New Geocentrist Blunder

Neither do we.But we get used to it in a few hours and so do bees.See NASA Challenger STS-41C, April 1984

Gravity effects from the earth only to a first order approximation. Satelites are essentially outside of the earth's atmosphere and close enough to the earth so that earth so that earth's gravity is dominant. A geostationary orbit is just an orbit in the plane of the equator with a period of 1 day. A circular orbit of 22,200 miles will work.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Sure but a satellite has to get to that location - fair enough - then get to the speed required to orbit in order to be geostationary, then maintain it over time. My question is how does it get up to that speed? Perhaps the delivery vehicle delivers that also, then vacuum does the rest plus onboard propulsion does the tweaking?

I think you've answered your own question here.Yes the delivery vehicle gives it to the proper height and the required speed. Inertia then keeps the vehicle in the proper orbit with some tweaking required cause of the near vacuum. The orbit needs tweaking primarily because of gravity perturbations from moon and sun, maybe also some effect from the solar wind and the earth not being a perfect sphere. I think only a few tweaks per year are needed to keep satellites in a proper orbit.To first order though, the moon's gravitational perturbations are cyclic and cancel out over monthly cycles. I just wanted to make it clear that there wasn't any special earth/moon/sun gravity thing that helped out. You can calculate the orbital distance and the required speed for a circular orbit from the mass of the earth alone.

I've often thought it would be great fun to watch a geocentrist try to explain geostationary satellites. Apparently there's a certain height above the Earth were things will just sit still if you put them there, OK, fair enough. But then you have to think about the rocket that gets it there --- it attains all that lateral velocity so that ... when you release the satellite, it stays in one place?

Absolutely.I have to admit that today is the first time I'd ever given geocentrists much thought. My impression is that to be a geocentrist, you've already bought into a bunch of really silly physics that is way more fun to pick at than is your belief that the earth is stationary.I'm sure a geocentrist could manage the task you describe here, and I'm also sure I'd be rolling on the floor laughing at the video.

We had one here last year ... Smooth Operator (see Relativity is wrong...)I also found an old thread GeocentrismEnjoy

this series is extremely informative on the topics of how we know certain things from astronomy. i highly recommend watching all of it.

Thanks for this one. I remember that someone posted something similar to this on Geosentric "Science" some time ago. It was the first time I ever heard of it and Googling it gave me a lot of pleasure. I really laughed. maybe out of embarrassment that some people can be that stupid? Even guys with PhD's in Cosmology were involved. The "Leader" had a PhD in Cosmology from some American UniversityI Googled it again. Laughed just as much. Those Amcans can be crazy!But, I remember that one of the recent Presidents of the Flat Earth Society was a national of my country. Some of us are just as crazy as some of you guys are. Sigh.

Page not found - Americans United

quote:

---

Self-Centered: ‘Geocentrist’ Movie To Get Limited Theatrical Release

​

Last April, I wrote about a bunch of cranks who believe that the Earth is the center of the universe. These so-called geocentrists are extreme Roman Catholics who believe that Copernicus and Galileo were wrong to promote the heliocentric model of the universe.

​

Somehow these zealots scraped up a pot of money and produced a fancy, CGI-laden documentary called The Principle, which in the spring of 2014 they claimed would appear in theaters soon.
The film didn’t appear, but the matter attracted some attention because The Principle is narrated by Kate Mulgrew, an actress who played Capt. Kathryn Janeway on Star Trek: Voyager and later appeared as Galina Reznikov on the popular Netflix series Orange is the New Black. The film also features interviews with actual scientists like Lawrence Krauss, Michio Kaku and others.

​

Mulgrew felt compelled to issue a statement affirming her belief in the heliocentric universe, and Krauss and some of the other scientists said they had no idea the documentary was about geocentrism when they were asked to take part.

​

I figured that was the end of it, but late last night I received a press release via email with big news: The Principle will play in selected theaters Jan. 23!

---

So these people quote-mined the scientists (see trailer via link) to provide pseudo-evidence for their beliefs ... just as we see creationists quote-mining scientists to pervert what they say into pseudo-evidence for their beliefs ...Curiously I wonder what the creationists will say ...Enjoy

Has anyone seen this? I cannot find it anywhere. Was it shown in any US theaters?

Three theatres two in Southern Cali and one in Spokane.
In Theaters - The Principle

Spokane? Interesting choice. Maybe because it's close to the really loony part of Idaho. The Sensuous Curmudgeon had an interesting bit on the movie.KP

Hi everybody. I’mmmm Baaaack!Actually, Aristotle was (one of) the first to put this argument forward. The Greeks of his time had determined that the earth is a sphere and were even able to cleverly measure its diameter to within 10 percent. Ari thus knew that if the earth were rotating at a rate to cause the apparent motion of the stars that the earth’s velocity at Athen’s latitude would be about 900 miles per hour (for Faith, that would be about 650 cubits per second). He then argued that if you dropped a rock from the top of the Parthenon, in the approximately two seconds it took to hit the ground Athens would have moved to the east about half a mile and the rock would appear to land about half a mile to the west. Of course, when Aristotle performed this experiment, the rock fell straight down to the base of the Parthenon. Unfortunately, Aristotle’s fellow philosopher, Newtonicles happened to be standing at the base at the time. Newtonicles could have used this observation to derive the universal law of gravitation if he had not been left in a persistent vegetative state by the incident.Interestingly, if you want to test for the rotation of the earth about a north-south axis, you don’t fly east or west. You fly north or south! If the earth is rotating, you will have to veer slightly to the east or west, respectively to stay on course due to the Coriolis effect. I won’t try to explain this effect since googling on it will get several clear explanations with nice graphics and also explain why this isn’t the reason water forms whirlpools when draining out of tubs and sinks. This effect, due entirely to the earth’s rotation, is also the cause of hurricanes and cyclones and explains why those weather structures rotate CCW in the northern hemisphere and CW in the southern hemisphere. (In case you think I have these backwards, note that I didn’t specify whether you were on your back looking up or floating in the ionosphere looking down.) So, the existence of hurricanes/cyclones proves the rotation of the earth!It would also be nice to keep the terminology straight. The earth does not rotate or revolve around the sun. The earth rotates/revolves about its axis. It orbits around the sun. Even in a geocentric model of the universe, the earth could rotate about its axis resulting in the apparent motion of the stars.At any rate, any question about the earth’s rotation was put to rest in 1851 with the demonstration of the Foucault pendulum (q. g.:quid googelay), which effectively acts like a gyroscope that remains stationary while the earth rotates beneath it. (When His Holiness Pope Pius IX saw this demonstration he exclaimed: Well, doesn’t this just fuck all!, which was mistranslated into the French name the pendulum apparatus now bears.)One thing that always amazes me is how long it took humankind to arrive at the concept of momentum and its conservation. We were using momentum to throw all kinds of crap, including crap, at each other for millennia before Galileo started sliding stuff down ramps and inclines and making the detailed measurements that led to the understanding of momentum and its importance - and also quite literally starting the slipery slope to the demise of religion. I think this prolonged awkward stumbling towards reality tells more about our struggle with epistemology than all the philosophers in all the gin joints in all the towns in the world.

Thank you. It was really Aristotle that inspired the Roman Church and was the cause of the persecution of Galileo, not the Bible, although I'm sure they tried to put it all together as if the Bible said the same thing, which it doesn't. The RCC followed Aristotle far more than the Bible, and in fact continues in some cases to teach Aristotle to new priests, according to Irish ex-priest Richard Bennett who says that's what he was taught, and he had to learn the Bible on his own.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.