Originally posted by Transfinitum
If your orbital physics class did not teach you the basic principle of relativity-that no motions are absolute, that there are no preferred reference frames, and that all motions are relative and can be equally described by a coordinate transformation, then I suggest you ask for your tuition back. As for NASA, please be sure to watch this thread tomorrow, since i intend to post proof that NASA uses a fixed-non-rotating earth centered reference frame for its GPS satellite calculations.
Thank you for posting.
Well, when your supposed "truth" works in the real world, I will go to your class. Until the, your theory has long been disproved and it simply does not work.
How is this thread not supposed to be part of the other thread?
http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=474825&pagenumber=21#post10390062
Originally posted by Shakyamunisonthats what i said to him 😐
How is this thread not supposed to be part of the other thread?http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=474825&pagenumber=21#post10390062
Originally posted by DigiMark007instead of spam, and spiting him, could you for once show common courtesy to him, and instead just ask a mod to merge the two threads? i mean if that isnt too big an imposition
Yeah, reporting for spam. We have a thread for this already. There's no reason at all to have this. It would be like having 2 creationism/evolution threads, but switching the names in the titles or something.😬
Originally posted by chickenlover98
instead of spam, and spiting him, could you for once show common courtesy to him, and instead just ask a mod to merge the two threads? i mean if that isnt too big an imposition
We have a thread for this. It needs merged or closed. I said as much in my report. Simple as that. It's not spite against Trans...it's the same rules that apply to everyone.
Originally posted by DigiMark007the way u said it appeared as spite. i completely disagree with trans, however he is my friend. id appreciate it if youd at least give him the time of day
We have a thread for this. It needs merged or closed. I said as much in my report. Simple as that. It's not spite against Trans...it's the same rules that apply to everyone.
Originally posted by chickenlover98
the way u said it appeared as spite. i completely disagree with trans, however he is my friend. id appreciate it if youd at least give him the time of day
Quit trying to construe it as a personal insult. It's not. This thread shouldn't exist for the reasons I stated...that's all. It's not personal, it's just business. I'm not concerned with debating the matter, just enforcing the rules as they apply to everyone.
😬
Originally posted by chickenlover98
the way u said it appeared as spite. i completely disagree with trans, however he is my friend. id appreciate it if youd at least give him the time of day
Really? He is your friend IRL? Wow. I didn't know.
Nothin' wrong with being his friend, BTW...that's not what I was trying to imply above.
Originally posted by dadudemonive been stating he goes to my highschool for quite some time now 😐 doesnt matter that wasnt directed at you, so its ok. i just wish people would actually debate the poits with him, instead of saying "this argument doesnt matter because heliocentrism is generally accepted" just crush the argument once and for all. sheesh
Really? He is your friend IRL? Wow. I didn't know.Nothin' wrong with being his friend, BTW...that's not what I was trying to imply above.
Originally posted by chickenlover98
instead of spam, and spiting him, could you for once show common courtesy to him, and instead just ask a mod to merge the two threads? i mean if that isnt too big an imposition
Given his new avatar, I believe that this picture is appropriate:
No, I have nothing more to add to this thread. Physics is really boring, and I'm quite certain that the debate of geocentrism and heliocentrism is rather pointless overall.
Originally posted by Transfinitum
>> I hope I have thoroughly concentrated your mind here, Sleep Deprived. No more asinine chatter about the Sun needing to be pinned to something, I trust.....>>BRAVO!! You have gotten it! Excellent! So you have just made my point, that each and every argument advanced by Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, et. al., against a geocentric universe, was in fact falsified by the postulates of general Relativity. Now that this has finally been established, we can move on to Round II: the NEW evidence from orbital sensors, not available to Einstein, showing evidence for a GEOCENTRIC, as opposed to acentric, cosmos.
I knew you could do it, big fella.........
>>Exactamundo. This is why NOAA, for example, uses a fixed, non-rotating earth as its frame for calculating navigation on its GOES. This is important for later stages of our....exchange, so keep this in mind.
>>>And in a universal system, the universal barycenter is the ideal reference frame, as we already begin to see from the physical derivation of the Euler, Coriolis and centrifugal forces. This is an objective advantage of the geocentric system. There are a very great many more, as we shall see.
Ho-hum. I believe somebody already dealth with that NOAA and GOES of yours. All in all nothing new to offer. Youre beginning to sound like that 65 year old ejit.
Basically it boils down to is this: the Lense-Thirring effect of using a some sort of rotating matter shell with the earth at the center CAN explain the Coriolis and centrifugal forces found herein the Earth, BUT it introduces a whole bunch of complications into the general mathematical laws; you can reduce the complications by specifying instead that it is the Earth that is ROTATING, just like Venus, Jupiter and the rest of the other planets in the Solar system. Frame dragging or the Lense-Thirring effect is NOT exclusive to geocentrism.
Originally posted by Transfinitum
I think it is pretty clear what to make of a chap who dismisses valid citations from the physicist who founded General Relativity as a "bad application and demonstration of gyroscopic principles". The simple truth is, like a howler monkey, you can't understand and/or refute Einstein, and so you ignore him.That is, indeed, cute.
I'll just go ahead and snip the rest of your nonsense, since turnabout is always fair play with a howler monkey.
Bwahaha. Is this all i get after pointing out your intellectual dishonesty with your misquoted quotes on Einstein? Nothing to say at all as to why you just arbitrarily apply universal gyroscopic stability/ barycenter only on Earth when it could be applied on Mars or Pluto?
Just remember trying to use relativity’s arguments that maintain no preferred reference frame exists against the arguments for heliocentrism, Pluto-centrism, my finger, and then using it to prove arguments for geocentrism is one gigantic double standard. We just use the convenient reference frame to do our measurements. Insisting on earth's place on the universe would violate General relativity and if its done away, geocentrism would simply be untenable using the simpler Newtonian mechanics.
Originally posted by Transfinitum
>>I suggest you deal with the fact that Albert Einstein just told you he had to reintroduce the concept of an ether to General Relativity.>>It is Albert Einstein, not Robert Sungenis, who was quoted. I note with satisfaction that you would rather divert and obfuscate, than deal with the quote. This is highly indicative of the weakness of your position generally here.
Albert Einstein just told you that he was forced to dispense with the notion of a vacuum. Here, let's let him tell you again. Like the rest of your pack, you seem to have a terrible time dealing with Albert Einstein's actual WORDS, as opposed to your hilariously deluded notions of what you WISH he would have said:
Einstein tells Sleep Deprived that the ether has been reintroduced in General Relativity:
Rob Sungenis conveniently forgot to quote Einstein's address in the University of Leyden in April 1920 which occured just a couple of months after the quote you posted where he clarified his stance on the ether. Intellectual dishonesty again.
The "ether" that Einstein talks about is different from the classical ether (medium of propagation for light) that was part of physics before he introduced relativity. He believes that the classical ether like in the Morley-Michelson experiment was undone by his special relativity. The "ether" he is referring to is something else different (empty space equipped with gravitational and electromagnetic fields). He could have used a completelty different name instead to spare all of us the confusion but i guess its something to latch on to and misinterpret if you have a religious agenda in mind.
Originally posted by Transfinitum
>>You don't remember it right. The centrifugal force is only "apparent" for you, since it cannot be physically derived from within the postulates of Newtonian gravitational theories. As I have told you before, this shortcoming of the Newtonian system is corrected by the work of Hans Thirring, Albert Einstein, and Ernst Mach.You really need to get up to speed here, Sleepy. After all, we have made progress since the seventeenth century in these matters.
