| |
Main
Date: 01 Aug 2006 00:14:10
From: stubblef@hotmail.com
Subject: spacial expansion...
|
Could it be that the increase in speed of the ex[pansion of space is
that space itself is expanding and filling the gaps between the star
systems? perhaps as matter moves away from matter the stress on space
causes it to expand? Or could there be areas of space so distant that
we cannot see its matter yet we are seeing the gravitational effect it
has on the matter we do see. Picture a matrix of points in space where
matter is pulled out of nothing, a spotanious series of vacume
fluctuations that result in big bangs... As this matter moves from
its' origen it might slow for a while then as the edges of each
expansion of matter moves closer to the surrounding areas of expanding
matter they would increase again in speed drawn by the matter of the
neighbouring ares of space. Just a thought or three.
Best Regards, Dave S.
evolution is THE constant, all other constants change.
|
|
| |
Date: 01 Aug 2006 05:01:41
From: Kleopatra
Subject: Re: spacial expansion...
|
>
> " The 10th argument,taken from the periodic times, is as follows; the
> apparent movement of the Sun has 365 days which is the mean measure
> between Venus' period of 225 days and Mars' period of 687
> days.Therefore does not the nature of things shout out loud that the
> circuits in which those 365 days are taken up has a mean position
> between the circuits of Mars and Venus around the Sun and thus this is
> not the circuit of the Sun around the Earth -for none of the primary
> planets has its orbit arranged around the Earth,as Brahe admits,but the
> circuit of the Earth around the resting Sun,just as the other
> planets,namely Mars and Venus,complete their own periods by running
> around the Sun."
>
> Johannes Kepler
His third law (a^3 is proportioned to T^2) is by far the best.
RIP Kepler.
Kleo
|
| |
Date: 01 Aug 2006 03:12:19
From: oriel36
Subject: Re: spacial expansion...
|
stubblef@hotmail.com wrote:
> Could it be that the increase in speed of the ex[pansion of space is
> that space itself is expanding and filling the gaps between the star
> systems? perhaps as matter moves away from matter the stress on space
> causes it to expand? Or could there be areas of space so distant that
> we cannot see its matter yet we are seeing the gravitational effect it
> has on the matter we do see. Picture a matrix of points in space where
> matter is pulled out of nothing, a spotanious series of vacume
> fluctuations that result in big bangs... As this matter moves from
> its' origen it might slow for a while then as the edges of each
> expansion of matter moves closer to the surrounding areas of expanding
> matter they would increase again in speed drawn by the matter of the
> neighbouring ares of space. Just a thought or three.
>
>
>
> Best Regards, Dave S.
> evolution is THE constant, all other constants change.
Funny,funny,funny,the epitome of celestial sphere geometry is the
every-valid-point-in-the-expanding-space-universe junk.Here you go,the
dummies misread foreground rotation for accelerating expansion and
never bother to take into account center's of rotation,not the Earth's
axial,heliocentric orbital or galactic orbital rotations.
http://www.opencourse.info/astronomy/introduction/02.motion_stars_sun/celes=
tial_sphere_anim.gif
And all because Isaac thought it would be a good idea to introduce
celestial sphere geometry into heliocentricity along with the notion
that the Sun around the Earth is a valid description.-
PH=C6NOMENON IV.
"That the fixed stars being at rest, the periodic times of the five
primary planets, and (whether of the sun about the earth, or) of the
earth about the sun, are in the sesquiplicate proportion of their mean
distances from the sun." NEWTON
http://members.tripod.com/~gravitee/phaenomena.htm
The whole point of Copernican heliocentricity was the insertion of the
Earth's orbital motion between Venus and Mars and that planetary
heliocentric motion is seen directly from Earth.I call up the actual
description of Kepler which can be contrasted with the blatant fraud
of Newton using the 'periodic times'argument.
What a horrible condition it must be to have the original Keplerian
argument for heliocentricity before you and you opt for a obvious
fraudulent version which has no sense notr meaning to it apart for the
most selfish ends possible.When a person marvels at the easy to
understand reasoning of Kepler,then and only then will they find the
Newtonian version as repugnant as all genuine astronomers should.
Epitome Of Copernican Astronomy by Johannes Kepler
Finally by what arguments do you prove that the centre of the Sun which
is at the midpoint of the planetary spheres and bears their whole
system - does not revolve in some annual movement,as Brahe wishes,but
in accordance with Copernicus sticks immobile in one place,while the
centre of the Earth revolves in an annual movement.
