HOMO-CENTRIC UNIVERSE: DONUT EARTH

Skipping your ad BS

The earth is flat, but it has no form.

No, all the evidence shows it is round, and has form.
If it has no form, it can't be flat.

This is because it is a two-dimensional torus.

That would be an annulus. But we know Earth isn't that as we can circumnavigate it in any direction.
Did you mean a flat torus?
If so, that is still wrong. That is because when we go north, we are still north.
If it was a flat torus going north would result in us ending up to the south.

The topology you are looking for is a spherical shell.
i.e. Earth is round.

Skipping your ad BS
The topology you are looking for is a spherical shell.
i.e. Earth is round.

Nope. Stop talk BS. You are the only BS here. He says true and the earth seems homocentric more than sphere.
All evidences prove the earth is NOT round. All measurements prove this. By using ships behind the waves because of perspective you can not claim the earth's being round scam.
Ie the earth is not round. Stop lying. Leave him alone.

My book has been published.

Congratulations. I hope you success.

All evidences prove the earth is NOT round. All measurements prove this.

Then why have you been completely unable to provide a single piece of evidence that Earth isn't round?
Why have you been unable to provide a single measurement which shows Earth isn't round?
Why do you instead need to resort to plenty of lies, such as your failed map which does not accurately show the location and size of various places, and your lies about perspective?

I'm not the one lying here.

Nope. Stop talk BS. You are the only BS here. He says true and the earth seems homocentric more than sphere.
All evidences earth is NOT round[/b].]prove the earth is NOT round.

I thought the the Flat Earth was supposed to be round like this!

That looks round to be.

So it your Flat Earth isn't round what shape is it? Square?

HOMOCENTRIC UNIVERSE: FLAT EARTH
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07TLZGKY9/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=flat+earth&qid=1561768569&s=digital-text&sr=1-2

My book has been published.
I am presenting a new flat earth model in this book.

The earth is flat, but it has no form.
The same is true of the earth as if the water were not in form.
So how does the world work?
This is because it is a two-dimensional torus.
That doesn't mean it's doughnut-shaped.
The sun, which went west, comes east again like a game screen.
That is the characteristic of our world.
Time and space, or the world is constantly renewed like that.

<Table of Contents>

Preface
1. Appearance and reality
    The secret of 0.1°
    Eratosthenes' strange sundial
      The truth of a sundial
2. Homocentric Universe
    Holographic universe
      North-South angle difference
      East-West time difference
      Lorentz force
      2-dimensional torus
      Sky and Earth as space
      Round Sky and Square Earth
      Harmony of Round Sky and Square Earth
      Moon illusion
    Multiverse
      Renewal of the world
3. True face of the Earth
    The Earth has no shape
    To save the phenomena
      Duhem-Quine thesis
Footnote

Harmony of square box and round pizza.

The whole problem comes when you try to explain how
two or more people simultaneously observe the same world
standing hundreds or thousands of miles away from each other.

The SAME world.
(They don't have their own worlds each.)

Quote from: zorbakim on June 28, 2019, 06:08:18 PM

My book has been published.

Congratulations. I hope you success.

Thanks, wise
I can feel your sincerity and kindness.

Leave Jack alone.
I don't deal with him.

Quote from: zorbakim on June 28, 2019, 06:08:18 PM

HOMOCENTRIC UNIVERSE: FLAT EARTH
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07TLZGKY9/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=flat+earth&qid=1561768569&s=digital-text&sr=1-2

My book has been published.
I am presenting a new flat earth model in this book.

The earth is flat, but it has no form.
The same is true of the earth as if the water were not in form.
So how does the world work?
This is because it is a two-dimensional torus.
That doesn't mean it's doughnut-shaped.
The sun, which went west, comes east again like a game screen.
That is the characteristic of our world.
Time and space, or the world is constantly renewed like that.

<Table of Contents>

Preface
1. Appearance and reality
    The secret of 0.1°
    Eratosthenes' strange sundial
      The truth of a sundial
2. Homocentric Universe
    Holographic universe
      North-South angle difference
      East-West time difference
      Lorentz force
      2-dimensional torus
      Sky and Earth as space
      Round Sky and Square Earth
      Harmony of Round Sky and Square Earth
      Moon illusion
    Multiverse
      Renewal of the world
3. True face of the Earth
    The Earth has no shape
    To save the phenomena
      Duhem-Quine thesis
Footnote

Harmony of square box and round pizza.

The whole problem comes when you try to explain how
two or more people simultaneously observe the same world
standing hundreds or thousands of miles away from each other.

That is the secret of world harmony.
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibnitz also spoke of the harmony of the world.
But he fell short of cosmology.
Homocetric universe is the only way to tell the secret.

I don't deal with him.

Yes, you seem to like avoiding those that show your claims to be nonsense.
That wont stop me pointing out your BS.

You are yet to provide a single reason why the current RE model is wrong, nor address the mountains of issues with what you have presented.

Quote from: Macarios on June 28, 2019, 11:07:07 PM

Harmony of square box and round pizza.

The whole problem comes when you try to explain how
two or more people simultaneously observe the same world
standing hundreds or thousands of miles away from each other.

That is the secret of world harmony.
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibnitz also spoke of the harmony of the world.
But he fell short of cosmology.
Homocetric universe is the only way to tell the secret.

I already asked you if two people are 10 000 miles away from each other, which one is at the center?
You blured the answer.

And all this time you are talking about perception by humans, not about the world itself.

~~~~~

Sound is independent vibration of air even when we are not there to hear it.
Wave splashing will spread through the air long after we perish and the word "splashing" gets forgotten.
Things don't have to be named or perceived to exist.

~~~~~

If "the Earth has no shape", how come you attribute the Flat shape to it?
Or the book is just poetry (or "poetry") and your activities on this forum were just an advertisement?

Indeed more perspectives are needed to better understand the universe.
The more points of view the better.

Congrats and keep it up, Zorbakim!

Zorbakim, the LGBTI community all around the globe, salutes you with your newest book! (I love how you've incorporated all the colors of the LGBTI rainbow on the front cover, and used "flat earth" as a metaphor for old discriminations)

I honestly hadn't realised the entire flat earth community was so heavily involved with the underground gay/queer culture, that a book need be written about it! I guess I can be forgiven, considering it was underground. This is a daring and bold move on your part, zorbakim, jumping out of the closet like this! Congrats, I'm looking forward to reading more about the 'homocentric' view of the universe!

It's all starting to make sense now!

Quote from: zorbakim on June 29, 2019, 01:55:15 AM

Quote from: Macarios on June 28, 2019, 11:07:07 PM

Harmony of square box and round pizza.

The whole problem comes when you try to explain how
two or more people simultaneously observe the same world
standing hundreds or thousands of miles away from each other.

That is the secret of world harmony.
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibnitz also spoke of the harmony of the world.
But he fell short of cosmology.
Homocetric universe is the only way to tell the secret.

I already asked you if two people are 10 000 miles away from each other, which one is at the center?
If "the Earth has no shape", how come you attribute the Flat shape to it?

I think I already told you.
Everyone is the center of the world.
The earth is not an object but space.
The sky is also space.
The sky(universe) is flat.
That means there is no curvature.
That is a fact that has already been scientifically proven.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shape_of_the_universe
The same is true of the earth.

The sky is the space above and the earth is the space below.

Quote from: Macarios on June 29, 2019, 03:00:09 PM

Quote from: zorbakim on June 29, 2019, 01:55:15 AM

Quote from: Macarios on June 28, 2019, 11:07:07 PM

Harmony of square box and round pizza.

The whole problem comes when you try to explain how
two or more people simultaneously observe the same world
standing hundreds or thousands of miles away from each other.

That is the secret of world harmony.
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibnitz also spoke of the harmony of the world.
But he fell short of cosmology.
Homocetric universe is the only way to tell the secret.

I already asked you if two people are 10 000 miles away from each other, which one is at the center?
If "the Earth has no shape", how come you attribute the Flat shape to it?

I think I already told you.
Everyone is the center of the world.
The earth is not an object but space.
The sky is also space.
The sky(universe) is flat.
That means there is no curvature.
That is a fact that has already been scientifically proven.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shape_of_the_universe
The same is true of the earth.

The sky is the space above and the earth is the space below.

That is why I pointed out that you blured the answer.
How many centers the Universe can have?
Why are they called "center"?
How can two individuals far apart be both in the center?

