[geocentrism] Re: Tides
- From: "philip madsen" <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 11:30:28 +1000
Though I have never ventured into the discussion on the tides, it being a
mystery, outside my comprehension, I've decided to look at it. Some have
claimed the moon does not cause the tides. Well this raises more questions.. If
the moons gravity is not the cause, then certainly something related to the
moon and its position above, is the cause. I'm going to think on that.
Also we have the anomaly of the pendulum under the lunar eclipse which NASA
though claiming attention to it seem to be avoiding it, or have no answer.
Further, in my own writings re gravity/inertia, to Allen, I find seeming
contradictions about this whole business. Is it just a matter of scale and
distribution.. I read others mathmatical analysis, and I acknowledge that I am
not gifted in maths, and cannot comment specifically, but I have experienced
enough to know that a mathmatical analysis is only as true as the data
inputted.. Leave something out and it is in error. And that is always on the
cards. A physicist who understands nature, should be able to explain movements
without resort to complex formulae.
At this moment I am having doubts. If I was correct about gravity in the
effects on free fall, affecting every particle equally in the space vehicle,
then how can the water be pulled up separately and further than the rest of the
Mass earth? Shouldn't the whole thing stay together and dance a wobble with the
moon? Just a bigger spacedhip.
Was it Regner, who said that the solid world is spinning under the tides?
Someone did. I thought it at one time. This cannot be true, and I mean true in
the conventional system
The tide is like a wave form. Water flows to both sides of the crest of this
wave. The ocean as a whole like the atmosphere must rotate with a general speed
similar to the solid earth. Imagine the turbulence if this was not so.
In geocentricism:
Just a small final word , as regards geocentrism, and how far we can take the
Biblical claim to the earth shall not move. If the earth is absolutely still,
then the moons variations of the elliptic, must not cause any secondary
orbital/translationary movement to the earth. What that does to the
barycentre, the math man can tell us.
But I feel, intuitively that if the earth was FIXED the moon would have to
eventually form a true circular orbit. Wouldn't it.
This is where the aether , the universe , and independent motions, (of the
moon.) make a complex problem as regards dynamics. (from our viewpoint)
One motion of the moon around the world almost daily, is not an individual
movement, but rather a locked in with the "aether sphere" rotation, and
therefore, not like a normal real independent movement as with similar orbiting
moons around other solar system planets. In addition the moon has its own
independent motion against this universal movement. What we see is the
resultant. But what we feel inertially is the standard 28 day orbit. Just as
what we feel inertially with respect to the earth, is a 24 hour rotation. The
two systems are dynamically equivalent as regards inerial properties.
But the tide follows the moon, which means that the universal rotation of the
stars, aether, and slipping moon, all contribute in some way to the tides.
I have much to retreat into my shell to think about..
comments welcome.. Guiding lights.
Philip
Other related posts:
