Universal Laws of Heavenly Bodies

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Aug 18, 2011
971
7
0
#1
Recently I stumbled into a conversation about the nature of movements of heavenly bodies with a brother of mine.
No we weren't talking about Shakiras tush or Antonia Banderas either.:D

We were talking about cellestial bodies and their movements and the mechanics of such bodies with their relation between one and the other.

There are several schools of thought on this but I will give you a definition of both for you from wikipedia and we will go from there.

I am inclined to the Heliocentric model Below
Heliocentrism, or heliocentricism,[1] is the astronomical model in which the Earth and planets revolve around a stationary Sun at the center of the solar system. The word comes from the Greek (ἥλιος helios "sun" and κέντρον kentron "center"). Historically, heliocentrism was opposed to geocentrism, which placed the Earth at the center. The notion that the Earth revolves around the Sun had been proposed as early as the 3rd century BC by Aristarchus of Samos,[2] but had received no support from most other ancient astronomers.
It was not until the 16th century that a fully predictive mathematical model of a heliocentric system was presented, by the Renaissance mathematician, astronomer, and Catholic monk Nicolaus Copernicus, leading to the Copernican Revolution. In the following century, this model was elaborated and expanded by Johannes Kepler and supporting observations made using a telescope were presented by Galileo Galilei.
With the observations of William Herschel, astronomers realized that the sun was not the center of the universe and by the 1920s Edwin Hubble had shown that it was part of a galaxy that was only one of many billions.

Others put forth this argument

In astronomy, the geocentric model (also known as geocentrism, or the Ptolemaic system), is the superseded theory that the Earth is the center of the universe, and that all other objects orbit around it. This geocentric model served as the predominant cosmological system in many ancient civilizations such as ancient Greece. As such, most Ancient Greek philosophers assumed that the Sun, Moon, stars, and naked eye planets circled the Earth, including the noteworthy systems of Aristotle (see Aristotelian physics) and Ptolemy.[1]
Two commonly made observations supported the idea that the Earth was the center of the Universe. The first observation was that the stars, sun, and planets appear to revolve around the Earth each day, making the Earth the center of that system. Further, every star was on a "stellar" or "celestial" sphere, of which the earth was the center, that rotated each day, using a line through the north and south pole as an axis. The stars closest to the equator appeared to rise and fall the greatest distance, but each star circled back to its rising point each day.[2] The second common notion supporting the geocentric model was that the Earth does not seem to move from the perspective of an Earth bound observer, and that it is solid, stable, and unmoving. In other words, it is completely at rest.
The geocentric model was usually combined with a spherical Earth by ancient Greek and medieval philosophers. It is not the same as the older flat Earth model implied in some mythology. However, the ancient Greeks believed that the motions of the planets were circular and not elliptical, a view that was not challenged in Western culture until the 17th century through the synthesis of theories by Copernicus and Kepler.
The astronomical predictions of Ptolemy's geocentric model were used to prepare astrological charts for over 1500 years. The geocentric model held sway into the early modern age, but was gradually replaced from the late 16th century onward by the heliocentric model of Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler. However, the transition between these two theories met much resistance, not only from the Catholic Church, which was reluctant to accept a theory not placing God's creation at the center of the universe, but also from those who saw geocentrism as a fact that could not be subverted by a new, weakly justified theory

Please put your posts up for this and give me your opinions

May Jesus bless you all
SELAH
 
Aug 18, 2011
971
7
0
#3
Aug 12, 2010
2,819
12
0
#5


LEFT: Johannes Kepler, Heliocentrist, witch. Probable murderer of...

RIGHT: Tychoe Brahe, Geocentrist, Christian and noble fellow.

You can tell a lot by a persons face.
 
Aug 12, 2010
2,819
12
0
#6
So...whats the universal law of heavenly bodies Musky?

Gravity?

Believe me, this is what your argument is gonna boil down to.
 
Aug 12, 2010
2,819
12
0
#7
"reluctant to accept a theory not placing God's creation at the center of the universe, but also from those who saw geocentrism as a fact that could not be subverted by a new, weakly justified theory"

Well said.
 
Aug 12, 2010
2,819
12
0
#8
"astronomers realized that the sun was not the center of the universe and by the 1920s Edwin Hubble had shown that it was part of a galaxy that was only one of many billions."

How did hubble show that?
 
J

jimmydiggs

Guest
#9
Interesting articles Jimmy but instrumentalism is more or less a wait and see platform rather than a picking of a particular side of the fence.
What I am getting at is do you believe the earth revolves around the sun?

Or do you believe the Sun revolves around the earth?

A or B there is no C
There is a "C".



A Heliocentrism
B Geocentrism
C Agnostic.
 
