[geocentrism] Re: rotation part 1
- From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 19:58:23 -0700 (PDT)
You are missing the fact that motion is relitive. It matters not what is in
real motion or not...stars or camera......any scale of a rotaion will produce a
real rotaional effect every time...please explain your objections using
somthing real not just imagined talking points...a camera at any scale will
show a rotational effect if it is in rotation!.. guys that is science,
demonstratable and reproducable at any scale every time using real stars ...!?
What you fail to realise is that in MS all motion is purly relitive that is to
say the roation of a camera is equivilent in every way including any/ all
effects as the universe in roation around a fixed camera.......scale has
nothing to do with rotational effects!!!!!.. This is a undisputed fact guys!...
Any camera that rotates ever wrt the real stars will produce a rotaion!.. What
in the world are you talking about!?...go outside and see for your self!..
quite using your imagination and start applying real
world atestable pplications....
--- On Sat, 9/20/08, philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: rotation part 1
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Saturday, September 20, 2008, 4:39 PM
YES, Im already fully aware of ALL the previous as well as
possible objections allen
being aware of them and comprehending them are two different things.
Allen if I were to try to make a real to scale model of your plan I would
have to make the head of a pin to represent the 180 million mile diameter of
your orbit, with the camera on the edge of the pin, and place your star another
smaller pin a pinpoint light 1000 miles away on the other side of the
continent, and still its not far enough to be true, but it is far enough to
show how your camera rotating around the head of a pin will not resolve
anything. ie.. the picture produced would be unchanged rotating or
stationary..Its a matter of scale. phil
----- Original Message -----
From: Allen Daves
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, September 20, 2008 12:02 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] rotation part 1
I sent this 12 hours aago and still have not seen it even in the archives...i
think the internet is slowwwww....
I want to start with this which is parts 1 &2 of 12.......I still need the
PDEEMA diagram...but i will get to it latter
The basic issue before us is what if any effects should we see given the HC
construct...
I want to start by focusing attention on these two diagrams....it demonstrates
that in a Universe where everything is just relitive motion (that if in fact
all motion is just relitive) then it follows that a translational motion/orbit
of one body must produce a equivilent efect as a spin/ orbit in some other
body. The reason this must hold true for a truly relitive universe where all
motion is just relitive motion is that any external observer will see a
translation as nothing more then a spin in the opisite direction of the
translational orbit without respect for the motion since the motion is purely
relitive we can't be sure what is in "real motion" thus we cant be sure what is
spining and what is translating...in a translation one body is spining in the
opisite direction that the other body is translating in.....you have to think
and see both motions simoltaniously they my be relitive but one is doing one
thing and the other is doing somthing
different wrt any external observer.........distance is irrelevant for any and
all rotational effecst because every rotation or spin will demonstrate the
effects if a rotation if it truly exist at all. This is demonstrated by the
fact that a camera in rotation will produce the effects wrt real
stars....Thus: if the effects do not exist then either.......... ..i will leave
this blank for now in hope of some thought provoking discussion.......consider
these things carefully..
From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 08:59:30 -0700 (PDT)
EUREKA!!......A translational orbit still produces a rotational effect!...The
punch line is ....
1. the axis of the rotation shifts from the body that is being orbited to the
center of the body in the translational orbit....
2. It reverses the effects of the rotational effects. That is to say that a
clockwise orbit will produce counter clockwise rotational impression on
film where if the translational orbit is clockwise then the rotational effects
on film will be clockwise!..
The fact that the earth's has a translational orbit around the sun cannot and
will not hide a rotation around the NCP which is offset from the nightly NEP by
23 degrees.. YES, Im already fully aware of ALL the previous as well as
possible objections.....i was able to isolate each and every single
one.........I have now found the way to prove it as well as demonstrate how it
can be accomplished in the real world ......The solution is remarkably
"simple" but extremely hard to visualize due to the complexities of the
kinematics........If you imagine a set of crosshairs they have a up/ down equal
distant mark as well as a left and right equal distant mark....The trick is
understanding that the back and fourth motion of the sun by 23 degrees annually
is nothing more then up/down deviations from that up/down center mark.....The
key is as long as the right/ left center mark does not deviate we can still get
our rotation around a axis that lay parallel
to a axis that is perpendicular and runs through the suns (ecliptic
deviation/ path) since it lay perpendicular to the up/down centerline on our
cross hairs, because it lays 23 degrees offset ..this is true because any
rotation around the sun or ecliptic is not dependent on the north south
deviation of the sun/ecliptic ..the rotation & it’s effects are around a axis
that lay perpendicular to that deviation. Yes we have to have a camera that
does not move with respect to that ecliptic deviation….I will show but we
should already know exactly how to accomplish that… .......the proof is quite
detailed i will lay out the fundamentals bit by bit so we don’t get confused by
all the motions........I plan to submit some diagrams and photos
eventually...using real stars and demonstrating exactly how it was done...but
the key is a translational motion will still produce a rotation on the NCP
.....The rub is, I kept trying to tell you guys that the
clue was “hidden” in that “most powerful definition of rotation known to man”
....In fact, It would have to produce a rotational effect in order for all of
the motions to be "equivalent"!.............. Oh, what fun I am going to have
now.....”Destruction” and “chaos” the likes of which have not been seen since
the Renaissance itself..& ..It won’t take me any 400 years either!
Other related posts:
