Geocentrism
- Thread starter zone
- Start date
-
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.
vaguely disappointed in the thread.
didn't see much "science" or "proof"
or even supporting scriptures. (that talk about the sun as a ball of light and not just its sunshine)
I guess i'll have to read the websites and see if they are any better.
didn't see much "science" or "proof"
or even supporting scriptures. (that talk about the sun as a ball of light and not just its sunshine)
I guess i'll have to read the websites and see if they are any better.
"There exists no better exposition of the history and science of geocentrism. Very highly recommended and a must for all those interested in the issues surrounding geocentrism today"
(Gerardus Bouw, Ph.D., Astronomy)
"In their over 700-page book, Drs. Sungenis and Bennett make a convincing case for the special and central position of the earth in the cosmos"
(Vincent Schmithorst, Ph.D., Physics)
"Galileo Was Wrong is a work of monumental proportion which ranks, in my opinion, on a par with the meticulous observations of the Danish astronomer, Tycho Brahe, and the tireless efforts of Walter van der Kamp"
(Neville Jones, Ph.D., Physics)
"In their new book, Sungenis and Bennett take no prisoners...Now that the Enlightenment is over, it was inevitable that the system upon which it was based should come in for the powerful critique which Sungenis and Bennett provide. Not inevitable, however, was the brilliant way they provide it"
(E. Michael Jones, Ph.D., ed. Culture Wars)
"Sungenis and Bennett examine the anomalies that arise from the Copernican model...A must read for those who can set aside prejudices and a priori assumptions"
(Joseph Strada, Ph.D. Aerospace Engineering)
"The book Galileo Was Wrong forcefully addresses the history, science, theological, philosophical, and worldview implications of our place in the universe"
(Russell T. Arndts, Ph.D., Chemistry, LSU)
"It is with pleasure that I remand this volume into the hands of the reader"
(Martin Selbrede, Chief Scientist, Unipixel)
"Robert Sungenis and Robert Bennett have done a great service to science and to men of good will. Those who see the universe as the handiwork of the benevolent God need no longer be subservient to fairy tales"
(Anonymous, Ph.D., MIT);
"Galileo Was Wrong is a model for the kind of scholarship we need today -- intellectual understanding not as an end in itself, but as a commitment to reality, infused with moral passion, love for the earth, common sense and philosophical sensitivity"
(Caryl Johnston, M. Ed., Jefferson Medical College).
Objection:
In the Geocentric model you have stars exceeding the speed of light.
Answer:
1) No, the aether is doing the moving not the stars
2) In the Copernican model YOU have stars exceeding the speed of light:
"...the universe does expand faster than the speed of light, and, perhaps more surprisingly, some of the galaxies we can see right now are currently moving away from us faster than the speed of light!"
Ask an Astronomer - Cornell University
.....
"There are many galaxies visible in telescopes with red shift numbers of 1.4 or higher. All of these are currently traveling away from us at speeds greater than the speed of light."
Faster-than-light - WIKI
In the Geocentric model you have stars exceeding the speed of light.
Answer:
1) No, the aether is doing the moving not the stars
2) In the Copernican model YOU have stars exceeding the speed of light:
"...the universe does expand faster than the speed of light, and, perhaps more surprisingly, some of the galaxies we can see right now are currently moving away from us faster than the speed of light!"
Ask an Astronomer - Cornell University
.....
"There are many galaxies visible in telescopes with red shift numbers of 1.4 or higher. All of these are currently traveling away from us at speeds greater than the speed of light."
Faster-than-light - WIKI
"An alternative to admitting the existence of dark energy is to review the postulates that necessitate its introduction. In particular, it has been proposed that the SNe observations could be accounted for without dark energy if our local environment were emptier than the surrounding Universe, i.e., if we were to live in a void. This explanation for the apparent acceleration does not invoke any exotic substances, extra dimensions, or modifications to gravity – but it does require a rejection of the Copernican Principle. We would be required to live near the center of a spherically symmetric under-density, on a scale of the same order of magnitude as the observable Universe. Such a situation would have profound consequences for the interpretation of all cosmological observations, and would ultimately mean that we could not infer the properties of the Universe at large from what we observe locally.