Aug 18, 2011
971
7
0
#10
"astronomers realized that the sun was not the center of the universe and by the 1920s Edwin Hubble had shown that it was part of a galaxy that was only one of many billions."

How did hubble show that?
I suppose the clouds are just dust from Gods feet as he walks the earth eh?

Guess the earth is flat too because if you believe a silly theory like geocenticisn you would believe that too.
None of your scripture, I don't care where you get it from in the bible says anything about the earth being the center of all creation Doc. sorry.
You can twist it any way that suits you but you will not convince me of it!
You refute every picture ever taken from space.
You refute every piece of mathematics pertaining to the subject.
Did you know that the only stars you can see in the night sky with the naked eye are all within our galaxy?
 
Aug 18, 2011
971
7
0
#12
"astronomers realized that the sun was not the center of the universe and by the 1920s Edwin Hubble had shown that it was part of a galaxy that was only one of many billions."

How did hubble show that?
It was called a TELESCOPE look it up Doc,
BTW Keppler never murdered Brahe....that is subversion man come on.LOL
 
Aug 18, 2011
971
7
0
#13
"reluctant to accept a theory not placing God's creation at the center of the universe, but also from those who saw geocentrism as a fact that could not be subverted by a new, weakly justified theory"

Well said.
Reluctance has nothing to do with it Doc. If you wish to adhere to a stupid lame excuse for a theory as geocenticism go ahead the only person your fooling is yourself.
The theory of heliocentricism is no longer a theory BTW it is fact so you can stay with the other non-believers if you wish or you can accept proven fact
 
Aug 12, 2010
2,819
12
0
#14
I suppose the clouds are just dust from Gods feet as he walks the earth eh?

Guess the earth is flat too because if you believe a silly theory like geocenticisn you would believe that too.
None of your scripture, I don't care where you get it from in the bible says anything about the earth being the center of all creation Doc. sorry.
You can twist it any way that suits you but you will not convince me of it!
You refute every picture ever taken from space.
You refute every piece of mathematics pertaining to the subject.

Did you know that the only stars you can see in the night sky with the naked eye are all within our galaxy?
<Sigh>

You may begin bringing all your pictures and mathematics forward whenever your ready.
 
Aug 12, 2010
2,819
12
0
#15
It was called a TELESCOPE look it up Doc,
BTW Keppler never murdered Brahe....that is subversion man come on.LOL
You clearly are gonna be terrible at this subject Musky. It'd be better for you if you walk away before we get into the science.
 
Aug 12, 2010
2,819
12
0
#16
Reluctance has nothing to do with it Doc. If you wish to adhere to a stupid lame excuse for a theory as geocenticism go ahead the only person your fooling is yourself.
The theory of heliocentricism is no longer a theory BTW it is fact so you can stay with the other non-believers if you wish or you can accept proven fact
Go ahead then, tell us why its a fact.

Hint: Dont bother bringing forward any KINEMATIC evidence. It doesnt matter what is the centre of the system, you will see the same things from Earth.

This rules out:

- Steller parallax
- Phases of venus, the moon or anything else.
- Mars retrograde
- Anything else you can think of which involves distances, angles, speeds, orbits etc.

What you have is coreolis and gravity (both easily dealt with). Just cut to the chase so this doesnt run 20 pages.
 
Aug 12, 2010
2,819
12
0
#17
And can you please try and keep calm and cool it with the techy remarks ok?
 

ada

Banned
Aug 25, 2011
402
2
0
#18
The universal law of man want to be god on earth is, nihilism.
 
Aug 18, 2011
971
7
0
#19
Go ahead then, tell us why its a fact.

Hint: Dont bother bringing forward any KINEMATIC evidence. It doesnt matter what is the centre of the system, you will see the same things from Earth.

This rules out:

- Steller parallax
- Phases of venus, the moon or anything else.
- Mars retrograde
- Anything else you can think of which involves distances, angles, speeds, orbits etc.

What you have is coreolis and gravity (both easily dealt with). Just cut to the chase so this doesnt run 20 pages.
No you show your evidence Smart guy.
You refute kinematic evidence before it is even laid before you
Stellar parralax could not be ascertained in Brahes time because the instruments hadn't been invented yet.
 
Aug 18, 2011
971
7
0
#20
<Sigh>

You may begin bringing all your pictures and mathematics forward whenever your ready.
Wouldn't matter with you Doc. you think your right and will not listen to any but yourself.

Simple equation if the sun is the distance from us 149,597,870.7kms that it is and were to orbit us it would have to be going faster than the speed of light to cover the distance required in your theory 365 times faster than it actually moves now since this cannot be your theory is debunked period.