World, Writing, Wealth discussion
The Lounge: Chat. Relax. Unwind.
>
Can sun be orbiting the Earth after all? -:)
date
newest »
newest »
message 51:
by
Nik
(new)
Apr 23, 2021 08:28AM
Seeing such a sharp division over corona, vaccination and the growing dimension of believers in conspiracies of all colors, I'm surprised heliocentric theory still somewhat holds. But maybe we shouldn't be so sure? :)
reply
|
flag
I think it will hold. What you may not realize is the mathematics of the alternative epicycle theory are much more difficult, and general sloth and laziness will prevent a return to that :-)
Good to know. I thought all one needed was a lift of an elephant multiplied by the number of them to bear the flat earth of needed dimension (you can move them, if you want some pieces like China to crumble) + reasonable replacement for a three shifts work :)
All motion is relative. The sun rotating around the earth is just as true as the earth rotating around the sun. But the heliocentric model is simpler and more realistic. In the earthcentric model. planets like Mars have retrograde movements (travel baclwards) which doesn't actually happen. For explorers traveling from Earth to Mars, the red planet only moves in one direction.
In the Earth-centric model, all you do is put the frame of reference around a non-rotating Earth - which ends up by requiring the frame of reference to be essentially rotating. You can do that, but the maths are terrible.Of course, the maths are not that easy for the heliocentric model either because we have both rotating about a centre of mass for the whole planetary system with interactions between all the planets, and a particularly complicated correction for Mercury. There is no analytical solution. But the simple fixed sun is a very good approximation.
I still think of the sun as rising in the east and setting in the west, although I know it isn't so. I'm earth-centric.
Scout, you are using relativity, and you observe in your frame of reference. It would be more confusing on Mars because the sun rises in the east, and like our moon, its moon Phobos goes around the planet the same way, but it rises in the West and sets in the east. That is because it is closer and goes faster. Both head in an eastward direction, but it takes our moon 28 days to go around, so the earth's rotation is a lot faster and the moon seems to rise in the east. On mars, Phobos goes around (from memory) in roughly four hours, so it goes faster than the planet's rotation. There is relativity at work.
The last I looked. Hold on, let me go outside and check. Yup, the sun still revolves around me. ;)
That warm, bright thing we see from the window might just be an alien surveillance drone disguised as a celestial body :)
Nik wrote: "That warm, bright thing we see from the window might just be an alien surveillance drone disguised as a celestial body :)"No, the Moon is the alien object looming over our heads.
https://youtu.be/3bUUXFuOvfo
The "History" Channel...
J. wrote: "No, the Moon is the alien object looming over our heads.https://youtu.be/3bUUXFuOvfo
The "History" Channel......"
Then, the Moon too :) Interesting stuff! Never heard about reverberations b4. Hope Ian would elect to offer an explanation.
Nik, my explanation: youtube a strong source of rubbish is :-)
People who go for conspiracy theories and pseudoscience are either ignorant or have ego issues — they want to be "in the know", the "elite", the "insiders who know the real truth" etc.
Ian wrote: "Nik, my explanation: youtube a strong source of rubbish is :-)"1.) The clip was hosted on YouTube, but it was originally produced for cable TV, hence my "History" Channel joke.
2.) Luna did ring, as recounted and explained in this article from Popular Science: https://www.popsci.com/does-moon-soun... The Ancient Aliens crowd just ignored, omitted, and/or exaggerated the parts which didn't fit their narrative.
Ray wrote: "People who go for conspiracy theories and pseudoscience are either ignorant or have ego issues — they want to be "in the know", the "elite", the "insiders who know the real truth" etc."You're omitting the third position. Disturbing as it is, some of these conspiracy theories turn out to be true. In a nation that had to apologize for the Tuskegee Experiment and in which the CIA has been repeatedly caught doing horrific things to the people that they are meant to protect, paranoia is not unfounded.
But advocating/inventing conspiracy theories to support pseudoscience doesn't make the pseudoscience any more legitimate.And let's be honest, some of these conspiracy theories are total b.s., like a government conspiracy to make everyone think the Earth is round, turning people away from the "ice wall" with soldiers, etc.
It's just more ego pandering so people can think "At least I'm not one of the sheeple ha ha."
I had a friend who moved to Belize in 1990 because he was sure Western civilization was going to implode. Well, he's in his 80's now, still waiting, still spouting his crackpot theories. I now see he's just an egomaniac who craved recognition for his "great" ideas and work but never got it, so he chose to think everyone else was wrong. He was a capable mechanic who wanted to be more than average but never bothered to do the real work necessary. He wasted all his time instead telling everyone "this is how things really are in the world blah blah blah and this is what I would do blah blah" but he never did enough work to impress anyone or prove his words.
J. said, "Disturbing as it is, some of these conspiracy theories turn out to be true." That's a fact, so if you discount '"conspiracy theories" out of hand and trust the government in all things, you may be just as wacky as those who have a healthy distrust of all things government.
Yes, but while some conspiracy theories do turn out to be true, those ones usually have a sort of strain of sense running through them, if you can see it. For example, if you take the JFK assassination, the conspiracy theory is Oswald did not make the shot because it would have required sniper-grade shooting and Oswald was not good enough. I am not saying that is true, but at least you can see a strain of sense, not helped by Oswald being shot so soon after. If Oswald did make the shot, Kennedy could be regarded as unlucky, and that is probably the truth of the matter, but you can see how the theory arises. On the other hand, if you take the one that Armstrong never went to the moon and it was all shot in a shed in Arizona, or somewhere else, then you need some sort of evidence.
The primitive transparency grows with all those cameras everywhere and invasion of privacy through our computers and cell phones, however the degree of "hidden" agendas and conspiracies hardly diminishes, maybe grows too with new opportunities, like floating fake conspiracies, availed by social networks. On the other hand, most of them may be a nice thing to toy with, but otherwise have little practical meaning either because it doesn't directly involve us or because we can do little about it anyway - like whether Arms landed on the moon or in Arizona :)
It probably gives some people a thrill to make up some conspiracy theory and if it takes on it will be like writing a best seller.
I don't trust the government. If I'm considered a conspiracy theorist, so be it. But I'm going to question the government's actions. There's just too much incentive for dishonesty.
You don't need to be a conspiracy theorist to distrust Governments. All you have to do is look at the behaviour of politicians