I will let you read the quote again:
quote:
"Let K [the Universe] be a Galilean-Newtonian coordinate system [a system of three dimensions extending to the edge of the Universe] and let K' [the Earth] be a coordinate system rotating uniformly relative to K' [the universe]. Then centrifugal forces would be in effect for masses at rest in the K' coordinate system [Earth], while no such forces would be present for objects at rest in K [the universe]. Already Newton viewed this as proof that the rotation of K' [the Earth] had to be considered as 'absolute', and that K' [the Earth] could not then be treated as the 'resting' frame of K [the universe]. Yet, as E. Mach has shown, this argument is not sound. One not need view the existence of such centrifugal forces as originating from the motion of K' [the Earth]; one could just as well account for them as resulting from the average rotational effect of distant, detectable masses as evidenced in the vicinity of K' [the Earth], whereby K' [the Earth] is treated as being at rest. If Newtonian mechanics disallow such a view, then this could very well be the foundation for the defects of that theory…."---Albert Einstein, cited in Hans Thirring, "On The Effect of Rotating Distant Masses In Einstein's Theory of Gravitation", Physikalische Zeitschrift 19, 33, 1918
Now what is crucial to remember here is that Albert Einstein is telling you, Sleepy, that in a geocentric Universe the Coriolis, Euler, and centrifugal forces are physically derivable as the direct result of distant masses, and not a "fictitious" consequence of rotation of the local frame.
This famous quote is what Ernst Mach meant when he said "Mass there (in the distant rotating masses) governs inertia here". This will become important in regard to your comments below.
*snip*
I believe i've said a thing or two already about frame dragging (Lense Thirring effect).
Admitedly i was confused with what you were trying to prove earlier with the Newton's bucket experiment mainly because it WASNT conceived to prove or even study centrifugal forces which is what you are trying to describe. So i tried striking a middle path and use balls and buckets to describe it. The bucket experiment was designed to prove Newton's concept of absolute space against someone (Leibniz?). Yet again, another example of geocentrist's taking things out of context and spinning it around to suit their needs.
While Mach's principle, which was an ambiguous philosophical conjecture and not some scientific law, and its implication of "mass there affects inertia here" was a source of inspiration for Einstein early work, he later abandoned it in the early 1920's when it was realized that inertia is implicit in the geodesic equation of motion and need not depend on the existence of matter elsewhere in the universe. As always, geocentrists have been very economical (ie. dishonest) with us with their so-called scientific truths.
Oh im waiting on how you would twist satellite and orbital sensors results to prove geocentrism.
Re: Round II: Geocentrism on the Offensive-The Shocking New Evidence
Originally posted by Transfinitum*snip*
THE COPERNICAN DILEMMA
*snip*
This "dilemma"is resolved by realizing that the gamma ray bursts are so bright that they can be seen at distances corresponding to the early universe. The discovery of afterglow emission associated with faraway galaxies definitively supported the extragalactic hypothesis. Not only are GRBs extragalactic events, but they are also observable to the limits of the visible universe; a typical GRB has a redshift of at least 1.0 (corresponding to a distance of 8 billion light-years), while the most distant known (GRB 050904) has a redshift of 6.29 (12.3 billion light years).
Originally posted by Transfinitum*snip*
THE QUASAR SHELLS/QUANTIZATION OF RED SHIFTS
*snip*
Redshift quantization-cosmologically distant objects like quasars tend to cluster around multiples of some particular value.
The first claimed observations of redshift quantization came from studies of galaxies. There have also been claimed observations of redshift quantization in quasar populations (1970's) Since these claimed observations were made, galaxy surveys have increased the quantity and quality of the redshift data enormously. Taken on the whole, it appears that the surveys do not show any quantization of redshifts , though many supporters of the idea have made the claim that the models are not applicable to the entire quasar sample. One study with a new database was specifically designed to test the most popular model of quasars associated with galaxies and that the redshifts of the galaxy pairings appear in regular intervals and are not homogeneous. The statistical methods were approved in advance by supporters of this model, but despite the prior approval, those supporting quantization still reject the result showing a lack of galaxy-quasar pairing.
Proofs? 😆
Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
No. Digi is an armchair mod--he moderates despite having no actual power in this forum. This frustrates him sexually and so he has to blumpkin all over other other posters in order to become aroused. After this mildly heinous sexual act is complete, he smears feces all over his body, takes a few pictures, posts them to a scat website, and masturbates all over the commissions.No, I have nothing more to add to this thread. Physics is really boring, and I'm quite certain that the debate of geocentrism and heliocentrism is rather pointless overall.
Zeal, you are going way too far in this thing you have with digi. This is a warning. Carry on hassling him like that and you will be banned.