[geocentrism] Re: Dual Axis Proof
- From: "Jack Lewis" <jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 21:31:02 -0000
Dear Allen,
Are you responding to yourself?
Jack
----- Original Message -----
From: Allen Daves
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 5:14 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Dual Axis Proof
only the earth's axis of nightly rotation.....
Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
1. Facing the same direction year around?.......Not rotating.! ?..what in
the world are you talking about? ..only the earth is tilted in the same
direction not the observer, certainly is not forced so as to be prevented from
seeing the other directions ..Hey wake up, its a sphere !? How is the observer
force to only see one direction on a sphere !? The observer can position
himself any where on the sphere he likes. He can also orientate himself
parallel to any axis !!!???? ....That is a ridiculous argument...look at the
diagrams i gave you again.....If the base line is irrelevant then parallel view
are equivalent!
2. Moving around the sun is rotation at 24 hour intervals as long as the
observer is orientated is parallels the axis of ROTATION ( by definition) there
is no logical or mechanical reason the observer cannot or will not see the
rotation on that axis if it exist.....For crying out loud people only the
direction of the rotation is in question not the fact that the rotation
exist!.....The only difference between the annual and nightly is the size of
the circumference and the direction of the axis......look at the diagram that
is the postion a observe is in at 24 hour intervals and as long as the
expsoures are taken over a long enough period (160-365days or so) the observer
is in a real rotation about a real axis that he can and is oreinted to...
3. Forget this nonsens about stoping the nightly spin........it is
irrelevant! No one is questioning that nightly star trails will be visible if
the exposures are taken year around there is no difference in taking a photo of
any rotational object such as a blade on a helicopter at 23 rpm or 24 RPM
whether or not you take photos of the rotation all within one rotation interval
or if you take the photos over a 365 intervals they will all still record the
exact same rotation ..that is moot issue and would not afect our ability to see
the other rotaion if it existed.......That has nothing to do with the issue!
Taking exposes at 24h 56min or 24 hour intervals has nothing to do with
rotation on the annual axis...we are discussing a deviation from that axis not
the fact that a observer will see the nightly rational axis even if he takes
photos at different hours of the night in 365 day intervals ......SO WHAT !? of
course you are going to see the same star trails you taking a photograph of the
very same thing.if you take a time lapse photography of a spinning wheel that
spins at 23.56 RPM at any interval other then 23.56rpm you will see a rotation
but only about that axis ..IT MAKES NO DIFFERNECE IF YOU TAKE THEM ALL WIHTIN
ONE REVOLUTION OR YOU TAKE THEM IN 365 ROTAIONAL INTERVALS ...ITS JUST A PHOTO
OF THE SAME EVENT OVER A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME..SO WHAT!..we are discussing a
different event a different axis altogether the fact there is nightly star
trails in photos taken with exposures all year long is irrelevant! We are
looking for the rotation around the solar axis .not the rotation around the
blank spot just to the side of Polaris..!!!!!!!!!!!
The last photos i sent were only to demonstrate the axist and the path of
deviation if it existed the photogrpah would in fact just all be a blurr...the
problem is we have time lapse photography over the course of 365 days taken at
24 hour (midnight) intervals it is not blurry it clearly shows the same nightly
rotation taken at differnt times of the year ...and so it should, becuse it is
a photo of the exact same thing the nightly path.....we are looking for and
must have a secondary path ....
There is no reason you can give for why we do not see the annual path that
does not apply to the nightly path nor is ther any reason you can give to
expalin why we do not see the annual path that would not negate the nightly
path..........There is obviously still alot of confussion on this...
j a <ja_777_aj@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Philip,
Me in Red
Well finally I can begin to feel sane, because Paul has fallen...I do not
mean he was on the pedestal, but he managed to keep confusing me.. But now he
confirms his fall with this to Ja "I concur 100%"
Jar said, "he is facing the same direction all year long. If the
observer does not rotate with the axis, how can he see a star trail?" The
observer would not actually be rotating, Yes moving around the sun, but not
rotating..
And this is very incomplete, and thus lacking in accuracy, and is a
contradiction. The two underlined are a contradiction. I qualified my above
statement with the removal or stopping of the earths daily rotation. Now since
the north pole always points at Polaris, then any other direction an observer
may face on any other place on the planet will not change over the course of a
year. Therefore there is no rotation of the observer with respect to the stars.
So there is no contradiction in my statement. I am simply trying to separate
the real motions (in HC) so that the results of each motion can be determined,
only then can we determine if we fail to see them.
philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
And If you meant this Paul, shame again, though you had it in quotes....
In my imagination, I thought of the Earth's relationship to the Sun in
the the same way we tend to think of the Moon's relationship to the Earth --
"If we always see the same face, it can't be spinning!"
As you know the moon makes one complete rotation for every orbit of the
earth.
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: philip madsen
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 9:10 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Dual Axis Proof
Well finally I can begin to feel sane, because Paul has fallen...I do
not mean he was on the pedestal, but he managed to keep confusing me.. But now
he confirms his fall with this to Ja "I concur 100%"
Jar said, "he is facing the same direction all year long. If the
observer does not rotate with the axis, how can he see a star trail?" The
observer would not actually be rotating, Yes moving around the sun, but not
rotating..
And this is very incomplete, and thus lacking in accuracy, and is a
contradiction. The two underlined are a contradiction.
How can any observer maintain a fixed orientation and face the exact
same direction in space all year long? The only co-ordinate he can chose is a
star, and it is this star's status, stationary or moving, that is under
question. ???? The closest to this would be to face vertically N.. And because
the earths motion is under question even this is not actually determinate.
Only if the world were static, or the stars were static and unmoving
could this orientation be achieved, and it is this continuous and unending
problem of indeterminate relative motions that is being debated, so far without
success.
None of us with all the uncountable drawings plans explanations has
come even close to an acceptable understanding or concensus. Everything we try
is thwarted because of the need to assume some basic premise which is
contestable.
So far I see no sound proof offered to Regner. Not 5, not 1.
Excepting perhaps the revolutionary hypothesis on the aether, not acceptable to
MS or Regner. My rational expectations is that GWW and Roberts input will be
dispensed with a very short and concise rebuttal as being inconclusive.
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Deema
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 2:40 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Dual Axis Proof
J A
I concur 100%.
Now what would you see if you repeated the experiment but with the
Earth's axis magically made orthogonal to the plane of revolution -- the
ecliptic plane? (The axis is now pointing at the (north or south) ecliptic
pole).
Paul D
----- Original Message ----
From: j a <ja_777_aj@xxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, 3 November, 2007 4:32:16 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Dual Axis Proof
I want to take one more stab at our Proof. From the AC position, If
we could magically stop the planet in it's path around the sun but still
rotating daily, we could still observe the nightly star trails, because the
observer is rotating with the axis. If we could magically stop the daily
rotation but not the yearly, what would we see? The observer would not actually
be rotating, Yes moving around the sun, but not rotating. Now reduce the
baseline to zero and what is the observer doing? It's the same whether the
baseline is zero or 1au, he is facing the same direction all year long. If the
observer does not rotate with the axis, how can he see a star trail?
Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
To prove it take a camera and spin it at 23.44 degrees subtended
to the perpendicular. now spin the camera 365 times on the 23.44 degree axis
for every one time that the whole apparatus is rotated 360 degrees
.........this will adequately demonstrate the effect and since the observers
scale (observers distance from axis of rotation) makes no difference and we
would be using actual stars at actual distances there can be no protest of
scale......
All is well in the house of the Geocentric
Universe.............ahhhhhhhhh......:)
Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Not to dispare..you see it does not matter ..why? ..because the
nightly moves through 360 degress 365 times for ever 1 anual rotation so the
observer is at some point all through out the 365 nights is going to be in
rotaion about the anual axis in all 360 degreess ......there will be a star
trail but only on the nightly axis everything as stated previously still
applies.. and it would all be a big blur.....but we already have that photo
available to us.....it is not blured at all by stars tracing out multiple paths
simoltaniously...
j a <ja_777_aj@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Everybody,
I see a potential problem we need to consider in developing
the dual axis proof, which potentially could render it unusable. From an
A-centric position, basically it is this: On the nightly star trail the
observer is moving along the axis of rotation, therefore the view of the axis
doesn't change. On the annual star trail the observer is moving along a path
that is 23.5 degrees off of the axis of rotation. This means that the observers
view of the axis is changing by the same amount that a particular star moves
around that axis, therefore negating the motion, making it appear to be
motionless.
Now if this is true, then to test whether the annual star
trail exists, the observer would have to travel north or south by a certain
number of degrees for each successive observation such that his path remains on
the axis of rotation in question. The problem here is that if we did this we
would be reversing the problem and should expect to see an annual trail even if
Geo-centrism were the truth because we would be observing based on a created
axis.
Any axis we create will show what we should expect it to
whether AC or GC is the actual truth.
What does everyone think? I'm depressed.
JA
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection
around
http://mail.yahoo.com
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------
National Bingo Night. Play along for the chance to win $10,000
every week. Download your gamecard now at Yahoo!7 TV.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.20/1107 - Release Date:
3/11/2007 11:22 AM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.20/1107 - Release Date:
3/11/2007 11:22 AM
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Other related posts:
