Podcast Episode 59

Episode+59.jpg

image source: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:London_Guildhall.jpg

Podcast Episode 59: The Rise of International Guildhall Governments

(Please excuse inevitable typo. Auto spell correct is an evil gremlin. I will fix the typos as I find them. Thanks you, AA Morris)


How the Royal Society and Jesuit institutions spread faith in fallacious heliocentric ideas.

Origin and evolution of the endlessly ad hoc patched international secular religious faith.

SHOW NOTES:

The Royal Society is Royal chartered, (letters patent bearing) guild.

History of the Royal Society

"Following a lecture by Sir Christopher Wren, the Royal Society is founded at Gresham College, London on 28 November. King Charles II becomes patron."

"The story of the Royal Society is the story of modern science."

"Our origins lie in a 1660 ‘invisible college’ of natural philosophers and physicians. Today we are the UK’s national science academy and a Fellowship of some 1,600 of the world’s most eminent scientists."

"Nullius in verba"

"The very first ‘learned society’ meeting on 28 November 1660 followed a lecture at Gresham College by Christopher Wren. Joined by other leading polymaths including Robert Boyle and John Wilkins, the group soon received royal approval, and from 1663 it would be known as 'The Royal Society of London for Improving Natural Knowledge'. The Royal Society's motto 'Nullius in verba' is taken to mean 'take nobody's word for it'. It is an expression of the determination of Fellows to withstand the domination of authority and to verify all statements by an appeal to facts determined by experiment. 

"Advancements and adventure"

"The early years of the Society saw revolutionary advancements in the conduct and communication of science. Hooke’s Micrographia and the first issue of Philosophical Transactions were published in 1665 alone. Philosophical Transactions, which established the important concepts of scientific priority and peer review, is now the oldest continuously-published science journal in the world. We published Isaac Newton’s Principia Mathematica, and Benjamin Franklin’s kite experiment demonstrating the electrical nature of lightning. We backed James Cook’s journey to Tahiti, reaching Australia and New Zealand, to track the Transit of Venus. We published the first report in English of inoculation against disease, approved Charles Babbage’s Difference Engine, documented the eruption of Krakatoa and published Chadwick’s detection of the neutron that would lead to the unleashing of the atom.  The leading scientific lights of the past four centuries can all be found among the 8,000 Fellows elected to the Society to date. From Newton to Darwin to Einstein and beyond, pioneers and paragons in their fields are elected by their peers. Current Fellows include Jocelyn Bell Burnell, Richard Dawkins, Stephen Hawking and Tim Berners-Lee."

source: https://royalsociety.org/about-us/history/

Guilds are forms of government.

"A guild /ɡɪld/ is an association of artisans or merchants who oversee the practice of their craft/trade in a particular area. The earliest types of guild formed as confraternities of tradesmen. They were organized in a manner something between a professional association, a trade union, a cartel, and a secret society. They often depended on grants of letters patent from a monarch or other authority to enforce the flow of trade to their self-employed members, and to retain ownership of tools and the supply of materials. A lasting legacy of traditional guilds are the guildhallsconstructed and used as guild meeting-places."

source: Guild - Wikipedia  •  Guild | Definition of Guild by Merriam-Webster 

GUILD:

"also gild, early 13c., yilde (spelling later influenced by Old Norse gildi "guild, brotherhood"), a semantic fusion of Old English gegield "guild, brotherhood," and gield"service, offering; payment, tribute; compensation," from Proto-Germanic *geldjam"payment, contribution" (source also of Old Frisian geld "money," Old Saxon geld"payment, sacrifice, reward," Old High German gelt "payment, tribute;" see yield (v.)). The connecting sense is of a contribution or payment to join a protective or trade society. But some look to the alternative prehistoric sense of "sacrifice," as if in worship, and see the word as meaning a combination for religious purposes, either Christian or pagan."

"The Anglo-Saxon guilds had a strong religious component; they were burial societies that paid for Masses for the souls of deceased members as well as paying fines in cases of justified crime. Continental guilds of merchants, incorporated in each town or city and holding exclusive rights of doing business there, arrived after the Conquest. In many cases they became the governing body of a town (compare Guildhall, which came to be the London city hall). Trade guilds arose 14c., as craftsmen united to protect their common interest."

source: guild | Origin and meaning of guild by Online Etymology Dictionary

International Banking Sun Worshipping Cult Becomes Guild and Government

Sun Worsip Becomes "Scientific" Cosmology

"An inscription dateable AD 307–310 at the site PRO SALVTE D N CCCC ET NOB CAES DEO MITHRAE ET SOLI INVICTO AB ORIENTE AD OCCIDENTEM" may be translated "For the Salvation of our lords the four emperors and the noble Caesar, and to the god Mithras, the Invincible Sun from the east to the west" (Collingwood and Wright 1965, no. 4)."

"The London Mithraeum, also known as the Temple of Mithras, Walbrook, is a Roman mithraeum that was discovered in Walbrook, a street in the City of London, during a building's construction in 1954. The entire site was relocated to permit continued construction and this temple of the mystery god Mithrasbecame perhaps ..."

source: London Mithraeum - Wikipedia

The Revelation of The Terror of Doomsday:

"No surveys were made of the City of London,"

"Domesday Book encompasses two independent works (in, originally, two physical volumes). These were "Little Domesday" (covering Norfolk, Suffolk, and Essex), and "Great Domesday" (covering much of the remainder of England and parts of Wales‍—‌except for lands in the north which later became Westmorland, Cumberland, Northumberland, and the County Palatine of Durham). No surveys were made of the City of London, Winchester, or some other towns, probably due to their tax-exempt status. (Other areas of modern London were then in Middlesex, Kent, Essex, etc., and are included in Domesday Book.) Most of Cumberland and Westmorland are missing. County Durham is missing because the Bishop of Durham (William de St-Calais) had the exclusive right to tax it; in addition, parts of north-east England were covered by the 1183 Boldon Book, listing areas liable to tax by the Bishop of Durham. The omission of the other counties and towns is not fully explained, although in particular Cumberland and Westmorland had yet to be fully conquered "Little Domesday" – so named because its format is physically smaller than its companion's – is the more detailed survey, down to numbers of livestock. It may have represented the first attempt, resulting in a decision to avoid such level of detail in "Great Domesday"."

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domesday_Book

"While laying waste to the rest of the country, William the Conqueror “came friendly” to London, recognised the liberties of its citizens, pledged to defend their freedoms and fortified the City against barbarian attack. London’s special status within the constitution was upheld by a stream of charters and privileges that protected the City of London from external interference. In Magna Carta, the 1215 charter of rights between King John and the barons, not only are the rights of the “whole body” of citizens respected but the mayor of London was designated as one of two guarantors charged with ensuring that the Crown kept its side of the bargain. The Corporation of London, which announced itself as a “commune” in 1191, was recognised as one of the great institutions of the Ancient Constitution, with a place only one step below the sovereign. The combination of wealth, functioning democratic and legal institutions and an effective system of civic militias meant the Crown could never subordinate the City of London to its rule. London taxed itself, judged itself and governed itself."

source: https://www.ft.com/content/7c8f24fa-3aa5-11e4-bd08-00144feabdc0

Guilds evolve into governmental forms.

"Guilds and Community Interrelationships"

"The members of the guild were called confraternities, brothers helping one another. From the political viewpoint, the guild was neither sovereign nor unrelated to society outside the guild and town organization. As a collective unit, the guild might be a vassal to a bishop, lord or king, as in Paris. The extent of vassalage depended on the degree of independence of the town where it was located. There was a close connection between the guild and the city authorities: 

  • The City Council could intervene in event of trouble between guilds. 
  • Council could establish the hours of work, fix prices, establish weights and measures
  • Guild officials were frequently appointed to serve in civic government because guilds usually voted as a unit, raised troops for the civic militia, and paid taxes as a group. 

Each guild was required to perform public services. They:

  • took turns policing the streets and
  • constructed public buildings and walls to defend the town or city. 

"A perceived higher social status could be achieved through guild membership."

"The guildsmen of The Canterbury Tales had wives who liked to be called "Ma Dame" by their inferiors."

"...took turns policing the streets and  constructed public buildings and walls to defend the town or city. "

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_London_Corporation  •  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_London

"The livery companies of the City of London, currently 110 in number, comprise London's ancient and modern trade associations and guilds, almost all of which are styled the "Worshipful Company of..." their respective craft, trade or profession.[1][2] London's livery companies play a significant part in City life, not least by providing charitable-giving and networking opportunities. Liverymen retain voting rights for the senior civic offices, such as the Lord Mayor, Sheriffs and City of London Corporation, its ancient municipal authority with extensive local government powers.[2]

The term livery originated in the specific form of dress worn by retainers of a nobleman and then by extension to special dress to denote status of belonging to a trade. Livery companies evolved from London's medieval guilds, becoming corporations under Royal Charter responsible for training in their respective trades, as well as for the regulation of aspects such as wage control, labour conditions and industry standards. Early guilds often grew out of parish fraternal organizations, where large groups of members of the same trade lived in close proximity and gathered at the same church.[3] Like most organisations during the Middle Ages, these livery companies had close ties with the Catholic Church (before the Protestant Reformation), endowing religious establishments such as chantry chapels and churches, observing religious festivals with hosting ceremonies and well-known mystery plays. Most livery companies retain their historical religious associations, although nowadays members are free to follow any faith or none. Companies often established a guild or meeting hall, and though they faced destruction in the Great London Fire of 1666 and during World War II, thirty-nine companies maintain their sometimes elaborate and historic halls.[3]

Most livery companies still maintain contacts with their original trade, craft or professional roles. Some still exercise powers of regulation, inspection and enforcement, while others are awarding bodies for professional qualifications. The Scriveners' Company admits senior members of legal and associated professions, the Apothecaries' Company awards post-graduate qualifications in some medical specialties, and the Hackney Carriage Drivers' Company comprises licensed taxi drivers who have passed the "Knowledge of London" test. Several companies restrict membership only to those holding relevant professional qualifications, eg. the City of London Solicitors' Company and the Worshipful Company of Engineers. Other companies, whose trade died out long ago, such as the Longbow Makers' Company, have evolved into being primarily charitable foundations.[2]

After the Carmen received City livery status in 1746 no new companies were established in London for 180 years until the Master Mariners in 1926 (granted livery in 1932).[2] Post-1926 creations are known as modern livery companies. The Worshipful Company of Arts Scholars, the newest, was granted livery status on 11 February 2014, making it the 110th City livery company in order of precedence.[4] The Honourable Company of Air Pilots is exceptional among London's livery companies in having active overseas committees in Australia, Canada, Hong Kong, New Zealand and North America."

source: Livery Companies in the City of London - Wikipedia

The crisis, reaction revolution will never end and will always be broadcast by whatever means  possible.

Consider the history of the police forces of the world and how this history is very much associated with freemason lodges and how sherif badges and other police imagery reflect this fact.

Guilds profit from protection racketeering.

Gossip becomes governmental building gospel. Word of mouth hearsay morphs into mass choir sung church song, mass produced printed propaganda, telegraph connected international News and so much more...

This is a story about how guilds would grow into the cancerous tax burdensome governmental forms of today, including the criminal justice, for profit, prison system.

The control of information is of upmost importance to the few who seek to manage the many.

The Royal Society, like similar Jesuit institutions, controls information and freely mixes liberal doses of propaganda nonsense with actual real technology to produce governmental marketing material and mythology sold as historic an scientific fact.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guildhall,_London

https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/about-the-city/history/Pages/livery-companies.aspx

https://www.britannica.com/topic/guild-trade-association

Royal Society

"The President, Council and Fellows of the Royal Society of London for Improving Natural Knowledge, commonly known as the Royal Society, is a learned society. Founded in November 1660, it was granted a royal charter by King Charles II as "The Royal Society". It is the oldest national scientific institution in the world. The society is the United Kingdom's and Commonwealth of Nations' Academy of Sciences and fulfils a number of roles: promoting science and its benefits, recognising excellence in science, supporting outstanding science, providing scientific advice for policy, fostering international and global co-operation, education and public engagement.

The society is governed by its Council, which is chaired by the Society's President, according to a set of statutes and standing orders. The members of Council and the President are elected from and by its Fellows, the basic members of the society, who are themselves elected by existing Fellows. As of 2016, there are about 1,600 fellows, allowed to use the postnominal title FRS (Fellow of the Royal Society), with up to 52 new fellows appointed each year. There are also royal fellows, honorary fellows and foreign members, the last of which are allowed to use the postnominal title ForMemRS (Foreign Member of the Royal Society). The Royal Society President is Venkatraman Ramakrishnan, who took up the post on 30 November 2015. Since 1967, the society has been based at 6–9 Carlton House Terrace, a Grade I listed building in central London which was previously used by the Embassy of Germany, London."

source: Royal Society - Wikipedia

"Charles II (29 May 1630 – 6 February 1685)[c] was king of England, Scotland and Ireland. He was king of Scotland from 1649 until his deposition in 1651, and king of England, Scotland and Ireland from the restoration of the monarchy in 1660 until his death. Charles II's father, Charles I, was executed at Whitehall on 30 January 1649, at the climax of the English Civil War. Although the Parliament of Scotland proclaimed Charles II king on 5 February 1649, England entered the period known as the English Interregnum or the English Commonwealth, and the country was a de facto republic, led by Oliver Cromwell. Cromwell defeated Charles II at the Battle of Worcester on 3 September 1651, and Charles fled to mainland Europe. Cromwell became virtual dictator of England, Scotland and Ireland. Charles spent the next nine years in exile in France, the Dutch Republic and the Spanish Netherlands. A political crisis that followed the death of Cromwell in 1658 resulted in the restoration of the monarchy, and Charles was invited to return to Britain. On 29 May 1660, his 30th birthday, he was received in London to public acclaim. After 1660, all legal documents were dated as if he had succeeded his father as king in 1649. Charles's English parliament enacted laws known as the Clarendon Code, designed to shore up the position of the re-established Church of England. Charles acquiesced to the Clarendon Code even though he favoured a policy of religious tolerance. The major foreign policy issue of his early reign was the Second Anglo-Dutch War. In 1670, he entered into the Treaty of Dover, an alliance with his first cousin King Louis XIV of France. Louis agreed to aid him in the Third Anglo-Dutch War and pay him a pension, and Charles secretly promised to convert to Catholicism at an unspecified future date. Charles attempted to introduce religious freedom for Catholics and Protestant dissenters with his 1672 Royal Declaration of Indulgence, but the English Parliament forced him to withdraw it. In 1679, Titus Oates's revelations of a supposed "Popish Plot" sparked the Exclusion Crisis when it was revealed that Charles's brother and heir (James, Duke of York) was a Catholic. The crisis saw the birth of the pro-exclusion Whig and anti-exclusion Tory parties. Charles sided with the Tories, and, following the discovery of the Rye House Plotto murder Charles and James in 1683, some Whig leaders were executed or forced into exile. Charles dissolved the English Parliament in 1681, and ruled alone until his death on 6 February 1685. He was received into the Catholic Church on his deathbed. Charles was one of the most popular and beloved kings of England,[1] known as the Merry Monarch, in reference to both the liveliness and hedonism of his court and the general relief at the return to normality after over a decade of rule by Cromwell and the Puritans. Charles's wife, Catherine of Braganza, bore no live children, but Charles acknowledged at least twelve illegitimate children by various mistresses. He was succeeded by his brother James."

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_II_of_England

Presidents of the Royal Society

"Years President Profession

1690–1695Sir Robert SouthwellDiplomat

1695–1698Charles MontaguPoet and statesman

1698–1703The Lord SomersJurist and statesman"

"1703–1727 Sir Isaac Newton Physicist, mathematician, astronomer, natural philosopher, alchemist, and theologian."

source: List of presidents of the Royal Society - Wikipedia


Peer Reviewed Propaganda Crafting, Royal Society Style

"Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people of similar competence to the producers of the work (peers). It constitutes a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a profession within the relevant field. Peer review methods are employed to maintain standards of quality, improve performance, and provide credibility. In academia, scholarly peer review is often used to determine an academic paper's suitability for publication. Peer review can be categorized by the type of activity and by the field or profession in which the activity occurs, e.g., medical peer review."

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review

PEER REVIEW

"Scientific journals use a process of peer review, in which scientists' manuscripts are submitted by editors of scientific journals to (usually one to three, and usually anonymous) fellow scientists familiar with the field for evaluation. In certain journals, the journal itself selects the referees; while in others (especially journals that are extremely specialized), the manuscript author might recommend referees. The referees may or may not recommend publication, or they might recommend publication with suggested modifications, or sometimes, publication in another journal. This standard is practiced to various degrees by different journals, and can have the effect of keeping the literature free of obvious errors and to generally improve the quality of the material, especially in the journals who use the standard most rigorously. The peer review process can have limitations when considering research outside the conventional scientific paradigm: problems of "groupthink" can interfere with open and fair deliberation of some new research."

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method#Peer_review_evaluation


The Royal Society Peer Define The Bounds of Reason and The Imagination

Of clockwork banking kings and drawing lines on world maps.

The Peer Review Approach for the work of men like Sir Isaac Newton compared to actual and demonstrable and mass reproducible experiment like the construction of mechanical gear based clocks. This very real world technology is integral to the art of navigating the world. Pendulums make for terrible measuring devices but not so mechanical clockworks. No mechanical working and reproducible clocks would have meant no lines of longitude drawn on international banking backed paper maps.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Harrison#Longitude_problem

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method#Peer_review_evaluation  •  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

Francis Bacon - Wikipedia

History of the Royal Society | Royal Society  •  Royal Society - Wikipedia  •  Royal Society | British science society | Britannica.com

"As discussed earlier in this lesson, a projectile is an object upon which the only force acting is gravity. Many projectiles not only undergo a vertical motion, but also undergo a horizontal motion. That is, as they move upward or downward they are also moving horizontally. There are the two components of the projectile's motion - horizontal and vertical motion. And since perpendicular components of motion are independent of each other, these two components of motion can (and must) be discussed separately. The goal of this part of the lesson is to discuss the horizontal and vertical components of a projectile's motion; specific attention will be given to the presence/absence of forces, accelerations, and velocity."

source: http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/vectors/Lesson-2/Characteristics-of-a-Projectile-s-Trajectory

July 5, 1687: Publication of Sir Isaac Newton's Principia

"In August 1684, more than a decade after Newton was elected Lucasian professor of mathematics, Edmund Halley came to Cambridge to consult with him about the law of gravitation, specifically seeking to resolve the question of whether the law of attraction was that of the inverse square, and, if so, what the orbit of a planet would be. Newton answered that it was an ellipse and sent a demonstration of his findings that November, also working out the substance of several propositions in the first book of the Principia. These, along with notes on the laws of motion, were published by the Royal Society in February 1685 as the paper De Motu."

source: https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200007/history.cfm

Orbits lack fundamental hypothesis.

newon wrong.jpg

Published by the Royal Society: Newton's Principia : the mathematical principles of natural philosophy

"...which we would not be understood to determine by any hypothesis;" 

source: Pages 512 - 53 - Link: https://archive.org/stream/newtonspmathema00newtrich#page/n517/mode/2up

"The overall process involves making conjectures (hypotheses), deriving predictions from them as logical consequences, and then carrying out experiments based on those predictions to determine whether the original conjecture was correct. "

"The scientific method is the process by which science is carried out. As in other areas of inquiry, science (through the scientific method) can build on previous knowledge and develop a more sophisticated understanding of its topics of study over time. This model can be seen to underlay the scientific revolution.[26] One thousand years ago, Alhazen argued the importance of forming questions and subsequently testing them, an approach which was advocated by Galileo in 1638 with the publication of Two New Sciences. The current method is based on a hypothetico-deductive model formulated in the 20th century, although it has undergone significant revision since first proposed (for a more formal discussion, see below).

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method#Overview

The Scientific Process:

"The overall process involves making conjectures (hypotheses), deriving predictions from them as logical consequences, and then carrying out experiments based on those predictions to determine whether the original conjecture was correct. There are difficulties in a formulaic statement of method, however. Though the scientific method is often presented as a fixed sequence of steps, these actions are better considered as general principles.[11] Not all steps take place in every scientific inquiry (nor to the same degree), and they are not always done in the same order. As noted by scientist and philosopher William Whewell (1794–1866), "invention, sagacity, [and] genius"[12] are required at every step."

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method#Process

Newton1.jpg
Newton2.jpg

Mental Misdirection:

The accelerated effect of gravity ignored in favor of billboard ball based physical explanation.

Newton illogically makes use of the average distance an object would fall for the first second of falling, from rest. He then fallaciously uses this average as some kind of constant, which only makes sense as hypothesis-less propaganda and does not make sense as anything resembling the scientific method.

The work attributed to Sir Isaac Newton erroneously describes gravity acting like an "object in motion, stays in motion" type of force, along the lines of billiards or ballistic based physics, with a fixed velocity. Gravity is demonstrably described correctly as an accelerated force. 

"Earth moves around the Sun in an elliptical orbit. Earth's orbit is almost a perfect circle; its eccentricity is only 0.0167!"

source: Elliptical Orbits - Windows to the Universe

wrong.jpg

Magical Billiard Ball Planetary Physics

Newton's concept ignores demonstrable gravity and makes use of a fallacious concept that would require a boundary or magical intervention of some kind.

Newton3.jpg

Newton correctly makes no reference to "centrifugal" type effect as the motion  around the supposed spherical Earth would have to be many times faster and were this "effect" to fully manifest, we'd expect the imagined orbiting body to fly off in a straight line like a stone from a sling, centrifugal effect plays no part in orbital mechanical musing.

