[geocentrism] Re: Regner concedes?

  • From: Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2007 19:37:09 +0000 (GMT)

Neville J
You are still refusing to look into that dark cupboard!
You get star trails centred on the NCP by pointing your camera at the NCP and 
nailing it to the ground because the Earth is conveniently rotating about that 
axis.
You will NOT get star trails centred on the NEP by pointing your camera at the 
NEP UNLESS you ALSO align it CONSTANTLY with the ecliptic axis and this is the 
thing you and others REFUSE to do!!! In addition you must also cause it to 
rotate once per year around that axis to mirror the Earth's once per year 
revolution. There are simple ways to achieve this.
Why is this so difficult to see?
It's like Nelson refusing to look through Galileo's telescope -- two avenues of 
failure!
The point here is that this tactic would produce similar star trails centred on 
Arcturus or Spica or any other star. It doesn't prove anything, so why do you 
keep insisting that it cannot be shown?
A much more indicative experiment to demonstrate orbital motion is to do a 
statistical analysis of the the correllation between the degree of eccentricity 
of polar region stellar parallax and ecliptic plane stellar parallax. You will 
find a steady progression from circular to straight line. From this you may 
infer orbital motion and NEP centred star trails will then make added sense.
Paul D



----- Original Message ----
From: Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, 7 November, 2007 4:45:14 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Regner concedes?


Philip,

The essence of all this is rotation. Either rotation of the two cameras (HC) or 
rotation of the starry heavens (GC).

In the HC system, the stars are both fixed and a very, very long way away.

Take your camera, in the HC model, and rotate it about an axis, any axis, 
whilst the World is stationary. You will get star trails about the pole.

Point it somewhere else in the night sky and do the same thing. You will get a 
similar result.

Now replace the manual rotation of your camera with some rigidity to the World 
and let the rotation of the World turn your camera about the optical axis.

What is the difference? Nothing.

So if we obtain the trails about one rotation axis, but not the other, then 
rotation about the other axis in the heliocentric system is non existent.

Neville

www.GeocentricUniverse.com



-----Original Message-----
From: pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wed, 7 Nov 2007 16:44:32 +1000


I have tried very hard to comprehend what we were all attempting to do. Yes in 
the beginning I thought we had something.. ..so I will ask you to answer two 
simple questions. 
 
1. If we take a picture of polaris from the same position and time on earth  
and with the same angle of observation , once in January, and again 6 months 
later. How will those pictures differ from each other ? 
 
2. If we take the pictures again at the same times with a different angle of 
observation, aimed at the ecliptic if you wish, How will those differ from each 
other?
 
I maintain that both pictures in exercise 1 will be identical except that the 
star will show up on a different spot of the daily trail you have for reference 
taken under the same conditions. 
 
Further that both pictures in exercise 2 though different from those in 
exercise 1., will be identical, except the star also will be on different spots 
of the daily trail you have kept for reference taken also under the same 
conditions. 
 
The two different trails will not be the same size due to the camera angle 
change. But this has nothing to do with the position from which the pics are 
taken, ie 2 AU apart. Which I think makes no difference .  
 
The difference I think we are trying to detect for HC  , is whether the earth 
rotates in one solar day or in one sidereal day. Whats that? How many sidereal 
days are there in a 365 solar day year? 
 
Am I confused or on a star trek  er trail. 
 
Phil. 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Neville Jones 
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 4:32 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Regner concedes?


Philip,

With respect, and despite your trifold repetition posting, it is not Allen but 
yourself who misses the point, because you comment upon, "our inability to 
visualise why a camera will not detect which system is actually moving." In 
this comment you simply assert that the camera cannot detect something which 
you assume is there. But the camera could detect it, the reason it does not is 
because the second component of motion is not there. This second component of 
motion is NOT equivalent WITH RESPECT TO THE BACKGROUND STARS between 
heliocentric and geocentric models.

The camera does detect what is moving, that is the entire point. Regner, as far 
as I am aware, since I was away at the time, wanted some proof of geocentrism 
did he not? Here it is. One set of star trails predicted by geocentrism and two 
sets predicted by heliocentrism, for exactly the same reasons. What do we 
observe? One set. So which model is demonstrably wrong?

Uhmmm, difficult question.

What you are doing is quoting effects which are explainable in both systems. 
What we are doing is offering a proof of one system over another. Something 
which cannot be explained away in the heliocentric model or, if it can, Regner 
has not yet attempted to do it.

Neville

www.GeocentricUniverse.com



-----Original Message-----
From: pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 12:02:19 +1000


Allen You seem to have missed that this is exactly what I said...
 
What you and miss is the fact "that newton does not pretend to know why they 
act the way they act. Newton does not know what the mechanical force is...he is 
only explaing it..his laws are descritptions of observation "  
 
Allen You seem to have missed that this is exactly what I said
 
Allen You seem to have missed that this is exactly what I said
 
Allen You seem to have missed that this is exactly what I said
 
And that is why I also said such has no bearing on the question..as regards 
Geocentrism being explainable within his "laws are exact descritptions of 
observation"  ..  and I also said, and will say it three times again, 
 
"We have known about, and discussed this here for years, why do we keep running 
away from it? "  We have known about, and discussed this here for years, why do 
we keep running away from it? We have known about, and discussed this here for 
years, why do we keep running away from it? 
 
You went into a long winded nothing that failed to eplain what is observed , 
namely the world reacts against a flywheel, and therefore must be moving 
according to all the known mechanical laws of science..  
 
You seem to have missed what I also said, so I'll say again it three times..
In Newtonian physics thats the proof of the HC system. In Newtonian physics 
thats the proof of the HC systemIn Newtonian physics thats the proof of the HC 
system..
 
and 
We need to fault Newtons laws and prove it, to win this debate..  I'm hoping 
Robert with GWW can do that. 
We need to fault Newtons laws and prove it, to win this debate..  I'm hoping 
Robert with GWW can do that. 
We need to fault Newtons laws and prove it, to win this debate..  I'm hoping 
Robert with GWW can do that. 
 
And you and me and all are not going to do that  by talking about illusions 
caused by our inability to visualise why a camera will not detect which system 
is actually moving..  Nor will we do that by repeating over and over that 
Newton is wrong, unless you can prove he is wrong and supply an acceptable 
alternative theory..   
 
I'm hoping Robert with GWW can do that. I'm hoping Robert with GWW can do that. 
I'm hoping Robert with GWW can do that. 
 
Now please go back and DO  the flywheel experiment for an hour..  not think 
about it ... do it..   
 
Philip. 



Get Free 5GB Email – Check out spam free email with many cool features!
Visit http://www.inbox.com/email to find out more!



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.21/1109 - Release Date: 4/11/2007 
11:05 AM




Keep Spyware Off Your Computer - Protect your computer with Spyware Terminator!
Visit http://www.spywareterminator.com/install and find out more!


      
National Bingo Night. Play along for the chance to win $10,000 every week. 
Download your gamecard now at Yahoo!7 TV. 
http://au.blogs.yahoo.com/national-bingo-night/

Other related posts: