[geocentrism] Re: Regner concedes?

  • From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2007 11:29:06 -0800 (PST)

 #2 is false i read it as a double negitve...

Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:      JA,

I will answer in green ... 



    -----Original Message-----
From: ja_777_aj@xxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wed, 7 Nov 2007 10:55:55 -0800 (PST)


      Dr. Jones, A few responces in red. I am really interested to hear Your 
and Allens Yea or nay to 5 statements I've written far below.
   
  JA...

Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
    JA,

Your second paragraph is quite a mixture of ideas and models, but your 
essential argument, if I understand you correctly, is this: since the nightly 
rotation always produces the same set of star trails, then it is not possible 
for these to draw out another circle, because they are simply always in the 
same place. 

This is a subtle argument and I had to pray for guidance before I considered it.

My response is the following:

You and I take a 35-mm SLR camera each, mount them on tripods and place them in 
our back gardens. One in your garden, wherever it is, and one in mine, such 
that I cannot see your camera and you cannot see mine.

In the heliocentric system, the cameras move. In the geocentric system, the 
stars move. Forget any motion of the World for now.

Now, unbeknown to me, you point your camera at a star and, unbeknown to you, I 
point mine at a star (it does not have to be a different star, but the chances 
are that it will be).

I rotate my camera through 360 degrees about an axis whilst the shutter is open 
for one minute. I will obtain circular stars trails on the emulsion.

You rotate your camera through 360 degrees about a different axis whilst the 
shutter is open for two minutes. you will obtain circular trails on your 
emulsion.

Does the rotation of my camera affect in any way the image that you have 
obtained on your camera? Does the rotation of your camera affect in any way the 
image that I have obtained on my camera? The answer to both questions is 'no'. 
I must agree, but I would point out that if your camera is pointed to a 
different direction in the sky then mine, then we would record different star 
trails. And combining our pictures would produce no useful knowledge. True.

These rotations are isolated. The stars are fixed in this system, so as long as 
the two components remain isolated there is no way that the movement of one 
camera affects what is recorded by the other.

We now let the World do the rotating while our cameras are in some (different) 
way fixed to it.

So, instead of my rotating my camera, I fix the tripod to the ground and align 
it such that the optical axis of the camera is parallel to the celestial polar 
axis. I leave the shutter open for 6 hours, whilst the World allegedly rotates 
about its axis.

The question is exactly the same: Does the image I am obtaining in any way 
affect the image that you are obtaining? The answer again is 'no'. Remember 
that this is the heliocentric system where the stars are fixed. I still agree, 
but I would point out that if I fix my camera exactly as you descibe yours, 
then we would record the same thing, maybe not the same portion of any 
particular star trail, but if overlayed they would match up.. True.

Night after night, the answer is the same. The camera motions are isolated.

But the same must be true in reverse, with you aligning the optical axis of 
your camera with the ecliptic polar axis and allowing the camera to rotate 
through 360 degrees over 12 months as the World allegedly trundles around its 
orbit of the Sun. This will in no way affect what I see in the heliocentric 
system, but you will still have produced the star trails about the ecliptic 
pole if heliocentrism is correct.

Locking the camera onto the ecliptic pole is easy, we lock them on stars all 
the time, and the ecliptic pole is just like a star position. (is the ecliptic 
the same as the Annual axis?) if I did this, I would record an annual trail. 
Locking the camera axis to the annual axis will produce the annual trail. Thats 
why we get a nightly trail from a stationary camera but cannot get an annual 
trail from a stationary camera. True. Also, if I lock my camera axis to any 
imaginary axis, I can produce annual star trails for that axis. Not true, 
because now you have nothing, real or imaginary, that is going to be rotating 
the camera. You are confusing alignment with rotation.

    In talking to you and Allen. It has occurred to me that maybe I've 
misunderstood a particular point. Let me spell out a few things that you each 
can simply answer as true or not true. This should help me, or maybe help me 
help you, or help me help you help me figure out what we are missing in what 
the other is saying. ;-)
   
  Pleae respond true or not true to the following:
   
  1) The demonstration of the "dual axis proof" is that the Nightly circle made 
by polaris is exactly the same every day of the year and in the exact same 
spot, when recorded by a camera that is stationary with respect to the ground 
it is affixed too. True.

   
  2)  The demonstration of the "dual axis proof" is that the Annual circle made 
by polaris is not evident, when recorded by a camera that is stationary with 
respect to the ground it is affixed too, when pictures are taken at 24 hours 
intervals. Not true. The camera has to be moving in this instance with respect 
to the ground, but the orientation of the camera is always such that the 
photographic film always has its bottom edge, say, nearest to the World's 
geographical polar axis.

   
  3)  The demonstration of the "dual axis proof" is that the Annual circle made 
by polaris is not evident, when recorded by a camera that is stationary with 
respect to the ground it is affixed too, when pictures are taken at 23 hour 56 
minute intervals. Not true.

   
    4)  The demonstration of the "dual axis proof" is that the Annual circle 
made by polaris is not evident, when recorded by a camera that is rotated to 
stay parrallel with the annual axis, when pictures are taken at 24 hours 
intervals. Not entirely true, because the camera is simply aligned, not 
rotated. You must not lose sight of the fact that the rotation of the camera 
must always be caused by the World's alleged motion.

   
  5)  The demonstration of the "dual axis proof" is that the Annual circle made 
by polaris is not evident, when recorded by a camera that is rotated to stay 
parrallel with the annual axis, when pictures are taken at 23 hour 56 minute 
intervals. Not true.



Neville

    www.GeocentricUniverse.com



Other related posts: