Re: Empirical cult

Michael J Davis wrote:
In message <1143565970.454654.18870@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
oriel36 <geraldkelleher@xxxxxxxxx> writes
Michael J Davis wrote:
In message <1143481597.789491.314830@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
oriel36 <geraldkelleher@xxxxxxxxx> writes

Do you clearly understand why Newton's notions and their adherence my
the majority has temporarily ruined the ability to appreceate the
continuity and the great difference between Ptolemaic and Copernican
astronomy ?.

Nope.

Would you like to hear it from Copernicus -

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0112/JuSa2000_tezel.gif

Nice pix. Are the time intervals constant? (In sidereal or solar time
intervals?)


Considering that there were no clocks and no telescopes in the era of
Ptolemy and astronomy yet these great astronomers mapped out the motion
of the planets against the stellar background,the Ptolemaics drew
conclusions of spiraling motion against the stationary Earth while the
Copernican astronomers correctly identified a forward moving Earth
overtaking the slower moving outer planets -

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0112/JuSa2000_tezel.gif

The modern convenience of time lapse footage makes the appreciation of
these great astronomies so easy yet look at this stupid attempt to
defend the Newtonian notions based on guessing what motions look like
from the Sun -

"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

Planetary motions are always seen directly from Earth,that is the whole
point of the great Western heliocentric advancement yet you defend
Newton's frame hopping,not because it is just plain wriong but because
you know no better.The ends justifies the means and that is what is so
wrong with the Newtonian conception,Newton pays lip service to
Copernicus and Kepler and proceeds,in utter disregard for astronomical
methiods,to follow a method which has no astronomical roots except the
convenience of the calendrically driven Ra/Dec system.










The Symmetry of the Universe

"32 In this arrangement, therefore, we discover a marvelous symmetry
of the universe, and an established harmonious linkage between the
motion of the spheres and their size, such as can be found in no other
way. For this permits a not inattentive student to perceive why the
forward and backward arcs appear greater in Jupiter than in Saturn and
smaller than in Mars, and on the other hand greater in Venus than in
Mercury. This reversal in direction appears more frequently in Saturn
than in Jupiter, and also more rarely in Mars and Venus than in
Mercury." COPERNICUS


Sir ,do you see where Copernicus states - " such as can be found in no
other
way" well Newton found another way ! -

"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

Nope, seems to me - with Kepler to be describing the same thing.


"Copernicus, by attributing a single annual motion to the earth,
entirely rids the planets of these extremely intricate coils [spiris],
leading the individual planets into their respective orbits
[orbitas],quite bare and very nearly circular. In the period of time
shown in the diagram, Mars traverses one and the same orbit as many
times as the 'garlands' [corollas] you see looped towards the
centre, with one extra, making nine times, while at the same time the
Earth repeats its circle sixteen times "


Astronomia Nova 1609

Kepler is comparing the orbital motions of the Earth against the
orbital motions of Mars as was the astronomical method of his era which
is why his conclusion in in line with the working principles of a
moving Earth rather than the dumb Newtonian variant -

"The proportion existing between the periodic times of any two planets
is exactly the sesquiplicate proportion of the mean distances of the
orbits, or as generally given,the squares of the periodic times are
proportional to the cubes of the mean distances." KEPLER


"PHÆNOMENON IV.
That the fixed stars being at rest, the periodic times of the five
primary planets, and (whether of the sun about the earth, or) of the
earth about the sun, are in the sesquiplicate proportion of their mean
distances from the sun. " NEWTON


Considering that no appreceation has been shown for the original
Copernican insight from the point of view of a forward moving Earth,it
is unlikely that you would discern the horror of the quasi-geocentric
Newtonian 'Sun about the Earth".









The astronomical form of creationism is Newtonian empiricism and it is
far more destructive in content and character than the minority
creationist view and far more difficult to deal with a cult heavy with
mathematicians with no intutive sense of what is correct and what is
not.

Anyone who takes the time to appreceate how the observed motions of the
planets were resolved by discerning an orbital motion to the Earth will
join Galileo and Kepler is praising Copernicus.The empiricists on the
other hand present a shallow view of Copernicus as is their custom with
none of the real substance and reasoning that makes the Copernican
insight special -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copernican_principle

C merely but greatly realised that a) the viewpoint was significant -
but tried to show that the solar system was based on celestial spheres
(in a musical relationship - as in 'the harmony of the spheres'). Kepler
demonstrated that it worked better if the planets were seen to be in
elliptical orbits with the sun at one of the focii, and Newton described
the gravitational forces that gave rise to elliptical orbits.

So... nope!

Mike
[The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting]
--

How easy it is to create fables and an empirical cult based on
genuine astronomical insights.How great you must seem to students who
rely on adult sincerity when explaining matters of natural phenomena
yet clearly few have a grasp on how heliocentricity emerged from the
same data that the geocentricists used. Is God is truly served by
individuals who adhere to an inferior version of the explanation for
heliocentricity which ultimately goes badly astray to the point where
people believe in 'time machines',multiples universes and every exotic
nonsense going.

Behind all this is the magnificence of creation both astronomical and
terrestial by going outside an d appreceating those facets of existence
and that is why natural phenomena is a facet of Christian faith and
nothing more.William Blake accurately portrayed what empiricism does,
in drawing the reader away from looking outside and down towards the
page,the theory and the opinion,men start to think themselves bigger
than the material -

http://www.wga.hu/art/b/blake/02newton.jpg

"Like Dr. Priestly and Bacon and Newton-
Poor spiritual knowledge is not worth a button
For thus the Gospel Sir Isaac confutes:
'God can only be known by His attributes; 115
And as for the indwelling of the Holy Ghost,
Or of Christ and His Father, it's all a boast
And pride, and vanity of the imagination,
That disdains to follow this world's fashion.'
To teach doubt and experiment 120
Certainly was not what Christ meant. "

William Blake

http://www.bartleby.com/236/58.html

Blake knew the intellectual and intutive wasteland that was emerging
from the empirical doctrine where even God would be reduced to being
guessed at by the brain.The same intutive sense which recognises the
majesty of Christ and Christianity recognises the works of the great
Christian astronomers yet these great works are almost lost to history
and exist now only as a parody.

The energy of Blake,Underhill and the great astronomers withers in an
era of vacuous science/religion arguments that are neither scientific
nor religious.The simple intutions which are the test of reality should
have compelled participants to discuss or at least attempt to come to
grips with the wayward notions of Newton and his contemporaries,
considering that the same intutions serve both astronomy and Christian
to some extent.

We infer Christ in the face of humanity,not directly but partly through
observation of the behavior of others and partly through our own
experience.We infer heliocentricity,not directly but through the
observed behavior of the planets and consequently our participation in
heliocentric motion.We may draw conclusions of our participation in the
life of Christ and Christianity and in the great astronomical cycles
which make existence possible but these conclusions are never an end in
themselves for no end is ever sought,just a continuous creating for the
benefit of future generations.In the late 17th century that process
stopped and has remained stopped.




Michael J Davis
http://www.trustsof.demon.co.uk
<><
For this is what the Lord has said to me,
"Go and post a Watchman and let
him report what he sees." Isa 21:6
<><
.