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
“Too often students believe that Moses, or rather Newton or Einstein, came down from a physical Mt. Sinai with his laws engraved on tablets of stone.”
(Ronald Newburgh, “Inertial forces, absolute space, and Mach’s principle: The genesis of relativity,” American Journal of Physics, 75(5), May 2007, p. 427).
Yes Ronald. Not from Mount Sinai, but rather from Mount ‘The Science’.
We have discussed the fundamental importance of the invariance of light speed for modern cosmology and astrophysics. The ‘unchanging’ velocity of light is prophesied to be rather precisely, 186.000 miles per second. This is wrong as many posts have outlined. Literally tens of thousands of experiments have disproven this gnostic dogma, including the famous Michelson-Morley light interference observations of 1887, Sagnac in 1913, and Dayton Miller during the 1920s and 30s. This is never taught.
Ironically, the standard model of ‘The Science’ already admits that light speed is variable.
The Big Bang creation event assumes a light speed more than a trillion billion times faster than the current invariant calculation. The fraud of the merged space-time dimension ineluctably leads to a variation in light speed given the dynamics of gravitational waves and attractions within this merged dimension. In other words, the tautological calculus of Einstein, hangs his own theory, by its own petard.
As usual, ‘The Science’ is all over the place like a drunken Irishman on a Friday night in Dublin. More here
“...the quasars in the 57 groups...are arranged on 57 spherical shells with the Earth as the center. The cosmological interpretation of the redshift in the spectra of quasars leads to yet another paradoxical result: namely, that the Earth is the center of the universe.”
(Y.P. Varshni, astronomer, in, The Red Shift Hypothesis for Quasars: Is the Earth the Center of the Universe?” Astrophysics and Space Science, 43: (1), (1976), p. 3)
Quasars have always been a problem for the Big Bang theology. As Varshni stated, quasar phenomena support geocentricity. Few know about Varshni or quasar data. Gamma rays also present the same problem for the Bangers. This planet sits in a protective void. I am sure you were taught this at ‘school’.
In the 1960s radio telescopes were deployed and found traces of radio wave transmission from outside our solar system. Optical telescopes were then built and pointed in the direction of these radio waves. The optical scopes found faint points of light, which were named ‘quasi-stellar radio sources’, or ‘quasars’. It was a fascinating discovery. More here
“The gyroscope is rotationally at rest relative to the inertial frames in its neighborhood. It and the local inertial frames rotate relative to the distant galaxies with the angular velocity Ω because the Earth’s rotation “drags” the local inertial frames along with it.
Notice that near the north and south poles the local inertial frames rotate in the same direction as the Earth does (Ω parallel to J), but near the equator they rotate in the opposite direction (Ω antiparallel to J; compare Ω with the magnetic field of the Earth!).” (Martin Selbrede, “Geocentricity’s Critics Refuse to Do Their Homework,” The Chalcedon Report, 1994, p. 11)
We have discussed how geocentricity could be valid. The above quote opens another door to this possibility – fluid dynamics. Relativity is false, but even using their own theorems, there is nothing within Relativity which precludes geocentricity. Indeed, ‘The’ Einstein’s scientism is more supportive of geocentricity than heliocentricity.
Let’s have a gander at fluid dynamics and the use of General Relativity.
First, we must understand that space is not a ‘vacuum’, it is not empty, but is suffused with materiality, which in previous centuries was named the ‘aether’. This substack has many posts on why the aether exists and how this (yet again) disproves the Einstotle’s philosophy.
Second, if we view Tychonism or geocentricity, this aether medium is carried with the universe as it rotates around the Earth. What we don’t know is if this aether ‘drags’ on the Earth’s surface and forces the Earth to rotate. As other posts have outlined, the answer could be no.
Relativists themselves do not believe in an aether (aether-denialism) and thereby do not support the forced rotation of this planet by such forces. We can now use this precept to see if geocentricity is possible. More here
