An admission + asking JohnMartin for some help

[Roy]

My cat acts like he really does understand.

Your cat is a Heliocentrist.

JM

JM has previously inadvertently proved that he is dumber than a squirrel. Now he has admitted that the is dumber than robrecht's cat. Are there any mammals he is smarter than, or do we need to start IQ comparisons with reptiles? newts? acorn worms? tardigrates? fungi???

[robrecht]

JM has previously inadvertently proved that he is dumber than a squirrel. Now he has admitted that the is dumber than robrecht's cat. Are there any mammals he is smarter than, or do we need to start IQ comparisons with reptiles? newts? acorn worms? tardigrates? fungi???

Well, to be fair, my cat is exceptionally smart.

[Duragizer]

Cats are generally smarter than humans. So smart so as never let on just how smart they are.

[Sparko]

Cats are generally smarter than humans. So smart so as never let on just how smart they are.

I thought that was the mice?

[rogue06]

JM has previously inadvertently proved that he is dumber than a squirrel.

[JohnMartin]

He is secretly very much amused by this silly debate.

Your cat is smiling whilst standing on the stationary earth. He only believes the earth moves because others think it is so. Maybe you should present a proof for the moving earth, so his belief is confirmed with something more that just human opinion. Then again, you may seek for proof for Helio, but never find it.

In fact, no proof for Helio has ever been presented, for no proof can ever be presented.

JM

[JohnMartin]

According to Jim Newtonian mechanics is used to determine the satellite orbit around the earth. Yet, Newtonian mechanics provides no mechanism and no force that can push and pull on each satellite as the earth accelerates and decelerates around the sun.

The gravitational attraction between the sun and the satellite.

Your answer has already been exposed on the Problems with Heliocentrism thread -

Post 5

Post 51

Problem 2 is further explained in the diagrams shown on page 1. Another way to explain the problem is to imagine a butterfly flying within an enclosed car. The car moves in a straight line and the butterfly hovers within the moving car, thereby moving in the same direction as the car. The car then begins to turn. What then occurs to the butterfly? If the car turns left, the butterfly will hit the right hand window. Similarly the satellites are sent into the atmosphere and apparently according to the Helio model, move along with the earth. Then the earth either -

1. Moves towards the sun. Then a satellite on the far side of the earth, away from the sun (like the butterfly initially moving with the car) will continue on its original path and drift away from the earth. Or a satellite on the sun side of the earth will continue on its original path and crash into the earth.

2. Moves away from the sun. Then a satellite on the far side of the earth will crash into the earth. Or a satellite on the sun side of the earth will drift away from the earth.

For a butterfly to continue to move with the car when the car turns right, requires either 1. the butterfly also turns right. Or 2. the butterfly is fixed to the car, like a passenger fixed into a seat with a seat belt. Either 1 or 2 require a force on the butterfly for the insect to travel with the car when the car turns.

In like manner, the satellites must either 1. turn to move towards or away from the sun, or 2. be fixed to the earth like a passenger in the seat with the seat belt. Evidently 2 is false, so only 1 remains. But 1 requires a force act on the satellite to move with the earth, towards and/or away from the sun.

I put it to you that this force does not exist within Newtonian physics, which is required to account for the Helio model.

As the force which must be both a pulling and pushing force on the satellites, depending on the relative motion of the earth to the sun and position of the satellite, does not exist. Evidently the elliptical orbit of the earth means the helio model does not have the forces to account for the motion of the satellites around an ever moving earth relative to the sun.

Moreover, each satellite must twist 180^o every six months as the earth orbits the sun.

...and the satellite also orbits the sun.

Still.

The Helio model requires that -

1) the earth's face to the sun remain near constant over six months and

2) the earth's face to the stars change by 180 degrees every 6 months. Every six months the earth will face a different set of stars at 12 pm solar time. Those stars will be 180 degrees opposite every six months.

The earth's face change to the stars over six months is in accord with the difference between sideral and solar day as explained by Durham university.

Solar time is time measured with respect to the Sun's apparent motion in the sky. The clocks we use for civil timekeeping are based on this motion. Of course, the apparent motion of the Sun across the sky is actually caused by the rotation of the Earth. So, our clocks measure the length of time required for the Earth to rotate once with respect to the Sun. From our perspective, the Sun revolves around the Earth every 24 hours. This period is known as a solar day.

Sidereal time is time measured with respect to the apparent motion of the 'fixed' stars in the sky due to the Earth's rotation. While the Earth is rotating on its axis it is also moving along its orbit around the Sun. Over the course of a day the Earth moves about one degree along its orbit (360 degrees in a full orbit divided by 365.25 days in a year is about one degree). Therefore, from our perspective, the Sun moves about one degree from west to east with respect to the 'fixed' stars.

As the earth moves about one degree from west to east with respect to the 'fixed' stars, the earth must be twisting relative to the stars by about one degree per day. The change in direction of the earth's face towards the stars over six months is in accord with the difference between the sidereal and solar day as required by the Helio model. The accumulated difference of the direction of the earth's face towards the stars is about 180 degrees over six months.

The above phenomena is well illustrated by the following diagram -

sat 1.jpg

The black arrows in the above diagram provide some indication that the earth twists in space relative to the stars over six months. The black arrows point right, but the dark areas on the earth change from left to right over six months. The dark shaded areas of the earth in the top and bottom pictures, relative to the fixed black arrows indicate a different direction of the earths face relative to the fixed stars over six months.

Notice the night sky in the top picture points to a star field left of the earth, and the in the bottom picture, (six months later) the night sky points to the right of the earth. If a satellite faces the earth in the top picture during the night, the rear of the satellite will face in the same star direction as an observer on the earth. For the same satellite to face the earth six months later, the rear of the satellite must point to a set of stars to the right of the earth.

[JohnMartin]

JM has previously inadvertently proved that he is dumber than a squirrel. Now he has admitted that the is dumber than robrecht's cat. Are there any mammals he is smarter than, or do we need to start IQ comparisons with reptiles? newts? acorn worms? tardigrates? fungi???

Just more evidence that Roy is immature. Atheism is just one affect of his dwarf morality.

JM

[robrecht]

Your cat is smiling whilst standing on the stationary earth. He only believes the earth moves because others think it is so. Maybe you should present a proof for the moving earth, so his belief is confirmed with something more that just human opinion. Then again, you may seek for proof for Helio, but never find it.

In fact, no proof for Helio has ever been presented, for no proof can ever be presented.

JM

Proofs depend upon presuppositions and axioms. Have you ever proved geocentrism to someone who does not share your presuppositions?

[JohnMartin]

Proofs depend upon presuppositions and axioms. Have you ever proved geocentrism to someone who does not share your presuppositions?

I doubt that there is a proof for any model based upon science alone. We simply do not know enough about the universe to be sure of one model over another. We can prove Geo from the sources of revelation and then seek to have some explanatory power within a variety of Geo models. So no, I have not apodictically proven Geo from science, but I have presented some evidence that is consistent with a stationary earth which is either at, or near the center of the universe.

JM

[JohnMartin]

Notice the night sky in the top picture points to a star field left of the earth, and the in the bottom picture, (six months later) the night sky points to the right of the earth. If a satellite faces the earth in the top picture during the night, the rear of the satellite will face in the same star direction as an observer on the earth. For the same satellite to face the earth six months later, the rear of the satellite must point to a set of stars to the right of the earth. The different directions of the satellite face over six months, as implied in the above diagram, infers the Helio modeled earth twists in space relative to the stars over 6 months, and maintains the same face towards the sun over the same six months.

JM

For the satellite to constantly have the same face directed towards the orbiting earth, the satellite must have a force that causes the satellite to twist in space as the earth orbits the sun. The satellite must act like a ball attached to a string, which is swung around the boys head. As the ball is attached to the string, the same face of the ball is always directed towards the boy at the center of the balls motion. For Helio to account for the satellites having the same face directed towards the earth there must be something like a string attached to every satellite, causing every satellite to twist just at the same rate the earth orbits the sun. Of course there is no force within any model that acts on the satellite like the string acts on the ball.

Alternatively, the satellites must act in a similar manner to the moon, which has the same face directed towards the earth. Helios claim the moon rotates on its own axis just at the required to rate to have the moons face in sync with the earth's daily rotation rate. If a similar principle is applied to the satellites, then those satellites must also rotate at the required rate to be in sync with the earth's yearly orbit. If there is no force available within the Newtonian or Relativist models to account for the required twisting of the satellites, then the satellite problem invalidates the Helio model. Of course, there is no force applied within any model that purports to account for satellite motion around the earth. So the satellite problem does invalidate the Helio model.

For the satellites to work consistently with the supposition of the earth's yearly orbit around the sun, a mindless superstition is required to have all the satellites twist without a force appied as the earth orbits the sun. It seems the satellites show the Helio model to be a mindless superstition.

JM

[Yttrium]

Of course, there is no force applied within any model that purports to account for satellite motion around the earth. So the satellite problem does invalidate the Helio model.

I feel obligated to point out that there is indeed a force that purports to account for that. It's called "gravity".

[JohnMartin]

I feel obligated to point out that there is indeed a force that purports to account for that. It's called "gravity".

Gravity is only a centripetal force that acts along the direct line between the centers of mass of two bodies. The centripetal force between 1) the moon and earth, and 2) the satellite and the earth cannot in any way cause the rotation of the moon, or satellite in sync with the earth's motion. Newtonian mechanics does not have a mechanism to cause a torsion force within a gravity model to account for the twisting required of satellites around the orbiting earth.

If a torsion force is proposed, it will have to be caused by the sun, earth and moon within the Newtonian model. The torsion force will act inside every satellite to rotate the satellites in sync with the earth's orbit around the sun. As the sun, earth and moon only ever act on satellites gravitationally, the sun, earth and moon can only ever act on the satellites according to centripetal force that acts directly focussed upon the satellites center of mass. But a torsion force will always be focused within the satellite, at a point offset a distance from the center of mass, to produce a force acting around the center of the satellites mass, as the center of the satellites rotation. Hence Newtonian mechanics cannot poduce a torsion force within the satellite using gravity.

The satellite problem invalidates the Helio model.

JM

[oxmixmudd]

All this has been explained to Moonbat at least a dozen times in the many threads we've had here on the topic. You might as well try explaining tensor calculus to your cat.

My cat probably would understand it better than John does ...

Jim

Wait ... how did you know I have a cat ...

[oxmixmudd]

Your answer has already been exposed on the Problems with Heliocentrism thread -

Post 5



Post 51Durham university.



As the earth moves about one degree from west to east with respect to the 'fixed' stars, the earth must be twisting relative to the stars by about one degree per day. The change in direction of the earth's face towards the stars over six months is in accord with the difference between the sidereal and solar day as required by the Helio model. The accumulated difference of the direction of the earth's face towards the stars is about 180 degrees over six months.

The above phenomena is well illustrated by the following diagram -

[ATTACH=CONFIG]19945[/ATTACH]

The black arrows in the above diagram provide some indication that the earth twists in space relative to the stars over six months. The black arrows point right, but the dark areas on the earth change from left to right over six months. The dark shaded areas of the earth in the top and bottom pictures, relative to the fixed black arrows indicate a different direction of the earths face relative to the fixed stars over six months.

Notice the night sky in the top picture points to a star field left of the earth, and the in the bottom picture, (six months later) the night sky points to the right of the earth. If a satellite faces the earth in the top picture during the night, the rear of the satellite will face in the same star direction as an observer on the earth. For the same satellite to face the earth six months later, the rear of the satellite must point to a set of stars to the right of the earth.

you sure are a hoot John. Always entertaining.

Jim