Soren Kierkegaard said,
There are two ways of being fooled.
One, to believe what is not true.
Two, to refuse to believe what is true.
All the arguments put forward here boil down to one issue.
Does the Earth move against a background of stationary stars?
Or is the Earth still, and the stars moving?
In the 17th and 18th centuries, scholars and scientists
were beginning to accept the heliocentric model as factual,
and astronomers were anxious to find an experiment
that provided concrete evidence the Earth was moving.
One solution appeared in the early 17th century
by James Bradley, the British astronomer royal.
His theory was that if the Earth was moving in orbit around the Sun,
then the stars being still could be seen as a point of reference.
If a particular star was chosen, for example Gamma Draconis,
this star could serve as the anchor point.
The Earth takes one year to make an orbit of the Sun,
so if he plotted the apparent position of the star
in relation to the Earth's movement in orbit,
logically then the plotted points would form a small circle or ellipsoid,
a sort of reflection of the Earth's orbital movement.
Bradley set up a telescope pointing up vertically to see the star,
and expected over time as the Earth moved in orbit
the line of sight of the star would fall out of vision,
so the telescope had to be tilted to keep the stationary stars in sight as the Earth moved.
Logically he believed the telescope would have to be tilted several times.
Bradley's experiment was hailed as a success
and claimed to be one of the major appendixes of heliocentricity to this day.
But European astronomers were later thinking
that Bradley's evidence was tenuous and threadbare,
and that there must be a better way to determine once and for all
that the Earth moves in orbit around the Sun.
Astronomers and scientists in Europe, however,
were not happy with Bradley's experiment,
believing the evidence to prove the Earth was moving tenuous and sketchy.
Roger Josef Boskovich, a Serbian theoretical astronomer,
tried to reproduce Bradley's experiment but using a water-filled telescope.
This, he believed, would bend the starlight by refraction
and slow down the light so the telescope would not need to be tilted as the Earth moved.
In 1866, George Bedell Airy, Astronomer Royal,
repeated Boskovich's experiment using a water-filled telescope.
Airy followed an accepted scientific methodology to the letter
and the records are still available to this day.
Scientists and astronomers eagerly awaited Airy's results
and were expecting the experimental concrete evidence that Earth moves.
But Airy's result was not what was expected
and the experiment was dubbed Airy's failure
because he could not show progressive tilt of the telescope as the Earth moved.
Airy followed up on Bradley's work to prove the Earth was moving.
But heliocentrists today say that Airy failed
because he failed to find the ether,
a mysterious substance that permeated the whole universe.
This is an example of how when scientists are cornered
by genuine scientific evidence,
they change the goalposts in order to make a failure into a resounding success.
But Airy's experiment showed clearly the Earth does not move,
supporting the geocentric paradigm where the Earth does not move
quite contrary to the heliocentric model.
To astronomer scientists it was a failure
but to those pursuing scientific truth the experiment was a resounding success.
Why was it seen as a failure and a disappointment?
Because it failed to meet the paradigm expectations
showing that the experiment was paradigm driven
looking for evidence of what astronomers already believed
to support the heliocentric model.
Is Airy an accomplished astronomer listed in those hallowed halls of astronomy?
Try to find the name George Bedell Airy
in a modern student textbook, university curriculum
or glossy encyclopedia of astronomy.
There may be a brief mention, but other than that, virtually nothing.
It appears George Bedell Airy has been airbrushed out of history.
He did without any doubt make many worthy contributions
to other areas of astronomy and retired as astronomer royal in 1881.
As seen in the following photos, the plumes from erupting volcanoes
can be blown by prevailing winds thousands of feet above.
But where there are no prevailing winds above
sometimes the plumes go straight up as seen in the following photos.
Now using scientific observation and common sense
how could this be the case if the earth is rotating on its axis
at 19 miles per second on the equator
while at the same time as whizzing around the sun at almost 67,000 miles an hour?
When heliocentric believers are confronted with simple facts
based on simple observations, science does not matter.
It is the deeply ingrained belief in the psyche that carries the day.
Just as it was hard to convince medieval doctors that bleeding a patient
was of no use at all because of indoctrination of the masses
this practice was almost impossible to dislodge.
