will have to either see the flaws in his own argument or have his head explode in a cloud of cognitive dissonance. But maybe I am just a sadistic bastard like that..........
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
Straggler writes: So you accept Newtonian gravity. You also accept the concept of inertial mass. You also bewilderingly seem to accept that all of the other less massive bodies in the solar system orbit the Sun. Yet you still insist that the Sun orbits the Earth..... Yes, what seems to be the problem? Well why do all other planets orbit the Sun whilst the Earth does not?
Straggler writes: 1) Is the Earth or the Sun the most massive body in your version of the "solar" system? Probably the Earth, but we can't say for sure. Then why do the other planets in the "solar" system not orbit the Earth rather than the Sun?
Straggler writes: 2) Do you think the Earth is somehow static, fixed and unmoving at a point in space that lies at the centre of the Universe? If so how is it fixed in place? Yes, it's static relative to the center of the universe. It just stands there, nothing is acting upon it, so it's not moving. Nothing is acting upon it? The gravity of the Sun? The gravity of the other planets in the planetary system? The gravity of the moon? No? Would none of these suggest that, even if we think the Earth is the most massive entity in the "solar" system, that the Earth is not actually completely static?
Straggler writes: 3) Just out of interest do you think the surface of a sphere contains a point that can be described as the "centre" of that surface? No, the sphere has a center that is inside the sphere. But the surface of a sphere itself does not have a centre. Agreed? Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
Straggler writes: Well why do all other planets orbit the Sun whilst the Earth does not? Because it's in the center of the universe, and the universe together with the Sun orbits the Earth. Pardon? Why do the other planets in our Solar system orbit the Sun and not the Earth?
Straggler writes: Then why do the other planets in the "solar" system not orbit the Earth rather than the Sun? Who says they don't? Maybe they do, we don't know. We have different models to describe both movements. Oh. I thought observation said not? Which is more massive in your version of the "Solar" system, the Earth or the Sun?
It is acting upon it, but not enough to move it. Surely all objects undergoing forces suffer a change in motion to some degree. Newtons second law etc. etc. No? What is special about the Earth? Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
Straggler writes: Which is more massive in your version of the "Solar" system, the Earth or the Sun? Observations have only indicated movement. But we can't say for sure what is turning around what. In my model the Earth is more massive. But of course, I'm not sure. Oh. So you accept Newtonian gravity. You accept the concept of inertial mass. But you don't consider the relative masses of different bodies in the "solar" system particularly important with regard to what orbits what. I am beginning to suspect that you may not have thought this through very well.
Surely all objects undergoing forces suffer a change in motion to some degree. Newtons second law etc. etc. No? What is special about the Earth? It's in teh center of the universe, so the forces cancel each other out. So in your model the Earth is stationary and static with all other bodies in the universe exerting equal but opposite cancelling gravitational forces upon the Earth at the centre point. Is that correct? If one of these bodies (e.g. the Sun) gets a bit closer to the Earth and exerts a slightly greater force how is this precarious equilibrium maintained? Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Or maybe I did, but you forgot that teh rotating shell of the universe exerts forces that are stronger than gravity. The much stronger force is exerted by the rotation of the cosmos. The rotating shell? How does the rotating shell exert a force? How can we detect and measure this force?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Straggler writes: How does the rotating shell exert a force? How can we detect and measure this force? I have. Nope. I still don't get it. Can you explain specifically how a rotating shell exerts a force on the Earth such that it is always at the very centre of the universe regardless of any gravitational forces? Even a slight imbalance in the various forces on the Earth would result in the Earth moving from a fixed point. Moving from centre of the universe. No? Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Straggler writes: Can you explain specifically how a rotating shell exerts a force on the Earth such that it is always at the very centre of the universe regardless of any gravitational forces? How? It's just balanced that way. That is not very informative. "Balance" means that all forces are ultimately equal but opposite thus cancelling each other out. How does a rotating shell give rise to that result? There is no known mechanism by which this can occur. Is it "magic"?
Straggler writes: Even a slight imbalance in the various forces on the Earth would result in the Earth moving from a fixed point. Moving from centre of the universe. No? No it wouldn't because those forces are not strong enough to move the Earth. F=ma Newtons second law. Any overall resultant force no matter how small will result in a change of motion. Why do the changing forces of gravity exerted on the Earth not result in changes in motion of this initially static Earth? Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024