Geocentrism

[Horn]

Look! even Santa spins along with everything else under the Sun,

[Neuro]

I wonder if there are any atheist phycisists that has researched the subject who subscribe to the geocentric theory? That would sort of rule out a theological bias. My apologies if it had already been mentioned in the thread, as I have only had a cursory reading of it...

[Santa]

Look! even Santa spins along with everything else under the Sun,

Empirically, the universe spins around me.... when I get drunk. Works every time. It's hard to deny such concrete evidence.

[Neuro]

Empirically, the universe spins around me.... when I get drunk. Works every time. It's hard to deny such concrete evidence.

LOL I remember when Santa was the center of my Universe too!

[alex_ro]

2. Everywhere appears central

Actually, there is strong evidence against homogeneity. Especially CMB low multipoles, but if you really think about the rest of the evidence for a privileged position of the Earth, they can't be used within the cosmological principle (equivalence of places) either.

Also, no measurement to date has established our translation or rotation.

Also tilt. Nor there can be such evidence, within GR.

I would correct your term "translation", since it usually means motion in a straight line (use "revolution" or "orbital" instead).

The reason its not questioned in Science is because its an absurdity of biblical proportions...

Actually, all the cosmologists know that geocentrism is apparently true. Only that they avoid that, due to their metaphysical assumptions.

How many such quotes are you prepared to read?

Anyway, in another forum, I showed that big bang is wrong, that geocentrism is apparently true, and also how distances of billions of ly (if the formal numbers are correct, and there is strong indication that they are not) are explainable in a thousands of years timeframe. It's not Humphreys or Hartnett, etc., or likely any other explanation you heard before, so you should be interested.

However:
- I am not sure I can provide such a link here (to another forum)
- I will not provide the link until you openly express your commitment to actually read tens of usual pages (or several forum pages)

I wonder if there are any atheist phycisists that has researched the subject who subscribe to the geocentric theory?

Of course not. Regardless of what evidence says, they will keep their heads in the sand and pretend a different reality.

Isn't their atheism a metaphysical CHOICE? How exactly would you expect them to accept evidence for the Bible?

That would sort of rule out a theological bias.

Actually, with the except of quantized redshift (Hartnett), none of the evidence for geocentrism was discovered by a believer. Not to my knowledge, anyway. I expect John to correct me if I'm wrong.

[Neuro]

Of course not. Regardless of what evidence says, they will keep their heads in the sand and pretend a different reality.

Isn't their atheism a metaphysical CHOICE? How exactly would you expect them to accept evidence for the Bible?





Actually, with the except of quantized redshift (Hartnett), none of the evidence for geocentrism was discovered by a believer. Not to my knowledge, anyway. I expect John to correct me if I'm wrong.

I don't think it is inherent in Atheism to reject any scientific theory, on the basis that it is adhered to by a religion. I think atheists only reject the theory of god(s)...

[JohnQPublic]

Newtonian–Machian analysis of the
neo-Tychonian model of planetary
motions
Luka Popov
Department of Physics, University of Zagreb, Bijeniˇcka cesta 32, Zagreb, Croatia
E-mail: lpopov@phy.hr
Received 5 December 2012, in final form 6 December 2012
Published 31 January 2013
Online at stacks.iop.org/EJP/34/383

Abstract
The calculation of the trajectories in the Sun–Earth–Mars system is performed
using two different models, both in the framework of Newtonian mechanics.
The first model is the well-known Copernican system, which assumes that the
Sun is at rest and that all the planets orbit around it. The second is a less wellknown
model, developed by Tycho Brahe (1546–1601), according to which the
Earth stands still, the Sun orbits around the Earth, and the other planets orbit
around the Sun. The term ‘neo-Tychonian system’ refers to the assumption that
orbits of distant masses around the Earth are synchronized with the Sun’s orbit.
It is the aim of this paper to show the kinematical and dynamical equivalence
of these systems, under the assumption of Mach’s principle...


...5. Conclusion

The analysis of planetary motions has been performed in the Newtonian framework with the
assumption of Mach’s principle. The kinematical equivalence of the Copernican (heliocentric)
and the neo-Tychonian (geocentric) systems is shown to be a consequence of the presence of
pseudo-potential (4.4) in the geocentric system, which, according to Mach, must be regarded
as the real potential originating from the fact of the simultaneous acceleration of the Universe.
This analysis can be performed on any other celestial body observed from the Earth. Since the
Sun and Mars are chosen arbitrarily, and there is nothing special about Mars, one can expect
to obtain the same general conclusion.

There is another interesting remark that follows from this analysis. If one could put the
whole Universe in accelerated motion around the Earth, the pseudo-potential corresponding
to pseudo-force (4.2) will immediately be generated. That same pseudo-potential then causes
the Universe to stay in that very state of motion, without any need for exterior forces acting
upon it.

[Horn]

Empirically, the universe spins around me.... when I get drunk. Works every time. It's hard to deny such concrete evidence.

[Neuro]

Newtonian–Machian analysis of the
neo-Tychonian model of planetary
motions
Luka Popov
Department of Physics, University of Zagreb, Bijeniˇcka cesta 32, Zagreb, Croatia
E-mail: lpopov@phy.hr
Received 5 December 2012, in final form 6 December 2012
Published 31 January 2013
Online at stacks.iop.org/EJP/34/383

Abstract
The calculation of the trajectories in the Sun–Earth–Mars system is performed
using two different models, both in the framework of Newtonian mechanics.
The first model is the well-known Copernican system, which assumes that the
Sun is at rest and that all the planets orbit around it. The second is a less wellknown
model, developed by Tycho Brahe (1546–1601), according to which the
Earth stands still, the Sun orbits around the Earth, and the other planets orbit
around the Sun. The term ‘neo-Tychonian system’ refers to the assumption that
orbits of distant masses around the Earth are synchronized with the Sun’s orbit.
It is the aim of this paper to show the kinematical and dynamical equivalence
of these systems, under the assumption of Mach’s principle...


...5. Conclusion

The analysis of planetary motions has been performed in the Newtonian framework with the
assumption of Mach’s principle. The kinematical equivalence of the Copernican (heliocentric)
and the neo-Tychonian (geocentric) systems is shown to be a consequence of the presence of
pseudo-potential (4.4) in the geocentric system, which, according to Mach, must be regarded
as the real potential originating from the fact of the simultaneous acceleration of the Universe.
This analysis can be performed on any other celestial body observed from the Earth. Since the
Sun and Mars are chosen arbitrarily, and there is nothing special about Mars, one can expect
to obtain the same general conclusion.

There is another interesting remark that follows from this analysis. If one could put the
whole Universe in accelerated motion around the Earth, the pseudo-potential corresponding
to pseudo-force (4.2) will immediately be generated. That same pseudo-potential then causes
the Universe to stay in that very state of motion, without any need for exterior forces acting
upon it.

I guess one could do the same type of analysis, with any planet of the solar system separately, being the center and the sun spinning around it at the rate of the turning around of its axis, and the other planets rotating around the sun... No?

[Horn]

I guess one could do the same type of analysis, with any planet of the solar system separately, being the center and the sun spinning around it at the rate of the turning around of its axis, and the other planets rotating around the sun... No?

You've really got to work on your Bible study.