Monday, August 22, 2022

Heliocentrism : still not proven

Heliocentrism : still not proven · Sam Harris, Allie, Me and Cosmic Distances · No, Geocentrism with Angelic Movement is Not what CMI Classifies as God of the Gaps Fallacy

Who proved that the Earth revolves around the Sun?

Hans-Georg Lundahl
amateur reader of it [of science]
Aug 3 [2022]

Unsuccessful candidates : Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, Euler.

Do you know the proof Euler gave in an educational letter to a Prussian Princess?

“Jeder Fixstern scheint dazu bestimmt eine gewisse Anzahl von Körpern zu erleuchten und zu wärmen, die unserer Erde ähnlich sind und ohne Zweifel wie diese bewohnt sind …”

Translation : Each fix star seems to be meant to enlighten and warm up a certain number of bodies, which are similar to our Earth and without doubt are inhabited like this.

And it would be curious if all the inhabitants of Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Kepler 452b were in an illusion when thinking their planet was the centre of the universe, while we on Earth were the only ones not in illusion about that.

Besides, “Newton has proved that that is how it works physically” - meaning he is accepting only inertia and gravitation as moving factors for things this size, freewilled actions (like angels moving planets) are excluded, and were probably not even on Euler’s radar anymore.

Counterquestion : who has proved that the Earth does not move? Albert A. Michelson and Edward W. Morley - see

Michelson–Morley experiment
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bob Myers
Wed 17.VIII.2022
So you don’t believe that at this point, the fact that the Earth orbits the Sun has been proven through direct observation?

Hans-Georg Lundahl
When did you go in Starship Enterprise to another galaxy and observe Earth and Sun from there?

Observation from any of the involved bodies will give directly the relative movements, but will NOT prove which is the one moving or whether both move and if so which one is moving most.

Your question is fairly naive as to optics and epistemology of observations.

Bob Myers
You do realize that we have sent several probes to the outer system by now, right? And not only have those looked back to the inner system, the missions themselves would not even have been possible if we did not possess a fairly detailed and correct understanding of the motions of all the bodies involved.

I’m sorry, but despite your demonstration of at least some grasp of terms such as “epistemology,” your answer remains abjectly ignorant.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
“And not only have those looked back to the inner system,”

Some, not much. Their cameras are turned off and have mostly been turned on the stars they are looking at.

“ if we did not possess a fairly detailed and correct understanding of the motions of all the bodies involved.”

Relative movements are adequate. Which movements are absolute and which ones are illusions (optical, for instance) is much less important.

No comments: