# Kepler's Wild Elliptical Ride

**Apologetics and Fallacious Claims Cannot Really Make The Fantastic Imaginings of Kepler Real**

The heliocentric model is a very flawed one that had to be revised a few times with complicated modeling to even begin to get it to work. The geocentric model on the other hand is based on what we actually observe. The celestial objects start off in the east and end in the west. The Sun and Moon, for example, rise low on the eastern horizon and arc up to noonday height to then arc back down and to set in the west. We naturally observe these bodies making what are essentially circles around the Earth.

**The Geocentric Model Accurately Reproduces Naturally Observed Phenomena Despite Historical Hype To The Contrary**

*"As an indication of exactly how good the Ptolemaic model is, modern planetariums are built using gears and motors that essentially reproduce the Ptolemaic model for the appearance of the sky as viewed from a stationary Earth. In the planetarium projector, motors and gears provide uniform motion of the heavenly bodies. One motor moves the planet projector around in a big circle, which in this case is the deferent, and another gear or motor takes the place of the epicycle."*

source: The Ptolemaic Model

**Reality is a lot less fantastic and mundane.**

We do not and cannot observe a heliocentric based model. It is not natural and is the work of men enamored with fantasy and dream. Kepler is considered to be an author of fantasy, which most label as "science fiction". Fairy tale would be a better description.

*Somnium (Latin for "The Dream") is a novel written in 1608, in Latin, by Johannes Kepler. The narrative would not be published until 1634 by Kepler's son, Ludwig Kepler. In the narrative, an Icelandic boy and his witch mother learn of an island named Levania (our Moon) from a daemon (demon). Somnium presents a detailed imaginative description of how the Earth might look when viewed from the Moon, and is considered the first serious scientific treatise on lunar astronomy. Carl Sagan and Isaac Asimov have referred to it as the first work of science fiction.*

source: Somnium (novel) - Wikipedia

Kepler's Circularly Reasoned Fantasy Cannot Replace Nor Replicate Reality

**The NY Times: After 400 Years, a Challenge to Kepler: He Fabricated His Data, Scholar Says**

By WILLIAM J. BROAD Published: January 23, 1990

*"JOHANNES KEPLER, the father of modern astronomy, fabricated data in presenting his theory of how the planets move around the Sun, apparently to bolster acceptance of the insight by skeptics, a scholar has found. The scholar, William H. Donahue, said the evidence of Kepler's scientific fakery is contained in an elaborate chart he presented to support his theory. Kepler showed that the planets move in elliptical orbits rather than in circles as Copernicus suggested. In his book describing the insight, he said it was confirmed by independent calculations of the planets' positions. In fact, Dr. Donahue says, Kepler derived the data by calculations based on the theory itself. *

*Kepler anticipated stiff criticism of his theory. From antiquity, the circle had been considered the only geometrical shape perfect enough to describe the movement of heavenly bodies. Done in 1609, Kepler's fakery is one of the earliest known examples of the use of false data by a giant of modern science. *

*The discovery was made by Dr. Donahue, a science historian, while translating Kepler's master work, ''Astronomia Nova,'' or ''The New Astronomy,'' into English. Dr. Donahue, who lives in Sante Fe, N.M., described his discovery in a recent issue of The Journal of the History of Astronomy. The fabricated data appear in calculated positions for the planet Mars, which Kepler used as a case study for all planetary motion. Kepler claimed the calculations gave his elliptical theory an independent check. But in fact they did nothing of the kind. *

*''He fudged things,'' Dr. Donahue said, adding that Kepler was never challenged by a contemporary. *

*Experts, nearly unanimous in defending the great astronomer, say Kepler's act may be less reprehensible than it seems. For instance, methods of investigation and reporting at the start of the scientific revolution were often quiet rudimentary. 'Kepler was one of the people who invented modern science,'' said Walter W. Stewart, a researcher with the National Institutes of Health who is helping Congress investigate cases of scientific fraud. ''It's not clear his standards were the same as ours.'' "*

source: After 400 Years, a Challenge to Kepler - He Fabricated His Data ...

**Fantastic Apologetics**

Kepler's work is filled with fudge. Copernicus failed and so did Kepler and Newton. Heliocentric based models are logically fallacious. Gravitation, the apple accelerating as it falls towards the center of the Earth, cannot explain orbits. Gravity is an accelerated phenomena that cannot logically be balanced with what is essentially a fixed orbital velocity. Magical thinking is required to accept what basic ballistic physics and the apple proves. What goes up comes back down with accelerated velocity, Forward motion is separate from gravitational pull and a bullet fired from a gun hits the ground at the same time as a bullet dropped from hand. The idea that the lights in the sky have to be flying rocks of some kind is a very fantastic one. It is unnatural and cannot be demonstrated.

**Copernicus, Kepler and Newton were not scientists in any real sense. They did no experiments.**

### Illogically applied mathematical equation is no substitute for demonstration.

Labeling speculation as "Laws" can't magically make fantasy backed with fallacious math into reality.

NASA and other space agencies are supposed to be the real experiments that prove these guys right. The fact that the world's space programs are the result of clear Hollywood fakery is a huge clue that there is no reason to accept any model but a logically based geocentric one. The one based on what we actually can observe and what we can actually demonstrate. Most people do not understand that nation states are fake constructs used by international banking managers to manage global human resource. The space programs are a Cold War relic that the governments of the world rely on as the medium for nuclear annihilation style propaganda. Nation states depend on existential threat of the other nation's leaders as impetus for taxing its citizenry. The fact that the super powered weaponry of the nations of the world are as fake as the space programs is something we are not supposed to even consider as a possibility.

*"Figure 6: Finding the area swept out by a line joining a planet to the Sun. The points M1, M2 etc. represent positions of Mars. S is the Sun."*

image source: https://plus.maths.org/content/origins-proof-ii-keplers-proofs

**Kepler Estimated and Massaged The Results To Match Intellectual Prejudice**

### And guess what? It was good enough! Nothing like the art of apologetics.

*"Kepler's method of finding areas is, as he says, similar to that used by Archimedes (c.287 - 212 BC) to find the area of a circle. But it is not exactly the same, and unlike Archimedes' procedure, Kepler's is not completely rigorous. However, Kepler's method does, also, look a little like integration, and it did in fact mark the beginning of a technique called "the calculus of indivisibles" which is now seen as an ancestor of modern calculus."*

*"Anyway, by Chapter 40 of his book, Kepler had decided the area law was good enough to go on with. He used it as a way of measuring time."*

*"Anyway, by Chapter 40 of his book, Kepler had decided the area law was good enough to go on with. He used it as a way of measuring time."*

source: https://plus.maths.org/content/origins-proof-ii-keplers-proofs

for more about the calculus of indivisibles please see*: *Cavalieri's principle - Wikipedia

**Kepler's Home Made Fudge: The Fallacious Use of Geometry To Explain Orbits**

"*Kepler's account of his calculations in the New Astronomy is certainly not a full diary of what he actually did, but there is good reason to suppose that it does, in outline, follow the actual progress of his reasoning. We know, therefore, that the law we call the second (sometimes also called the "area law") was in fact arrived at first.*"

source: https://plus.maths.org/content/origins-proof-ii-keplers-proofs

**Kepler's Imperfect Method**

*"As his calculations progressed, Kepler was able to use exact geometrical methods to find areas. But at first finding the areas was a difficult task, and Kepler's method was approximate, effectively adding up areas of triangles with their vertex at the Sun and very small vertical angles, as shown in figure 6. Kepler used triangles whose vertical angle was one minute of arc. His method is best near the apsides, that is the positions at which the planet is nearest to or furthest from the Sun, which (once he knows the shape of the path) will turn out to be the ends of the major axis of the ellipse. The calculations are made more difficult by having to allow for the motion of the Earth, which is, of course, not in the same plane as the motion of Mars. (The planes of the two orbits are inclined to one another at about 1 degree 50 minutes.)"*

source: https://plus.maths.org/content/origins-proof-ii-keplers-proofs

**Kepler's Logic is Hard To Follow**

"*Kepler published the first two laws in 1609 in a work aptly titled New Astronomy. The third appeared ten years later in a book about cosmology, called The Harmony of the World. Both of these works are now available in English translation (see the bibliography) but neither is exactly an easy read. Indeed Kepler himself admits as much in the New Astronomy, saying in the second paragraph of his Introduction:*

I myself, a professional mathematician, on re-reading my own work find it strains my mental powers to recall to mind from the figures the meanings of the demonstrations, meanings which I myself originally put into the figures and the text from my mind. But when I attempt to remedy the obscurity of the material by putting in extra words, I see myself falling into the opposite fault of becoming chatty in something mathematical.

[trans. JVF]

*It is good to know one has the author's permission to find the mathematical reasoning difficult to follow.*

*The New Astronomy was printed as a large folio. In an effort to make it look attractive, the publisher added some decorations to the diagrams. Modern readers may not find the effect totally reassuring. Indeed, it seems that on the whole Kepler's contemporaries also found the work difficult. The reason for this was to do with how Kepler set about proving that planetary motion could be described by the two laws. This method was new. It was, in fact, new to Kepler as well as to his readers..*"

source: The origins of proof II : Kepler's proofs | plus.maths.org