>What they teach in school:Charts and Diagrams with all of the planet orbiting the sun in perfect circles. Sacred geometry, makes sense intuitively to our child minds.>Actual reality of what scientists think:elliptical off-center orbits required to make heliocentrism work>What they used to think:perfect geometrical orbit patterns via geocentrism why shouldn't I trust the model that I was taught in school: perfect circular orbits (but as seen in geocentrism rather than heliocentrism)?Has Geocentrism actually ever truly been debunked? My research says no, there has been no true debunk of it, i.e. nothing with a solid proof. So if both theories are valid, then I'm going with the one that creates perfect patterns as more sensible for how magnetic orbit paths would work IRL.
here are your perfect orbits required to explain the retrograde of jupiter, btw
every planet orbits the sun in the tychonic model, except the moon and the sun itself. the simplified view would be that the earth orbits the sun just like all other planets while the moon orbits the earth.
the tychonic model is not perfect, it needs to be infinitely fine-tuned to make it match observed reality, whereas kepler's model just works. its like the real sin(x) function vs the infinite taylor series that approximates sin(x) and completely falls apart at some point, so you have to keep tweaking it. in seeking perfection, you attained imperfection. and circles are just special types of ellipses, so they are covered by kepler's more perfect model.
>>42379543>>What they teach in school...to children before they can understand complexity...why did you stop at first grade?>What they used to think:Changed when they found a model that can actually explain what is happening, rather than just mark down increasingly complex and confusing patterns.
>>42379543>Has Geocentrism actually ever truly been debunked?Has it ever made a claim to debunk?Just drawing what you see isn't anything to debunk.What does geocentrism say is the REASON the planets suddenly reverse direction? THAT can be debunked.Go.ahead and explain the cause of the observation.
>>42379543>why shouldn't I trust the model that I was taught in school: perfect circular orbitsbecause light dosnt move through materials with out bending, the atmosphear is a variable density prism, all light not perpendicular to the surface bends. all models of the world based on light passing though the sky with out bending are wrong.
>>42381141>>42381649
>>42381176>whereas kepler's model just works.everybody was using the tychonic model until the stellar parallax, that tychon himself argued that they should exist IF stars were distant, were observed
>>42381691And it was abandoned when a more explanatory model that didn't require constant fine tuning was developed.Just like everyone was doing the side roll in the high jump until Fossbury came along.
>>42379543You don't actually care about the subject. You have no interest in astronomy, you don't look up at the night sky, you don't own a telescope.So what is the reason for you having a "position" on something you don't care about?It's simple: you want to feel superior to those who do care to cope with an inferiority complex . It's absolutely pathetic.
>>42381141don't be disingenuous; that motion comes from perfect circles as wellThat loop comes from two perfect circles' motion overlapping.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/A4_2xDP1gzo
>>42381643Isn't the "backwards motion" just an illusion based on perspective. I read that last night. No, I can't source it right now, but I'm interested enough to research it later and post sources then.
>>42381834There is a major problem with institutions such that it's this extreme effect where you cannot go against the grain. If geocentrism were true and proven, it's to the point where it wouldn't come out due to too many cockblocker reddit mods IRL whose careers and egos rely on heliocentrism.The same people who are doing 'research' and spitting it back out as education on the validity of changing your sex are those who are controlling research and education on astronomy and anything else. they block things that are remotely spiritual or interpretable as religion-affirming.
>>42382672You. Don't. Care. Everything you just wrote is for the purpose of making you feel smug about wallowing in ignorance, hashed together from 4chan memes.
>>42382791I earnestly care. I have a bunch of ebooks downloaded from the 1800s and before because I'm trying to figure out what people posited and how they got there before 'truth' became totalitarian-feeling.I care because it defines the reality in which we live. So I'm trying to figure out my own best estimates of what the truth is about certain matters. It's unfortunately possible that the truth is being hindered, so it's something important to check into on your own. Not for smug purposes, for soul purposes.
>>42382849If you actually cared you'd get a telescope. You can see other galaxies. Andromeda, the galaxy closest to us, can be seen with the naked eye under somewhat favorable dark sky conditions.This image of Andromeda was taken with an 8 inch telescope by an amateur. You can see the structure of the Milky Way, the galaxy our planet is in. In late june / july the center of our galaxy is visible, and it is filled with nebulae and star clusters.You could, if you wished, get a solar telescope (or a solar filter) and take pictures of the sun during the year and compare the apparent size of the sun, and find that it varies by a few percent over the course of the year because of Earth's elliptical orbit - largest at perihelion, smallest at aphelion.You could do all sorts of things with a telescope. But you won't because fundamentally you don't care about astronomy.
>>42382646Not in the Tychonic model. That's the problem.It makes perfect sense as a trick of perspective - IF all the planets are in elliptical orbits around the sun.>>42382672>you cannot go against the grainYou mean like when people were literally killed for advocating heliocentrism?>>42382849>So I'm trying to figure out my own best estimatesPost your telescope setup.
>>42382849>>42382849there's a standard for disproving heliocentrism and no one has been able to meet it, including the people from the 1800s. a myriad of highly intelligent scientists , mathematicians, philosophers and thinkers have gone over those arguments already and collectively come to the conclusion that heliocentrism is true. if you want to disprove heliocentrism, you must first show that you know something that all those other people didn't. the reason for this is very simply practicality. we can't be going around hearing out every single person who has a funny idea about how the world works. for you and me its fun to discuss online. but if you want to overturn the status quo, it's not as simple as complaining about reddit cockblockers on 4chan. show us the product of your meticulous year-long research project. just downloading and re-hashing old ideas isn't enough. you have something new to bring to the table. so lay it out for us. be comprehensive and meticulous. demonstrate why we should take your ideas seriously. show that you are more professional than the institutions you criticize. people will come naturally to you if you have something worthwhile to share. it doesn't even have to be conclusive in any way. there are plenty of retards online spouting nonsense that goes against the grain, and they get plenty of attention. people are receptive to bullshit, you just need to actually present it.
>>42379543discordgg/7kMhrksaGT