Within the standard inflationary cosmological model the probability of large, deep voids occurring is extremely small. However, it can be argued that the center of a large underdensity is the most likely place for observers to find themselves. In this case, finding ourselves in the center of a giant void would violate the Copernican principle, that we are not in a special place…"
- “Living in a Void: Testing the Copernican Principle with Distant Supernovae,” Physical Review Letters, 101, 131302 (2008) DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.131302.with citation from A. D. Linde, D. A. Linde and A. Mezhlumian in Physical Letters B345, 203 (1995) and S. Alexander, T. Biswas and A. Notari at [arXiv:0712.0370]; and H. Alnes, M. Amarzguioui and Ø. Grøn in Physical Review D73, 083519 (2006); and J. Garcia‐Dellido & T. Jaugboelle in Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 04, 003 (2008).
"We would be required to live near the center of a spherically symmetric under-density, on a scale of the same order of magnitude as the observable Universe."
Within the standard inflationary cosmological model the probability of large, deep voids occurring is extremely small. However, it can be argued that the center of a large underdensity is the most likely place for observers to find themselves. In this case, finding ourselves in the center of a giant void would violate the Copernican principle, that we are not in a special place…"
- “Living in a Void: Testing the Copernican Principle with Distant Supernovae,” Physical Review Letters, 101, 131302 (2008) DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.131302.with citation from A. D. Linde, D. A. Linde and A. Mezhlumian in Physical Letters B345, 203 (1995) and S. Alexander, T. Biswas and A. Notari at [arXiv:0712.0370]; and H. Alnes, M. Amarzguioui and Ø. Grøn in Physical Review D73, 083519 (2006); and J. Garcia‐Dellido & T. Jaugboelle in Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 04, 003 (2008).
"We would be required to live near the center of a spherically symmetric under-density, on a scale of the same order of magnitude as the observable Universe."
"Astronomers will find it hard to settle that troubling sensation in the pit of their stomachs. The truth is that when it comes to swallowing uncomfortable ideas, dark energy may turn out to be a sugar-coated doughnut compared to a rejection of the Copernican principle.”
“Dark Energy and the Bitterest Pill,” July 14, 2008 at the Physics arXiv blog.
“Dark Energy and the Bitterest Pill,” July 14, 2008 at the Physics arXiv blog.
A summary of Relativity's 'begging the question' regarding the Michelson-Morley Experiment......
To commit the fallacy of begging the question, a conclusion to be demonstrated is assumed into a premise.
1 An experiment is set up to demonstrate the motion of the earth through space.
2 A positive result is expected from theory.
3 The experiment produces a null result.
4 The null result has a cause.
5 The cause of the null result is not a stationary earth, because the earth is moving.
6 The cause of the null result is a moving earth
7 Therefore an experiment on the moving earth has demonstrated that c is constant in any inertial reference frame.
8 Therefore c is constant in all reference frames.
Line 8, implies a moving earth as part of the conclusion, yet line 5 merely asserts the earth is moving, to conclude to line 8. Therefore theconstancy of c is invalid according to the fallacy of begging the question.
The only way science can conclude to one of special relativities postulates is to beg the question on the motion of the earth as shown above.
The constancy of c in any inertial reference frame is known from a logical fallacy (see above)
Constancy of c in any inertial reference frame is a postulate of SR.
SR uses four dimensional space to mathematically explain the MM null result.
Minkowski space is four dimensional used to explain SR.
As SR is founded on a fallacious postulate, the so too, Minkowski space is also founded on a fallacious postulate.
As a fallacy invalidates a theory, then both SR and MS are invalid.
cosmoquest.org
To commit the fallacy of begging the question, a conclusion to be demonstrated is assumed into a premise.
1 An experiment is set up to demonstrate the motion of the earth through space.
2 A positive result is expected from theory.
3 The experiment produces a null result.
4 The null result has a cause.
5 The cause of the null result is not a stationary earth, because the earth is moving.
6 The cause of the null result is a moving earth
7 Therefore an experiment on the moving earth has demonstrated that c is constant in any inertial reference frame.
8 Therefore c is constant in all reference frames.
Line 8, implies a moving earth as part of the conclusion, yet line 5 merely asserts the earth is moving, to conclude to line 8. Therefore theconstancy of c is invalid according to the fallacy of begging the question.
The only way science can conclude to one of special relativities postulates is to beg the question on the motion of the earth as shown above.
The constancy of c in any inertial reference frame is known from a logical fallacy (see above)
Constancy of c in any inertial reference frame is a postulate of SR.
SR uses four dimensional space to mathematically explain the MM null result.
Minkowski space is four dimensional used to explain SR.
As SR is founded on a fallacious postulate, the so too, Minkowski space is also founded on a fallacious postulate.
As a fallacy invalidates a theory, then both SR and MS are invalid.
cosmoquest.org
Inflationary paradigm in trouble after Planck 2013
The recent Planck satellite combined with earlier results eliminate a wide spectrum of more complex inflationary models and favor models with a single scalar field, as reported in the analysis of the collaboration. More important, though, is that all the simplest inflation models are disfavored by the data while the surviving models -- namely, those with plateau-like potentials -- are problematic. We discuss how the restriction to plateau-like models leads to three independent problems: it exacerbates both the initial conditions problem and the multiverse-unpredictability problem and it creates a new difficulty which we call the inflationary "unlikeliness problem." Finally, we comment on problems reconciling inflation with a standard model Higgs, as suggested by recent LHC results. In sum, we find that recent experimental data disfavors all the best-motivated inflationary scenarios and introduces new, serious difficulties that cut to the core of the inflationary paradigm. Forthcoming searches for B-modes, non-Gaussianity and new particles should be decisive.
Cornell University Library
[1304.2785] Inflationary paradigm in trouble after Planck2013 < click
The recent Planck satellite combined with earlier results eliminate a wide spectrum of more complex inflationary models and favor models with a single scalar field, as reported in the analysis of the collaboration. More important, though, is that all the simplest inflation models are disfavored by the data while the surviving models -- namely, those with plateau-like potentials -- are problematic. We discuss how the restriction to plateau-like models leads to three independent problems: it exacerbates both the initial conditions problem and the multiverse-unpredictability problem and it creates a new difficulty which we call the inflationary "unlikeliness problem." Finally, we comment on problems reconciling inflation with a standard model Higgs, as suggested by recent LHC results. In sum, we find that recent experimental data disfavors all the best-motivated inflationary scenarios and introduces new, serious difficulties that cut to the core of the inflationary paradigm. Forthcoming searches for B-modes, non-Gaussianity and new particles should be decisive.
Cornell University Library
[1304.2785] Inflationary paradigm in trouble after Planck2013 < click
Last edited:
coming soon - sign in to receive notification when released
DEMISE OF THE COPERNICAN PRINCIPLE
Demise of the Copernican Principle - The Principle Movie < click
DEMISE OF THE COPERNICAN PRINCIPLE
Demise of the Copernican Principle - The Principle Movie < click
"Both camps admit that no experiment, observation, or phenomenon can demonstrate that the earth is moving."
Geocentricity - CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science < click
if we can at least accept, as christians, that the earth is not moving, perhaps believing GOD'S ACCOUNT will be palatable.
Geocentricity - CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science < click
if we can at least accept, as christians, that the earth is not moving, perhaps believing GOD'S ACCOUNT will be palatable.
"The Copernican principle states that humans are not privileged observers of the universe and provides our philosophical basis for assuming that on the largest scales the universe is spatially homogeneous. While it is one of the foundational aspects of modern cosmology, this assumption remains untested outside of the standard paradigm. Though it may seem pedantic to test something so obvious, the standard paradigm itself is built on shaky foundations, relying on an unexplained, gravitationally repulsive, dark-energy component for observations to fit the model. The implications of this cannot be overstated. Assuming that the laws of physics do apply equally everywhere in the universe, the only non- copernican configuration possible is one in which we live in a place that originates from special initial conditions."
'Testing the Copernican principle by constraining spatial homogeneity' : Wessel Valkenburg,1, 2 Valerio Marra,2 and Chris Clarkson3 1Instituut-Lorentz for Theoretical Physics, Universiteit Leiden Postbus 9506, 2333 CA Leiden, The Netherlands.
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1209.4078v1.pdf < click
The Copernican principle......remains untested.
the standard paradigm itself is built on shaky foundations,
relying on an unexplained, gravitationally repulsive, dark-energy component for observations to fit the model.
The implications of this cannot be overstated.
'Testing the Copernican principle by constraining spatial homogeneity' : Wessel Valkenburg,1, 2 Valerio Marra,2 and Chris Clarkson3 1Instituut-Lorentz for Theoretical Physics, Universiteit Leiden Postbus 9506, 2333 CA Leiden, The Netherlands.
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1209.4078v1.pdf < click
The Copernican principle......remains untested.
the standard paradigm itself is built on shaky foundations,
relying on an unexplained, gravitationally repulsive, dark-energy component for observations to fit the model.
The implications of this cannot be overstated.
"For the purpose of this paper, we will only focus on the one of the consequences of Mach’s principle: that the inertial forces can be seen as resulting from real interactions with distant matter in the Universe, as was for example shown by A. Zylbersztajn [15].
The only question remains: are these forces by themselves enough to explain all translational motions that we observe from Earth, and can they reproduce the Tycho Brahe’s model? The discussion in this paper will show that the answer to this question is positive."
...
"But what is less known is that Tycho Brahe, Kepler’s tutor, developed a geostatic system that was just as accurate and elegant as Kepler’s: the Sun orbits around the Earth, and all the other planets orbit around the Sun. The trajectories are ellipses, and all the Kepler’s laws are satisfied."
...
"We can therefore conclude that the Sun’s orbit in the Earth’s pseudo-potential is equivalent to that observed from the Earth in the heliocentric system."
...
"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."
...
"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 of exterior forces acting on it."
'Newton-Machian analysis of Neo-tychonian model of planetary motions' : Luka Popov, University of Zagreb, Department of Physics, Bijeniˇcka cesta 32, Zagreb, Croatia
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1301.6045.pdf < click
...
"causes the Universe to stay in that very state of motion, without any need of exterior forces acting on it"
Hebrews 1:3
He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power.
The only question remains: are these forces by themselves enough to explain all translational motions that we observe from Earth, and can they reproduce the Tycho Brahe’s model? The discussion in this paper will show that the answer to this question is positive."
...
"But what is less known is that Tycho Brahe, Kepler’s tutor, developed a geostatic system that was just as accurate and elegant as Kepler’s: the Sun orbits around the Earth, and all the other planets orbit around the Sun. The trajectories are ellipses, and all the Kepler’s laws are satisfied."
...
"We can therefore conclude that the Sun’s orbit in the Earth’s pseudo-potential is equivalent to that observed from the Earth in the heliocentric system."
...
"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."
...
"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 of exterior forces acting on it."
'Newton-Machian analysis of Neo-tychonian model of planetary motions' : Luka Popov, University of Zagreb, Department of Physics, Bijeniˇcka cesta 32, Zagreb, Croatia
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1301.6045.pdf < click
...
"causes the Universe to stay in that very state of motion, without any need of exterior forces acting on it"
Hebrews 1:3
He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power.
"Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) observations from the WMAP satellite have shown some unexpected anisotropies, which surprisingly seem to be aligned with the ecliptic 1,2. This alignment has been dubbed the “axis of evil” with very damaging implications for the standard model of cosmology3. The latest data from the Planck satellite have confirmed the presence of these anisotropies4. Here we report even larger anisotropies in the sky distributions of powerful extended quasars and some other sub-classes of radio galaxies in the 3CRR catalogue, one of the oldest and most intensively studies sample of strong radio sources 5,6,7. The anisotropies lie about a plane passing through the two equinoxes and the north celestial pole (NCP). We can rule out at a 99.995% confidence level the hypothesis that these asymmetries are merely due to statistical fluctuations. Further, even the distribution of observed radio sizes of quasars and radio galaxies show large systematic differences between these two sky regions. The redshift distribution appear to be very similar in both regions of sky for all sources, which rules out any local effects to be the cause of these anomalies. Two pertinent questions then arise. First, why should there be such large anisotropies present in the sky distribution of some of the most distant discrete sources implying inhomogeneities in the universe at very large scales (covering a fraction of the universe)? What is intriguing even further is why such anisotropies should lie about a great circle decided purely by the orientation of earth’s rotation axis and/or the axis of its revolution around the sun? It looks as if these axes have a preferential placement in the larger scheme of things, implying an apparent breakdown of the Copernican principle or its more generalization, cosmological principle, upon which all modern cosmological theories are based upon."
...
"...there is no denying that from the large anisotropies present in the radio sky, independently seen both in the discrete source distribution and in the diffuse CMBR, the Copernican principle seems to be in jeopardy."
'Is there a violation of the Copernican principle in radio sky?' Ashok K. Singal, Astronomy and Astrophysics Division, Physical Research Laboratory, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad - 380 009, India. Cosmology and Extragalactic Astrophysics (astro-ph.CO),
Submitted on 17 May 2013.
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1305.4134.pdf < click
[1305.4134] Is there a violation of the Copernican principle in radio sky? < click Cornell
...
"...there is no denying that from the large anisotropies present in the radio sky, independently seen both in the discrete source distribution and in the diffuse CMBR, the Copernican principle seems to be in jeopardy."
'Is there a violation of the Copernican principle in radio sky?' Ashok K. Singal, Astronomy and Astrophysics Division, Physical Research Laboratory, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad - 380 009, India. Cosmology and Extragalactic Astrophysics (astro-ph.CO),
Submitted on 17 May 2013.
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1305.4134.pdf < click
[1305.4134] Is there a violation of the Copernican principle in radio sky? < click Cornell
[Heliocentrism] wishes to turn the whole of astronomy upside down...I believe the Holy Scriptures, for Joshua commanded the sun to stand still and not the earth."
Martin Luther
"I have no doubt ... from the established alterations of days and nights, that the course and revolutions of the sun, moon, and stars, are regulated by the marvelous wisdom of God."
John Calvin
The truth is that God states in many places in His word that the sun is in motion, her circuit resulting in both day and night, and that the world remains both motionless and stationary. Nowhere does God speak to the contrary...
Wilhelmus a Brakel
Martin Luther
"I have no doubt ... from the established alterations of days and nights, that the course and revolutions of the sun, moon, and stars, are regulated by the marvelous wisdom of God."
John Calvin
The truth is that God states in many places in His word that the sun is in motion, her circuit resulting in both day and night, and that the world remains both motionless and stationary. Nowhere does God speak to the contrary...
Wilhelmus a Brakel
A
don't have issues with the time thing. God could have sped things up whenever He wanted to.
hmm the multiquote option didn't work as well as hoped.
anyway I check them out but I highly doubt it will change my mind about a tilted Earth that rotates (causes day and night) and revolves around the sun (causing the seasons) which in turn rotates around the galaxy center.
I am still not convinced that GOD tells men in the Bible that the Earth is the center of the universe.
It sounds like a manmade tradition to me.
yes the Jewish people might have believed it but they have been wrong about what God meant in Scripture before.
hmm the multiquote option didn't work as well as hoped.
anyway I check them out but I highly doubt it will change my mind about a tilted Earth that rotates (causes day and night) and revolves around the sun (causing the seasons) which in turn rotates around the galaxy center.
I am still not convinced that GOD tells men in the Bible that the Earth is the center of the universe.
It sounds like a manmade tradition to me.
yes the Jewish people might have believed it but they have been wrong about what God meant in Scripture before.