Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

Moderators: DrVolin, Wombaticus Rex, Jeff

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

Postby vogonpoet » Thu Aug 13, 2015 11:56 pm

I am all for "counter-narratives undermining the consensus view of reality" (especially quantum physics, UFOs, synchronicity and magick) but the flat-Earth meme is a non-starter for me -- a mere time-waster and distraction. For one thing, Coriolis forces show we are on a spinning ball - water swirling down the drain; trade winds; that sort of thing. Until someone shows me the world-bearing Turtles, I'm not buying it.
User avatar
vogonpoet
 
Posts: 57
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 6:35 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

Postby BrandonD » Sat Aug 15, 2015 7:41 pm

guruilla » Thu Aug 13, 2015 7:05 pm wrote:This is a rapidly-growing meme anyhow; I was pointed to the FE model a few weeks ago and today received an email from wayki guy.

what intrigues most about the question of earth-shape is the liminal state created by recognizing the impossibility of knowing. I suspect if I watched some of these docs all the way through, I would end up seriously doubting that the earth is round too. In fact just hearing about this movement is enough for me to doubt, because it forces me to acknowledge that I don't know. On the other hand no amount of evidence is going to make me 100% sure either way unless I can go up in a hot air-balloon high enough to see for myself. For this reason I’m not that interested in the specifics, since it doesn't make any difference to me if the Earth is round or flat. What does interest me is this growing phenomenon of counter-narratives undermining the consensus view of reality. (The Moon landing is another obvious example, & obviously related to the FE model.)

wayki is comparing recognizing the flatness of earth to a spiritual awakening; that to me is the fishiest part of all about this meme.

At first or fifth whiff, I smell psyop.


Yes, this is my feeling as well.

Here is what supports this premise, in my experience so far.

When I first read about this subject (around the time of my comment at the top of the thread), I was very intrigued. It felt sort of like finding a secret tunnel in your own backyard.

I listened to a podcast by Eric Dubay, in which he came across as a sensible and level-headed guy. He had intriguing points I had never thought about, because I had never really given the subject itself much thought.

At the end of the podcast he mentioned a forum where people could go if they wanted to learn more. I wasn't a believer, but my interest was certainly hooked, so I joined this forum. (The guy who contacted you, Waykiwayki, was a member of this forum)

I'm a person who tries to treat my fellow forum members with respect and courtesy. I felt that they would consider me an asset to their group because I don't fly off the handle, and I try to give all ideas due consideration no matter how "out there" they might be.

However, once inside the forum the vibe of everything changed quite drastically. It was certainly more cult-like, any questions I asked were promptly treated as an attack upon the group. I wasn't challenging anyone, which should have been obvious because I wasn't hostile to the idea at all, I was merely asking for clarification as any inquisitive person would.

My questions were treated in an antagonistic manner, and I was soon told that this group was for "believers only". I was banned after only 2 days. My behavior in that forum was exactly like my behavior in this forum - I've been on RI for many years without ever getting banned, and in the flat earth forum I lasted exactly 2 days.

At first I was a bit hurt/insulted, but later I became suspicious at how differently their behavior within the group was from their public persona.

I couldn't help but feel a hunch that there are people involved in this burgeoning subject who are actually fishing for people with a "religious zealot" emotional temperament. There is a vibe here that this may be a budding new religion. There was definitely more spiritual talk within the forum than there was in their podcasts.
"One measures a circle, beginning anywhere." -Charles Fort
User avatar
BrandonD
 
Posts: 768
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2011 2:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

Postby guruilla » Sat Aug 15, 2015 8:18 pm

It's like group think + negative identity (= cult).

People gather together out of a shared belief that flies in the face of consensus wisdom and "common sense", of course they feel special but also courageous for facing up to the mockery and ire of the mass (& their own family members - just imagine!) and bind together out of that shared experience, creating a space in which their beliefs (sense of identity) will be reinforced by the constant agreement about how smart they are to have seen beyond The Big Lie.

I guess because of the emotional and unconscious elements to this group-forming, the beliefs then become increasingly dogmatic and anyone who questions them (even out of a desire to understand them better) is rapidly scapegoated, ie used as a way to strengthen the beliefs of the group and their sense of agreement that they are in the KNOW, ie that their belief system is actually truth, capital T.

The tell is when supposed information morphs into ideology.

This bit is interesting too:

BrandonD wrote:It felt sort of like finding a secret tunnel in your own backyard.

The feeling of being privy to privileged information, being let in on a secret, is a big lure. I even felt it momentarily in my correspondence with wayki guy, until i remembered that it makes exactly zero difference to me, in the past, present or the future, what shape the Earth is or turns out to be.
It is a lot easier to fool people than show them how they have been fooled.
User avatar
guruilla
 
Posts: 1329
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:13 am
Location: Canada
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

Postby BrandonD » Sat Aug 15, 2015 9:15 pm

guruilla » Sat Aug 15, 2015 7:18 pm wrote:It's like group think + negative identity (= cult).

People gather together out of a shared belief that flies in the face of consensus wisdom and "common sense", of course they feel special but also courageous for facing up to the mockery and ire of the mass (& their own family members - just imagine!) and bind together out of that shared experience, creating a space in which their beliefs (sense of identity) will be reinforced by the constant agreement about how smart they are to have seen beyond The Big Lie.

I guess because of the emotional and unconscious elements to this group-forming, the beliefs then become increasingly dogmatic and anyone who questions them (even out of a desire to understand them better) is rapidly scapegoated, ie used as a way to strengthen the beliefs of the group and their sense of agreement that they are in the KNOW, ie that their belief system is actually truth, capital T.

The tell is when supposed information morphs into ideology.

This bit is interesting too:

BrandonD wrote:It felt sort of like finding a secret tunnel in your own backyard.

The feeling of being privy to privileged information, being let in on a secret, is a big lure. I even felt it momentarily in my correspondence with wayki guy, until i remembered that it makes exactly zero difference to me, in the past, present or the future, what shape the Earth is or turns out to be.


For myself, I live with a deep-rooted feeling that my incorrect perception of reality is due to one or more very basic assumptions that were impressed upon me at a young age, and that have gone all this time unseen and thus unchallenged. This subject definitely touched upon that feeling, which is probably why it captivated me right away.
"One measures a circle, beginning anywhere." -Charles Fort
User avatar
BrandonD
 
Posts: 768
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2011 2:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

Postby DrEvil » Sat Aug 15, 2015 9:38 pm

... the horizon is always at eye level or higher no matter how high you are... you will never look down at the horizon... this proves that the earth is not a ball... all directions the horizon line is at eye level... Horizon = Eye level.


This guy has clearly never seen a ship coming over the horizon, and looking down at the horizon is hard exactly because the Earth is a (squished) sphere. The higher you get the further away the horizon gets because you can see further around the curve of the Earth (And never mind that if the Earth wasn't a sphere there wouldn't be a horizon).
And the horizon is not a line, it's a curve. Just look out at the ocean and it's pretty obvious.

The video is gone btw.
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 1864
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

Postby chump » Mon Aug 24, 2015 1:09 pm

Absolutely!

I agree that Flat Earth Theory suddenly splashed accross the internet lately, and have to wonder ... Is some sort of intelligence pushing the meme?

Flat Earth is not the same as Geo-centricity, imo.

FWIW, for the first time in a long time, I had a notion to google the guy who made some vids I posted in 9/11 (which I thought were really good) - and was pleasantly surprised to find that Mr B, a potentially brilliant historian or propagandist, had just fuggin' posted his first fuggin' video - in four fuggin' years - about flat earth theory? WTF? Sychronicity speaking, this was significant for me, (thus always interesting) so I watched the fuggin' thing and was conflicted by Coriolis and confused by the rest. Then the next morning the video was gone??

And then it returned - to the link below... Followed by Part 2... And then Part 3, continuing to explain that the earth is flat, and not a ball - which I am not into - not at all.

--------------
New link Part 1:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dumCW71SBgY [/center]
Published on Aug 10, 2015

(The Earth is Flat - There is No Curvature)

The aeronaut can see for himself that Earth is a Plane. The appearance presented to him, even at the highest elevation he has ever attained, is that of a concave surface - this being exactly what is to be expected of a surface that is truly level, since it is the nature of level surfaces to appear to rise to a level with the eye of the observer. This is ocular demonstration and proof that Earth is not a globe.

Whenever experiments have been tried on the surface of standing water, this surface has always been found to be level. If the Earth were a globe, the surface of all standing water would be convex. This is an experimental proof that Earth is not a globe.

Surveyors' operations in the construction of railroads, tunnels, or canals are conducted without the slightest "allowance" being made for "curvature," although it is taught that this so-called allowance is absolutely necessary! This is a cutting proof that Earth is not a globe.

The lights which are exhibited in lighthouses are seen by navigators at distances at which, according to the scale of the supposed "curvature" given by astronomers, they ought to be many hundreds of feet, in some cases, down below the line of sight! For instance: the light at Cape Hatteras is seen at such a distance (40 miles) that, according. to theory, it ought to be nine-hundred feet higher above the level of the sea than it absolutely is, in order to be visible! This is a conclusive proof that there is no "curvature," on the surface of the sea - "the level of the sea,"- ridiculous though it is to be under the necessity of proving it at all: but it is, nevertheless, a conclusive proof that the Earth is not a globe.

Astronomers, in their consideration of the supposed "curvature" of the Earth, have carefully avoided the taking of that view of the question which - if anything were needed to do so -would show its utter absurdity. It is this: - if, instead of taking our ideal point of departure to be at Valentia, we consider ourselves at St. John's, the 1665 miles of water between us and Valentia would just as well "curvate" downwards as it did in the other case! Now, since the direction in which the Earth is said to "curvate" is interchangeable - depending, indeed, upon the position occupied by a man upon its surface - the thing is utterly absurd; and it follows that the theory is an outrage , and that the Earth does not "curvate" at all: - an evident proof that the Earth is not a globe.

If we take a journey down the Chesapeake Bay, by night, we shall see the "light" exhibited at Sharpe's Island for an hour before the steamer gets to it. We may take up a position on the deck so that the rail of the vessel's side will be in a line with the "light" and in the line of sight; and we shall find that in the whole journey the light will won't vary in the slightest degree in its apparent elevation. But, say that a distance of thirteen miles has been traversed, the astronomers' theory of "curvature" demands a difference (one way or the other!) in the apparent elevation of the light, of 112 feet 8 inches! Since, however, there is not a difference of 100 hair's breadths, we have a plain proof that the water of the Chesapeake Bay is not curved, which is a proof that the Earth is not a globe.

The Suez canal, which joins the Red Sea with the Mediterranean, is about one hundred miles long; it forms a straight and level surface of water from one end to the other; and no allowance for any supposed "curvature" was made in its construction. It is a clear proof that the Earth is not a globe.

When astronomers assert that it is "necessary" to make "allowance for curvature" in canal construction, it is, of course, in order that, in their idea, a level cutting may be had, for the water. How flagrantly, then, do they contradict themselves when the curved surface of the Earth is a "true level!" What more can they want for a canal than a true level? Since they contradict themselves in such an elementary point as this, it is an evidence that the whole thing is a delusion, and we have a proof that the Earth is not a globe.

