British Physicist Julian Barbour: "It is remarkably difficult to say categorically whether the Earth moves, and if so, in what precise sense...

They got it all wrong? dont think so

I do find this very interesting.

I have wondered if the earth is moving how come it takes so long to travel by flight?

Or why does a blimp need a motor to move, wouldn't it just go up and wait, the earth is moving, so it's location would be different? See where I am going?

It is true, there are no experiments that prove earth is moving, or is the center it all, or if it’s flat.

There are no experiments that prove the zodiac is going around the earth.

There are no experiments that we are not in a binary star system.

I’ve never thought of this before. Same with planes, can’t they just go up and wait? The earth supposedly rotates 1,000 miles an hour, at least 2-3 times the speed of modern aircraft.

I like the way you think. I have thought about it the same way as well. I think what's going on is the atmosphere is spinning just as fast as the earth. So are we that's why we stay planted to the ground, instead of floating away. I used to think the earth should move under my feet of I were to just jump straight up. But science says everything is spinning, at least that's what I was taught.

So why do the moon the sun and all the constellations and planets seemingly move throughout our night sky? Aether firmament shoal? Inner earth, Agatha, Neuschwabenland. What do we really know?

The blimp is contained within earths atmosphere and held by gravity? Your theory makes no sense. You think just because you levitate in the air over your house that in 24 hours you’ll travel the globe and come back to your house? Surely humanity hasn’t gotten this stupid .

Newton insisted, but did not prove, that space was "absolute" - did not move. Mach and Einstein argued that accelerated frames, not just inertial frames, must be accounted for. If the frame accelerates (universe rotates) it produces real forces (centrifugal, coriolis, euler) on objects in the system. Newton believed that there were only two things at work: gravity and inertia. In a Geostatic system, there are three more forces at work. Newton's model still works wonderfully for closed systems like our Solar System, but when you take into consideration the entire system of the Universe, it is entirely possible for the Universe to rotate around a motionless Earth and obey the laws of physics. In fact, the Michelson-Morley experiment actually proved experimentally that the Earth does not rotate or revolve, but the results were misinterpreted due to certain ideological biases.

Yep. That's the way God made it. Now that we know all their "expert knowledge" is garbage we can begin to deconstruct the lies they have fed us and discover Truth!

Wouldn't the sky and stars show movement? Especially planetary observation over time? Like if you look out into the sky at a planet, say Mars, you can triangularly visualise the solar system. You can even make it out with more than one planet in the sky. You know where the sun is, so when you see those planets you can 'see' the distances between us and them. Surely the crawl of the planets across the sky prove our movement?

Yes, exactly, the earth may not be moving or if it did you would go around in 24 hours without assistance.

And gravity has never been proven, at least how modern science explains einsteinian gravity. Another theory, supported by Tesla’s theory is that gravity is caused by forces exerting pressure downward, I.e. the etheric realm pushing down creating physical objects.

That proves nothing except that you can triangulate their positions.

It does not prove the earth itself is moving. It also does not prove the earth is not moving.

.

.

.

The sun revolves around the Earth at a slightly slower pace than the stars. The stars revolve in 23 hours, 56 minutes, 41 seconds; the sun revolves in exactly 24 hours. Also, in the Geostatic system the entire universe moves on an ecliptic. The sun is located on this ecliptic and travels with it daily around the fixed earth but also has a counterclockwise movement of 1 degree daily (due to local planetary gravitational and inertial drag). In this system, the entire universe has two motions: an annual motion up and down by 23.5 degrees and a daily rotational motion. The sun is on this same ecliptic plane and therefore also has the same motions differing only by 1 degree due to local forces. This model matches with the data we have from the cosmic microwave radiation (CMB) which itself is aligned with the Earth's equinoxes and the Sun-Earth ecliptic. Even Stonehenge recognized this thousands of years ago, as Stonehenge is an ancient astronomical observatory built on the Geostatic system with the rest of the universe moving back and forth on a tilting plane.

This is true. You can't prove it. And you can't disprove it either. You are facing two choices, and you have to choose based on philosophical grounds:

1. The Earth is the fixed center point of the Universe, the fulcrum around which all of creation pivots.

2. The Earth is not privileged in any way, it's just a random place among a near infinity of places.

Depending on your belief system you'll prefer one or the other. I vote for #2 because it fits my belief system. But it can't be proven!

(At least not yet, there may be some kind of measurable physical effect that makes it possible to tell for sure which it is, we just haven't found such an effect yet.)

Et Sano, while I agree that the Earth is fixed, I reject your claim that Flat Earth is a diversion from this fact. For Flat Earth is the truth:
[link to www.godlikeproductions.com]

Two choices for those limited to a materialistic understanding of existence.

We're talking about PHYSICS here. Physics is about a materialistic understanding of existence. It's what physics does. Everything outside that box is metaphysics.

I have some wacky metaphysics beliefs too (wackier than most, actually!), they just weren't relevant to the point discussed in this thread. Because it was about physics, and what is knowable vs unknowable about the physical universe, as it can be studied scientifically.

regarding the earth moving, Foucault's Pendulum would be one experiment, done around 200 years ago and still going today, that does say the earth moves


How Does Foucault’s Pendulum Prove the Earth Rotates?
[link to www.smithsonianmag.com (secure)]

I have no theory it's just thinking out loud and btw gravity is theory, it is not proven science.

What I am saying if we are moving rotating at a great speed seems there would be away to use this resource. Or is our atmosphere traveling along with us? Explain it.

That was my first thought (also) - of course one always has to keep an open mind ! - so what else _might_ be making the pendulum rotate on a fixed earth, I wonder ?

It was experimentally proved in 1887 (Michelson-Morley) and again in 1925 (Michelson-Gale) although the results were intentionally misinterpreted and suppressed because the theological implications were unwelcome by the Materialist establishment. Einstein was specifically tasked with coming up with an alternate explanation that would find a way around the unwelcome results that demonstrated that the Ether (medium of space) was real and Earth neither rotates nor revolves thru it.

Add to the results of Micheslon-Morley and Michelson-Gale the radio galaxy and quasar alignment with the north celestial pole. Add to that the cosmic microwave background radiation universe-spanning axis alignment with earth's equator and ecliptic. Add to that the spin axis of galaxies alignment with the CMB axis. Add to that the distinct distribution of galaxies, gamma rays and quasars in concentric spheres around the Earth, which all taper off as if there is an edge to the universe. And add to all these modern discoveries the fact that the ancients had accurately predicted and observed the Geostatic model. For example, everything Copernicus' system could do, Brahe's could do better. The only thing missing from Brahe's model was the power grid: what was making the larger sun revolve around the smaller earth? Brahe didn't have the solution. But Brahe's system answered every one of the observable motions in the sky (including retrograde motions, phases of venus, etc) using Earth as the fixed center. In Brahe's system the earth was fixed at the center and had only two satellites, the sun and moon. Everything else in our solar system was orbiting the sun. And the sun and planets were orbiting on the ecliptic plane. And everyone in Brahe's times said why should that be? Why an ecliptic plane? They ridiculed Brahe for suggesting everything in our solar system was orbiting on a 23.5 degree ecliptic plane. Why is this the case they wanted to know. But Brahe had no answer other than that was what he observed. 400 years after Brahe was laughed at, it was one and only one cosmological model that predicted that the 23.5 degree angle had universe-spanning significance, and that was Brahe's model. That 23.5 degree axis was seen in the CMB to span the entire universe, passing right through Earth as it does so. Brahe had predicted this and was laughed at. Even before Brahe, Stonehenge also told the same story that the modern CMB data tells us: the whole Universe operates and is aligned by the distance between the sun and the Earth.

. Plus there is a magnetic field, we do know this.

With today's technology it's easy enough to prove or disprove, unfortunately the technology is in the hands of known liars...
In our day and age of technological advancement this is not even a question that should be debated really.

If you toss a ball up in the air in a car doing 70mph does the ball smash against the back window? Does it wack the passenger in the back at 70mph? This is the same reason why you can't just lift a blimp in the air and let the earth rotate under it. Your idea is completely sound though, you just have to lift the blimp above the earths atmosphere first.

A single link, or better yet a link for each quote, would be nice for context.

You don't need to accept our current theories. Indeed you could have a theory that things work one way today, another way tomorrow, etc. That they work in whatever way you observe, period.

The tendency of drains to swirl one way in the N. hemisphere, the other way in the S. hemisphere, is evidence for the existence of Coriolis force, which results from rotation around the axis.

Nothing is "proof" or ever can be, if you demand the standard of mathematical rigor. All we can ever do is systematize observations and prefer rules that explain them simply and generally.