Dad wrote:
Paul,
The diffraction limit of "big expensive" telescopes is not achieved in
the real world. Also, no astronomer is "directly examin[ing] the
universe," but rather making observations in a terrestrial laboratory
and seeking to promote and understand those observations within the
currently accepted model.
Beautiful, bravo, bravo, so agreed upon am I! Springs to mind this:
"There are no purely observational facts about
the heavenly bodies. Astronomical measurements are, without exception,
measurements of phenomena occurring in a terrestrial observatory or
station; it is only by theory that they are translated into knowledge
of a universe outside." (Eddington, "The Expanding Universe,"
CUP.) From "Outer Space" here:
http://www.geocentricperspective.com/page82.htm
Smiles all around!!!
Steven.
Neville
Jack L
I doubt one person in a hundred would regard this statement as
patronising. There was an attempt at humour in there -- perhaps that is
what has sparked your ire?
What Regner is doing that only a very small percentage of the
overall population is doing -- is being a professional astronomer. He
gets to use lots of big expensive exciting equipment to directly
examine the universe. I don't know about you but I'm envious.
Paul D
-----
Original Message ----
From: Jack Lewis <jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Dear Paul,
Why did you find it necessary to patronise Regner in that way?
Regarding the 'real thing' what in heavens name is Regner doing that
no-one else is?
Jack
----- Original Message -----
Allen D
I'd be careful about advising Regner to refer to a model. He doesn't
need one. He plays with the real thing!
Paul D
|
