Re: Copernican heliocentricity
- From: "oriel36" <geraldkelleher@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 22 May 2006 14:43:16 -0700
"oriel36" <geraldkelleher@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
The Ptolemaic and Copernican astronomers plotted the motion of theI found the passage attributed to Newton in his Principia but I can't find
planets against the background stars.Here are actual 23 images of
Jupiter and Saturn taken over the course of a year -
When assembled into time lapse footage, the motions look like this -
With a little effort,Christians can enjoy seeing the faster Earth
overtaking the slower moving outer planets and that is how Copernicus
worked out that the Earth moved around the Sun.
The poor Newtonians got it wrong and any Christian can affirm it after
becoming comfortable with the time lapse footage above and what those
motions represent through Copernican reasoning.It really is a bad
Newtonian mutation of Copernican reasoning.
" Against the stellar background planetary motions appear sometimes
direct,sometimes stationary and sometimes retrograde.But from an
orbitally moving Earth planetary heliocentric motions are seen direct "
Newton chages this to -
" For to the earth planetary motions appear sometimes direct, sometimes
stationary, nay, and sometimes retrograde. But from the sun they are
always seen direct," NEWTON
the one attributed to Copernicous. Could you point me in the right
direction. Also, everyone at the time could see retrograde motion. Ptolemy
and Copernicus had opposing theories. Copernicus won. Newton and the rest
added to Copernicus because of small but noticeable details that were
unexplained. Kepler came up with elliptical orbits and Newton came up with
the laws of mass and motion. Where does this video show any explanation of
your belief that Newton was wrong and Copernicus knew everything?
Look,it is near impossible for empiricists to acknowledge the Newtonian
mutations and I sympathise that you can't grasp the difference .
I provided the second greatest representation after the Copernican
heliocentric arrangement - the Panis Quadragesimalis of Kepler to
affirm plotted planetary motions aghainst the stellar background and
I can give you the text of Copernicus and how he reasoned
heliocentricity through the forward motion of the Earth overtaking the
slower forward motion of the other planets as the primary way to infer
the orbital motion of the Earth and Mars but at thios stage I object to
presenting my astronomical heritage to people hellbent on destroying
it through that rotten Newtonian mutation.
"We find, then, in this arrangement the marvelous symmetry of the
universe, and a sure linking together in harmony of the motion and size
of the spheres, such as could be perceived in no other way. For here
one may understand, by attentive observation, why Jupiter appears to
have a larger progression and retrogression than Saturn, and smaller
than Mars, and again why Venus has larger ones than Mercury; why such a
doubling back appears more frequently in Saturn than in Jupiter, and
still more rarely in Mars and Venus than in Mercury; and furthermore
why Saturn, Jupiter and Mars are nearer to the Earth when in opposition
than in the region of their occultations by the Sun and re-appearance .
.. . . All these phenomena proceed from the same cause, which lies in
the motion of the Earth. De revolutionibus, 1543
No jumping to the Sun to account for the behavior of the planets,for
the Ptolemaic astronomers too referenced apparent retrogrades using the
stellar background but dropped it in their conclusions of periodic
looping motions from a stationary Earh.In this respect,the
idiosyncratic Newtonian format is not even geocentric.
Not if Copernicus or Kepler himself appeared before you would you
change your views,the ability to consider Newton's foundational agenda
to be incorrect is almost impossible to contemplate but I assure you it
is and it is destructive in content and character.
None of you have any reason to complain,who would know the difference
between an older and distinguished astronomical method and it twisting
to support a casual agenda by fraudulent means.
This has been one long day.
- Prev by Date: Re: god exists
- Next by Date: Re: Bombshell on bird origins
- Previous by thread: Re: Copernican heliocentricity
- Next by thread: Re: Copernican heliocentricity