Seven-hundred miles is said to be the length of the great Canal, in China, Certain it is that, when this canal was formed, no "allowance" was made for "curvature." Yet the canal is a fact without it. This is a Chinese proof that the Earth is not a globe.




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5D2tiFqpfXQ

(Video desciption)

Fake World Reality Part 2:

Published on Aug 10, 2015

(Proof that Earth is Not Spinning, Rotating, Revolving or Wobbling)

If the Earth truly were a spinning ball orbiting the Sun, there are several tests and experiments which could be, and have been, conducted to prove or disprove the veracity of such a claim. For example, Danish Astronomer Tycho Brahe famously argued against the heliocentric theory in his time, positing that if the Earth revolved in an orbit round the Sun, the change in relative position of the stars after 6 months of orbital motion could not fail to be seen. He argued that the stars should seem to separate as we approach and come together as we recede. In actual fact, however, after almost two hundred million miles of supposed orbit around the Sun, not a single inch of parallax can be detected in the stars! Desperate heliocentrists, instead of conceding, doubled-down claiming the stars were all actually trillions upon trillions of miles away from us, so incredibly far away that no appreciable parallax could ever be detected! This convenient explanation, which heliocentrists have clung to for centuries, has proven satisfactory to silence the uninquisitive minds of the masses, but still falls short because even at trillions of miles away, a two hundred million mile change in position WILL create a measurable difference. The following video explores several more modern proofs that the Earth is not spinning, rotating, revolving, tilting, wobbling, or shooting through infinite space as NASA has brainwashed us to believe.



from the video:
... The world you live in is a fabricated maintained illusion through the media and education indoctrination...

Runways can face in any direction and the plane lands perfectly nearly all the time... How is this possible?

A flight from Africa to Australia takes on average 12 Hours. So the plane then would have to fly around the world completely, People on board will experience a day and a night, landing early the next morning, all during a 12 hour period. The Earth will do a half rotation in that 12 hours. But a plane leaving Africa early morning will arrive in Australia late sunset 12 hours later. So the Earth cannot be spinning. A plane flying north to south flies the same speed as a plane flying east to west and vice versa. This can be like this if the earth is not moving.

So if you say the air and plane is moving with the earth Let's have a look....


Coriolis Effect?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coriolis_effect

(From the video) ... From the very start you have been trained not educated. They don't care if you understand it as long as you believe it. And so you pass with flying colours... The conspiracy goes deeper than you could possibly imagine...


... It is not possible for the earth's air to be spinning. Because it would not be moving in a straight line. It would be spinning around a center point, therefore the air closer to the ground will always move slower than the air higher up. Fireworks and rain as we know it would be impossible spinning at 1600 km/h? Compounder to this, the air at the equator will move faster than at the poles...

... The Earth is not Spinning, Rotaing, Revolving, Tilting, Wobbling or Shooting through Space as NASA would have you believe. The Earth is motionless just as it seems. The moon, and stars all revolve around us, just as they appear:

You have been indoctrinated, conditioned, brainwashed.


==========

Fake World Reality Part 3

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Uw3GDb-Aa0
(Video description)
Published on Aug 11, 2015

(Sun, Moon and Stars Prove the Flat Earth)

NASA's astronomical figures always sound perfectly precise, but heliocentrists have historically been notorious for regularly and drastically changing them to suit their various models. For instance, in his time Nicolas Copernicus calculated the Sun’s distance from Earth to be 3,391,200 miles. The next century Johannes Kepler decided it was actually 12,376,800 miles away. Issac Newton once said, “It matters not whether we reckon it 28 or 54 million miles distant for either would do just as well!” How scientific!? Benjamin Martin calculated between 81 and 82 million miles, Thomas Dilworth claimed 93,726,900 miles, John Hind stated positively 95,298,260 miles, Benjamin Gould said more than 96 million miles, and Christian Mayer thought it was more than 104 million! Nowadays they have settled around 93 million for the time-being.

“As the sun, according to ‘science’ may be anything from 3 to 104 million miles away, there is plenty of ‘space’ to choose from. It is like the showman and the child. You pay your money - for various astronomical works - and you take your choice as to what distance you wish the sun to be. If you are a modest person, go in for a few millions; but if you wish to be ‘very scientific’ and to be ‘mathematically certain’ of your figures, then I advise you to make your choice somewhere about a hundred millions. You will at least have plenty of ‘space’ to retreat into, should the next calculation be against the figures of your choice. You can always add a few millions to ‘keep up with the times,’ or take off as many as may be required to adjust the distance to the ‘very latest’ accurate column of figures. Talk about ridicule, the whole of modern astronomy is like a farcical comedy - full of surprises. One never knows what monstrous or ludicrous absurdity may come forth next. You must not apply the ordinary rules of common-sense to astronomical guesswork. No, the thing would fall to pieces if you did.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (115)

From Video: Because there are 360 degrees in a circle, an artist understood that when two people on the same plane observed an object at 60 degrees to themselves that the distance between the two people would be the same as the distance between them and the object they were looking at. So they hid these basic principles in perspective and geomoetryby means of sympbols to keep their power and position over the masses but also spread disinformation to misdirect.

So does this symbol look familiar?


Is possible that Outer space = Inner space? Considering Cosmic and Psyche... Astrology...[/i] Synchronicity, et cetera and so forth... Are Freemasons and Kabbahlists the mathematicians and mystics who understand and manipulate our manifestation of +/- binary elements intelligently elaborating our electro-magnetic conception of the universe - inextricably woven within our mind?

------------------------


John Keel, Operation Trojan Horse, p.169 of 287:

Our world exists in three dimensions: height, width and breadth. We can move in many directions within these dimensions : up, down, sideways, forward, and backward. We measure space in relation to our own size, by inches, feet, yards, miles, light years. If we were 25 feet tall and our planet were the size of Jupiter (many times larger than Earth), we would undoubtably have adjusted our measurements of space accordingly. Our inch might be equal to an Earth foot, our mile might be equal to ten earth miles.

Space does not exist except when we make it exist. To us, the distance between atoms in matter is so minute that it can only be calculated with hypothethical measurements. Yet, if we lived on an atom and our size was relative to it's size, the distance to the next atom would seem awesome and beyond reach. The ant lives in a world of giants where even a blade of grass is a gigantic structure and a tree is whole universe. If ants had measurements, their inch might be the size of the point of a pin, and their mile would be less than a foot.

How dare we try to reduce the universe to our own terms? We can't even see or sense a large part of the world around us. Man is not the final, perfect end product of evolution.

He is the beginning...

There is another man-made measurement called time. Unlike the other three dimensions, time has us trapped. We can move in only one direction through it - forward. This forward otion is governed by physical laws. We cannot leap ahead fifteen years any more than we can slide back to 1848. We are trapped in this moment of time. This instant.

The only way we can bridge time is to create something that will endure beyond the immediate moment. We construct buildings, pyramids, works of art, and even laws that become material and lasting things. Our moments become seconds, minutes, days, hours, years. Our lives revolve around clocks and calenders. Time becomes very real to us, and it is inconceivable that we could live without it.

Yet time doesn't really exist at all.

This moment exists to us. The same moment is being shared by other planets or other stars. Or is it?

The light from a distant star may take 30 years to cross space and reach us. We can see a nova (exploding star) 1,000 years after it has actually burst and vanished. With strong telescopes, we can peer into the past. We could see that event 1,000 years after it happened. Perhaps we couls see a planet near that star, see a whole population panic and go mad as their sun started to expand and pour heat and radiation onto them. Perhaps long after our own planet is a dead cinder some dispassionate astronomer in some remote part of the universe will collect the light from this moment and watch us grovelling about this year.

We have learned to measure time by observing the special characteristics of our environment. Our days and nights are measured by the length of time it takes the earth to rotate on its axis. Our years are the number of days it takes to make one complete corcuit around the sun. Our lives are scaled by the number of years our delicate organisms can survive. If the earth did not rotate, there wouold be no days. If it did not circuit the sun, there would be no years. If we were larger or smaller and lived on Ganymide, one of Jupiter's moons, our whole measurement of time would be different...

Stretching Time

Much has been written about the fact that astronauts whizzing through space at 25,000 mph return to earth a fraction of a second younger than the rest of us, because as Einstein discovered, the faster a particle moves through space, the slower it moves through time. Time becomes a hypothethical field. Trapped here on earth, we all move through that field at the same rate. Science fiction writers have always made a big deal out of this, and there are endless tales of astronauts dashing off to other planets and, upon returning to earth, finding that hundreds of years hace actually passed, even though they are only a months or years older.

Physicists following Einstein's concepts assert that nothing can exceed the speed of light without becoming infinite mass and being reduced to energy. However, if we want to blow our minds altogether, we can speculate that an energy particle might hit such a high frequency and move so fast that it doesn't move at all. Energies beyond the cosmic rays on our spectrum scale would have such a very high frequency that they would appear to be motionless. A small group of American physicists are now actually trying to build the equipment necessary to test this possibility.

These super-high frequencies would be far outside our time field, yet they could exist all around us, and we have no way of detecting or defining them. We could only guess at their existence, just as men guessed for hundreds of years about atomic structure before we developed the technology needed to confirm the theories.

To repeat this another way: If an astronaut can move more slowly through the time field by accelerating through three dimensional space, then it might be possible for a super-high frequency particle moving at super-high speeds tp escape or be uninfluenced by our time field altogether.

What I'm trying to do here is reduce the complex Einstein theory to the simplest of terms.

Now then, how can all this be applied to the UFO phenomenon?

Throughout this book I have tried to explain that UFOs seem to be transmogrifations: seemingly material apparitions that might actually be composed of energies from the high reaches of the electromagnetic spectrum. If this is so, then one additional factor is necessary: order or intelligence.

The UFO phenomenon does seem to be controlled. It does seem to follow intelligent patterns. If the objects themselves are manifestations of higher energies, then something has to manipulate those energies somehow and reduce them to visible frequencies. Not only do they enter the visible frequencies, but take forms that seem physical and real to us, and they carry out actions which seem intelligent.

Thus we arrive at the source. The source has to be a form of intelligent energy operating at the very highest point of the frequency spectrum. If such an energy exists at all, it might permeate the universe and maintain equal control over each component part. Because of its high frequency, so high that the energy particles are virtually standing still, the source has no need to replenish itself in any way that would be acceptable to out environmental sciences. It couls actually create and destroy matterby manipulating the lower energies. It would be timeless, because it exist beyond all time fields. It would be infinite because it is not confined by three-dimensional space...

... If the energy form were infinite, timeless. and permeated the entire universe, it would have total knowledge and total awareness. It would not need eyes and ears and nerve endings for perception. Like Mount Everest, it would be there and be unaffected by whatever was happening lower on the energy spectrum.

It could surround you completely at this very moment and be totally aware of all the feeble impulses of low energy passing through your brain. If it so desired, it could control those pulses and thus control your thoughts.

