Since we are taking opinion polls on scientific questions about the earth, how about another?
The Earth Moves, Fact or Fiction?
- Thread starter jncc
- Start date
Of course it moves, it rotates.
But in terms of it displacing itself, I'm not sure. Do other bodies (including stars) move? If they do, I'd see no reason why the Earth couldn't move as well. Or burn out
But in terms of it displacing itself, I'm not sure. Do other bodies (including stars) move? If they do, I'd see no reason why the Earth couldn't move as well. Or burn out
- Thread starter
- #3
Why not say the stars and the sun and moon revolve daily around the Earth? It sure looks that way to me.
Because I'm pretty sure scientists have proven otherwise.
I guess I don't understand the question. The earth spins on it's axis, it orbits the sun, the solar system very slowly orbits around the center of the galaxy, the Milky Way along with the Andromeda galaxy is part of a binary system contained within a "local group" of galaxies. The universe as a whole is expanding like raisins in a loaf of rising bread. There is no ultimate fixed point of reference.
From Wikipedia: In the general sense, the absolute velocity of any object through space is not a meaningful question according to Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity, which declares that there is no "preferred" inertial frame of reference in space with which to compare the Galaxy's motion. (Motion must always be specified with respect to another object.)
Is this the catch?
From Wikipedia: In the general sense, the absolute velocity of any object through space is not a meaningful question according to Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity, which declares that there is no "preferred" inertial frame of reference in space with which to compare the Galaxy's motion. (Motion must always be specified with respect to another object.)
Is this the catch?
Well, I am standing here in my front yard. I am not moving. I don't see any motion other than a breeze through the trees. So no, the earth doesn't move. And don't give me any contradictory evidence that proves otherwise because my mind's made up. Made up, I tell you!
- Thread starter
- #7
It sounds like you are voting for a moving Earth: one that revolves on its axis and orbits the sun.
But, as far as I can tell with my own eyes and my own experience the ground is stationary and the sun goes around the earth (not the other way around)
Like evolution and global warming, special relativity is a theory, not a fact. But, even if you accept special relativity, it does not really fit this case because the theory concerns linear, not circular motion. Additionally, circular motion involves acceleration not just velocity.
All spelling is relative.....it depends on your perspective
I shall return later to offer my view...........after this poll has time to establish a consensus............
"I feel the Earth, move, under my feet" -- Carole King
If the earth didn't spin on it's axis east to west and west to east flight times would be the same. They are not.
Is this tongue-in-cheek?
NO.
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/dynamics/q0027.shtml
Scratch that, I read further.
who would have thought it would be so hard to demonstrate the earth moves?
- Thread starter
- #15
The air moving is enough to make e-w flight times differ from w-e times
From the linked page:
"So, the end result of that long discussion is that the rotation of the Earth has no effect on the travel time of an aircraft. Actually, as you suggested, it is the headwinds and tailwinds that cause the change in travel times."
Hewlett Packard did an experiment, years ago, flying and atomic clock around the world. Prior to flight, it was synced with a stationary clock. After a trip one way around the world, there was a difference between the two. Flying the opposite direction, eliminated the difference. This, in part, proved Einstein's theory that time slowed as one approaches the velocity of light.
hum. How about satellites that are in a geosynchronous orbit? Heavenly bodies move relative to the apparently stationary satellite but the satellite can't be truly stationary because it relies on centrifugal force to keep it from falling to earth?
The idea is that the math doesn't work out at all unless you assume the earth moves.
Similar threads