Heliocentrists will find an answer to anything that conflicts
to make it fit with their belief and call it science
to justify the trillions of dollars spent on space exploration.
As mentioned, astronomers, according to the heliocentric paradigm
believe the earth has a double motion rotating around its own axis
at about 1,024 miles per hour at the equator
and traveling around the sun at approximately 67,000 miles per hour.
Back in 1887, two physicists, Mickelson and Morley
conducted an experiment to find the velocity of the earth
in orbit around the sun, and personally for Mickelson
to show his lifetime belief the ether existed.
For centuries, scientists have believed that the whole of space was filled with what was
termed the luminiferous ether, but until this time in the 1880s
the ether was assumed to exist. Mickelson was hoping
to find scientific experiments to produce evidence that the ether
really did exist. The ether was believed to be undetectable
tasteless, invisible, an almost mystical substance that
permeated the whole universe including space. So when objects
such as the earth moved through the ether, it may be possible to detect the relative
motion of objects such as the earth by its effect on the light waves.
All energy, whether light, sound, or electricity
can be represented as a wave-like motion that requires some medium
through which they can travel, just as water is needed to allow waves
to travel across the surface of the sea. The notion of the ether
was believed to have been proposed by Plato and conceived by his
student Aristotle. In the 17th century, Rene Descartes
made reference to the ether, and the idea was embraced and assumed to exist
by all scientists including Isaac Newton to be filling space.
So logically light from the sun and stars must have some
medium to travel through the ether. Albert Mickelson
invited his friend Edward Morley, and together they embarked on a series
of experiments that produced curious and disturbing results.
Mickelson's hope from being a high school graduate was to detect
the ether, and he was well qualified for this research.
Four years at Annopolis, eight years at the Case Institute, Ohio,
and three years at Clark University, Massachusetts.
Mickelson was talented in many ways and designed and made his own device called
an interferometer for measuring the speed of light. The real
purpose, however, of their experiment was to find the velocity of the earth
in orbit around the sun, and the assumed ether became part of that
experiment. It all started in Cleveland, Ohio at the
Case School of Applied Science in the 1880s. This is the idea
which is quite simple. Mickelson thought that for six months
of the year the earth was traveling toward the sun, and in the other six months
he was moving away from it. He persuaded Alexander Graham Bell
to give him the funds to set up an experiment with which he built an apparatus
he called an interferometer, which could measure the speed of light very
accurately. His original interferometer made in Germany
was inadequate, so later he acquired a bigger, more accurate
interferometer consisting of a huge rectangular block of sandstone
as a table, floating on a bed of mercury, where the sandstone table
could be turned easily in any direction, so the speed of light
could be measured from all directions, and at the same time be free from
any vibrations or disturbances. The Newtonian idea
was that the speed of light was pushed through the ether, in which case it should vary
to the observer depending on whether the observer was moving toward or away
from the source of light, and the ether may not be evenly spread
and light may not travel at a constant speed, in which case
it should vary to the observer depending on whether the observer was moving
toward or away from the source of light, and the ether may not be evenly
spread and light may not travel at a constant speed.
To explain it simply, Mickelson created an apparatus to send and
receive a narrow beam of light to a half-silvered mirror which would
allow some light through and reflect some light at the same time.
They called it a beam splitter. Then the two beams were split and
recombined together again. The hypothesis was that they expected to see
through the lens a light spot in the middle surrounded by a dark
fringe showing partial interference. It is important to note
that the arms of the cross in Figure 2 were exactly the same
distance and length. Both light beams would recombine at sea
but according to the ether theory there should be a delay where one
beam may take longer than the other to traverse the distance resulting in interference.
To understand how this works it's necessary to briefly look
at interference phenomenon for those who are unfamiliar with the concept.
This is not as difficult as it appears. Light travels
in a wave-like motion. When troughs and crests line up in phase
it is called constructive interference and the beam is bright
as at A in Figure 3. Two waves in harmony.
When the waves are completely out of phase the viewer sees no light
only a black spot as the waves cancel each other out as in B.
When the waves are slightly out of phase a light
spot is seen in the middle surrounded by a fringe of dark as in C.
Michelson expected to see a black fringe
showing the two beams were out of phase but it was unexpectedly not the case.
This is made clearer in Figure 3 in terms of direction
and flow of ether and light. What was expected to be seen at C
one of three outcomes. One, a bright circular
light where the returning light is in phase with the scent light beam
constructive interference bright. Two,
totally black. Complete destructive interference.
Troughs cancel out the peaks dark. Three,
or fringe around a bright light would show partial interference.
Michelson expected to see a fringe around a bright light
partial interference as seen at C because he expected the
returning light to be slower. The result however of the experiment
was no fringes at all. And since his hypothesis
failed he called this a null result because there was no out of
phase light showing returning light beams were slower. So if
one of the beams of light had encountered an ether wind there would be an expected
delay. This is what Michelson Morley expected
that the ether wind would show one beam out of phase with the other.
But surprise the beams were synchronized arriving at the same
time. What does this mean? There is no ether?
This was such a shock to Michelson and Morley and to Science.
The question was how could light from the sun be transmitted through
space? Surely there must be an ether. Michelson
profoundly believed in the ether and was disappointed blaming the instrumentation
that he had designed and considered his experiment as a failure.
Why a failure? To think that all these years he had believed in the existence
of an ether. The experiment appeared to prove the ether
did not exist. Most scholars except today that Michelson and Morley
were dedicated and sincere researchers and no other experiment
has ever been executed with such meticulous care and attention
and repeated time and time again by other scientists also yielding the same
result. The result of the experiment was a null result
based on the hypothesis that the earth was moving through the ether.
But it could also be interpreted that the earth was not moving at all
and perfectly still. Since contrary to expectation
both light waves arrived at the same time and there was no delay
and no interference fringes seen. But only three conclusions were
considered. One, the ether does not exist
which means sunlight can travel through the vacuum of space.
Two, the speed of light is constant in all directions.
Or three, no effect could be detected either in summer or winter.
Critics argue, hey, come on. Where
was the fourth conclusion? The experiment assumed the earth
was moving but it could also show that the earth is not moving
at all. This is the obvious fourth conclusion. The
earth is still. In which case it was the stars that were moving
and not the earth. Nevertheless, Mickelson and Morley
were hailed as heroes put on a pedestal and praised.
The publicity for the time especially in science circles was huge.
Mickelson and Morley paved the way to probably the greatest scientific
revolution of the time, the theory of relativity.
But some scientists, however, were not happy with these conclusions.
Far-sighted scientists of the day realized there
was a fourth conclusion that was unreported and sooner or later
this error would be seen. So mathematicians came in to
offer some refinements. They believed there was a chance the experiment
could be saved, if it needed to be saved, that is.
In 1892 the Irish physicist George Francis Fitzgerald
theorized that one of the arms on the interferometer had shrunk
in the direction of motion, even though the arms were of equal length.
The theory was supported by the Dutch physicist Hendrik Lawrence
who produced a set of equations that between them came to be known
as the Lawrence Fitzgerald contraction equations.
Their mathematical formula claimed to prove that parts of the apparatus
Mickelson and Morley used had actually changed size
physically, literally. A claim which can never be falsified.
The question arises, if the experiment was such a success
why would mathematicians be required? They moved
the goalpost and tried to change the rules so they could win the game.
The Lawrence Fitzgerald contraction formula, as they came to be known,
are seen as mathematical proofs of theoretical ideas
assuming the reality of heliocentric theory which can never be
falsified. And why would the formula be necessary if the Mickelson-Morley
experiment was such a success? Thousands of highly qualified
scientists accept the formula as proof of heliocentricity to this
day, proved by mathematical modeling and prediction.
But can mathematical modeling really prove a theoretical idea?
Some of the applications include the physical sciences
medical, such as the absorption of medication, civil engineering
including bridge building, and social sciences such as patterns
of election voting. Mathematical modeling is used extensively
in biology and ecology to examine population for fluctuations
water catchments, erosion, and the spread of pollutants, fluid
mechanics, modeling of evolving tsunamis across the ocean, and bridge
design, and other applications. Mathematical modeling
is indispensable to scientists, but it does have its limitations.
Mathematical models do not always represent reality.
It is always based on assumptions, and with Mickelson
and Morley, the assumptions must be made clear. It is only
meaningful and useful if the assumptions are based on reality and can be
falsified. The gyroscope always follows a simple
rule. The directions of movement of the gyro, as shown in
Figure 6, is always at right angles to the spin of the flywheel.
For this experiment, the gyro will need to be placed in a
gimbal, which often comes with the package when the gyro is purchased.
If a table is placed firmly on the ground, and the earth is rotating
on its axis, the table and gyro must be moving and rotating also,
and logically, the gyro will change direction according
to the rule above. There are simple experiments the reader may want
to try, with a high precision commercial gyro with a gimbal, which can be
purchased quite easily. Experiment 1, place the gyro
on a mat, on a flat table, as shown in Figure 7. Set
the gyro spinning, and slowly pull the mat along for 60 cm.
Observe, does the gyro obey the rule on a flat surface
when it's moved? So what if the gyro now moves down a curve?
Experiment 2, use the same table and add a
slope to the end of the table, as shown. Gently move the gyro
along with the table, and gently down the slope. Does the
gyro obey the rule? If the earth is turning on its own axis,
it should obey this rule. But does it? The expected
result, assuming the earth was turning on its axis, the flywheel
would tilt. Does it tilt? But the table is on the earth
turning with the earth, according to astronomers.
In the 19th century, scientists were eager to show the public that the earth
moved on both its axis and in its orbit around the sun.
This was the time when Isaac Newton, Henry Cavendish,
and other scientists received recognition in support of heliocentricity.
In 1851, French scientist Leon Foucault
performed an experiment using a huge pendulum that he believed
proved conclusively that the earth was moving. This experiment
was performed in a place that was high enough to support a pendulum bob of
28 kg, the length of the wire being
67 meters. This was accommodated inside the dome
of the Pantheon Paris, and later models were placed in other similar
tall buildings. As the pendulum moved relatively slowly, it described
a circle in a scattering of sand below. This experiment
was declared as absolute proof that the earth was moving, and is
accepted by scientists all over the world as being proof that the earth moves.
The pendulum made one rotation in 31 hours
50 minutes, rotating clockwise. This is 11.3
degrees per hour. The pendulum wire is connected to a ball
joint which hangs from the dome of the building. The claim was made
that in the northern hemisphere it would rotate clockwise, and in the southern
hemisphere rotate counterclockwise. The mathematical
modeling is very impressive, along with modern simulations,
enough to convince the believer, or any interested 19th century
onlooker, that the earth indeed does move. The very
sight of the use of mathematical formulas is enough to convince most
people that it must be a scientific fact, and can be proven.
This belief is rarely challenged, and told in textbooks to young children
in schools, and in universities is taught as fact. But critics
claim that when Foucault's pendulum is examined carefully, it does not
prove anything at all, only in the mind of the believers of heliocentricity.
Lady Blunt in the Romance of Science says
we believe with all due deference to the pendulum and its proprietors
that it proves nothing but the craftiness of the inventor,
and we can only describe the show and showmen as deceptions.
A thing so childish as this pendulum proof that it can only be described
as one of the most simple and ridiculous attempts to gull the public that has
ever been conceived. It has been said that the pendulum experiment
proves the rotation of the earth, but this is quite impossible.
For one pendulum turns one way, and sometimes another pendulum turns in
the opposite direction. Now we ask, does the earth rotate in
opposite directions of different places at one in the same time? We should like
to know. Perhaps the experimenters would kindly enlighten us on this point.
If the earth were undergoing the terrible motions attributed to it,
there would be some sensible effect of such motion. But we neither
feel the motion, see it, nor hear it. And how people can stand
watching the pendulum vibrate and think that they are seeing proof of the motion
of the earth almost passes comprehension. They are, however,
brought up to believe it, and it is thought to be scientific to believe
what the astronomers teach. The oscillations are not uniform,
but unpredictable, as all pendulums are. They can be in the same plane
backwards and forwards, or describe an elliptical or circular
movement. And the pendulum needs to be pushed to start it off.
If the earth is moving, however, it shouldn't need a push at all,
since the movement of the earth is enough to move the pendulum. If this was
truly the case, then all pendulums on earth would be moving due to the
inertia of the earth's movement. In 1879, Haick,
while studying for his doctorate, discovered that any geometrical
imperfection of the system, or elasticity in the wire, may interfere
with the two horizontal modes of oscillation from linear to elliptical
movement within one hour of the pendulum being pushed. Also,
if Foucault's pendulum was started, it should continue as long as the
earth continues to spin on its axis or move in its orbit. It does,
however, eventually come to a stop. But the earth never stops moving
according to heliocentricity. The stopping, says Foucault,
is explained as dampening by the air resistance. So Foucault
used an electromagnet or mechanical device to keep the pendulum going,
which prevented it from stopping altogether. If the earth was
moving the pendulum, then logically it should continue moving,
even accounting for friction at the ball and socket joint connection of the connecting wire.
Also, the pendulum is located in different positions
on the earth. The closer they come towards the north and south poles,
the gravitational acceleration becomes diminished as the rotation of the earth on
the axis. What would be the behavior of the pendulum on the equator?
Foucault's pendulum is no proof at all. But to a
crowd of believers desperate to confirm the earth moves, it must have been
impressive. So much so, there are replicas all over the world
in buildings with high enough towers. What about the Coriolis effect?
National Geographic describes the importance of the Coriolis
effect as follows. First, of moving objects such as airplanes
and rockets are influenced by the Coriolis effect. Pilots
must take the earth's rotation into account when charting flights over long distances.
This means that most planes are not flown in straight lines,
even if the airports are directly across the continent from each other.
The line between Portland, Maine, and Portland, Oregon, for instance, is very
long and fairly straight. Flying, however, from Portland
to Oregon could not fly in a straight line and land in Portland, Maine.
Flying east, the Coriolis effect seems to bend to the right
in a southerly direction. If the Oregon pilot flew in a straight
line, the plane would end up near New York or Pennsylvania.
Military aircraft and missile control technology must calculate the Coriolis
effect for similar reasons. The target of an air raid can be missed
entirely and innocent people in civilian structures can be damaged.
The Coriolis force applies to the movement of rotating objects.
It is determined by the mass of the object and the object's rate of rotation.
The earth spins on its axis from west to east.
The Coriolis force, therefore, acts in a north-south direction.
The Coriolis force is zero at the equator. Is this so?
Is the Coriolis effect even real? When a cannon ball
is fired vertically, the ball lands in the muzzle, or at most
two feet away, but the earth should be moving so the ball will fall
some distance away from the cannon. What would happen if a cannon pointing
exactly 90 degrees straight up were to fire a cannon ball vertically?
Would not Coriolis effect move the ball significantly sideways?
According to David Wardlaw Scott, experiments were done
in England at the turn of the 20th century, using a cannon
assuring that there was no Coriolis effect whatsoever with respect to the earth.
In the experiment, the cannon was fastened to the earth securely
in a vertical position and then fired. The cannon ball went up
vertically into the air for 14 seconds, making the total time for it to go back
to the earth 28 seconds. At the latitude in England, the earth
would be traveling at about 600 miles per hour, and assuming the
Coriolis force was genuine, the ball should fall about 5 miles west
away from the cannon. This did not happen. In repeated
experiments, the cannon ball fell generally within two feet of the muzzle
of the cannon, and in a couple of instances, the cannon balls actually
returned right back to the muzzle of the cannon's mouth. There is no
concrete evidence of a Coriolis effect. Indeed, if there were truly
a Coriolis effect on the earth, as depicted, then the artillery
officers and snipers would be trained to consider the spin of the earth
and have to make their calculations. As Samuel Robotham wrote,
hence it would be found that if the earth is moving rapidly from west to east,
a cannon ball fired in a due easterly direction will send the ball from a
greater distance than it would if fired in a due westerly direction.
But the most experienced artillerymen, many of whom who have had great
practice, both at home and abroad, in almost every latitude, have
declared that no difference whatsoever is observable, that in charging
and pointing their guns, no difference in the working is ever required.
Gunners in warships have noticed a considerable difference in the results
of their firing from guns at the bow when sailing rapidly towards the
object fired at, and when firing from guns placed at the stern
while sailing away from the object. And in both cases, the results
are different to those observed when firing from a ship at perfect rest.
These details of practical experience are incompatible with the
supposition of a revolving earth. If a projectile is fired
from a rapidly moving body in an opposite direction to that which the body is going,
it will fall short of the distance at which you reach the ground if fired
in the direction of motion. Now since the earth is said to move at a rate
of 1024 miles per hour from west to east, it would make
all the difference imaginable if the gun were fired in the opposite direction.
But, as in practice, there is not the slightest difference
whichever way the thing may be done, we have a forcible overthrow of all
fancies relative to the motion of the earth. Whirlpools are often
referred to as proof of a globe earth assuming a northern and southern hemisphere.
The belief is that water draining into a sink or toilet basin
or small whirlpools in a river or lake will rotate one way or another
clockwise in the northern hemisphere and counterclockwise in the southern hemisphere.
This experiment has been tried many times
and the conclusion is a whirlpool can go either way in both hemispheres.
There are other factors that need to be considered that determine the
direction of a whirlpool. Sinks and toilet basins are sometimes
designed to channel the water in a particular direction. This, however,
is an experiment the reader can try as a team or group with members living
in both hemispheres. A walk by a river or lake, a whirlpool
may sometimes be seen. Take care and make note of the direction
and compare it with the location. How do astronomers and scientists
explain this and justify the earth as moving? Galileo
explained that a cannonball shot vertically into the air would land inside the muzzle
of the cannon or very close by because the iron ball
remembered it was part of the earth and came back home automatically.
Marcus Chaun explains, the answer is that we
and the ball and the air around us were all born into a moving world
and continue to move around with the earth as it turns because that is what
moving things do. This sounds more like metaphysics
than physics, but this is the basic philosophy that Galileo
used. It hardly makes sense, since Galileo says that
these rules did not apply to the atmosphere and the clouds.
If the earth was moving, cannonballs fired west should go further
and balls fired north and south should show their paths curving to the west.
This clearly shows the earth is not moving.
Harold Brown in an article, Galileo the Elements and the Tides
suggests the gravitational pull of the earth is synchronized with every
part of the earth inorganic and organic. The rock or iron
cannonball is seen as part of the earth and contains inherent properties
of the earth. When Galileo, believing the earth moves from east
to west, noticed the sky and clouds were moving west to east in the opposite
direction, Galileo concluded that the gravitational forces
do not apply to the air or the clouds. If the earth was
turning on its own axis, flights from Keto in Ecuador to Singapore
halfway across the world would be unnecessary.
Both cities lie on the equator, about 12 hours apart.
In that time, the earth will have moved east to west and Singapore would occupy
the space that Keto occupied. This logically would mean
that instead of taking a flight, the passengers could board a helicopter,
hover above Keto, and 12 hours later descend vertically onto
Singapore, which would have been carried by the earth's rotation at 19 miles
per second from east to west. To heliocentrists,
this is a preposterous idea, but logically, if the earth really
is rotating, it makes perfect sense. Felix Bumgardner
was taken up by a balloon in a capsule to about 128,000 feet
and jumped. Felix landed very close to where the balloon
carrying his capsule was launched, but if the earth was moving beneath him
in the four minutes he was falling, and the earth was rotating east to west
Felix would land far to the east in the Atlantic Ocean.
Some believe this may be because he was held over the launching site by the wind,
but this is arguable. Almost everyone in the modern world
has experienced the Doppler effect, named after the German scientist
Christian Doppler, which has various applications including in astronomy
redshift and blueshift. Imagine an observer stood in a safe
position on the side of the road, and an ambulance comes along at the road
at great speed with sirens screaming. At first the noise is low from a
distance, but gets louder and louder as it passes the observer.
Then the sound is suddenly diminished and fades away. The intense sound
is caused by the approaching ambulance compressing the airwaves.
As the compression wave passes the observer, the wave compression is reduced
substantially and very quickly. The point here is that this experiment
can be observed, and it does not matter whether the ambulance is traveling
from north to south, west to east, or east to west, it always works.
Now if the earth is moving east to west at 19 miles per second,
the effect would be greater than the west to east, since the earth is
already traveling at speed in that direction. But this is not the case.
It works in all directions of the compass.
To learn more about this fascinating subject, please read the full book
The Lies Astronomers Tell, for free, link in the description box.
And watch the following playlist and recommended videos here.