Category Archives: Earth
How Flat Can A Planet Be? ~ Forbes Magazine 2.14.17
Looks like Forbes is attempting to deflect Flat Earth knowledge and reason and defend round ball heliohead theory and inference. Note, there is STILL not one single full photograph of our Earth from space. Not one! Why?
Is this article setting the tone for a “discovery ” of a flat planet in space? hmmm.
Two-hemisphere global composites of Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) data, taken in 2001 and 2002. Observations show that Earth is nearly perfectly round, but must all planets be? Image credit: NASA.
We know that the Earth isn’t flat, and have known this for hundreds of years. There are many ways to demonstrate this, from ships’ masts disappearing as they sail out over the horizon, to your ability to see farther at higher altitudes, to the longer shadows cast by the Sun at higher latitudes, to measuring the shape of the Moon’s shadow on the Earth during a solar eclipse, to actually going to space and seeing the shape of the Earth for yourself.
But just because the Earth isn’t flat doesn’t necessarily mean a planet couldn’t be. In fact, there are many observations that we make that would be consistent with a flat, circular Earth.
The two ways Earth could cast a circular shadow on the Moon: by being a spherical object (bottom) or a disk-like object (top). Lunar eclipse observations cannot determine the Earth’s sphericity on theirown. Image credit: Windows to the Universe Original (Randy Russell), under a c.c.a.-s.a.-3.0 unported license.
So how close could we actually get to a flat planet? One strategy would be to take a solid slab of material — stone, steel, or something even harder like diamond or graphene — and build the largest flat disk you could. If you used conventional materials like this, you could create a thin, flat disk many hundreds of kilometers in radius that was stable. In other words, you could make a flat world that was larger than any object in our asteroid belt, and possibly even nearly the size of our Moon.
The line for a planet vs. a non-planet is mass-dependent, and making a thin, rigid body fails on that account. You can have a flat “thing” in space, but it wouldn’t be a planet if you did. Image credit: Margot (2015), via http://arxiv.org/abs/1507.06300.
But it wouldn’t be a planet if you did it that way. Back in 2006, we famously set forth the three criteria for defining a planet. (That definition has since been extended to exoplanets, too!) In order to be a planet, a world:
- must be in orbit around the Sun (and not any other body like another planet),
- must have sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium shape (round, or oblate/prolate in the case of a rapid rotation), and
- must clear the neighborhood around its orbit (so that there are no other comparably large bodies also in/near its orbit).
That second part of the definition is what fails for our specially-created flat, thin world. If it isn’t massive enough to pull itself into hydrostatic equilibrium, it can’t be classified as a planet.
The rotations of the planets (and Pluto) in our solar system. Image credit: NASA / Calvin J. Hamilton (1999).
But there is a way to create a relatively flat planet: have it spin. Here on Earth, our planet is a relatively slow spinner: it takes 24 hours for us to rotate a full 360°. This means that a person living on the equator, the maximal distance from the Earth’s axis of rotation, experiences an extra speed of 464 meters per second (about 1,000 miles per hour) compared to someone at the poles. This extra speed affects the entire shape of the Earth, and causes it to elongate into a shape known as an oblate spheroid: a near-perfect sphere that’s flattened at the poles and elongated at the equator.
An oblate spheroid is compressed at the poles and elongated around the equatorial axis. Image credit: Sam Derbyshire of Wikimedia Commons.
The diameter of the Earth at the equator is 12,756 km, while at the poles its only 12,714 km. You are 21 kilometers closer to the center of the Earth standing at the North Pole than you are at the equator. This doesn’t seem like much, but there are worlds out there that rotate far faster. The gas giants all rotate quite quickly, with Saturn’s poles compressed by 10% relative to its equator.
(more)
How Did The Kings of Astronomy Get it So Wrong? – Einstein and the Still Earth
***
It will be remembered how Hipparchus failed to get an angle to the stars 2,000 years ago, and arrived at the conclusion that they must be infinitely distant; and we have seen how that hypothesis has been handed down to us through all the centuries without question.
