11
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 567:
Line 567: + + + + + + + + +
Talk:Geocentric theory (view source)
Revision as of 19:51, December 21, 2016
, 19:51, December 21, 2016reply
# You talk about one of my equations being wrong, which one is it? (it might be that mistake with speed at full moon that I made and should have corrected)
# You talk about one of my equations being wrong, which one is it? (it might be that mistake with speed at full moon that I made and should have corrected)
# Also could you say why my energy argument is wrong, you haven't responded to that. [[User:PeterIceHockey|PeterIceHockey]] ([[User talk:PeterIceHockey|talk]]) 08:07, 17 December 2016 (EST)
# Also could you say why my energy argument is wrong, you haven't responded to that. [[User:PeterIceHockey|PeterIceHockey]] ([[User talk:PeterIceHockey|talk]]) 08:07, 17 December 2016 (EST)
Let me reply to these now.
1) "In short, we disagree because you think the speed of the moon is constant in the sun's frame of reference, and I believe it is constant in the earth's frame of reference."
Exactly. Please read my simple explanation with the cars traveling around a racetrack. This dynamic is nothing unique to the Earth and moon, but to any object which must orbit another object already in motion (in the same model as the moon orbits the Earth in which the orbiting object must orbit in the direction of travel of the orbited object)
2) Because at first and last quarter moon phases the observers on Earth have the same frame of reference as the sun would during the full moon phase. Those frames of reference reveal the constant SPEED of the moon (see simplified explanation again)
3) The Kepler equations and theory are not relevant or necessary to explain or understand this inconsistency. I really think we're muddying the water here. We aren't looking for small speed changes due to gravitational pull, etc. This goes to your last question as well, about why Vac=Vab+Vbc must be applied when the moon is in the full moon phase. That is the position where directions of travel allow the equation to work. It is also the point which reveals the slowest speed the orbiting object may travel and still overtake the orbited object. If the relative velocity of the moon were taken to be 2,288 MPH (or anything even close to that) at any of the other 3 major moon phase positions, it would not have enough speed to overtake the Earth. Frame of reference - see simplified explanation.
4) Just like Heliocentrism which has been engineered so it cannot be tested or proven, the escape velocity theory is the same thing. There is no proof of it, there can never be any experiment or proof of it, so we are left with equations as evidence which got us into this mess in the first place. It also discounts the possibility the Earth is motionless and the sun and moon are in motion. Maybe it is true, but I'm talking about superior empirical evidence which can be seen with our eyes and measured with math. The energy theory is just that, a theory based on estimates, based on calculations, based on other theories, based on guesses. It is the same as saying the Geocentric model cannot be correct because a rabid Heliocentrist invented a special relativity theory to explain away the failure of an actual experiment to detect Earth's motion. Another similar argument is everything is so far away from Earth, the speeds, if it all had to rotate around the Earth, would be impossible to achieve. However this supposes the speed of light is limited, and calls for knowing how far away "everything" is. I don't accept either premise, and I certainly place more weight on experiments over equations. Anyone can create a model then work out equations to show speeds, velocities and distances. That doesn't make it true.
Lastly, I'm not reposting this. If someone else here wants to at some point, that's fine. I don't believe no one else understand this glaring inconsistency.
==References==
==References==