Re: Galactic images
- From: oriel36 <kelleher.gerald@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 4 May 2008 08:19:57 -0700 (PDT)
On May 4, 5:03 am, James <wimpyVO2...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Apr 25, 7:51 am, oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
After looking at the images and putting them into a broad context,the
same people will t talk about the expanding space and galaxies flying
apart from each other in order to satisfy a seperate empirical agenda
of the 'big bang'.
Colliding galaxies do not contradict big bang theory. Physics and
observations support the "lumpiness" we see. Physics predict that
shortly after the singularity exploded, the cloud of matter underwent
numerous nuclear and chemical reactions, and the equations predict a
non-uniform distribution of matter. This is what we see in the distant
background radiation -- it's lumpy, not uniform.
I truly believe that if people turned their direction towards the
historical,techincal,and yes,the theological background which saw the
emergence of heliocentric reasoning then they would be better served
than arguing for or against cosmological evolution via the current
'big bang' notion.The original arguments are based on obviating the
requirement that the Earth is the center of the cosmos and then
reducing this further to solar system structure by switching of the
Sun's position between Venus and Mars with that of the Earth -
"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." Epitome Of Copernican Astronomy by Johannes Kepler
The reason this approach works so well is that familiarity with the
principles then allows a person to consider the next
rotation,namely,the galactic motion of the solar system and how all
the local stars will turn wrt the external galaxies,if not by direct
observation then in principle.As you can see,there is no cosmological
evolution involved in such an undertaking,it is more or less a point
of departure for recognising the Ra/Dec as an observational
convenience that ultimately limits genuine astronomers from moving to
the solar system's galactic orbital motion and whatever consequences
and effects may arise from that motion.
I well understand that you may wish to discuss cosmological evolution
and none of the above satisfies a common ground for discussion
however,I do see where the arguments of Cusa heading in the direction
of heliocentric reasoning are meeting the 'every-valid-point-is-the-
center' going in the opposite sub-geocentric direction.I think it is a
fair point of discussion even without my participation.
.
- References:
- Re: Galactic images
- From: James
- Re: Galactic images
- Prev by Date: Astronomy magazines latest slip up
- Next by Date: Re: Astronomy magazines latest slip up
- Previous by thread: Re: Galactic images
- Next by thread: Re: What Is Islamowitch?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|