Jump to content

I can't be the only one.


Scotty99
 Share

Recommended Posts

Actually relativity itself dictates you cannot differentiate if we are going around the sun or if the universe is going around us. Its absolutely brilliant in that sense, but that does not mean its how reality is :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Scotty99 said:

Geocentric model isnt perfect (orbits for example), but to me it got more right than the copernican does.

And there's your answer to "how haven't more people come to the same conclusions i have?"

What takes the place of Newtonian gravity in the geocentric model?

Just now, Scotty99 said:

Actually relativity itself dictates you cannot differentiate if we are going around the sun or if the universe is going around us. Its absolutely brilliant in that sense, but that does not mean its how reality is :)

Special relativity works for inertial reference frames. Rotation and revolution are not inertial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, swansont said:

And there's your answer to "how haven't more people come to the same conclusions i have?"

What takes the place of Newtonian gravity in the geocentric model?

 What about the geocentric model makes you think gravity does not function in that system. Again i am suggesting earth occupies the exact center of mass in the universe and the entire sum of mass rotates around us. Local gravity does not change here, you are still going to have the small rotate around the large. I even recall researching why people think gravity does not work in a geocentric system, what laws is it breaking?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Scotty99 said:

 What about the geocentric model makes you think gravity does not function in that system. Again i am suggesting earth occupies the exact center of mass in the universe and the entire sum of mass rotates around us. Local gravity does not change here, you are still going to have the small rotate around the large. I even recall researching why people think gravity does not work in a geocentric system, what laws is it breaking?

How does the small mass remain stationary while the large mass moves in a circle (or ellipse)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, swansont said:

How does the small mass remain stationary while the large mass moves in a circle (or ellipse)?

By small mass i assume you mean us? We are entrenched unmoving at the centre, this would also explain earths bulge at the equator.

30 minutes ago, swansont said:

And there's your answer to "how haven't more people come to the same conclusions i have?"

What takes the place of Newtonian gravity in the geocentric model?

Special relativity works for inertial reference frames. Rotation and revolution are not inertial.

Oh there is rotation alright, but its not us thats moving.

Whats really sad about this entire deal is many people lump geocentrists with flat earthers, flat earth (in my opinion) was created to distract from actual truths and it turns out people were just dumb enough to bite.

That was a bit harsh but its the truth. All of the stuff you hear about flat earth should be about geocentrism (or rather, the copernican principle), people know something is off with our current understanding of the universe but they are barking up the wrong tree.

Edited by Scotty99
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Scotty99 said:

people know something is off with our current understanding of the universe but they are barking up the wrong tree.

I agree that we don't fully understand all the working of the universe but all that we know now and will discover in the future is and should be based on observation and  prior knowledge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Scotty99 said:

By small mass i assume you mean us? We are entrenched unmoving at the centre, this would also explain earths bulge at the equator.

Oh there is rotation alright, but its not us thats moving.

I understand your claim. And that's all it is: a claim.

I am asking (insisting, really) that you reconcile it with Newtonian gravity and Newton's laws of motion.

(i.e. "entrenched" is counter to these laws of motion)

1 hour ago, Scotty99 said:

Whats really sad about this entire deal is many people lump geocentrists with flat earthers, flat earth (in my opinion) was created to distract from actual truths and it turns out people were just dumb enough to bite.

That was a bit harsh but its the truth. All of the stuff you hear about flat earth should be about geocentrism (or rather, the copernican principle), people know something is off with our current understanding of the universe but they are barking up the wrong tree.

Don't care. I don't think anyone here is confused about the two positions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Scotty99 said:

You seemed to have skimmed over the meat of that article:

You seem to have skimmed over the “if they are right” when declaring this to be a fact. 

2 hours ago, Scotty99 said:

Actually relativity itself dictates you cannot differentiate if we are going around the sun or if the universe is going around us. 

Nope. 

3 hours ago, Scotty99 said:

Because people trust science, not religion. 

That is probably why no one believes in your delusions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Scotty99 said:

Whats really sad about this entire deal is many people lump geocentrists with flat earthers,

That would be because it is just as credible....  less so even being honest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Scotty99 said:

What about the readings from the CMB dont you understand?

The fact you have only made vague reference to the CMB rather than specific data. 

I gather you are referring to the anisotropy. I fail to see how much his supports your faith. If the Earth were in the centre I would expect it to be isotropic. The fact it isn’t show we are moving relative to the CMB so if we were in the centre in the past, we aren’t anymore. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DrP said:

That would be because it is just as credible....  less so even being honest.

So something with zero basis in reality has more credibility to you than a world view that lasted for thousands of years?

I am up against it more than i realized, heh.

2 hours ago, Strange said:

The fact you have only made vague reference to the CMB rather than specific data. 

I gather you are referring to the anisotropy. I fail to see how much his supports your faith. If the Earth were in the centre I would expect it to be isotropic. The fact it isn’t show we are moving relative to the CMB so if we were in the centre in the past, we aren’t anymore. 

Its incredible that even forum regulars such as yourself dont actually know the problems with the CMB, i will even bookmark the spot in the video for you:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Scotty99 said:

If they’re right, humans are living in the middle of the largest known void in the observable universe.

So, we live in  the biggest one we have found.

The vitally important word there is "known". There may be bigger ones- we haven't finished looking.

9 hours ago, Scotty99 said:

In my estimations, the most likely explanation for where earth resides is exactly at the center of mass in the universe.

This would explain a whole lot of things, including the two examples i gave above.

In what way?

It's like saying "I live in the middle of all the places that are within 10 minutes walk of my house- so it must be special.

 

8 hours ago, Scotty99 said:

No experiment has ever been done to prove the earth is moving

Yes they have. In particular, parallax measurements on nearby stars.

8 hours ago, Scotty99 said:

If science can actually prove this is all here for us people are going to take notice, things would change.

This is what science has already shown. We aren't in the middle.
 

you are here.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Scotty99 said:

So something with zero basis in reality has more credibility to you than a world view that lasted for thousands of years?

I am up against it more than i realized, heh.

Its incredible that even forum regulars such as yourself dont actually know the problems with the CMB, i will even bookmark the spot in the video for you:

 

Maybe try looking for some reliable scientific sources instead of depending on conspiracy theory lunatics who have „What is the Axis of Evil” written on a black board behind them and don’t know how to make a video with correct lipsync.

Edited by koti
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no idea who that guy is btw, i linked it because he has the facts correct on the CMB readings.

Its actually mind boggling to me most people on this forum really have no idea the problems with the copernican principle, too focused on dark matter/energy i reckon.

Eh and btw koti that is actually what the anistotropies and its alignment are called, not some sort of conspiracy theory lol.

Edited by Scotty99
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Scotty99 said:

Eh and btw koti that is actually what the anistotropies and its alignment are called, not some sort of conspiracy theory lol.

Anisotropies are the axis of evil? I want to learn more, please do explain. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Scotty99 said:

he has the facts correct on the CMB readings

How do you know?

Did you measure them and check?

On the other hand, I hate to say this but he's right about the AoE
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axis_of_evil_(cosmology)

 

(strictly, I didn't check if he was right, but he's not bat-shit crazy wrong about it.)

I invite whoever downvoted his post to reconsider.

1 hour ago, Scotty99 said:

... most people on this forum really have no idea the problems with the copernican principle,

What problem(s)?

Edited by John Cuthber
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

How do you know?

Did you measure them and check?

On the other hand, I hate to say this but he's right about the AoE
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axis_of_evil_(cosmology)

 

(strictly, I didn't check if he was right, but he's not bat-shit crazy wrong about it.)

I invite whoever downvoted his post to reconsider.

What problem(s)?

Are you serious? The guy starts off the video with talking about a George W. Bush speech about the "Axis of Evil" (Iran, Iraq, North Korea) and proceeds seamlessly to CMB research.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Scotty99 said:

I am up against it more than i realized, heh.

Isn't that what you started this thread for? You know, stating absurd notions supporting Earth as somehow privileged as designed by whatever designer you personally accept? You know, like many YEC's and IDers, revelling in the apparent notoriety you receive on a science forum from people who certainly know better.

Sorry ol buddy,  inferring any "god of the gaps"  myth, where some gaps in scientific knowledge and presently unexplained coincidences exist, do not hold any water...never have, never will.

These "god of the gaps"exercises in such futility are expected though, as a last minute defence against science and cosmology as it continues to push any notion of ID into oblivion.

For your information: The facts so far as they stand:

[1] Our solar system is heliocentric.

[2] It is just one stellar/planetary system among 3 or 4 hundred billion other systems just in the Milky Way galaxy, which itself is part of a gravitationally bound local group of galaxies.

[3] Which is just one local group among many billions of others only limited by the observable horizon of our observable universe.

[4] Logically concluding that no matter where we measure in that observable universe, that will be the only logical center to ever speak of...ie the center of one's observable universe.

 

10 hours ago, Scotty99 said:

Because people trust science, not religion. If science can actually prove this is all here for us people are going to take notice, things would change.

Science isn't really about "proofs" It's about constructing models that align with what we observe, the results of our experiments, and the ability to make successful predictions. As further observations confirm our model, and as successful predictions are made, so to does the confidence in our models increase. eg: GR...BB, and certainly, undoubtedly the theory of evolution of life.

Science also is continually showing that we/Earth is not special or centralized in any respect that you are obviously speculating on...actually the exact opposite to what you speculate/dream on in your statement.

Edited by beecee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, koti said:

Are you serious? The guy starts off the video with talking about a George W. Bush speech about the "Axis of Evil" (Iran, Iraq, North Korea) and proceeds seamlessly to CMB research.

This https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axis_of_evil_(cosmology)

is real.

As I said, I didn't check out the vid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Scotty99 said:

Its incredible that even forum regulars such as yourself dont actually know the problems with the CMB, i will even bookmark the spot in the video for you:

I'm not going to watch a video. If you have some information to provide, just do it.

But, as the comments here make clear, you are, as I guessed, talking about the anisotropies in the CMB. I can't imagine how deluded you would have to be to think that evidence that we are not symmetrically placed with regard to the CMB means that we are centrally located. That can only be interpreted as meaning we are not in a special place and are moving away from any place that we were before (which probably wasn't special anyway).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol strange, this isnt "information" ive stumbled across, its literally the results of decades worth of CMB missions which all came back with the same results.

Its not my job here to inform people of this data these aren't new findings, its about where do we go from here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Scotty99 said:

lol strange, this isnt "information" ive stumbled across, its literally the results of decades worth of CMB missions which all came back with the same results.

You still haven't said what this "information" is or why it supports your religious beliefs. I am having to guess what you are referring to and, as far as I can tell, it contradicts your faith-based claims.

You need to stop making snide, cryptic comments and explain why evidence that the Earth is moving through the universe supports your religious belief that it is stationary. That really doesn't make much sense. You might as well claim that getting a speeding ticket proves you were parked by the side of road. 

Quote

Its not my job here to inform people of this data ...

It is your job to support your pseudoscientific claims.

Edited by Strange
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Strange said:

You still haven't said what this "information" is or why it supports your religious beliefs. I am having to guess what you are referring to and, as far as I can tell, it contradicts your faith-based claims.

You need to stop making snide, cryptic comments and explain why evidence that the Earth is moving through the universe supports your religious belief that it is stationary. That really doesn't make much sense. You might as well claim that getting a speeding ticket proves you were parked by the side of road. 

I have already reported you once for the labeling me a religious person, going to ask you nicely to stop because that is not the angle i am coming from here. Secondly i am not going to spell out for you what the CMB readings mean, if you are want to continue posting in this thread there is plenty of data out there for you to research on your own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Scotty99 said:

Secondly i am not going to spell out for you what the CMB readings mean

So we can only conclude that you are unable to provide any justification for the anisotropies supporting your religious beliefs. Because they don't.

Quote

there is plenty of data out there for you to research on your own

Nope. That isn't how it works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.