The Earth IS NOT revolving around the sun (nothing to do with TimeCube).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ex283trHBgE
Watch this. I give it a 90% probability of completely shattering some of your preconceived scientific notions. (Or, at least, shattering some of the out-dated models that got shoved down our heads during grade-school indoctrination).
Link on the video leads (eventually) to here, for some background: http://humansarefree.com/2011/03/earth-is-not-revolving-around-sun.html
[EDIT] Dug around that website, and some others which 'debunk' his work. I'm really not interested in that drama. The 3d model of the solar system traveling with angular momentum so that the "orbits" of the planets produce spirals is what I really liked. I also think the idea that spacetime "twists" as it "curves" to be very appealing.
bugger. i'll have to check this at home.
That was really interesting. Definitely just updated my mental model of the solar system.
cool how we're making a big double helix through space
Telarus, I ended up in the Looneyville section of YouTube because of this.
:lulz:
It's ok though. Logically I knew this, but I had never visualized it before. He starts to get into potentially green ink territory by saying that if the solar system didn't revolve around the galaxy it would be like a skipping record and life would be pretty boring.
....I'm not exactly sure what he meant by that.
Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 28, 2011, 02:24:05 PM
Telarus, I ended up in the Looneyville section of YouTube because of this.
:lulz:
It's ok though. Logically I knew this, but I had never visualized it before. He starts to get into potentially green ink territory by saying that if the solar system didn't revolve around the galaxy it would be like a skipping record and life would be pretty boring.
....I'm not exactly sure what he meant by that.
:lulz: :lulz: Me too, spend an hour reading a blog which starts to debunk this guy's math/advanced physics ideas.
I really which these types of people wouldn't fall to the trap in the Law of 5s.. some of these observations are novel and worth followup (without going all "I'm right! I'm revolutionizing physics!").
For example, I used that "double torus" figure (which from above looks like a spinning Yin/Wang) for about an hour as a visualization for some chi/empty hand exercises (based on Sufi spinning, and Chi Gung 'spin' techniques). Made some VERY interesting intuitive observations which have really bubbled up as words or images yet.
BREAKING NEWS: REPARAMETRISATION CHANGES SHAPE OF CURVE :lulz:
Isn't this just a matter of frame-of-reference?
If the planets rotate relative to the sun, but the sun rotates relative to the galaxy, then of course the paths of the planets with respect to the galaxy won't be circles, but helices.
He lost me at the bit about the torus manifold and the second degree tensor coriolis forces. Kinda weird, how he switched from something very simple people learn in school (they just leave out the bit where the sun rotates in the galaxy, I wouldn't call that "absolutely incorrect"), suddenly to space-time curvature, spatial manifolds and cosmology.
It's a bit too much "woo" for me.
He spends a lot of time explaining something relatively obvious, and people think they "get it", and then he suddenly switches gear and tells them there's a torque in the space-time curvature and this is responsible for all things that spin, or something.
I'm not even sure what that even has to do with the initial explanation about that the orbits of the planets look like helices when you look at them from the point of view of the galaxy centre.
In his model, the solar system is traveling parallel to the direction of its axis of revolution. Is that even right?
I'm not buying any of this!
Iirc the suns equator is vertical in comparison to the galactic plane. I remember seeing it conjectured somewhere that this is due to the solar system originating in a smaller galaxy but got pulled into the milky way. How true that is im not sure but uranus does the same thing in relation to the sun so it is possible.
That is its possible for the sun to do that regardless of its origin.
The earth only recently began orbiting the sun. That is one of the consequences of becoming round.
Wat
Im guessing youre making a joke about the geocentric model vs heliocentric model. If so it could have had better delivery since im not positive i guessed correctly.
You guessed correctly. I think you could consider it a joke in that I think it is funny, but not in the set-up punchline sense.
I've been entertaining the idea that collectively held beliefs are actually fact. And that facts change as belief changes. It makes talking to churchies more fun
Eh. If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it it does actually make a sound.
Or as the meme goes here the barstool may be almost entirely empty space but its still going to hurt if i hit you with it.
I think that's what we all believe.
Whether we believe something or not is irrelevant. If a thing exists it exists independently of our imaginations. Same thing if it doesnt exist. I have a religion. But believing in my higher power doesnt make it real in an objective universe.
Normally, I'd agree with you. Just trying on some different operating parameters. I don't mean to have an argument really.
In college, I took a "history of mathematics" class. During the first week, the professor polled the class: do you think mathematics was invented or discovered. I was shocked, SHOCKED! by how many felt it was just made up. At the time I was convinced it was discovered - I.e. 1+1=2 whether I'm there to hear it or not.
I have later come to reconcile that it is actually some if both.
I think this is related to what philosophers call "A Priori" truth.
I only mention this because you seem very certain that you are right.
Quote from: rong on October 29, 2011, 12:05:46 AM
Normally, I'd agree with you. Just trying on some different operating parameters. I don't mean to have an argument really.
In college, I took a "history of mathematics" class. During the first week, the professor polled the class: do you think mathematics was invented or discovered. I was shocked, SHOCKED! by how many felt it was just made up. At the time I was convinced it was discovered - I.e. 1+1=2 whether I'm there to hear it or not.
I have later come to reconcile that it is actually some if both.
I think this is related to what philosophers call "A Priori" truth.
I only mention this because you seem very certain that you are right.
Mathematics is a discovery. Numbering systems are an invention. We needed to invent the language we use to describe mathematical functions.
Im right in that the universe remains unchanged if i change my mind about it.
by the way, I disagree with this
Humans are wiser at birth than after fully educated – for they are taught negativistic anti-life ONEism that does not exist in a world of false duality like Earth.
It devastates Life's pulsating antipodes.
Human metamorphosis has 4 life stages: Only the baby is created, the other 3 evolve life.
Without instituting the TimeCube 4 day principle on Earth, 4 races are doomed to the coming ONEness of hell on Earth.
God is ONEism. His pair supports gay wango tango dancing and mutilation of cat penises.
Don't forget, you are ONEist retarded, 1 perspective voids your opposite rationale.
(http://www.timecube.com/rotate.gif)
Cram's argument has merit, and a logic that is hard to deny.
Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 29, 2011, 12:22:12 AM
Im right in that the universe remains unchanged if i change my mind about it.
I think, technically, the opposite is true. The universe is different now than when you made that post, no matter how hard you try not to change your mind, the universe will keep changing.
If facts changed because our beliefs did scientific discovery would be impossible. The heliocentric model was observed -by the ancient greeks mind you- not invented.
Quote from: Cramulus on October 29, 2011, 12:28:52 AM
by the way, I disagree with this
Humans are wiser at birth than after fully educated – for they are taught negativistic anti-life ONEism that does not exist in a world of false duality like Earth.
It devastates Life's pulsating antipodes.
Human metamorphosis has 4 life stages: Only the baby is created, the other 3 evolve life.
Without instituting the TimeCube 4 day principle on Earth, 4 races are doomed to the coming ONEness of hell on Earth.
God is ONEism. His pair supports gay wango tango dancing and mutilation of cat penises.
Don't forget, you are ONEist retarded, 1 perspective voids your opposite rationale.
(http://www.timecube.com/rotate.gif)
:asplode:
Quote from: Cain on October 29, 2011, 12:31:07 AM
Cram's argument has merit, and a logic that is hard to deny.
Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 28, 2011, 11:42:12 PM
Eh. If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it it does actually make a sound.
Where's your observational data?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on October 29, 2011, 05:34:30 AM
Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 28, 2011, 11:42:12 PM
Eh. If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it it does actually make a sound.
Where's your observational data?
Dok Howl stole it, and used it to create an abomination he called "The Super Happy Fun Time Uterus Collider".
We lost three noobs to it in one day, but he insisted it was going to revolutionise the way we thought about sexual reproduction and that the bloodstains were unimportant in the grand scheme of things.
We.... We don't really like to talk about it.
Quote from: Emo Howard on October 28, 2011, 07:20:11 PM
In his model, the solar system is traveling parallel to the direction of its axis of revolution. Is that even right?
I'm not buying any of this!
Well, I'm not certain about the plane of the solar system relative to the plane of the galaxy, but I do know that the sun is both rotating around the galaxy and moving up and down in the plane of the galaxy. So you will probably not get a helix if you take both into account. The other thing is, can we take into account the motion of the galaxy itself? It is hard to get a reference system outside the galaxy, but we do know that the Milky Way and Andromeda are heading towards each other.
Also, he incorrectly states that the Coriolis effect makes water run down plug holes different ways in different hemispheres. Maybe it was just a brain fart, but it is hard to take him seriously when he messes up a simple physical principle like that.
Quote from: Telarus on October 28, 2011, 12:34:03 PM
I also think the idea that spacetime "twists" as it "curves" to be very appealing.
That's been measured in respect to earth's gravity, I believe.
Quote from: Rumckle on October 29, 2011, 11:28:52 AM
Also, he incorrectly states that the Coriolis effect makes water run down plug holes different ways in different hemispheres. Maybe it was just a brain fart, but it is hard to take him seriously when he messes up a simple physical principle like that.
I wondered about that too. But he only said it in so little words that I was unsure if he was actually being incorrect or just giving the wrong impression.
Quote from: Triple Zero on October 29, 2011, 05:31:13 PM
Quote from: Rumckle on October 29, 2011, 11:28:52 AM
Also, he incorrectly states that the Coriolis effect makes water run down plug holes different ways in different hemispheres. Maybe it was just a brain fart, but it is hard to take him seriously when he messes up a simple physical principle like that.
I wondered about that too. But he only said it in so little words that I was unsure if he was actually being incorrect or just giving the wrong impression.
Yeah, that's the general impression I got of the guy too.
But the best thing I took away from the video was that our simplified models have us thinking in arc of 90 degrees waaaaaaay too much.
According to the folks over @ this forum (http://cs.astronomy.com/asycs/forums/p/31176/449781.aspx), it's something like (Earth's axis is 23 degrees off of the ecliptic - solar-system-plane, and the ecliptic is about 60 degrees off from the galactic plane... and Sol' orbit around galactic center is not parallel with the galactic plane, we actually "will/have" crossed the galactic plane, much like Pluto does in the below diagram).
Not to Scale reference:
(http://www.astronomycast.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/phot-06c-99-preview.jpg)
Technical reference (note the orbits on the right are a "Zoom in" on the inner solar system):
(http://www.telusplanet.net/public/fenertyb/solSy22b.gif)
Technical reference from: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/fenertyb/solsysGC.html
QuoteThis web site focuses on schematic diagrams of the solar system (orbits and planet positions, may be updated occasionally) AS SEEN from the direction of the constellation Sagittarius and the centre of our Milky Way galaxy.
The pictures align the Milky Way horizontally, rather than at an angle as usually seen from Earth. As the home page indicates, note how steeply our Solar System is tilted compared to the galaxy. Not all books (even University texts) and films (sci-fi) show this angle correctly - a regular oversight resulting from earth-bound thinking. Yet anyone who studies the stars for a while (amateur and professional astronomers for example) realizes we are at an angle.
Over and over I encountered books and films which didn't show our correct placement among the stars, so I started making sketches while imagining what a traveller* coming from some other system might see as they approach our world. Those sketches along with contemplating the night sky when it was clear and exploring some computer star programs when the skies were cloudy led to putting this site together...
* could be an extraterrestrial or future human traveller
(http://www.telusplanet.net/public/fenertyb/solsys18.gif)
That's pretty cool, though, the gif does do one thing that annoys me about images of the solar system, relating the seasons to the location of the earth around the sun, but it probably just annoys me because I live upside down.
Quote from: Rumckle on October 30, 2011, 01:48:27 AM
That's pretty cool, though, the gif does do one thing that annoys me about images of the solar system, relating the seasons to the location of the earth around the sun, but it probably just annoys me because I live upside down.
Totally! And the orbits loop back on each other (if our reference point is outside of the solar system, they shouldn't).
Drawing the orbits connecting back to each other is fine, in some sense. It sells the idea of "caught in a gravity well" very well and our reference point for stationary motion in many of those diagrams is Sol, so it makes intuitive sense. But, to fall back on the near burnt out metaphor, it's just one Map, and it leaves out a lot of the Territory in such a way that those aspects of reality are edited out of our internal models. We simply 'can't imagine it' within the old model.
Don't worry. I also went "what is this I don't even".
Yes, the speaker is correct, if we take into account the movement of the solar system through space; to an outsize observer at a fixed point not traveling with the solar system, the planets tracks would be helical through space. However, they would still be /around the sun/. Furthermore, given that the sun and the planets move at the same speed in their revolution around the galaxy, and given that the scale is so small compared to the rest of the galaxy, the spiral movement is largely irrelevant. As for the rest of his gobblygook, I didn't even bother to listen.
The incline of the solar system plane to the galactic plane is, however, awesome.
I'd just like to point out that an outside observer likely wouldn't give a shit.
We're just another speck floating in space, and they have a fucking spaceship.
Really puts things into perspective, doesn't it?
Quote from: Telarus on October 28, 2011, 12:34:03 PMhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ex283trHBgE
Watch this.
Oh GOD it's
THAT GUY. I have friends who tried to make me watch a 6 COCKING HOUR lecture of his and it was all "BLURBLURBLUR IM SO SMRT COS I DIDN'T LISTEN IN SKOOL BLURBLURBLUR ATOMS WEAR CRAZY-ASS HATS IN 6 OUT OF 13 DIMENSIONS". I'm paraphrasing, heavily.
Quote from: Xooxe on October 31, 2011, 07:51:42 AM
Quote from: Telarus on October 28, 2011, 12:34:03 PMhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ex283trHBgE
Watch this.
Oh GOD it's THAT GUY. I have friends who tried to make me watch a 6 COCKING HOUR lecture of his and it was all "BLURBLURBLUR IM SO SMRT COS I DIDN'T LISTEN IN SKOOL BLURBLURBLUR ATOMS WEAR CRAZY-ASS HATS IN 6 OUT OF 13 DIMENSIONS". I'm paraphrasing, heavily.
EVERYBODY WINS!