[geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.

  • From: "philip madsen" <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "geocentrism list" <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 06:24:43 +1000

Well so far everyone is carrying on under the thread "magnitude of scale" 
without comment on the points I made, and as if they just did not get it..  
except Allen of course, because he re-sent out my diagram which Paul should 
have applied to his plank, 

but Allen seems to not understand photography. Or maybe he does.  

Polaris is 430 light years away on the hypotenuse of the enclined angle from 
the ecliptic. If we apply the formula H= sine 23 x430 we get polaris is 167 
light years away from the ecliptic axis. 

On my diagram to scale where the planet is less than a millionth of a mm and 
the orbit is 0.5mm across, any object 13 kilometers away and to the left of the 
vertical another 5 kilometers, doesn't it seem rather irrelevant deciding what 
is an accurate camera angle? 

Even if the limit of the sphere was just 13k away..  But this sphere is 
infinitely further. 

I just have to say it again, there is no physical rotation of anything around 
the ecliptic axis, except in HC the planet earth. All of the stars as observed 
on earth rotate around the celestial axis for no other reason than that the 
world turns. If GC is spot on then the stars rotate around this celestial earth 
axis. If HC is spot on, then no stars rotate anywhere, and certainly not around 
the ecliptic. Its the insignificant earths orbital rotation that you are trying 
to record. 

In my diagram polaris can never ever appear to rotate around the ecliptic, 
anywhere except on a photographic plate, and this is only due to the plate 
itself being rotated once in 12 months. 

Because of magnitude, there will be no difference between what is observed or 
recorded in one daily rotation or one annual rotation. Why ? Because at that 
scale at 0.5 mm  nothing has moved..  A camera is still in the DOT at any time. 
We can say that the image will be the same as if we were on the sun looking up 
the vertical axis, such is the magnitude we are at. Spin the camera anywhere 
inside that dot at any rate of rotation and the picture trails will all be 
identical.
See dot magnified. attched



Likewise if we were aimed at the celestial pole..  Except that all the stars 
will now all rotate around a different axis, and so individual stars will paint 
a different sized trail. But every trail will be identical in size for that 
location angle, irrespective of what time of the year or what rate the picture 
is exposed.  

And  if the earth is fixed, and the stars rotate this will produce a circle on 
the plate exactly the same as the first instance. Nothing is resolved merely by 
pointing the camera to a different axis. 

And Why?  the same old reason posted here for years..  No stable state of rest 
outside of heaven can be found. 

But the gyroscope is an enemy of geocentrism. The centuries long slow 
precession of the world physically supports a rotating world as its gyroscopic 
resistance to the more gradual curved motion due to galactic rotation, is ever 
so slowly opposed. 

These are physical realities. . Exercise: tip the world over till it is laying 
at 90 degree tilt . Now do all the pictires again... New earth axis, old earth 
axis, and ecliptic... Its gunna be difficult to keep the camera on the ecliptic 
pole.  Philip

GIF image

Attachment: magnified dot.GIF
Description: GIF image

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. geocentrism
  3. Archive
  4. 11-2007