|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Contending with structural astrologers
Brian Tung wrote -
However, strictly speaking, your niece is correct: You *can* arrange things so that the Earth is at the center of the universe. You can even arrange things so that you, personally, are at the center of the universe, even when you are spinning around. In order to so arrange it, though, you must set the Einsteinian tensor fields to something wholly ungainly. The universe is much simpler when you or the Earth are not at its center. Maybe people can now understand why the majority of people on the game show (52 %) believe that the Sun orbits the Earth - http://www.maniacworld.com/pitiful-a...game-show.html What it takes to smash the reasoning of Brian here and his colleagues I do not know,it cannot be good for humanity let alone astronomy. Brian finds the niece correct in some way and that should be frightening for reasonable people insofar as when Copernicus reasones how the Earth has an axial rotation and an orbital motion it should have ended any trace of geocentricity.No doubt Brian revels in the ability to say something perverse without objection but that may the only thing he has going for him,the ability to turn logic on its head . |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Contending with structural astrologers
On Jul 12, 12:17 pm, oriel36 wrote:
Brian finds the niece correct in some way and that should be frightening for reasonable people But he admits that Occam's razor makes the niece less correct than wrong, so he is not wholly unreasonable. I'll have to admit I didn't think that even General Relativity was that relative myself; while at a point, gravity and acceleration are equivalent, some structures of space-time must be produced by acceleration, and some by gravitation. Thus, the Principle of Equivalence doesn't make it impossible to distinguish between gravity and acceleration. Of course, even in Newtonian physics, one could imagine a universe in which the Earth does not need to revolve around the Sun, because some mysterious force keeps the Earth from falling into the Sun - and the distant stars from flying away - but that in no way makes Tycho Brahe "correct in some way". Einstein did not open up this door to chaos for astronomy. John Savard |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Structural and dynamical guidelines for discussion | oriel36[_2_] | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | May 27th 08 11:29 AM |
Structural and dynamic guidelines | oriel36[_2_] | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | May 27th 08 11:15 AM |
mercury capsule - structural drawings? | Tater Schuld | History | 0 | February 1st 06 07:14 PM |
NEED: Structural Dynamics Engineers | George Ellis | Technology | 0 | February 11th 04 03:33 PM |
X-37 technology demonstrator completes structural tests | Joseph S. Powell, III | Policy | 1 | July 27th 03 03:53 PM |