Gab@StFerdinandIII - https://unstabbinated.substack.com/
Plenty of cults exist - every cult has its 'religious dogma', its idols, its 'prophets', its 'science', its 'proof' and its intolerant liturgy of demands. Cults everywhere: Corona, 'The Science' or Scientism, Islam, the State, the cult of Gender Fascism, Marxism, Darwin and Evolution, Globaloneywarming, Changing Climate, Abortion...
Tempus Fugit Memento Mori - Time Flies Remember Death
The speed of light is variant. Light speed for the receiver (Earth) is not constant. There is also the vector radiation of light and energy which does not conform to the simple model of Relativity. NASA and space agencies used a fixed Earth (ECI or Earth Centred Inertial) in their software and calculations for satellites, probes and instrumentation. They don’t use ‘heliocentricity’.
As with so much of ‘the science’, ChatGPT or OpenAI replies related to scientific questions do not necessarily provide truth or reality. Questions about Global Positioing Systems (GPS) or geo-synchronous satellites are an example. Neither proves the Earth’s alleged Copernican motion, nor Einsteinian Relativity. Quite the opposite. They highlight the issues with Newtonian and Einsteinian physics. More here
In the last post we discussed stellar ‘parallax’ and why it does not prove heliocentricity and in fact completely upends planetary distance calculations from the Earth along with many other ‘modern scientific’ assumptions in astro-physics.
Related to the parallax is ‘stellar aberration’, which has been offered as a proof for heliocentrism since perhaps the early 17th century. Aberration is generally the first ‘observational proof’ of Copernicanism, given some 70-200 years after the theory was proposed by the confused Copernicus depending on who you believe. Pieroni, a Catholic astronomer who was friends with the self-promoter Galileo and Kepler the conniver, is sometimes credited with this ‘discovery’ in the early 17th century, though invention is a better description, given the poor calibration of the telescopes used in that era.
In the modern era ‘aberration’ was invented by James Bradley in 1725 though the dates vary from 1724-1729 depending on the source. Floating down the Thames, Bradley attempted to find a stellar parallax (Busch, 1838) but instead created his own aberration based on observations of the Draco or Dragon constellation (which apparently has not changed in its relationship with the Earth over 3500 years and through 1.8 Trillion miles of Earth movement!). Bradley found nothing as outlined below and fraudulently ‘recorded’ a fringe shift of light displacement 2 times the observable size. More here
In a previous post we discussed the many experiments which could find no movement of the Earth through the ‘aether’ (now called ‘dark matter’), or Einstein’s fictitious ‘vacuum’ of space (now defined as a ‘lack of energy’). These are never taught. In schools we are told that the stellar ‘parallax’ ‘proved’ that the Earth is moving. The German astronomer Bessel in 1838, is usually credited with this ‘discovery’. It is logical to maybe pause and summarise why such claims regarding parallax are also false.
Geo-centrists from the time of Tycho Brahe, had referenced the lack of a parallax to prove immobility. There is still a lack of parallax today, given how small the effect is, how negative parallax is as common as ‘positive parallax’, how few stars are affected and how different non-Copernican models can explain such an effect (below).
We should keep in mind a few things. The first is that the confused Copernicus whose effort was largely philosophical, not mechanical, combined different models including the Platonic and Pythagorean, to justify heliocentricity. He offered no proofs, his book ‘The Revolutions’ being infilled with plagiarised ancient Greek astronomical tables from Rhodes and Halicarnassus.
How is it possible that after some 1 trillion miles of Earth travel in ‘space’, ancient astrological maps would still be applicable to someone in the 16th century? Never discussed.
A simple reason why parallax failed to convince anyone is that such ‘evidence’ does not support Copernicanism. The proof for this statement is that by the 1890s, Relativity was the only possible recourse left for Copernicans to support heliocentricity. In other words, if parallax was so convincing and definitive a proof for Copernicanism (or Foucault’s ridiculous pendulum experiment), that would have been that.
More here