[geocentrism] Re: Celestial Poles
- From: "Dr. Neville Jones" <ntj005@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 00:37:05 +0100 (BST)
In a large universe, if the stars are as far away as HCs claim, such that you
no longer have a triangle, but a straight line, then there would be no
displacement of the star's position as a result of the World rotating. Just as
there is no movement of the celestial north pole, which can be regarded as
being at infinity.
Neville.
j a <ja_777_aj@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Thank you Phillip. It would seem that the proof I'm questioning only proves
it's point if the universe is small but not if the universe is large. Since
Heliocentrists think the universe is large, therefore the proof is not valid
against HC.
Philip wrote:I think you have a POINT ja! I think perhaps that is why neville
needs to shrink the universe.
You remind me of the old camera lense. one end had a focal length of perhaps a
foot. where as the other end was called infinity , which seemed to have a focal
length of everything from 10 feet outwards to infinity.
Something perhaps no one has considered.. Neglecting all our hypotheticals like
aether, empty space is not really empty. It is sposed to be composed of very
rareified atomic Hydrogen. Empty from our perspective, but I would hazard it
would be rather dense given a parsec or two. What sort of magnifying or
diffracting effect might this have on what we see in the heavens, as those rays
of light come our way. No one can state with absolute certainty that radiation
will not be forced to curve....whether by hydrogen or magnetic fields unknown
to us.
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: j a
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2005 12:17 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Celestial Poles
I used a little artistic liscence too. Think of the north star in my arguement
as the center of the circle that it produces daily. My responce is: what is 150
million Km compared to 430 light years. If I did the math right it's 0.000016
light years compared to 430 light years. Isn't that like comparing 5,090 miles
to a foot. How could you see a difference in something 5,090 miles away if you
moved left or right by 1 foot? If you sat on a kids' 'sit and spin' and placed
an object a short distance away from being directly overhead but 5000 miles
away and you watched it as you spun around you would see it make it's small
circle. Move the 'sit and spin' over 1 foot and look at the object again as you
spin and you will not see any difference from your previous view. And your view
above you has nothing to do with the view below you. Someone on the opposite
side of the earth could do the same experiment with the same result.
"Dr. Neville Jones" wrote:Hi James,
The diagram by Jack uses artistic licence to exaggerate the effect.
Polaris is not due north, but slightly offset. It is not so far away that we do
not detect the fact that it describes a circle daily. If we detect that on a
World with a 6,300 km radius, how much more would we detect it during the
course of one year - which is effectively on a World with a 150,000,000 km
radius?
Also, the effect on the south celestial pole would be empasized by the tilt of
the axis (the "ecliptic") and by the necessary wobble in the heliocentric myth.
Neville.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Other related posts:
