Problems with Heliocentrism

[klaus54]

So you think. Do those Geostationary satellites move along with the changing earth's v in space? The earth's velocity change is +-3,600 km/hr over about every 3 months. Jet thrusters don't account for the v change. What then does? Gravity doesn't work either. The Geostationary satellites are strong evidence for a stationary earth.

JM

Personally incredulity is not evidence.

[klaus54]

Yes, they do. They're in orbit around the Sun just like the Earth. The have the same average acceleration toward the Sun. And they orbit the Earth at the same time.

And if the Earth is fixed in space, the geosynchronous satellites could not be in orbit around the Earth, since they have to maintain a position above a fixed point on Earth. They would fall down.

But not with the ad hoc notion of Magick Sticky Aether.

[Yttrium]

But not with the ad hoc notion of Magick Sticky Aether.

So we calculate a launch and orbit based on heliocentrism, then God notices we're doing it wrong and helps us out by grabbing the satellites and placing them in the Magick Sticky Aether correctly. Sure, why not.

[klaus54]

I don't think so. You ignored the rebuttal and carried on anyway.

JM

You gave no rebuttal.

How does a gravimeter detect ore deposits and deep valley glacial till if Newtonian gravity is a fib?

Answer or link to the post where you claimed to answer.

[klaus54]

So we calculate a launch and orbit based on heliocentrism, then God notices we're doing it wrong and helps us out by grabbing the satellites and placing them in the Magick Sticky Aether correctly. Sure, why not.

Actually MSA would save a helluva lot of rocket fuel. Just launch vertically and wait for the sticky stuff to grab on.

[JohnMartin]

Yes, they do. They're in orbit around the Sun just like the Earth. The have the same average acceleration toward the Sun. And they orbit the Earth at the same time.

And if the Earth is fixed in space, the geosynchronous satellites could not be in orbit around the Earth, since they have to maintain a position above a fixed point on Earth. They would fall down.

"They have the same average acceleration toward the Sun" is a false solution because there is no force to cause the satellite to move with the earth's change in v. The real answer is the geosynchronous satellites stay above the earth because the earth's v does not change. It does not change because it is always zero.

The Helios say the geosynchronous satellites orbit the rotating earth, but avoid speaking about the earth's change in v and d around the sun. The problem is ignored because the problem cannot be solved.

JM

[JohnMartin]

Every place on Earth is less than 0.004 degree off the ecliptic.

Arctan(8000/93000000)

Geo/FE/whatever nutism you believe is invalidated.

That small angle means the sun should be seen from the balloons within that angle. The recent photos show this is not so. Hence Helio is invalidated. Thanks for affirming the proof.

JM

[Yttrium]

"They have the same average acceleration toward the Sun" is a false solution because there is no force to cause the satellite to move with the earth's change in v.

The force is the Sun's gravity. If you disbelieve in gravity, that's your problem. It works fine for most everybody else.

[JohnMartin]

So we calculate a launch and orbit based on heliocentrism, then God notices we're doing it wrong and helps us out by grabbing the satellites and placing them in the Magick Sticky Aether correctly. Sure, why not.

God thinks we can ignore the earth's change in v and d around the sun and think the satellites move along with the earth regardless.

JM

[JohnMartin]

You gave no rebuttal.

How does a gravimeter detect ore deposits and deep valley glacial till if Newtonian gravity is a fib?

Answer or link to the post where you claimed to answer.

Look it up yourself. This discussion is off topic.

JM

[JohnMartin]

The force is the Sun's gravity. If you disbelieve in gravity, that's your problem. It works fine for most everybody else.

The sun's gravity doesn't provide the force required. This has been discussed at length on this thread already.

JM

[Yttrium]

The sun's gravity doesn't provide the force required. This has been discussed at length on this thread already.

Yes, it has been discussed many times. you simply keep denying it, which is silly. Everything in Earth's planetary system is in the same orbit around the Sun. Because of the Sun's gravity. It's all the same elliptic orbit, with the same velocity changes.

[JohnMartin]

Yes, it has been discussed many times. you simply keep denying it, which is silly. Everything in Earth's planetary system is in the same orbit around the Sun. Because of the Sun's gravity. It's all the same elliptic orbit, with the same velocity changes.

I don't deny the solutions proposed. I have answered them all. The problem remains. You lot keep singing the gravity mantra, even though the sun has little to do with the answer.

JM

[JohnMartin]

Another Problem with Heliocentrism - The new moon is shown as a dark moon surface at night facing the earth. If the moon is between the sun and earth, why don't we see a dark moon spot in the day sky at new moon?

JM

[klaus54]

That small angle means the sun should be seen from the balloons within that angle. The recent photos show this is not so. Hence Helio is invalidated. Thanks for affirming the proof.

JM

???

No. It means the angle to the horizon depends only the balloon's elevation not the position of the Sun (apart from it's position change due to Earth's diurnal rotation.)