Argument 10
" The 10th argument,taken from the periodic times, is as follows; the
apparent movement of the Sun has 365 days which is the mean measure
between Venus' period of 225 days and Mars' period of 687
days.Therefore does not the nature of things shout out loud that the
circuits in which those 365 days are taken up has a mean position
between the circuits of Mars and Venus around the Sun and thus this is
not the circuit of the Sun around the Earth -for none of the primary
planets has its orbit arranged around the Earth,as Brahe admits,but the
circuit of the Earth around the resting Sun,just as the other
planets,namely Mars and Venus,complete their own periods by running
around the Sun."=20
Johannes Kepler
|
| |
Date: 01 Aug 2006 08:30:53
From: Sam Wormley
Subject: Re: spacial expansion...
|
stubblef@hotmail.com wrote:
> Could it be that the increase in speed of the ex[pansion of space is
> that space itself is expanding and filling the gaps between the star
> systems? perhaps as matter moves away from matter the stress on space
> causes it to expand? Or could there be areas of space so distant that
> we cannot see its matter yet we are seeing the gravitational effect it
> has on the matter we do see. Picture a matrix of points in space where
> matter is pulled out of nothing, a spotanious series of vacume
> fluctuations that result in big bangs... As this matter moves from
> its' origen it might slow for a while then as the edges of each
> expansion of matter moves closer to the surrounding areas of expanding
> matter they would increase again in speed drawn by the matter of the
> neighbouring ares of space. Just a thought or three.
>
>
>
> Best Regards, Dave S.
> evolution is THE constant, all other constants change.
>
No Center
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/nocenter.html
Also see Ned Wright's Cosmology Tutorial
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmology_faq.html
WMAP: Foundations of the Big Bang theory
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni.html
WMAP: Tests of Big Bang Cosmology
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bbtest.html
|
| |
Date: 02 Aug 2006 03:58:54
From: oriel36
Subject: Re: spacial expansion...
|
Kleopatra wrote:
> >
> > " The 10th argument,taken from the periodic times, is as follows; the
> > apparent movement of the Sun has 365 days which is the mean measure
> > between Venus' period of 225 days and Mars' period of 687
> > days.Therefore does not the nature of things shout out loud that the
> > circuits in which those 365 days are taken up has a mean position
> > between the circuits of Mars and Venus around the Sun and thus this is
> > not the circuit of the Sun around the Earth -for none of the primary
> > planets has its orbit arranged around the Earth,as Brahe admits,but the
> > circuit of the Earth around the resting Sun,just as the other
> > planets,namely Mars and Venus,complete their own periods by running
> > around the Sun."
> >
> > Johannes Kepler
>
> His third law (a^3 is proportioned to T^2) is by far the best.
> RIP Kepler.
>
> Kleo
No use spouting equations when the Newtonian geometrical foundation is
both fraudulent and a corruption of Copernican heliocentricity.Dull and
dreary astrophotographers are unlikely to grasp how the Newtonian
mutations differ from the actual Copernican/Keplerian working
principles and they would boring and tedious to those who have no
intelligence,intuitive or intellectual,but I have already taken those
harmless celestial peeping toms into account.
The Keplerian 10th argument for heliocentricity and his refinement
of the original Copernican insight is based on orbital comparisons as
seen from an orbitally moving Earth.,there is no ideological bound law
attached to the Keplerian insight however there is the accurate
working principles for heliocentric astronomy wrapped up in the method
that Newton so badly mangled.
The original Copernican insight and the Keplerian working principles
are based on the plotted positions of the planets against the stellar
background rendered into orbital comparisons as seen from an orbitally
moving Earth.The Panis Quadragesimalis of Kepler (Page 86),the second
greatest astronomical representation after the Copernican heliocentric
arrangement,is explained using the original words of Kepler -
http://mitpress.mit.edu/journals/pdf/POSC_13_1_74_0.pdf
"Copernicus, by attributing a single annual motion to the earth,
entirely rids the planets of these extremely intricate coils [spiris],
leading the individual planets into their respective orbits
[orbitas],quite bare and very nearly circular. In the period of time
shown in the diagram, Mars traverses one and the same orbit as many
times as the 'garlands' [corollas] you see looped towards the centre,
witho ne extra, making nine times, while at the same time the Earth
repeats its circle sixteen times "
KEPLER Astronomia Nova 1609
How many generations have died not knowing how the great astronomers
like Copernicus and Kepler thought ,intimidated by useless equations
which support ridiculous notions that never worked.The orbital
comparisons which can now be easily understood using time lapse footage
were twisted by Newton into a format using mean/Sun Earth distances and
a periodic times argument based on celestial sphere geometry -
"PH=C6NOMENON IV.
That the fixed stars being at rest, the periodic times of the five
primary planets, and (whether of the sun about the earth, or) of the
earth about the sun, are in the sesquiplicate proportion of their mean
distances from the sun. Newton
"The proportion existing between the periodic times of any two planets
is exactly the sesquiplicate proportion of the mean distances of the
orbits, or as generally given,the squares of the periodic times are
proportional to the cubes of the mean distances." Kepler
The original Keplerian view based on orbital comparisons is pure
Copernican thinking when the astronomiccal language becomes
familiar,what anyone makes of the pathetic quasi-geocentric Newtonian
muattion is their own sad business.
Of course,astronomy on this level has little to do with the physical
tools of telescopes,it has to do with intuitive and intellectual
intelligence to discern what is correct and what is not.
|
|