Meaningless Misdirection

An infinite numbers of lines is an mathematical idea and nothing more. This does not model the phenomena of gravity at all. Gravity is demonstrably an accelerated process. Newton has to ignore this fact in order to support his hypothesis-less notion. Orbits cannot exist. Demonstrable ballistic physics easily shows us why. The bullet dropped from gun barrel height strikes the ground with accelerated might, in the same amount of time whether fired from gun barrel or merely dropped from gun barrel height. Here Newton's "centripetal" force acts with consistent pressure to force the imagined cannonball from its equally imagined path. This magical ad hoc and baseless force, does not emulate the actual centripetal type effect to which Sir Isaac Newton refers. The centripetal component of Newtonian orbital mechanic is gravity itself of course. The inverse square law is imaginatively applied to this idea and the empty model of the solar system, an absurd artifact itself is basically born.

Newton erroneously has gravitation act with a fixed velocity value.

Weight is admittedly part of Newton's grand design and weight becomes accelerated motion when an object falls. This is integral to Newtonian orbital mechanics. Gravity is the key component to this scheme. Yet Newton does not use the actual effect, with its accelerated based mathematical modeling, Sir Isaac Newton fallaciously and magically has gravity act with a fixed mathematical value.


These equations model real world phenomena:

Newton's work does not make use of this math.

U1L6a1.jpg

Demonstrable Ballistic Physics Prove Newton Wrong - Orbits Do Not Exist

"The cannonball falls the same amount of distance as it did when it was merely dropped from rest (refer to diagram below). However, the presence of gravity does not affect the horizontal motion of the projectile. The force of gravity acts downward and is unable to alter the horizontal motion."

And vice versa of course. The forward (fixed velocity) motion of a projectile cannot effect the accelerated effect of the phenomena we term "gravity".

"Let's return to our thought experiment from earlier in this lesson. Consider a cannonball projected horizontally by a cannon from the top of a very high cliff. In the absence of gravity, the cannonball would continue its horizontal motion at a constant velocity. This is consistent with the law of inertia. And furthermore, if merely dropped from rest in the presence of gravity, the cannonball would accelerate downward, gaining speed at a rate of 9.8 m/s every second. This is consistent with our conception of free-falling objects accelerating at a rate known as the acceleration of gravity. If our thought experiment continues and we project the cannonball horizontally in the presence of gravity, then the cannonball would maintain the same horizontal motion as before - a constant horizontal velocity. Furthermore, the force of gravity will act upon the cannonball to cause the same vertical motion as before - a downward acceleration. The cannonball falls the same amount of distance as it did when it was merely dropped from rest (refer to diagram below). However, the presence of gravity does not affect the horizontal motion of the projectile. The force of gravity acts downward and is unable to alter the horizontal motion. There must be a horizontal force to cause a horizontal acceleration. (And we know that there is only a vertical force acting upon projectiles.) The vertical force acts perpendicular to the horizontal motion and will not affect it since perpendicular components of motion are independent of each other. Thus, the projectile travels with a constant horizontal velocity and a downward vertical acceleration."

source: http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/vectors/Lesson-2/Characteristics-of-a-Projectile-s-Trajectory



Infinitesimal apologetics and ad hoc patchwork can't hide the reality of Royal Society promoted, hypothesis-less fantasy.

When we use math that models real world phenomena, IE ballistic based math, which simply involves the basic accelerated effect of gravity and the fixed velocity of the cannonball, we notice how Newton fibbed and how the cannonball would go no further than (around) E in the illustration (from the Principia itself) below.

Episode+48-1.jpg

This illustration correctly models the idea using the real world efect of gravity. What it fails to do is point out the scale and supposed circumference of the Earth.

When we take these factors into account and we use the velocity for the International Space Station, when we plug the numbers into the equations that actually model real world, demonstrable phenomena, we can't help but notice that the imagined cannonball or equally imagined space stain can do nothing but fall within about 5 minutes time, crashing into the surface of the Earth.

Published by the Royal Society: Newton's Principia : the mathematical principles of natural philosophy

Falling is supposed to be towards the center of a spherical Earth, as per Newton, himself.

This would result in a spiral like path and not the imagined and illogical paths of the work attributed to Sir Isaac Newton.

Gravity is obviously an accelerated motion. Towards Earth's surface or if one assumes the world a globe, towards Earth's center of mass, ignoring the concept of shared center of mass, as this would still place the center of mass at Earths center, since Earth is so much more massive than the imagined cannonball.

Newton+Wrong-2-1.jpg

image source: Logarithmic spiral - Wikipedia

NASA's official explanation, like Sir Isaac Newton's orbital idea itself, contradicts demonstrable ballistic physics.

"The cannonball falls the same amount of distance as it did when it was merely dropped from rest. However, the presence of gravity does not affect the horizontal motion of the projectile. The force of gravity acts downward and is unable to alter the horizontal motion."

"The vertical force acts perpendicular to the horizontal motion and will not affect it since perpendicular components of motion are independent of each other. Thus, the projectile travels with a constant horizontal velocity and a downward vertical acceleration"

source: http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/vectors/Lesson-2/Characteristics-of-a-Projectile-s-Trajectory

Demonstrable Ballistic Physics Prove Newton Wrong: Orbits Cannot Exist

"...perpendicular components of motion are independent of each other..."

"Let's return to our thought experiment from earlier in this lesson. Consider a cannonball projected horizontally by a cannon from the top of a very high cliff. In the absence of gravity, the cannonball would continue its horizontal motion at a constant velocity. This is consistent with the law of inertia. And furthermore, if merely dropped from rest in the presence of gravity, the cannonball would accelerate downward, gaining speed at a rate of 9.8 m/s every second. This is consistent with our conception of free-falling objects accelerating at a rate known as the acceleration of gravity. If our thought experiment continues and we project the cannonball horizontally in the presence of gravity, then the cannonball would maintain the same horizontal motion as before - a constant horizontal velocity. Furthermore, the force of gravity will act upon the cannonball to cause the same vertical motion as before - a downward acceleration. The cannonball falls the same amount of distance as it did when it was merely dropped from rest (refer to diagram below). However, the presence of gravity does not affect the horizontal motion of the projectile. The force of gravity acts downward and is unable to alter the horizontal motion. There must be a horizontal force to cause a horizontal acceleration. (And we know that there is only a vertical force acting upon projectiles.) The vertical force acts perpendicular to the horizontal motion and will not affect it since perpendicular components of motion are independent of each other. Thus, the projectile travels with a constant horizontal velocity and a downward vertical acceleration."

source: http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/vectors/Lesson-2/Characteristics-of-a-Projectile-s-Trajectory

THE WORK ATTRIBUTED TO SIR ISSAC NEWTON ASSUMES THAT GRAVITY (THE INTEGRAL COMPONENT TO ORBITS) PULLS A PHYSICAL BODY TOWARDS THE CENTER OF EARTH MASS

International Space programs, funded by our taxes, evolved from Royal Society spread propaganda that mixed demonstrable science with Newtonian nonsense. International space dogma requires we believe that bodies can gal in circles around other physical bodies, We are supposed to buy into the fallaciously reasoned idea that free fall can occur in circles and that gravity can be made to bend itself into a hoolah-hoop shape of some kind, elliptical or perfect circle. Gravitational effect, which is accelerated is towards Earths surface, and what would be Earth center and not around the Earth as demonstrated by the falling apple.

The Zero Gravity fallacy relies on the appeal to authority, peer reviewed and on international governmental agreement,

Physical bodies cannot fall in circles.

Mental Misdirection:

The accelerated effect of gravity ignored in favor of billiard ball based physical explanation.

Newton illogically makes use of the average distance an object would fall for the first second of falling, from rest. He then fallaciously uses this average as some kind of constant, which only makes sense as hypothesis-less propaganda and does not make sense as anything resembling the scientific method.

The work attributed to Sir Isaac Newton erroneously describes gravity acting like an "object in motion, stays in motion" type of force, along the lines of billiards or ballistic based physics, with a fixed velocity. Gravity is demonstrably described correctly as an accelerated force.

Gravity's actual effect, when combined with the horizontal ballistic velocity of the imagined cannonball, pictured above, and Newtonian nonsense, below:

wrong 2.jpg

Published by the Royal Society: Newton's Principia : the mathematical principles of natural philosophy

The Orbital Problem:

The Illogic of Objects Falling Around The Earth or The Earth Falling Around The Sun Should Be Obvious
Yet we have been indoctrinated by cult thinking to truly believe the absurd makes sense.

1:4:9

abfba24c35344ee39ee4440f441abcab.jpg

ISS ORBIT: 26,275.2 miles circumference compare to Earth's assumed circumference of near 25,000 miles.

nother problem is that the path of the space station, this imagined orbit is larger than the circumference of the Earth.

Orbits cannot exist, space stations are not real.

Real technology cannot be based upon "science" ridden with numerous logical inconsistencies.

"For every 8000 meters measured along the horizon of the earth, the earth's surface curves downward by approximately 5 meters."

source: http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/circles/Lesson-4/Circular-Motion-Principles-for-Satellites

iss.jpg

Gravity's accelerated effect means that the average velocity of a falling body (sans atmosphere and per second of time) is 10 meters after the first second only, then it is demonstrably 20 meters after two seconds,  and then 30 meters after three seconds.

Distance covered as a result of acceleration is as follows - after 1 second of time: 5 meters distance covered and 10 meters per second is is now the average velocity as a result of acceleration, after 2 seconds: 15 meters distance is crossed in one second of time at a velocity that averages out to be 20 meters a second, total distance is now 20 meters; and after 3 seconds: 25 meters is now the distance covered in one second of time as a result of acceleration, the average velocity is now 30 meters a second and the total distance covered now is 45 meters.

The 5 meters of fall has to stay stuck and foxed at this value. This contradicts the actual and demonstrable effect of falling which makes that value increase.

"So what launch speed does a satellite need in order to orbit the earth? The answer emerges from a basic fact about the curvature of the earth. For every 8000 meters measured along the horizon of the earth, the earth's surface curves downward by approximately 5 meters. So if you were to look out horizontally along the horizon of the Earth for 8000 meters, you would observe that the Earth curves downwards below this straight-line path a distance of 5 meters. For a projectile to orbit the earth, it must travel horizontally a distance of 8000 meters for every 5 meters of vertical fall. It so happens that the vertical distance that a horizontally launched projectile would fall in its first second is approximately 5 meters (0.5*g*t2). For this reason, a projectile launched horizontally with a speed of about 8000 m/s will be capable of orbiting the earth in a circular path. This assumes that it is launched above the surface of the earth and encounters negligible atmospheric drag. As the projectile travels tangentially a distance of 8000 meters in 1 second, it will drop approximately 5 meters towards the earth. Yet, the projectile will remain the same distance above the earth due to the fact that the earth curves at the same rate that the projectile falls. If shot with a speed greater than 8000 m/s, it would orbit the earth in an elliptical path."

source: http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/circles/Lesson-4/Circular-Motion-Principles-for-Satellites

Spaced Out Programming

Please notice how in the above description the imagined projectile impossibly only and always drops 5 meters a second. This is obviously true only for the first second of time. This is a mental bait and switch, misdirection that allows the Royal Society indoctrinated, fundamentalist to cling to absurd (secular) religious faith in Newtonian orbital nonsense. The imagined international outer space program is key ego boosting myth of (post) modern times.

The above description ignores demonstrable ballistic physics which shows us that the accelerated pull of gravitational effect is an independent motion from the forward fixed velocity momentum of any real world projectile. Imagined projectiles can fly like Superman, of course.

Total Distances - After 1 second: 5 meters • After 2 seconds: 20 meters • After 3 seconds: 45 meters


Circular Reasoning (Pun Intended) is the Order of the Day:

Please note the self applied apologetics that most of us unconsciously engage in as we have been conditioned to do. The obvious is overlooked in favor of the nonsensical and fantastic, which most minds find to be "inspiring", and this "inspiration" would seem to become a very real addiction to mentally poisonous speculative nonsense long sold as fact.

 

VB-blackboard.jpg

image source: http://www.enterprisemission.com/Von_Braun2.htm

"In an inertial frame, if there really were two equal-but-opposite forces on the satellite as von Braun drew them, then the total force on it would be zero.  So it wouldn't accelerate; it would move in a straight line with constant speed.  Since the orbiting satellite doesn't move in a straight line, neither von Braun's picture nor his explanation can be right."

"In the 1960s, Wernher von Braun put together a series of articles about space flight, some of which were published in Popular Science Monthly.  Eventually they were collected and made into the book Space Frontier, (1st ed., Holt, Rinehart and Winston).  It's a very readable book, and talks about how rockets work, and flight and safety in space.  In one of the articles, von Braun explains why a satellite is able to stay up while in Earth orbit. He begins the article by asking what would happen if we could throw an object horizontally, but at faster and faster speeds, such as in the picture shown here.  "Eventually", he writes, "the curvature of the downward-bent trajectory would become equal to the curvature of the earth."  This is almost well and good.  (It's not quite right to say that the curvatures of the orbit and Earth's surface are the same, even for circular motion, but this is a minor error compared with what comes next.)  The important point is that as the bullet moves faster and faster, a magical speed is reached where the curved Earth drops away from the bullet precisely as fast as the bullet falls to the ground; added to which, the direction of "down" keeps changing.  As a result, the bullet never gets any closer to the ground—it's in orbit.  This is actually a marvellous special feature of an inverse square force like gravity; it would not be guaranteed to happen if gravity were not inverse square.  In general, orbits are ellipses, and one such is drawn on the left.  A picture just like this was originally included by Sir Isaac Newton in his Principia of 1687.  After this fine start, von Braun then proceeds to muddy the water.  He says that as the bullet is shot at ever faster speeds, "its trajectory will be less deflected because the centrifugal force is increased by its higher speed, and more effectively counteracts the Earth's gravitational pull."  At this point physicists baulk.  Centrifugal force?  What has that got to do with satellite motion? Next, von Braun draws a picture of a satellite in Earth orbit.  Acting on the satellite are two forces: gravity, pulling the satellite toward Earth, and this centrifugal force, pushing the satellite away.  He writes "A circular orbit occurs whenever a small mass, travelling through the gravitational field of a big one, happens to have a speed at which the centrifugal force is precisely strong enough to balance the large body's gravitational pull."  And later, "If the balance between gravitational and centrifugal force is not perfect, [...] the small body will describe an elliptical path around the large one."

"What would Newton say?  He too would draw the forces acting on the satellite, and would then proceed to apply his "force = mass × acceleration"; but first, he'd want to choose an "inertial frame" within which to do this, since his laws only work in inertial frames.  An inertial frame is one in which, if we throw a ball, it moves away from us with constant velocity (i.e. constant speed in a straight line). Since this doesn't quite happen on Earth, the frame Newton would choose would be something more all-encompassing, outside of Earth.  One good approximation would be the frame of the Solar System, within which the Sun is at rest and Earth revolves fairly accurately in a circle around it, once a year.  An inertial frame like this is presumably what von Braun is using, because anything noninertial won't tie in too well with his picture of Earth plus satellite. In an inertial frame, if there really were two equal-but-opposite forces on the satellite as von Braun drew them, then the total force on it would be zero.  So it wouldn't accelerate; it would move in a straight line with constant speed.  Since the orbiting satellite doesn't move in a straight line, neither von Braun's picture nor his explanation can be right."

source: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/General/Centrifugal/centri.html

Demonstrable Ballistic Physics Proves Newton Wrong: Orbits Cannot Exist

Please note that the gravity free path would not be points towards the horizon, assuming a spherical, globe shaped world.

NEWTON4.jpg

source: http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/vectors/Lesson-2/Characteristics-of-a-Projectile-s-Trajectory

Principia mathematica

"The manuscript of Sir Isaac Newton’s work, philosophiae naturalis principia mathematica (1687, mathematical principles of natural philosophy), is the Royal Society’s greatest treasure and a cornerstone of scientific thought. This document is the fair copy which Edmond Halley FRS (1656-1742), who oversaw production of the Principia, would have known in 1687. It retains corrections and notes added by Newton and Halley with the marginal smudges and inky fingerprints of the anonymous compositors who made the first edition; perhaps even Edmond Halley’s too. This is one of the world’s most influential books and the crowning achievement of 17th century natural philosophy."

source: https://royalsociety.org/collections/principia-mathematica/

Assuming mountain height of 249 miles and no atmosphere whatsoever...