Looks like you still didn't explain to yourself the difference between "the world" and "the perception of the world".

~~~~~

To define "space above" and "earth below" you first have to have "up" and "down" defined.
As we all know, the main definition of those is based on observation: things fall from "up" to "down".
They follow verticals.
And don't forget that two verticals far enough from each other are not paralel.

RGB is the color of the three primary colors of light.
It is related to yin and yang and Goethe's color theory.

RED: yang(+)
GREEN: the combination of yin and yang
BLUE: yin(-)

Yin-yang is the key principle of HOMOCENTRIC UNIVERSE.

Indeed more perspectives are needed to better understand the universe.
The more points of view the better.

Congrats and keep it up, Zorbakim!

Thanks, Danang.
You're right.
We need more perspectives to understand this world.

RGB is the color of the three primary colors of light.
It is related to yin and yang and Goethe's color theory.

RED: yang(+)
GREEN: the combination of yin and yang
BLUE: yin(-)

Yin-yang is the key principle of HOMOCENTRIC UNIVERSE.

Electromagnetic waves with wavelengths between 750 and 620 nanometers we perceive as "red".
People who assign the Yang principle to that are emotionally experiencing "red" as "active / male".

Wavelengths between 495 and 450 nanometers we perceive as "blue".
People who assign the Yin principle to that are emotionally experiencing "blue" as "passive / female".

Green as combination of Yin and Yang is just an extension of the attempts to spread out / design personal experiences of receptive part of the population.

On the contrary, Chinese tradition presents Yang as "sky / active / male", and the sky is blue.
Yin is "earth / passive / female" and before the industrial revolution it was mostly green.

Yin / Yang system is binary (base 2). Light and dark, regardles the color. Rods in the eye.
Red / Green / Blue system is ternary (base 3). Colors regardless the brightness. Cones in the eye.

The way you present them they are not really compatible.



~~~~~

There are two main principles of color mixing: additive and subtractive.

Additive color mixing is the kind of mixing you get if you overlap spotlights in a dark room.
The commonly used additive primary colors are red, green and blue,
and if you overlap all three in effectively equal mixture, you get white light.

Subtractive color mixing is the kind of mixing you get if you illuminate colored filters with white
light from behind. The commonly used subtractive primary colors are cyan, magenta and yellow,
and if you overlap all three in effectively equal mixture, all the light is subtracted giving black.

As you can see, in both cases green is not a mixture of red and blue.



~~~~~

What you are trying to do here is to channel the interpretation of facts deeper into spirituality.

I don't know how much is a pure spirituality in the scope of this forum.

Everyone is the center of the world.

And as you have already been told, this only makes sense if you are saying there is no centre.

The earth is not an object but space.

No, Earth is an object in space.
It is not the space itself.
If you want to talk about space, use the word already agreed upon. Don't blatantly misrepresent what you are talking about.

The sky(universe) is flat.
That means there is no curvature.
That is a fact that has already been scientifically proven.

Space is assumed to be flat as there is no detectable curvature, even at the large scale of the universe.
But that is space, not Earth.
Earth is round. That has been scientifically "proven" (note, science doesn't deal with proof, but with disproof).

The same is true of the earth.

No. Earth is fundamentally different.
Earth is an object in space. Yes, the curvature of space near Earth is mostly insignificant, but the curvature of the surface of Earth is not.

RGB is the color of the three primary colors of light.
RED: yang(+)
GREEN: the combination of yin and yang
BLUE: yin(-)

Not only is this pure garbage, it is a direct contradiction.
If Green is a combination of red and blue (yang and yin) then it isn't a primary colour.
In reality red, green and blue are the primary colours (for light emitting) due to your eyes having receptors for these colours.

Yin and Yang has nothing to do with it.

Leave religion (or other forms of "spirituality") out of science. They have no place there.

Quote from: zorbakim on June 30, 2019, 02:05:49 AM

RGB is the color of the three primary colors of light.
It is related to yin and yang and Goethe's color theory.

RED: yang(+)
GREEN: the combination of yin and yang
BLUE: yin(-)

Yin-yang is the key principle of HOMOCENTRIC UNIVERSE.

Electromagnetic waves with wavelengths between 750 and 620 nanometers we perceive as "red".
People who assign the Yang principle to that are emotionally experiencing "red" as "active / male".

Wavelengths between 495 and 450 nanometers we perceive as "blue".
People who assign the Yin principle to that are emotionally experiencing "blue" as "passive / female".

Green as combination of Yin and Yang is just an extension of the attempts to spread out / design personal experiences of receptive part of the population.

On the contrary, Chinese tradition presents Yang as "sky / active / male", and the sky is blue.
Yin is "earth / passive / female" and before the industrial revolution it was mostly green.

Yin / Yang system is binary (base 2). Light and dark, regardles the color. Rods in the eye.
Red / Green / Blue system is ternary (base 3). Colors regardless the brightness. Cones in the eye.

Materialistic thinking cannot tell the secret of the world.
The world is a relationship.
Round is not the earth, but the celestial sphere.

Materialistic thinking cannot tell the secret of the world.

Why not?
The world is material.
There is no reason to insert spiritual BS into it.

Round is not the earth, but the celestial sphere.

The celestial sphere is nothing more than a consequence of Earth rotating about its axis, with stars in all directions.

Also, quite the dishonest double standard where you happily go and pretend that because space is Euclidean that means Earth is flat, while rejecting the same kind of comparison (which is far more valid) between the celestial sphere and Earth.

Can you define homocentric?

Can you define homocentric?

It means that man is central.

Quote from: Macarios on June 30, 2019, 02:51:02 AM

Quote from: zorbakim on June 30, 2019, 02:05:49 AM

RGB is the color of the three primary colors of light.
It is related to yin and yang and Goethe's color theory.

RED: yang(+)
GREEN: the combination of yin and yang
BLUE: yin(-)

Yin-yang is the key principle of HOMOCENTRIC UNIVERSE.

Electromagnetic waves with wavelengths between 750 and 620 nanometers we perceive as "red".
People who assign the Yang principle to that are emotionally experiencing "red" as "active / male".

Wavelengths between 495 and 450 nanometers we perceive as "blue".
People who assign the Yin principle to that are emotionally experiencing "blue" as "passive / female".

Green as combination of Yin and Yang is just an extension of the attempts to spread out / design personal experiences of receptive part of the population.

On the contrary, Chinese tradition presents Yang as "sky / active / male", and the sky is blue.
Yin is "earth / passive / female" and before the industrial revolution it was mostly green.

Yin / Yang system is binary (base 2). Light and dark, regardles the color. Rods in the eye.
Red / Green / Blue system is ternary (base 3). Colors regardless the brightness. Cones in the eye.

Materialistic thinking cannot tell the secret of the world.
The world is a relationship.
Round is not the earth, but the celestial sphere.

Assigning Yang to sky and Yin to Earth is not materialistic at all.
Yin and Yang are principles by which humans (still) try to give emotional explanations to the world around.

What is materialistic is the Universe that surrounds us.
We can either limit ourselves to just own, personal point of view (declare our ego to be the center of everything), or
we can exchange data, have views from more than one point and build a bigger, more accurate (less limited) picture.

~~~~~

"Celestial sphere" is the term originating in Geocentrism, not in Flat model.
Ancient Flat model before Plato and Aristotle had Dome, not Spheres.
(Looks like the term "the seventh heaven" came from superficial understanding of Geocentrism among common people.)

In Geocentrism there is Earth as the sphere in the center of heavens and
several crystal spheres, each carrying own set of celestial bodies.

Instead of bands, Plato's student Eudoxus developed a planetary model using concentric spheres
for all the planets, with three spheres each for his models of the Moon and the Sun and four each for
the models of the other five planets, thus making 26 spheres in all.
Callippus modified this system, using five spheres for his models of the Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, and Mars
and retaining four spheres for the models of Jupiter and Saturn, thus making 33 spheres in all. Each planet is
attached to the innermost of its own particular set of spheres.
Although the models of Eudoxus and Callippus qualitatively describe the major features of the motion of the planets,
they fail to account exactly for these motions and therefore cannot provide quantitative predictions. Although
historians of Greek science have traditionally considered these models to be merely geometrical representations,
recent studies have proposed that they were also intended to be physically real or have withheld judgment,
noting the limited evidence to resolve the question.

(from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestial_spheres

Quote from: zorbakim on June 30, 2019, 03:08:49 PM

Quote from: Macarios on June 30, 2019, 02:51:02 AM

Quote from: zorbakim on June 30, 2019, 02:05:49 AM

RGB is the color of the three primary colors of light.
It is related to yin and yang and Goethe's color theory.

RED: yang(+)
GREEN: the combination of yin and yang
BLUE: yin(-)

Yin-yang is the key principle of HOMOCENTRIC UNIVERSE.

Electromagnetic waves with wavelengths between 750 and 620 nanometers we perceive as "red".
People who assign the Yang principle to that are emotionally experiencing "red" as "active / male".

Wavelengths between 495 and 450 nanometers we perceive as "blue".
People who assign the Yin principle to that are emotionally experiencing "blue" as "passive / female".

Green as combination of Yin and Yang is just an extension of the attempts to spread out / design personal experiences of receptive part of the population.

On the contrary, Chinese tradition presents Yang as "sky / active / male", and the sky is blue.
Yin is "earth / passive / female" and before the industrial revolution it was mostly green.

Yin / Yang system is binary (base 2). Light and dark, regardles the color. Rods in the eye.
Red / Green / Blue system is ternary (base 3). Colors regardless the brightness. Cones in the eye.

Materialistic thinking cannot tell the secret of the world.
The world is a relationship.
Round is not the earth, but the celestial sphere.

Assigning Yang to sky and Yin to Earth is not materialistic at all.
Yin and Yang are principles by which humans (still) try to give emotional explanations to the world around.

What is materialistic is the Universe that surrounds us.
We can either limit ourselves to just own, personal point of view (declare our ego to be the center of everything), or
we can exchange data, have views from more than one point and build a bigger, more accurate (less limited) picture.

~~~~~

"Celestial sphere" is the term originating in Geocentrism, not in Flat model.
Ancient Flat model before Plato and Aristotle had Dome, not Spheres.
(Looks like the term "the seventh heaven" came from superficial understanding of Geocentrism among common people.)

In Geocentrism there is Earth as the sphere in the center of heavens and
several crystal spheres, each carrying own set of celestial bodies.

Quote

Instead of bands, Plato's student Eudoxus developed a planetary model using concentric spheres
for all the planets, with three spheres each for his models of the Moon and the Sun and four each for
the models of the other five planets, thus making 26 spheres in all.
Callippus modified this system, using five spheres for his models of the Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, and Mars
and retaining four spheres for the models of Jupiter and Saturn, thus making 33 spheres in all. Each planet is
attached to the innermost of its own particular set of spheres.
Although the models of Eudoxus and Callippus qualitatively describe the major features of the motion of the planets,
they fail to account exactly for these motions and therefore cannot provide quantitative predictions. Although
historians of Greek science have traditionally considered these models to be merely geometrical representations,
recent studies have proposed that they were also intended to be physically real or have withheld judgment,
noting the limited evidence to resolve the question.

(from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestial_spheres

Of course, yin and yang theory is is far from materialism.
I thought you were into materialistic thinking.
I'm sorry if I misunderstood you.

In the flat earth model, there was a concept of the Celestial sphere.
Of course, the lower part of the foot was very vague.

In the flat earth model, there was a concept of the Celestial sphere.
Of course, the lower part of the foot was very vague.

Yes, that was the ancient FE model, where Earth was tiny.
For the newer FE model it is a celestial disk instead.

In the flat earth model, there was a concept of the Celestial sphere.
Of course, the lower part of the foot was very vague.

Since the earliest Egyptian and Mesopotamian cosmographies the Flat Earth model
"imagined the Earth to be a disc floating on water with an arched firmament above it
that separated the Earth from the heavens".

Arched Firmament is Dome, not Sphere.

Please tell me what do you mean by "lower part of the foot".

Quote from: zorbakim on July 02, 2019, 03:38:05 AM

In the flat earth model, there was a concept of the Celestial sphere.
Of course, the lower part of the foot was very vague.

Yes, that was the ancient FE model, where Earth was tiny.
For the newer FE model it is a celestial disk instead.

This is how you want to think FE'rs. This knowledge is wrong and aiming manipulation. Celestial sphere still is the most known and accepted model. You don't want him to success, you are jealous.

This is how you want to think FE'rs. This knowledge is wrong and aiming manipulation.

No it isn't.
The celestial sphere had the stars on it, and rotated such that different stars were above Earth or below Earth. This rotated almost once every 24 hours (slightly faster), with the stars above Earth visible and the stars not above Earth, not visible. The sun was one such star, but special as it moved along the celestial sphere.
Additionally, this sphere rotated at an angle.

This matches quite well with reality when you just consider a small portion of Earth, but fails massively for the common FE model.
The sun is one simple example.
For the ancient FE model, with the celestial sphere, the rotation of the celestial sphere would put the sun below Earth for a significant period each day, but for the modern FE models the sun remains perpetually above Earth.
The same is true of the vast majority of stars. They would be above or below Earth with the celestial sphere, but now they remain above Earth, circling around like a disc.

So no, the modern FE model doesn't have a celestial sphere. It has a disc.

If you wish to assert you still have a celestial sphere, please explain just how it works.

there is no need to argue for it. I know how we think as a flat earther. you claim otherwise. I did not read all your BS because your arguments are wrong. We are not what you think of us. you write imaginative things, we don't care. You think you've decided on our behalf. You should see a doctor.