[geocentrism] Re: Regner concedes?
- From: j a <ja_777_aj@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 17:16:31 -0800 (PST)
Allen,
I think what you are missing from my general arguement, is that yes, there
are two separate axis of rotation, that, if treated equally, would each produce
a different star trail for any particular star. But they are not treated
equally with the pictures that have been taken, therefore we cannot say they
have failed to record the annual star trail. First we must determine what it
would look like under the unequal circumstances they were recorded under.
I do not think you addressed my Logic challange in paragraph 2 below. Please
look at it one more time, because if anybody can cut through some faulty logic,
it's you. The first section you responded to is a statement of my logical
premise and I completely agree with what you said in responce, it just doesn't
have anything to do with the premise. The second section you responded to, I
spell out the problem, but you do not actually address it, you state your view
of why the helicopter scenario supports your view, which I may or may not agree
with. In the third section, I present the two mutually exclusive ideas, one of
which must be wrong, but your responce is a re-iteration of your proof. In this
logic challenge I am not challenging your proof's details, I am taking the 2
direct conclusions of your proof (an annual circle must be created) (the
nightly circle is created nightly and never moves reguardless of the baseline
of the earth or the earths orbit) and the only
conclusion you can draw from these two "facts"...... the motion about two axis
is impossible(because the yearly must be traced out by the nightly, yet it
cannot even be done theoretically)... and asking if this motion is observed in
any of the other planets. If it is, then I have shown your proof to be flawed
without talking about the details or reasoning behind your proof..
Now my drawings are a different matter, there I am challenging the mechanics
behind the Proof. If I have made an error them, please point it out to me.
That's what I'm attempting to do for you (everbody) by drawing them. I think I
really understand your points and the proof, but I think you are missing what I
am trying to point out about it. Please don't repeat why your proof is true, I
understand it well enough to probably convince most anybody (open-minded that
is) that geo-centrism was true based on your proof. But at this point I would
consider myself a liar to do so, because I am seeing things that show why it is
not a proof. And no-one has yet to really crush what I'm trying to point out,
only re-statement of the proof that I was a 100% believer in till I started
trying to draw my own proof for it.
JA....
Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Me in blue with attachments.....
hope this helps...
j a <ja_777_aj@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dr. Jones & Allen,
I appreciate your efforts, and I do wish to be back on board, however, the
more I look at it the further I am getting from accepting the Star trails
proof.
It seems to me that the proof, if correct, would not only demolish HC, but
would also demolish the possibility of that type of motion, IE... No planet
could rotate on an axis that is different from it's orbital axis. I think you
should look at the diagram ..One is a model of the, earth/ sun, solar system
shows both rotations about the two axis.......there is the suns axis that the
earth orbits and the earths axis that the earth rotates on ....Two axis of
rotation, they face two different directions......I completely agree! If the
nightly circle does not move through the sky during the year, how can it trace
out a larger circle? But the proof of the Nightly circle alone (anybodys proof)
shows that the nightly circle will always be in the exact same place,Right as
long as you take a photo graph of a helicoter blade it will always be in
rotaion..it does not mater if you take 5 photos of it in 5 sec or 365 days it
will still be in the same place doing the same rotaion. this
is the same whting with the nightl star trails..you will allways see them
annualy or nightly cause it is a photo grapgh of the same thing taken at
differnt times thats all....it will always be in the same place doing the same
thing..rotating...... so the motion must not be possible. But since other
planets move with that motion (or am I wrong), it must be possible and therfore
something is wrong with the proof. Break that logic Allen! ;-)
The nigtly star trails will all ways be visable year around and every night
it is the exact same photo graph of the exact same thing.....However...it is
the stars distance from the/ any axis of rotation that determines the size of
the startrail..this is true of the nightly as well. polaris is close to the
axis of nightly rotaion and thus wil have a small circle where other stars that
are further from the nightl axis will have larger star trails....Now..there is
another axis of rotaion that takes place over a year ( not just a helicopter
blade (stars) rotation but now the whole helicopter starts to move in circles
[about the sun]) since polaris is further from that axis or rotaion polaris
will produce a larger star trail...it must becuse it is the distance of a star
from the axis that determins the size of star trails even in the nightly ...the
reason polaris is now further from the other axis of rotaion is becuse of the
angle of the axis not the stright line( base
line) distance)..a axis sitting on a differnt angle cannot have all the same
stars as another axis that is facing a differnt direction...it is the stars
distance from the axis that determines the star trails size, if you have two
differnt axis facing in different directions then the stars cannot be the same
distance from both axis at the same time. thus, since HC has two axis of
rotation in differnt directions and the stars cannot all be the same distance
away from any axis of rotataion all at the same time each star has two diferent
paths of two differnt sizes becuse each star is closer to one axis and further
from the other.....
Now, the above was just a thought that occured to me while I was getting the
new drawings ready that you asked for. Hopefully these are easier to look at
and, since there are only 3, less confusing and time consuming. The first is
about the nighty star trail and the camera, the second and third are about the
annual star trail and the camera and why the annual does not work just like the
nightly.
JA....
j a <ja_777_aj@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dr. Jones, My replies in red,
I do not understand your drawings. You have not changed the rotation axis
from one scenario to the other, so the box is just as far away from the axis in
both cases. Correct, but does not matter. What I changed was the way the camera
moves around the axis, to demontrate the difference between a camera recording
nightly trails and a camera recording annual trails.
In diagrams 1, 2 and 3, your camera should not be diverging onto the axis, but
be parallel with it. As Allen has said, it does not matter what angle the
camera is pointed at, as long as you leave it still, it will record a star
trail. The difference between different camera angles will determine where the
axis is in the picture.
Just like you have in 4, 5 and 6, but here you have not changed the axis! If
you change the axis so as to point towards the box and make the rotor blades
orthogonal to that axis, then what is the difference between the mechanism of
1, 2 and 3, from 4, 5 and 6? I believe I would still record the same event,
just the center of rotation would appear in a different place on the film. The
difference between the two (1,2,3 & 4,5,6)(I wish I had thought to name these
better) is the difference between the stationary camera rotating with the axis
which will record a star trail and the not stationary camera rotating against
the axis which will not record a star trail.
Perhaps you could redo the diagrams and see. I'll see what I can do, to make it
clearer.
Allen,
Allow me to demonstrate. Actually, your mention of the helicopter is what got
my confused questioning to gel into something I could better understand, so I
have used the helicopter as my device. I found this much easier to visualize
and draw the motions. The Helicopters body will represent whatever axis we are
considering. The box on the ground beside the helicopter is any star you want
to consider a star trail for. The rotor is either the baseline of earths radius
or its orbit depending on whether you are talking about the nightly or annual
trail. The Camera on the end of the rotor the camera sitting on a tripod
anywhere on the earth.
Drawings 1, 2, 3 are of the setup of my system to simulate the nightly star
circle. The only difference between 1,2&3 is that I am increasing the length of
the rotor axis, so that you can see where the circle produced is heading as the
distance begins to negate the baseline (rotor length). Drawing 7 shows the
positions of the camera as it is swung around the axis. Drawing 9 shows the
results (the trail formed by taking a timelapse photo through one revolution in
each of the three drawings). The circle is progressively moving to center on
the axis of rotation. Exactly what we see in the sky and what your model
predicts.
Drawings 4, 5, 6 are of the setup of my system to simulate the annual star
circle. The only difference between 4,5&6 is that I am increasing the length of
the rotor axis, so that you can see where the circle produced is heading as the
distance becomes more important than the baseline (rotor length). Drawing 7
shows the positions of the camera as it is swung around the axis. Drawing 8
shows the results (the trail formed by taking a timelapse photo through one
revolution in each of the three drawings). Both circles (the axis circle and
the box circle) are decreasing in size and will diapear into a dot with enough
distance. Exactly what we see in the sky, but not what you are predicting.
So what is different in my model to yours? If your camera takes pictures 24
hours apart, you are not taking into consideration that the camera has not
rotated with the axis of rotation you are trying to record, and as my model
shows, that is all the difference needed to make the annual trails disapear.
This is not a proof of HC, only a disproof of the disproof, which are not the
same.
JA...
---------------------------------
Free 3D Marine Aquarium Screensaver
Watch dolphins, sharks & orcas on your desktop! Check it out at
www.inbox.com/marineaquarium
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Other related posts:
