"Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality" -Nikola Tesla
What I can't work out is why
Tesla seems to be held up as a hero by so many flat earthers or geocentrists. He certainly did not believe the earth to be flat or stationary!
See this address by him:
HOW COSMIC FORCES SHAPE OUR DESTINIES, ("Did the War Cause the Italian Earthquake") by Nikola Tesla also at
— How Cosmic Forces Shape Our Destinies — ("Did the War Cause the Italian Earthquake"), New York American, February 7, 1915 in which he states:
NATURAL FORCES INFLUENCE US
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accepting all this as true let us consider some of the forces and influences which act on such a wonderfully complex automatic engine with organs inconceivably sensitive and delicate, as it is carried by the spinning terrestrial globe in lightning flight through space. For the sake of simplicity we may assume that the earth's axis is perpendicular to the ecliptic and that the human automaton is at the equator. Let his weight be one hundred and sixty pounds then, at the rotational velocity of about 1,520 feet per second with which he is whirled around, the mechanical energy stored in his body will be nearly 5,780,000 foot pounds, which is about the energy of a hundred-pound cannon ball.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The sun, having a mass 332,000 times that of the earth, but being 23,000 times farther, will attract the automaton with a force of about one-tenth of one pound, alternately increasing and diminishing his normal weight by that amount
Though not conscious of these periodic changes, he is surely affected by them.
The earth in its rotation around the sun carries him with the prodigious speed of nineteen miles per second . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
From the above address.
From what I can gather,
Tesla did not deny
Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation, just differed with
Einstein's "curved spacetime" explanation of it.
Sure,
Nicola Tesla had a lot of "different ideas", but he most certainly
did not believe in a flat stationary earth.
Tycho Brahe warned heliocentric believers of the error in their model's. After he died, the model suddenly changed with no proof needed.
No, the model did not suddenly change. Many, including Galileo certainly believed that the earth rotated and Tycho Brahe was given the task of finding more accurate data, which he did.
Tycho Brahe did not accept the heliocentric model because even with his best measurements he could detect no stellar parallax.
This is understandable as Tycho Brahe could measure down to only 1' of arc but the largest stellar parallax is less than 0.8" of arc, over 1000 times smaller that Tycho Brahe could possibly see. In fact I have the greatest admiration for Tycho Brahe.
I hope that you realise that Tycho Brahe most certainly did not believe the earth to be flat or that the sun circled a short distance above the earth.
Reality was changed to fit the model, when we should basing the model on reality. Our model today, is basically what Tycho Brahe said was wrong about heliocentrism, with numbers moved around over time. 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. Newton said, “It matters not whether we reckon it (The Sun) 28 or 54 million miles distant for either would do just as well!
Even Newton realized, it's all about making reality fit the model. He didn't care what the numbers were, as long as it fit the model!
Rubbish! It's nothing of the sort. "Reality" was not changed! A better model of the solar system was developed.
There was no way to measure the distance to the sun back then!
And it us quite true that “It matters not whether we reckon it (The Sun) 28 or 54 million miles distant for either would do just as well!"
All matters for the basic model is that the sun is many times further away than the size of the earth.
Even those hundreds of years BC knew that much.
And if you check back you will find that Arastarchus "measured" the distance to the sun as 19 x distance to the moon.
And why the great discrepancies?
Would you, since you claim to be an authority on this suggest how the distance the sun might be measured without any optical aids like a telescope?
It wasn't till after Captain Cook's voyage to Tahiti a reasonably accurate measurement was made.
But, what about the height of your flat earth sun?
Our local "expert",
Sandokhan claims it is 12 to 15 km high,
Samuel Birley Rowbotham, the patron saint of modern flat-earthism, claims that the sun is no more than 700 statute miles high and
Most flat-earthers seem to claim a "bit more than" 3000 miles based on a non-measurement by Voliva and others.
You are hardly one to make any accusations about changing measurements and you have all the modern equipment available.
You flat-earthers can't make up your mind on a map, gravity, sun height, the cause of lunar and solar eclipse and so many other things.