~ G. Hickson ~
*****
This article/post is mostly taken from the work of Gerard Hickson in his 1922 book, “Kings Dethroned”. He lays clearly, concisely and irrefutably, how astronomer by astronomer in the 16th and 17th centuries began in error by the way they measured distance from Earth to Sun, Moon and planets and then subsequently came up with preposterous theory after theory, over decades, to cover up there errors, that continues to this very day.
From Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, Halley, Newton in Europe across the pond in the 1900’s to Einstein and NASA, astronomy has used the same errors in calculating distance of stars and planets in what is called Astrometry.
In the 1920’s, Gerrard Hickson proves conclusively, using their own geometry, math and theories of heliocentrism, gravity, relativity, etc., are gravely in gross error.
In no uncertain terms this work blows apart the Sun centered, Earth a sphere rotating, gravity based heliocentric theory that has been taught in every classroom on our flat plane Earth for the past century or more.
Enjoy!
(Original book title)
Click to access kingsdethronedhi00hickrich.pdf
****
Relative Phantasmagoria
“But I can conceive that in the course of time this Relative Phantasmagoria
might come to be regarded as science,
and be taught as such to the children of the near future.”
~ G. Hickson, April 1921, in reference to
newly proposed Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein
“But I can conceive that in the course of time this Relative Phantasmagoria
might come to be regarded as science,
and be taught as such to the children of the near future.”
~ G. Hickson, April 1921, in reference to
newly proposed Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein
*****
THE EARTH STANDS STILL
It would seem that Copernican Astronomy had reached its highest development about the year 1882, and then began to decline, or rather, to fall to pieces.
The first evidence of this devolution is to be found in the Michelson-Morley experiment of 1887, at Chicago; the result of which might have undeceived even the most devoted believer in the theory of a spinning earth.
Professor Michelson was one of the physicists foremost in determining the Velocity of Light, while he has recently been described in the New York Times as America’s greatest physicist; and it was he who—working in collaboration with Morley— in 1887 made the most painstaking experiments by means of rays of light for the purpose of testing, verifying, or proving by physical science, what really was the velocity of the earth.
To express this more clearly. Astronomers have for a very long time stated that the earth travels
round the sun with a speed of more than eighteen miles a second, or sixty-six thousand miles an hour.
Without in any way seeking to deny this statement, but really believing it to be thereabouts correct, Michelson and Morley undertook their experiments in order to put it to a practical test; just in the same way as we might say “The greengrocer has sent us a sack of potatoes which is said to contain 112 pounds weight; we will weigh it ourselves to see if that is correct.”
The apparent movement of stars around a still earth
More technically, the experiment was to test what was the velocity with which the earth moved in its orbit round the sun relative to the aether. A very well illustrated account of that experiment will be found in The Sphere, published in London, June 11th, 1921, and it is from that article I quote the following, verbatim :
“But to the experimenters’ surprise no difference was discernible. The experiment was tried through numerous angles, but the motion through the aether was NIL”!
Observe that the means employed represented the best that modern physical science could do to prove the movement of the earth through ethereal space, and the result showed that the earth did not move at all! “The motion through the aether was NIL.”
But the world of astronomy has not accepted that result, for it continues to preach the old dogma; it appears that they are willing to accept the decisions of physicists when it suits their case, but reject them when otherwise.
And so they still maintain the fabulous theory that the earth is rushing through space at eleven hundred miles a minute; which, as they would say in America, ” Surely is some traveling.” It must be faster than a bullet from a Lewis gun.
What I have now to record, I do with regret, and only because my sense of duty in the pursuit of truth compels me. It is the circumstance that Sir George Airy, who retired from his position as Astronomer Royal in 1881, related— some nine years later— how he had for some time been harassed by a suspicion that certain errors had crept into some of the computations published in 1866, and that, though he had set himself seriously to the work of revision, his powers were no longer what they had been, and he was never able to examine sufficiently into the work.
Then he spoke of a “grievous error that had been committed in one of the first steps,” and pathetically added —“My spirit in the work was broken, and I have never heartily proceeded with it since.” My sympathy goes out to Sir George in his tribulation of the spirit due to advancing age, while I am not unmindful of myself, for I realize that in him I have lost one who would have been a friend, who would have listened when I said that all was not as it should be with the science of astronomy; and stood by my side, encouraging and helping, when I, younger and stronger, strove to put it right.
I do not know whether Sir George Airy was influenced or not by the result of the Michelson-Morley experiment, but it is at least a noteworthy coincidence that he made those comments only three years later; but in any case science has need of him, and of such evident open-mindedness and sincerity as his, now not content to believe that the earth did not move, further experiments were carried out by Nordmeyer in the year 1903, to test the earth’s velocity in relation to the Intensities of Light from the heavenly bodies, but he also failed to discover any movement.
How Did The Kings of Astronomy Get it So Wrong? Part I – Copernicus – Newton
“It may be boldly asked where can the man be found, possessing the extraordinary gifts of Newton, who could suffer himself to be deluded by such a hocus-pocus, if he had not in the first instance willfully deceived himself;
Only those who know the strength of self-deception, and the extent to which it sometimes trenches on dishonesty, are in a condition to explain the conduct of Newton and of Newton’s school. To support his unnatural theory Newton heaps fiction upon fiction, seeking to dazzle where he cannot convince.
In whatever way or manner may have occurred this business, I must still say that I curse this modern history theory of Cosmology, and hope that perchance there may appear, in due time, some young scientists of genius, who will pick u courage enough to upset this universally disseminated delirium of lunatics”. ~ Johann Goethe
****
This is mostly taken from the work of Gerard Hickson in his 1922 book, “Kings Dethroned”. He lays clearly, concisely and irrefutably how astronomer by astronomer in the 16th and 17th centuries began in error by the way they measured distance from Earth to Sun, Moon and planets and then subsequently came up with preposterous theory after theory, over decades, to cover up there errors, that continues to this very day.
From Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, Halley, Newton in Europe across the pond in the 1900’s to Einstein and NASA, astronomy has used the same errors in calculating distance of stars and planets in what is called Astrometry.
In the 1920’s, Gerrard Hickson proves conclusively, using their own geometry, math and theories of heliocentrism, gravity, relativity, etc., are gravely in gross error.
In no uncertain terms this work blows apart the Sun centered, Earth a sphere rotating, gravity based heliocentric theory that has been taught in every classroom on our flat plane Earth for the past century or more.
Enjoy!
Part II; Einstein and the Still Earth
(Original book title)
Click to access kingsdethronedhi00hickrich.pdf
****
It will be remembered how Hipparchus failed to get an angle to the stars 2,000 years ago, and arrived at the conclusion that they must be infinitely distant; and we have seen how that hypothesis has been handed down to us through all the centuries without question.
~ G. Hickson ~
Gerrard Hickson
PORTRAIT OF THE AUTHOR, BY HIMSELF
PREFACE
In the year 1907 the author made a remarkable discovery which convinced him that the sun was very much nearer to the earth than was generally supposed.
The fact he had discovered was demonstrated beyond all doubt, so that he was compelled to believe that— however improbable it might seem— astronomers had made a mistake when they estimated the distance of the sun to be ninety-three millions of miles.
He then proceeded to examine the means by which the sun’s distance had been computed, and found an astounding error in the “ Diurnal Method of Measurement by Parallax,” which had been invented by Dr. Hailey in the early part of the 19th century, and which was used by Sir David Gill in measuring the distance to the planet Mars in 1877 ; from which he deduced his solar parallax of 8.80″.
Seeing that Sir Norman Lockyer had said that the distance to and the dimensions of everything in the firmament except the moon depends upon Sir David Gill’s measurement to Mars, the author set himself the tremendous task of proving the error, tracing its consequences up to the present day, and also tracing it backwards to the source from which it sprang.
The result of that research is a most illuminating history of the evolution of astronomy from the time of the Roman Empire up to April 1922 ; which is now placed in the hands of the people in “ Kings Dethroned.”
The author has taken the unusual course of submitting these new and startling theories for the consideration of the general public because the responsible scientific societies in London, Washington and Paris, failed to deal with the detailed accounts of the work which he forwarded to them in the Spring of 1920.
He believes that every newly-discovered truth belongs to the whole of mankind, wherefore, if those whose business it is to consider his work fail in their duty he does not hesitate to bring it himself direct to the people, assured of their goodwill and fair judgment.
*
Astronomy has ever been regarded as a study only for the few, but now all its strange terms and theories have been explained in the most lucid manner in “Kings Dethroned,” so that everyone who reads will acquire a comprehensive knowledge of the science.The author takes this opportunity of assuring the reader that none esteems more highly than he, himself,the illustrious pioneers who devoted their genius to the building of astronomy, for he feels that even while pointing out their errors he is but carrying on their work, striving, labouring even as they did, for the same good cause of progress in the interests of all.
*
On the other hand, he thinks that astronomers living at the present time might have used to better purpose the greater advantages which this century provides, and done all that he himself has done by fearless reasoning, devoted labour; and earnest seeking after truth.
*
G. H
******
“How do i do it?” he said to The New York Times correspondent. ” I know where the winds come from, and no so-called meteorologist knows that. It is quite simple. The sun heats the earth more rapidly than the sea; currents of air are set up, and if you study the coast lines and hills you soon find out all about the winds.”
“But how can rays from the sun, 93,000,000 million miles away, distinguish between sea and land?” G.H., Founder of the Hicksonian Society.
Is Sir Isaac Newton’s “Law of Gravity” Just One Great Big 500 Yr. Old Lie?
You do look, my son, in a moved sort, As if you were dismay’d. Be cheerful, sir. Our revels now are ended. These our actors, As I foretold you, were all spirits and Are melted into air, into thin air; And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, The cloud-capp’d towers, the gorgeous palaces, The solemn temples, the great globe itself, Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff As dreams are made on, and our little life Is rounded with a sleep.
Wm. Shakespeare from the Tempest—Act IV, sc. i
******
Gravity
The name is derived from the Latin word “ gravis,” which means “ heavy,” “ having weight,” while the Law of Gravitation is defined as “ That mutual action between masses of matter by virtue of which every such mass tends toward every other with a force varying directly as the product of the masses, and inversely as the square of their distances apart.”
Empirical Research:
A way of gaining knowledge by means of direct and indirect observation or experience. Much of Newton’s evidence was collected by observations,directly and indirectly, then with logical reasoning, he made informed decisions….
****
Direct Observations
Newton noted that apples always fall vertically (straight down). Apples never fall up or sideways. Since the apples are falling in one direction, vertically, instead of speed, scientists call the motion velocity.
Velocity is the speed of a moving object in a certain direction.
A Force is any action (a push or pull) that causes an object to change in speed, change in direction, or change in shape. As long as the force is applied, the speed of the object continues to change; and/or the direction of the object continues to change; and/or the shape of the object continues to change.
Newton’s hypothesis was that some(?) Force was pulling the apples vertically downward. Newton coined the word “gravity” to name this force.
~ Note that the word “weight” is left out of the definition of Newston’s Law of Gravity.
*****
Gravity, the Primordial Glue of all Life in the Universe
SO, the “Official Universally Accepted Modern Scientific Story of our Creation” as agreed by the highest degrees of academia, physics and astronomical science tells us that after the Big Bang… after atoms were created out nothing, from absolutely nothing….some 14.3 Billion years ago, our entire Universe came to be.
Then the atoms, through unidentified attractions began to hook up (sex atoms?). They then began creating dust particles and gaseous vapors made up primarily of hydrogen, nitrogen and oxygen.
All the while exploding outward at the speed of light, projecting in all directions at an unfathomable 670 million miles-per-hour for billions and billions and billions of years .
Out of this Primordial soup stars began to form including our maybe one and only Sun. Then, about 4.5 Billion years ago, so we are told, the Sun spun us off into the ether of space where we flew away from her at such great speeds that we settled some 93 million miles away from him in a locked not so perfect orbit.
Out of this all minerals and gases were formed including our multi’-layered atmosphere, all minerals like gold, and all sentient life as well as life-giving water.
IF WE can only Drill Down 8 miles, How Can we Know Earth’s Core?
FLAT EARTH – WHY YOU CAN’T DIG MORE THAN 8 MILES?
Wild Buffalo Join Dakota Native American Resistance; Powerful Message to All Seekers and Healers
When you step up in conscious resistance to the destruction of all Life on Earth; All of Nature Will Align to Assist and Join With You. Note how the Natives know and those that protect empire remain unaware how unaware they are unaware.
Aplanetruth.info 
Recent Comments