[geocentrism] Uranus

 
Paul, 
 
What makes you think any of this is relevant, logically , mechanically, or 
conceptually?
The moon is a sphere....on what bases are you claiming it axis is offset wrt 
the orbital plane..every particle in the moon lay in the moons orbital plane so 
what is the point of your diagram?.....The axis & the moons "tilt" you are 
referring to that is offset is and is defined by the moons 
librations........That axis of the moons librations lay 90 degrees to the plane 
of that motion.....I have already covered; they are not under consideration; 
nor are they in question as rotations(they are) ; nor are they even relevant.. 
...why?... ..because every particle in the moon either does or does not lay in 
the moons orbital plane, the axis of the orbital plane runs through the earth 
where the comon point  of that orbital play lay....…we the moons orbit is a 
distinct and separate motion from its librations...one simple does not affect 
or define the other...…The axis of the moons orbital rotation lay 90 degrees 
wrt the orbital plane...the other planes &
 axis of any of the moons other motions/rotations/librations are irrelevant wrt 
each other…..The orbital plane defines the axis of the moons orbital/rotational 
axis not the moons tilt or librations or any other axis of any other rotation 
that the moon could have even if it were to begin spinning in a complexly 
different direction....the new motion would be defined by the axis of that 
rotation and would not be affected by the moons orbital rotation in any shape 
form or fashion.......  regardless of any other motions the moons has, every  
particle of the moon individually or as a whole makes a progressive radial 
orientation to a point that lay at the earth.....any and all other axis of 
rotations parallel or offset do not change that fact no matter how many 
rotations exist for any given body.....The number and offsets for any number 
of rotations within a given body simply has nothing to do with whether or not 
the other rotations exist or not….The
 moons orbital plane  defines where the axis of orbital rotation is not the 
“moons tilt”.. that “tilt” is defined by the moons librations or back and 
fourth rotations…one has nothing to do with; nor affects the definition of; nor 
affects the reality of the other. ........I don’t see how this can be so 
difficult for anyone to grasp either logically or conceptually..... 
 
You keep looking at things that have no relevance to the issue at hand…… look 
at the diagram Parent “1”   it is a fundamental expose of the nature of a 
Rotation within a given body and as an extension any number of bodies that are 
“connected” via a solid substance or “gravity”, the principle is exactly the 
same….that diagram is relevant for any and all rotations even multiple 
rotations within a single body…. The number of rotations and any differences 
that the axis have or  lay wrt each other is irrelevant for what determines a 
rotation…. 
 
 
Happy new year everyone...


--- On Fri, 1/2/09, Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [geocentrism] Uranus
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Friday, January 2, 2009, 7:03 AM









 
 


--- On Thu, 1/1/09, Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [geocentrism] Uranus
To: Geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Thursday, January 1, 2009, 11:25 AM







Allen D

Please examine the attached "CommonPoint.png" illustration.
 
You are on record as saying that the Moon has only one motion -- a rotation 
(defined as "A progressive radial orientation to a common point") and that that 
common point "... lay outside the Moon itself at the Earth ...". Further, you 
have also stated that "...  every axis lay 90 degrees to the plane of the 
motion in question ...".
 
As shown in the illustration, these two statements are in conflict as regards 
the Earth/Moon -- the plane of the Moon's rotation (that motion which is at 90 
deg to its axis) passes through the Earth for only part of its orbit, exactly 
as for Uranus. Though the ratio of intersection to non-intersection is 
different, the fact of intersection and non-intersection is identical.
 
So I ask again -- what is the defining difference between the two cases which 
causes the Moon to have just one motion and Uranus to have two motions?
 
Paul D



Stay connected to the people that matter most with a smarter inbox. Take a look.

Other related posts: