heliocentric universe

6

Another teeny, tiny, two hundred year old book.
CONVERSATIONS ON THE PLURALITY OF WORLDS, 1809.

‘Fontenelle addresses female readers and suggests that the offered explanation should be easily understood even by those without scientific knowledge. This move has been praised by some modern feminist critics as admitting women’s intelligence in scientific matters’.

One of the most persuasive arguments for the idea that the sun moves around the earth was the complete absence of stellar parallax.

That is, the Ancient Greeks realized that if the earth moves, the stars should appear to change position relative to one another. But this doesn’t happen: they appear absolutely fixed in position.

There are, then, only two possible explanations:

  1. The earth doesn’t move.
  2. The stars are absurdly far away, vastly further away than the earth-sun distance. Which was calculated with reasonable accuracy through trigonometry.

Of course, it turned out to be the latter—but that wasn’t obvious at the time. Though Archimedes considered it a viable theory and uses the volume of the universe under heliocentrism as an example of a really huge number (as Scott Aaronson points out in a great article).

In fact, stellar parallax was not actually discovered—and therefore, in a sense heliocentrism was not fully proven—until 1838. (Of course, Newtonian physics implies that the earth must orbit the sun, but if they had not found the required stellar parallax, there would have been a big problem.)

youtube

Górecki - Symphony no. 2, “Copernican”

The third symphony, “Symphony of Sorrowful Songs” outshines Górecki’s earlier two in popularity. And even though the 1992 recording of the work sold over a million copies, there hasn’t been as much enthusiasm or interest from the more general public to explore the rest of Górecki’s output. I can understand why, to an extent. He was more of an avant-garde figure at first, his name only known to other Polish contemporaries and a few other composers around Europe. And though the third symphony is more complex with thick textures, it’s easy to overlook the “hard” stuff and instead listen to the pretty, Romantic melodies. While his second symphony is barely recorded and never programmed, it is still a fantastic piece of music. Górecki was commissioned by the Polish-American Kościuszko Foundation to commemorate astronomer Nicolas Copernicus’ 500th birthday. Copernicus was the Renaissance astronomer who was credited with formulating the heliocentric model of the universe, and infamously he was denounced by the Catholic Church which upheld Ptolemy’s geocentric, anthropocentric view of the universe. Being an artist, Górecki was less interested in the scientific aspects and was more taken in by the philosophical implications. We used to think we were literally at the center of the universe. This discovery shifted that thought and brought on new existential crises that are now at the center of postmodernism. The work is in two movements: the first is catastrophic, clustered dissonance, reflecting on the cosmic/existential dread of the discovery, and the second is a much calmer meditation, pentatonic melodies, seeking optimism in a trust in god, winding down in a more angelic atmosphere. The chorus, baritone, and soprano sing lines from Psalms 135, 145, 6, and from Copernicus’ book De revolutionibus orbium coelestium:

“Deus, qui fecit caelum et terram. Qui fecit luminaria magna… Solem in potestatem diei. Lunam et stellas in potestatem noctis. Quid autem caelo pulcrius, nempe quod continet pulcra omnia?”

(God, who created the heaven and the earth, who made the great lights, the sun for the power of day, the moon and stars for the power of night. What, indeed, is more beautiful than heaven, which truly contains all beautiful things?)

And though the work is born out of thick tone clusters, it has fewer harsh dissonances than his earlier works, and shows him moving toward a more consonant style. I love this symphony so much because it starts off so harsh, angry, ugly, but the ending is transcendent in comparison, and the coda is a nearly five minute drone of clustered strings in consonance. 

Movements:

1.

2.

The Magical Mythical Force of “Gravity”

In order to justify the assumed globe model, Newton came up with his force of “Gravity” to explain water sticking to and curving around the spinning ball earth.

Like most other mentally stifling ideologies, heliocentrism and globularism relies on self deception and stacking assumption on top of assumption. “Gravity” in this case acts as a sort of mental plaster filler to sandwich together the gaping cracks in the flawed model. The Capital “G” force of “Gravity” for “God” in the sense that “Gravity” works as a “Gravity of the gaps”. It makes the earth orbit the sun, and it makes satellites revolve the earth at precisely the right distance to beam radio waves into your television sets from millions of miles away. In addition to the this, “Gravity” has the power to bend light, squish entire worlds into the size of a molecule, and create new universes. And these same atheistic pseudo-physicists have the audacity to call religious people “superstitious”!

Disprove ‘Gravity’ through simple conditional reasoning, and the whole edifice falls apart. No Gravity, no 'Big Bang’, no black holes, no infinitely expanding universe, no heliocentrism, no Darwinism and no water sticking to, and curving around a spinning pear.

One of the reasons normies are so hostile to flat earthers is because the flat model is not simply a variation on existing physics, but a total rejection of it at the fundemental level. Existing physicists are allowed to debate how the universe sticks together, expands and the precise formations of stars, but they better not stray into the realms of intelligent design or anything that would imply that - An enclosed universe, a stationary earth, or life purposefully and thoughtfully created (instead of being a haphazard, random event) - or they would not last long in tenure. Ordinary people are routinely and willingly duped, and so the existence of someone who does not also buy into the same cartoon McWorld offends their pride.

It is quite easy to disprove “Gravity” as being the force that keeps us stuck to the earth, for the simple fact that air can be lifted by mechanically creating empty space.

It is the nature of a gas to diffuse to fill empty space. Each molecule in the gas is bouncing around independently off other particles and moving around with increased temperature as it carries more energy.

We are told that “Gravity” prevents air diffusing into space. But, when we create an empty space here on earth, the air diffuses into it.

How is this possible? How is it that a constant downward force, created by the earths mass, can pull an air molecule away from the vacuum of “space” at high altitude, but at the earths surface, air immediately fills a vacuum and gravity is powerless to prevent it diffusing into empty space?

Not only this, but atmospheric pressure of 14.7 Psi (which works out at nearly 10 tonne per square metre) can be used to lift immense weight, simply by using a suction cup and vacuum pump.

With “Gravity” turned on, a vacuum lift would never work, because the constant downward force of gravity would pull the air molecules away from the empty space and towards the earths surface.

The presence of a vacuum would not move air molecules an inch, as “Gravity” is already pulling them away from a vacuum.

The only way to rationalise this - barring circular logic of, 'gravity pulls air away from a vacuum, which means objects can be lifted by air defeating gravity and trying to diffuse into a vacuum’ - is to say that “Gravity” gets stronger the further one goes from earth, so it is stronger at the boundary to space, but weaker at the earths surface.

Clearly this is nonsense. The easily demonstrable nature of gases, pressure and the failure of “Gravity” tells us one thing: Our cosmos is limited and enclosed, allowing us to live and move freely in a pressurised environment.

Copernicus says “Notice that, in fact, the sun is the center of the universe!” and Feliks “What? That’s impossible. You cannot be serious, Mikołaj, everyone knows that Earth, more precisely Poland, is the center of the universe.”

Nicolaus Copernicus (Polish: Mikołaj Kopernik; 19 February 1473 – 24 May 1543) was a Renaissance mathematician and astronomer who formulated a model of the universe that placed the Sun rather than the Earth at the center of the universe (Heliocentrism). (…) Copernicus was born and died in Royal Prussia, a region that had been a part of the Kingdom of Poland since 1466. He was a polyglot and polymath who obtained a doctorate in canon law and also practiced as a physician, classics scholar, translator, governor, diplomat, and economist (Wikipedia).

Nicolaus Copernicus (1473-1543)

The father of Heleocentrism, who died almost immediately after the publication of his book “on the revolutions of these heavenly spheres”. His death is cause for a little curiosity due to the fact that the catholic church openly opposed his work as it was against much of what they taught at the time(the earth was said to be the center of the known universe). Oh well, Galileo proved he was right with a telescope so suck it I guess.