Man has always been aware of this intelligent energy or force. He has always worshiped it.
User avatar
chump
 
Posts: 1248
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 10:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

Postby chump » Tue Feb 02, 2016 11:42 pm



User avatar
chump
 
Posts: 1248
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 10:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

Postby JackRiddler » Wed Feb 03, 2016 6:03 am

They Live, now that is a good science fiction premise. Lizard people and all.

Flat Earth, not so much. Post-1522, very unimaginative.
To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

Top Secret Wall St. Iraq? & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 12584
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

Postby chump » Thu Feb 04, 2016 5:25 pm


https://youtu.be/eKmFH79Q5fA







Analogizing the computer desktop, Hoffman notes that when we drag the blue folder to the trashcan, there is no trashcan nor blue folder lurking behind the screen. The Windows desktop is a highly representational, though quite useful, extended metaphor. The 'reality behind' the interface is vastly more complex, consisting of unseen microprocessors and electrical charges that defy most users' understanding. Indeed the subterrenean and surface worlds bear little resemblance to one another. However the iconic display provides a fitting enough interface such that a successful experience on the device is possible. As Hoffman says, though we take the interface reality seriously (deleting the folder would cost us a full week's work) we do not take it literally. This workspace icon description combines Bowie/Duncan’s heraldic devices and Freud’s and Ernest Beckers’ Vital Lie. (“It is fateful and ironic how the lie we need in order to live dooms us to a life that is never really ours.”—Denial of Death, Ernest Becker). Caveat emptor in all cases. A June 11, 2015 Hoffman TED talk is embedded below:




https://youtu.be/oYp5XuGYqqY

Brains and neurons are a species-specific set of symbols, a hack. What does this mean for the mystery of consciousness?

Wee, it opens up new possibilities. For instance, perhaps reality is some vast machine that causes our conscious experiences. I doubt this, but it's worth exploring. Perhaps reality is some vast interacting network of conscious agents, simple and complex, that cause each other's conscious experiences...

Once we let go of our massively intuitive, but massively false, assumption about the nature of reality, ot opens up new ways to think about life's greatest mystery. I bet that reality will end up turning out to be more fascinating and unexpected than we've ever imagined.

The theory of evolution presents us with the ultimate dare:

Dare to recognize that perception is not about seeing truth, it's about having kids.



User avatar
chump
 
Posts: 1248
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 10:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

Postby chump » Sun Feb 14, 2016 7:47 pm



NASA - esque graphics and cool animations describe the 'Advanced Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory (LIGO).

https://www.theguardian.com/science/201 ... he-century

Gravitational waves: breakthrough discovery after two centuries of expectation
Tim Radford
Thursday 11 February 2016 12.27 EST
Last modified on Thursday 11 February 2016 17.01 EST

Physicists have announced the discovery of gravitational waves, ripples in the fabric of spacetime that were first anticipated by Albert Einstein a century ago.

“We have detected gravitational waves. We did it,” said David Reitze, executive director of the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (Ligo), at a press conference in Washington.

The announcement is the climax of a century of speculation, 50 years of trial and error, and 25 years perfecting a set of instruments so sensitive they could identify a distortion in spacetime a thousandth the diameter of one atomic nucleus across a 4km strip of laserbeam and mirror.

The phenomenon detected was the collision of two black holes. Using the world’s most sophisticated detector, the scientists listened for 20 thousandths of a second as the two giant black holes, one 35 times the mass of the sun, the other slightly smaller, circled around each other.


Why discovering gravitational waves changes everything

At the beginning of the signal, their calculations told them how stars perish: the two objects had begun by circling each other 30 times a second. By the end of the 20 millisecond snatch of data, the two had accelerated to 250 times a second before the final collision and a dark, violent merger.


The observation signals the opening of a new window on to the universe.

“This is transformational,” said Prof Alberto Vecchio, of the University of Birmingham, and one of the researchers at Ligo. “We have observed the universe through light so far. But we can only see part of what happens in the universe. Gravitational waves carry completely different information about phenomena in the universe. So we have opened a new way of listening to a broadcasting channel which will allow us to discover phenomena we have never seen before,” he said.

“This observation is truly incredible science and marks three milestones for physics: the direct detection of gravitational waves, the first detection of a binary black hole, and the most convincing evidence to date that nature’s black holes are the objects predicted by Einstein’s theory.”

The scientists detected their cataclysmic event using an instrument so sensitive it could detect a change in the distance between the solar system and the nearest star four light years away to the thickness of a human hair.

And they did so within weeks of turning on their new, upgraded instrument: it took just 20 milliseconds to catch the merger of two black holes, at a distance of 1.3 billion light years, somewhere beyond the Large Magellanic Cloud in the southern hemisphere sky, but it then took months of meticulous checking of the signal against all the complex computer simulations of black hole collision to make sure the evidence matched the theoretical template.

The detector was switched off in January for a further upgrade: astronomers still have to decipher months of material collected in the interval. But – given half a century of frustration in the search for gravitational waves – what they found exceeded expectation: suddenly, in the mutual collapse of two black holes, they could eavesdrop on the violence of the universe.

Prof B S Sathyaprakash, from Cardiff University’s school of physics and astronomy, said: “The shock would have released more energy than the light from all the stars in the universe for that brief instant. The fusion of two black holes which created this event had been predicted but never observed.”

The finding completed the scientific arc of prediction, discovery and confirmation: first they calculated what they should be able to detect, then decided what the evidence should look like, and then devised the experiment that clinched the matter. Which is why on Thursday scientists around the world were able to hail the announcement as yet another confirmation of their “standard model” of the cosmos, and the beginning of a new era of discovery.

Astronomers have already exploited visible light, the infrared and ultraviolet, radio waves, x-rays and even gamma-rays in their attempt to understand the mechanics of stars, the evolution of the galaxies and the expansion of the universe from an initial big bang 13.8bn years ago.


Unequivocal

Thursday’s announcement was the unequivocal first detection ever of gravity waves. The hope is that gravity wave astronomy could start to answer questions not just about the life of stars but their deaths as well: death by collision, death in a black hole, death in some rare stellar catastrophe so fierce that, for a few thousandths of a second, the blast is the brightest thing in the universe.

Even before the Ligo detectors in two US states reopened for business late last year, researchers were confident that a detection would follow swiftly. The announcement came after months of speculation, and decades of theoretical and practical work by an international network of more than a thousand scientists and engineers in Britain, Europe, the US and around the world.

Professor Kip Thorne, of the California Institute of Technology, and one of the founding fathers of Ligo, said that until now, astronomers had looked at the universe as if on a calm sea. All of that had changed.

“The colliding black holes that produced these gravitational waves created a violent storm in the fabric of space and time, a storm in which time speeded up and slowed down, and speeded up again, a storm in which the shape of space was bent in this way and that way,” he said.

Prof Neil Turok, director the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics at Waterloo in Canada, and a former research colleague of Prof Stephen Hawking, called the discovery “the real deal, one of those breakthrough moments in science”.

Not only had the detector picked up the collision of two enormous black holes across a distance of almost a billion light years of space, it recorded the distinctive “chirp” as the two spiralled towards each other.

The discovery, he said, completes a scientific arc of wonder that began 200 years ago, when the great British scientist Michael Faraday began to puzzle about how action was transmitted across the distance of space; how the sun pulled the Earth around. If the sun moved 10 yards, very suddenly, would the Earth feel the difference?

He reasoned that something must cross space to transmit the force of gravity. Faraday’s reasoning inspired the great British mathematician James Clerk Maxwell to think about how an electric force travelled, and arrive at an understanding of light and a prediction of radio waves.

“Einstein, when he came to write down his theory of gravity, his two heroes were Faraday and Maxwell,” said Turok. “He tried to write down laws of the gravitational field and he wasn’t in the least surprised to discover that his predictions had waves, gravitational waves.”


The Ligo discovery signals a new era in astronomy, he said.

“Just think of radio waves, when radio waves were discovered we learned to communicate with them. Mobile communication is entirely reliant on radio waves. For astronomy, radio observations have probably told us more than anything else about the structure of the universe. Now we have gravitational waves we are going to have a whole new picture of the universe, of the stuff that doesn’t emit light – dark matter, black holes,” he said.

“For me the most exciting thing is we will literally be able to see the big bang. Using electromagnetic waves we cannot see further back than 400,000 years after the big bang. The early universe was opaque to light. It is not opaque to gravitational waves. It is completely transparent.

“So literally, by gathering gravitational waves we will be able to see exactly what happened at the initial singularity. The most weird and wonderful prediction of Einstein’s theory was that everything came out of a single event: the big bang singularity. And we will be able to see what happened.”


Image


https://www.theguardian.com/science/201 ... ed-to-know

A US observatory announced on Thursday that it has detected evidence of gravitational waves. Here’s the key information

Why discovering gravitational waves changes everything

Tim Radford
Thursday 11 February 2016 11.29 EST
Last modified on Thursday 11 February 2016 11.53 EST

What are gravitational waves?

Ripples in spacetime, a bit like ripples on a pond, that propagate out at the speed of light. Throw something really big into the stillness of space – like two black holes colliding, or two pulsars merging – and gravitational waves created by the event should spread not just across the galaxy, but ultimately through all of spacetime.

Have they been found?

Yes. At a press conference on Thursday, physicists from the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory (LIGO) revealed that they had detected gravitational waves.

Watch this spacetime: gravitational wave discovery expected
Read more


Why did we think they exist?

Gravitational waves were predicted by Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity, 100 years ago. Almost everything the theory predicted has been confirmed by observation or experiment, except gravitational waves.


Hang on, hadn’t they already been detected?

For a blissful few weeks in 2014, physicists working on the BICEP-2 telescope in Antarctica were sure they had seen a sign of primordial gravitational waves left over from the big bang. Hope ebbed though as it became increasingly possible that they had instead seen an artefact created by dust in distant space after claims of a flawed analysis.

Two physicists got a Nobel Prize in 1993 for studies of a binary pulsar which behaved in a way that could best be explained by Einstein’s prediction: gravity waves would drain away the orbital energy of the two massive bodies and these would then spiral ever closer. But that was seen as inference, not definitive evidence.


Why persevere?

Because scientists were convinced they had to be there – if their version of cosmic physics made any sense. If they exist, then two exquisitely accurately measured lengths at right angles would fleetingly change as a gravitational wave rippled past. On Thursday, that was shown to have happened.

The hunt for them has been going on for decades. Fifty years ago Joseph Weber dangled metal bars in the hope of detecting telltale movement that could only be explained by a passing warp in spacetime. Nasa even sent a lunar surface gravimeter to the moon on Apollo 17 in 1972.

In the 90s German and British scientists began work on GEO600 at Hanover in Germany; the Italians have an experiment, as do the Japanese. Gravitational wave detection at LIGO - which has an L-shaped detector that uses a laser and mirrors - began in 2002. But accuracy remains the problem: a wave from millions of light years away would distort a four kilometre laser beam by less than a thousandth of the diameter of the nucleus of an atom. Which is hard to spot.


So is the experiment big enough?

Physicists proposed LISA, the ultimate Laser Interferometer Space Antenna: a trio of satellites huge distances apart in orbit, keeping a laser eye on each other for evidence of gravity waves. Europe last year launched LISA Pathfinder, to see if the experiment was even possible with present technologies.


Why bother at all?

Because gravity waves can answer questions about the moment of creation. Astronomers look back in time as well as space. To see something 13 billion light years away, they capture light that began its journey 13 billion years ago. But no matter how perfect the telescope, an optical astronomer could never peer into the first 400,000 years of the universe, because it would have been so dense and murky that even light could not break free of the primeval soup. But gravity waves must have been there, right from the beginning.


What is a black hole?
Read more


Now that gravitational waves have been found, is that it? Is that the end of physics?

No. The questions multiply. Why is the visible universe made of matter, and not antimatter? And why is 96% of the universe invisible and undetectable, existing as dark matter, and even more mysterious dark energy? Why does it seem to be stable? Is this all there is, or are we one of a zillion universes? Why does it exist all? This ultimate confirmation of Einstein’s theory would be the end of one set of questions, but it would open up a whole new set of puzzles.


Which came first, the universe, or math??


Can we manipulate the data to provide the public the proof we wanna perceive? Statistics is a horribly boring subject, but the video below was a palatable purview of how statistics are used to shape our perceptions and mislead the public - about health care, virus scares, probability calculations, political elections, opinion polls, space, t-shirts , and more...:


https://youtu.be/qiQwZ6inbOM
Uploaded on Jan 23, 2012

Charles Seife visits Google's New York, NY office to discuss his book "Proofiness: The Dark Arts of Mathematical Deception." This event took place on December 1, 2011, as part of the Authors@Google series.

"Proofiness," as Charles Seife explains in this eye-opening book, is the art of using pure mathematics for impure ends, and he reminds readers that bad mathematics has a dark side. It is used to bring down beloved government officials and to appoint undeserving ones (both Democratic and Republican), to convict the innocent and acquit the guilty, to ruin our economy, and to fix the outcomes of future elections. This penetrating look at the intersection of math and society will appeal to readers of Freakonomics and the books of Malcolm Gladwell.

Charles Seife, a journalist with Science magazine, has also written for New Scientist, Scientific American, The Economist, Wired UK, and The Sciences, among many other publications. His previous titles include Alpha & Omega and Zero. He received an MS in Probability Theory and Artificial Intelligence from Yale.




https://youtu.be/pPUTrIgdCZI
The Great Math Mystery Documentary New 2015 HD
Published on Oct 3, 2015

http://docuwiki.net/index.php?title=The ... th_Mystery

NOVA leads viewers on a mathematical mystery tour--a provocative exploration of math's astonishing power across the centuries. We discover math's signature in the swirl of a nautilus shell, the whirlpool of a galaxy, and the spiral in the center of a sunflower. Math was essential to everything from the first wireless radio transmissions to the successful landing of rovers on Mars. But where does math get its power? Astrophysicist and writer Mario Livio, along with a colorful cast of mathematicians, physicists, and engineers, follow math from Pythagoras to Einstein and beyond, all leading to the ultimate riddle: Is math an invention or a discovery? Humankind's clever trick, or the language of the universe? Whether we think we're good with numbers or not, we all use math in our daily lives. The Great Math Mystery sheds fascinating light on how math works in our brains and ponders the ultimate mystery of why it works so well when decoding the universe.


Narration from video: ... Pi is but one example of a vast interconnected web of mathematics that seems to reveal an often hidden order to our world. Physicist Max Tegmark from MIT thinks he knows why. He sees similiarities of our world and that of a computer game...

... The laws of physics in a game, like how an object floats, bounces or crashes, are only mathematical rules created by a programmer. Ultimately, the entire universe of a computer game is just numbers and equations...

Physicist Max Tegmark: "That's exacty what I perceive in this reality too.The closer I look at things that aren't mathematical, like my arm or my hand, the more mathematical it turns out to be! Could it be that our world then is also just as mathematical as computer game reality."


To Max, The software world of a game isn't that much different from the physical world we live in. He thinks that mathematics works so well to describe reality, because ultimately, mathematics is all that it is. There is nothing else.

Max again: "Many of my physicists colleagues will say that mathematics describes our physical reality, or at least some approximation... I go further and argue that it actually is our physical reality, because I'm arguing that our physical world doesn't have just some mathematical properties, it has only mathematical properties."



http://www.ducknet.net/attack-of-the-killer-algorithms


=====================
User avatar
chump
 
Posts: 1248
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 10:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

Postby chump » Wed Mar 16, 2016 6:52 pm

User avatar
chump
 
Posts: 1248
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 10:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

Postby chump » Wed Mar 01, 2017 2:10 pm

Geocentricy vs Heliocentricity, Esoteric vs Exoteric??

Mr PK of TNN suggested this series I've only started to explore myself...

( Interesting, if one can continue to pay attention... So far so good... Don't let the Flat Earth fool ya' ...)



Published on Jan 2, 2017

Additional details and references links will be provided in the very near future as this series is just beginning to be uploaded. Thank you.

Occult Science 1.0 - NASA, Vatican Connections & Freemasonry - http://tinyurl.com/gn783rj
Occult Science 1.1 - UN Space Connections & Theosophy - http://tinyurl.com/hnuz8gn
Occult Science 1.2 - UN-Rockefeller Philanthropy & Prometheus - http://tinyurl.com/j97pf4o
Occult Science 2.0 - Elaine Pagels & Gnostic Theology - http://tinyurl.com/j9xny3g
Occult Science 2.1 - Carl Jung & Gnostic Psychology - http://tinyurl.com/j9xny3g
Occult Science 3.0 - The Godly Globe & the Profane Plane - http://tinyurl.com/hdr72s9
Occult Science 3.1 - Theology and Cosmology - http://tinyurl.com/hc8uorh
Occult Science 3.2 - The Cosmic Abyss of the Supreme Being 1 - http://tinyurl.com/hfjzru9
Occult Science 3.3 - The Cosmic Abyss of the Supreme Being 2 - http://tinyurl.com/j5p57se
Occult Science 4.0 - Heliocentric vs. Geocentric Astrology - http://tinyurl.com/zld6pqq
Occult Science 4.1 - *Bonus Video* Heliocentric Astrology & David Bowie's Death - http://tinyurl.com/zz2zmoy
Occult Science 5.0 - Gravitation vs. Levitation - http://tinyurl.com/jrmdwf7
Occult Science 5.1 - Gravity and the Earth's Iron Core [Saturn-Mars-Pan] - http://tinyurl.com/j8gbdjh
Occult Science 6.0 - The Big Bang Theory: Primordial Matter & the Cosmic Egg - http://tinyurl.com/zjuzwe4
Occult Science 6.1 - The Concave Celestial Sphere - http://tinyurl.com/hcdmjaa
Occult Science 7.0 - Blavatsky & Heliocentrism - http://tinyurl.com/zr2j6lq
Occult Science 8.0 - Copernicus & the Church - http://tinyurl.com/jc69lb9
Occult Science 8.1 - The Copernican Question - http://tinyurl.com/zt3eqef
Occult Science 9.0 - Bruno the Pythagorean - http://tinyurl.com/jumur4j
Occult Science 9.1 - Bruno the Alchemical Martyr - http://tinyurl.com/zpv42kj
Occult Science 9.2 - Neil DeGrasse Tyson: the Hierophant of Cosmos - http://tinyurl.com/h3dkmeu
Occult Science 10.0 - Hypatia & the Alexandrian Gnosis - http://tinyurl.com/j6qm4td
Occult Science 10.1 - Hypatia: the High Priestess of the Mysteries - http://tinyurl.com/zdjga38
Occult Science 10.2 - Hypatia: Hollywood, History & Sagan's Cosmos - http://tinyurl.com/jyroof9
Occult Science 11.0 - Cosmos: A Historical Distortion Oddyssey - http://tinyurl.com/hdm8dpl
Occult Science 12.0 - Galileo's Astrology & Theology - http://tinyurl.com/hczwzca
Occult Science 12.1 - Kepler's Astrology & Theology - http://tinyurl.com/j5k9lqj
Occult Science 13.0 - Newton's Great Work & Alchemy - http://tinyurl.com/h68p36m
*More to come in the near future*


---------------------


https://youtu.be/ujaDASFNZHI
User avatar
chump
 
Posts: 1248
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 10:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Geocentricity vs Heliocentricity

Postby chump » Sun Mar 05, 2017 2:51 pm


https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/demiurge

Definition of demiurge

1
capitalized a : a Platonic subordinate deity who fashions the sensible world in the light of eternal ideas
b : a Gnostic subordinate deity who is the creator of the material world

2
: one that is an autonomous creative force or decisive power

... Did You Know?

In the Platonic school of philosophy, the Demiurge is a deity who fashions the physical world in the light of eternal ideas. In the Timaeus, Plato credits the Demiurge with taking preexisting materials of chaos and arranging them in accordance with the models of eternal forms. Nowadays the word demiurge can refer to the individual or group chiefly responsible for a creative idea, as in "the demiurge behind the new hit TV show." Demiurge derives via Late Latin from Greek dēmiourgos, meaning "artisan" or "one with special skill." The "demi-" part of the word comes from the Greek noun dēmos, meaning "people;" the second part comes from the word for worker, "ergon."





Occult Science 9.0 - Bruno the Pythagorean

... (Blavatsky) says this philosophy of Bruno was in common with the Alexandrian platonists, and Hypatia was part of the Platonic philosophers, the Alexandrian gnosis, and the latter kabalists:

... In common with Alexandrian platonists and the later Kabalists, he (Bruno) held that Jesus was a magician in the same sense given to this appellation by Porphyry and Cicero, who called it the Divina Sapientia (divine knowledge)*, and Philo Judeas, who described the Magi as the most wonderful enquirers into the hidden mysteries of nature, but not in the degrading sense given to the word magic in our century. In his noble conception the magi were holy men, who, setting themselves apart from everything else on this earth, contemplated the divine virtues and understood the divine natures of the god and spirits, the more clearly; and so, initiated other s into the same mysteries, which consist of one holding an uninterupted intercourse with those invisible beings during life."
HP Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, Volume 1 Science, pg 93-95

*So, what people commonly associate with magic, passing spells and performing witchcraft and getting secret love potions and stuff like that, that's all the Hollywood version of it. In the esoteric sense, it is more like working with human consciousness and shaping beliefs and awareness, and things like that.

I believe one of the popular definitions by Crowley and Dion Fortune is something akin to the changing of human consciousness in accordance with the will, and the will, of course, being the higher divine will of Thelema, or the will of the Lord's Prayer, the number 93, things we spoke about already. So, black magic would be your lower base desire will of the square, correct? Divine magic would be of the compass. So, divining a flat earth from scripture would be profane because that is of the ego of the demiurge, or of the square, and divining a spherical earth from scriptures will be the esoteric secret wisdom hidden within it, and that be of the compass. So, you can see the exoteric/esoteric theme is always at play in every single thing we look at, over and over and over again...



User avatar
chump
 
Posts: 1248
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 10:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Previous

Return to Religion and the Occult

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests