Satellites and the ISS

Since there is no gravity (and thus no gravitational fields) in FE theory, why the hell would the other planets orbit the sun, silly?

Gravity does not exist in FET, but Gravitation does. There's a difference.

Gravitation is just defined as the physical attraction of bodies. Magnets will "gravitate" towards each other, for example. Gravitation does not imply the mechanism of attraction; just the physical attraction of bodies.

Gravity is a specific underlying mechanism for Gravitation (bending of space-time/graviton particles/a force).

Learn more about the difference between Gravity and Gravitation here: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=19384.0

It's clear that Gravitation (the attraction of bodies), exists in the universe to some degree, and is why bodies can orbit each other. But the specific underlying mechanism for Gravitation is unknown to present human knowledge. However, I've always suspected that the mechanism for Gravitation in the universe is electromagnetic in nature.

Since there is no gravity (and thus no gravitational fields) in FE theory, why the hell would the other planets orbit the sun, silly?

Because planets don't orbit around the Sun in the FE theory, silly.

The retrograde motion of the planets suggests that they are orbiting the sun.

Because planets don't orbit around the Sun in the FE theory, silly.

Needs more consistency.

But the specific underlying mechanism for Gravitation is unknown to present human knowledge.

No, you reject the well-known mechanism with no other reason than that it conflicts with your beliefs.

However, I've always suspected that the mechanism for Gravitation in the universe is electromagnetic in nature.

Would you like to expand on this? How does it explain the motion of the stars around the North pole, and how does it explain the motion of the planets (especially their retrograde motion).

Has anyone saying the planets orbit the FE Sun ever bothered to look at the motion of said planets? All the superior planets are no closer to orbiting the Sun in a FE model than the Moon is. I also suspect that the inferior planets may have to pass so close to the Sun as to be passing through it during a transit.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on June 30, 2008, 05:53:52 PM

The retrograde motion of the planets suggests that they are orbiting the sun.

Quote from: Jack. on July 01, 2008, 03:32:15 AM

Because planets don't orbit around the Sun in the FE theory, silly.

Needs more consistency.

Please, review the FE diagram before you even debate.

Please, review the FE diagram before you even debate.

Can you please provide a link to this diagram so we are all using the same information?  I just looked on the FAQ and there is no information about whether planets orbit the sun or not.  Within this one thread there have been two contradictory answers, so you can understand if people get confused.

ENaG.

ENaG.

Earth is Not a Globe does not mention what planets are circling.  Here is the description for retrograde motion...

All the orbits are above the earth; and whenever a spectator stands in such a position that a planet is moving from right to left, he has only to wait until it reaches the end or part of its orbit nearest to him, when, as it turns to traverse the other side of the orbit, it will, for a time, pass in a direction to which the line of sight is a tangent. A good illustration will be found in an elliptical or circular race-course. A person standing at some distance outside the course would see the horses come in from the right, and pass before him to the left; but on arriving at the extreme arc they would for a time pass in the direction of, or parallel to, his line of sight, and would, therefore, appear for a time not to progress, but on entering the other side of the course would appear to the spectator to move from. left to right, or in a contrary direction to that in which they first passed before him.

and here is the diagram...




Neither of these gives a answer to the question about which standard should be used for arguments.  Do the outer planets orbit the Sun or are they in independent orbits around a central point above the Earth?

Can you see them orbit the Sun? Is that what we see? No. So no.

Maybe that needs to be added to the FAQ so everyone has the same information and confusion is prevented in the future.  We can't expect people to stumble onto this thread when it is on page 20 or so of the topics, and it probably won't come up on a search unless you are very specific on your search terms and willing to wade through a significant number of posts.

Can you see them orbit the Sun? Is that what we see? No. So no.

Actually... it IS what we see - transit of Venus from 2004:

Based on the fact that we have been told that FE planets "orbit" around a central point...

The following diagram is in The Earth is Not a Globe as shows the orbits of at least the outer planets...




Since this diagram pretty much matches the "orbital" description for every flat Earth celestial body (Sun, Moon and stars all "orbit" a central point), why don't we observe retrograde motion for any of these other bodies?

Quote from: General Douchebag on July 01, 2008, 09:12:38 AM

Can you see them orbit the Sun? Is that what we see? No. So no.

Actually... it IS what we see - transit of Venus from 2004:

Hey, check me out, I can post unattributed, animated gif images too!



Unsourced, animated gif images are useless to this discussion. 

How about a whole shitload of videos.

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=venus+transit+across+sun&search_type=&aq=f

Hey, check me out, I can post unattributed, animated gif images too!

The .gif has little to do with it. It's more the fact that Venus does transit the Sun, behaving differently to all the superior planets.

It doesn't show that at all! It's just a loop of a black thing blocking a big orange thing then moving.

Which was my point exactly.  I thought it would be more obvious, but I guess people were distracted with my own animation. 

It is a fun animation.

So Venus doesn't transit across the sun?

It doesn't matter what the .gif shows. If you will interpret it as nothing more than 'a black thing blocking a big orange thing then moving', then so be it. Venus still transits the Sun. I would have imagined that a fair number of people here caught the 2004 transit, although I imagine that a large portion of you here are American, and thus were not in a brilliant position to view it.

They next one in 2012 should be good for us Americans.

I actually really want to buy stuff to see that... Next one after that is in about 200 years I think...

I actually really want to buy stuff to see that... Next one after that is in about 200 years I think...

Probably for a transit of Venus, but there are a pair of Mercury transits coming up relatively shortly after that (2016 and 2019).  They haven't published the predicted paths yet, or at least the US Naval Observatory hasn't.

It doesn't matter what the .gif shows. If you will interpret it as nothing more than 'a black thing blocking a big orange thing then moving', then so be it. Venus still transits the Sun. I would have imagined that a fair number of people here caught the 2004 transit, although I imagine that a large portion of you here are American, and thus were not in a brilliant position to view it.

Yeah, I managed to catch it, although barely in time.  The sun rose out of early morning cloud cover just in time for me to catch the final seconds from the east coast:

It was my first real success at astrophotography.
There, sourced, everyone happy now?

Is that Mercury or Venus? Considering the size of sun VS planet in that pic, Mercury and Venus are pretty damn small according to FET.

All the heavenly bodies are smaller in FET, than in RET.

Is that Mercury or Venus? Considering the size of sun VS planet in that pic, Mercury and Venus are pretty damn small according to FET.

Venus.  Venus is much smaller than the sun.

It's clearly Venus because Mercury is larger than the sun...

and all the other planets in the solar system as well. . . they're HUGE!