[geocentrism] Re: aether & kepler's 3rd law
- From: "Robert Bennett" <robert.bennett@xxxxxxx>
- To: "Geocentrism" <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2007 14:02:18 -0400
I'm well aware that two mutually exclusive statements cannot both be
correct. Can we put that behind us?
But if the contradictions are recognized, why are they repeated?
Now my acceptance that the Earth rotates on its axis in 23h ... may not be
directly observable, as stated in the previous paragraph, but there is
evidence that it does rotate. Two items. One - as Neville J remarked in a
recent post, the geosynchronous satellite is one -- it was doing 6000+ mph
just before entering orbit, no braking was applied, where did the velocity
go?
6000+ mph is not the measured velocity, since it assumes the earth rotates
in the relative HC system. The orbital speed in the GS reference frame just
before geo-stat orbit insertion is measured at about zero mph. The 6000 mph
doesn’t go anywhere; it was never there to begin with.
If we on the ground are moving at 67,000 mph in the HC system, why aren’t we
in orbit like the satellites, which are moving much slower?
In fact how can we be moving 11 times faster than the satellites? Remember:
“I'm well aware that two mutually exclusive statements cannot both be
correct.”
…Two - if I experiment with a gymballed spinning gyroscope, I discover that
the flywheel behaves in a quite predictable manner when its frame is rotated
in different planes. If I leave the gyroscope spinning but its frame held --
apparently -- stationary, I observe that it behaves as though it were being
manipulated just as before, except more slowly. I am entitled to believe
that it is being manipulated by the -- apparently -- stationary object to
which the frame is attached ie the Earth. And to head off any
misunderstanding, I'm referring to the gyroscope's frame -- not frames of
reference.
[If I understand this description correctly??] the slow precession of the
gyro gimbals is due to the torque of its own weight – the weight being
caused by the downward flux of the firmament. It’s irrelevant to proving
terrestrial rotation or not.
If the gyro had a different shape or mass, the precession speed would be
different – would we then conclude that the earth’s rotation speed had
changed?
Do you have any similar experiments which imply that the Earth is
stationary, especially does not rotate?
Paul D
The Sagnac experiment and GPS daily operations.
Robert
Other related posts:
