[geocentrism] Re: Geosynchronous Satellites in a Geostationary Universe

The density of the Moon has been assumed to be that required by Newton's 
universal gravitation formula, with the latter then being proclaimed as truth 
(ie, the circular reasoning that I find so crazy). c) The gravity forces 
throughout the universe, by inference, would be so complex that the ordered 
cosmos we observe would be impossible. d) I believe that the Moon going around 
a path that is fixed in the fabric of space (not One Stone's "space-time") is 
the only way of achieving the clockwork precision of the heavens.

I hope that this answers your question.

Neville.

Thanks, yes. It does. Of course it could be objected that the g of the moon a 
la density is confirmed by the predicted orbits working quite as expected by 
objects of known density being sent to orbit the moon. How would you explain 
this ? 

Philip. 
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Neville Jones 
  To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 10:26 PM
  Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Geosynchronous Satellites in a Geostationary 
Universe


  Philip,

  Thank you for your comments.

  I use pdf for many reasons. It produces a small file, most people have 
Acrobat Reader, it is widely-used for publication of scientific material, and I 
use LaTeX (which I find immensely superior to Scientific Word). I appreciate 
that, without the full Adobe package, pdf files cannot be manipulated, but I 
find that a virtue.

  As regards the Moon, my view is basically this: a) The supposed gravitational 
relationship between the World and the Moon does not work (there is a 
correlation between tides and the Moon, for instance, but this is not caused by 
gravity); b) The density of the Moon has been assumed to be that required by 
Newton's universal gravitation formula, with the latter then being proclaimed 
as truth (ie, the circular reasoning that I find so crazy). c) The gravity 
forces throughout the universe, by inference, would be so complex that the 
ordered cosmos we observe would be impossible. d) I believe that the Moon going 
around a path that is fixed in the fabric of space (not One Stone's 
"space-time") is the only way of achieving the clockwork precision of the 
heavens.

  I hope that this answers your question.

  Neville.




    -----Original Message-----
    From: pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
    Sent: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 18:45:27 +1000
    To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
    Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Geosynchronous Satellites in a Geostationary 
Universe


    Neville, i will try to comment without any copy from your text.. 


    My question is this..  If you change the formulation to bring gravity away 
from the constant established, in order for there to be no gravitational pull 
at the height of the geostat satellite, then how do you account for the 
formulation still working in accord with the orbit of the moon.  ?  which we 
must assume is still attached to the world , and in the geocentric model 
rotating at a 24 hour orbit, and far greater centrifugal force than that 
attributed in the 28 day ascentric orbit.   at least as it seems to me..  

    Philip. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Prevent accessing dangerous websites - Protect your computer with Free Web 
Security Guard!
  More information at www.inbox.com/wsg


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
  Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.9/832 - Release Date: 4/06/2007 6:43 
PM

Other related posts: