[geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- From: Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 16:05:16 -0800
Philip,
We attach the camera to the ground we stand on and we leave it alone for the period in question.
If, when we develop the film, there is rotation of the stars about an axis, then either the World has rotated and the stars are stationary (HC), or the stars have rotated in the opposite direction whilst the World is stationary (GC).
Finally, if we observe no rotation on the film, then there was no movement. (Just like M-M really, they found no evidence of motion of the magnitude they 'knew' to exist and therefore ... )
Neville
-----Original Message-----
From: pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 09:39:06 +1000
Yes U are right Allen so long as you realise you are
making an image...that is faking it.... I can do that in the kitchen or a
planetarium..
If you rotate yourself or anything else, how do you know
you are really rotating, because you do not know what is at rest..
everything you do is just relative motions.. this is a wasted
discussion... all been done before.. some people never learn.
...
Philip.
- References:
- [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- From: Allen Daves
- [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- From: philip madsen
Other related posts:
- » [geocentrism] magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- » [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
We attach the camera to the ground we stand on and we leave it alone for the period in question.
If, when we develop the film, there is rotation of the stars about an axis, then either the World has rotated and the stars are stationary (HC), or the stars have rotated in the opposite direction whilst the World is stationary (GC).
Finally, if we observe no rotation on the film, then there was no movement. (Just like M-M really, they found no evidence of motion of the magnitude they 'knew' to exist and therefore ... )
Neville
-----Original Message-----
From: pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 09:39:06 +1000
From: pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 09:39:06 +1000
Yes U are right Allen so long as you realise you are
making an image...that is faking it.... I can do that in the kitchen or a
planetarium..
If you rotate yourself or anything else, how do you know
you are really rotating, because you do not know what is at rest..
everything you do is just relative motions.. this is a wasted
discussion... all been done before.. some people never learn.
...
Philip.
- [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- From: Allen Daves
- [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
- From: philip madsen