Within five minutes time at the supposed speed of 17,170 mph of International Space Station orbit and at 90% assumed gravity effect, the cannonball could do nothing but fall with accelerated velocity. Falling cannonballs and apples are nothing like the rising and setting Moon.

Demonstrable ballistic physics proves Newton;s hypothesis-less musings wrong.

Mathematical formula works like enchanting magic spell. Newton's math models nothing. the midsection is obvious what is also equally obvious is that this is propaganda and not science. It is a 'jovial' brainteaser.

Infinitesimal apologetics and ad hoc patchwork can't hide the reality of Royal Society promoted, hypothesis-less fantasy.

When we use math that models real world phenomena, IE ballistic based math, which simply involves the basic accelerated effect of gravity and the fixed velocity of the cannonball, we notice how Newton fibbed and how the cannonball would go no further than B in the illustration (from the video) below.

Newton's Cannon - HSC Physics For text and images see website. Website: http://quantumhertz.com

Examining Peer Reviewed Assumptions

"Newton’s work was supported and funded by an astronomer that would later be the pioneer of cometary orbits Edmond Halley. Halley used Newton’s mathematics to begin calculating the orbit of many different comets but began discovering that many of them have the exact same orbits. This led him to think that these comets that have the same orbit may actually just be one comet. He was the first to propose that comets may be periodic and appear in the sky in cycles based on their orbits. Halley used this theory to predict when the next time one particular comet."

source: https://sacramentoclc.com/2014/10/20/history-of-comets/

"Thousands of years ago, the motion of comets seemed erratic and unpredictable compared to the motion of the Sun, Moon, five visible planets, and the stars, and the erratic behaviour of comets led people to assume that they originated from inside of the Earth’s atmosphere. Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe disproved this in the late 1500."

source: http://www.thestargarden.co.uk/History-of-comets.html 

ROYAL SOCIETY MEMBER HALLEY DID NOT NEED NEWTON

Misdirecting the human mind:

Talk about the model and not the reality. Show people a picture and tell them what they are seeing over and over for generations. Centuries of counted time go by.

The Royal Society sleight of mind modus operandi of mixing things that do make sense with things that do not; talking about the model and not the reality, showing people a picture and tell them what they are seeing over and over for generations, is the same modus operandi of international government, advertising and international News media.

"While at Oxford University, Halley was introduced to John Flamsteed, the Astronomer Royal. Influenced by Flamsteed's project to compile a catalog of northern stars, Halley proposed to do the same for the Southern Hemisphere. In 1676, Halley visited the south Atlantic island of Saint Helena and set up an observatory with a large sextant with telescopic sights to catalogue the stars of the southern hemisphere.[7] While there he observed a transit of Mercury, and realised that a similar transit of Venus could be used to determine the absolute size of the Solar System.[8] He returned to England in May 1678. In the following year he went to Danzig (Gdańsk) on behalf of the Royal Society to help resolve a dispute. Because astronomer Johannes Hevelius did not use a telescope, his observations had been questioned by Robert Hooke. Halley stayed with Hevelius and he observed and verified the quality of Hevelius' observations. In 1679, Halley published the results from his observations on St. Helena as Catalogus Stellarum Australium which included details of 341 southern stars.[9][10] These additions to contemporary star maps earned him comparison with Tycho Brahe: e.g. "the southern Tycho" as described by Flamsteed. Halley was awarded his M.A. degree at Oxford and elected as a Fellow of the Royal Society at the age of 22. In September 1682 he carried out a series of observations of what became known as Halley's Comet, though his name became associated with it because of his work on its orbit and predicting its return in 1758 (which he did not live to see)."

source: Edmond Halley - Wikipedia

How exactly was Halley supposed to have made use of Newton's fallaciously reasoned orbital concept anyway?

BY MODELING EVERYTHING GOING AROUND THE SUN

see; The Wayward Comet: A Descriptive History of Cometary Orbits, ...

"In 1705, English astronomer Edmond Halley looked at all of the documented appearances of comets, and tried to derive their orbital parameters using Newtonian physics. This led him to predict that the comets of 1531, 1607, and 1682, were actually all the same object, which would reappear about 75 years after its last appearance. Halley became the first person to successfully predict the return of a comet when the comet reappeared in 1759. This comet has since been known as Halley’s Comet."

source: http://www.thestargarden.co.uk/History-of-comets.html

Tails of comets might best be described in electrochemical terms.

The lights in the sky are primary light sources.

Ad hoc and unexamined and unquestioned, peer reviewed and Pavlovian conditioned, Royal Society assumptions examined:

"Tycho measured the parallax of the Great Comet of 1577, and calculated that the comet was at least four times further away than the Moon.[1] The fact that individual comets can reappear, because they are orbiting the Sun in elongated elliptical orbits, was not proven until the 1700s. German astronomer Georg Samuel Dörffel first suggested this idea in 1681. English natural philosopher Isaac Newton showed how this was possible six years later, when he published his laws of gravitation[3] (discussed in Chapter 5). Newton believed that comets were rocky objects that contain ice, which vaporises when it’s heated by the Sun, creating the comet’s tail.

In 1705, English astronomer Edmond Halley looked at all of the documented appearances of comets, and tried to derive their orbital parameters using Newtonian physics. This led him to predict that the comets of 1531, 1607, and 1682, were actually all the same object, which would reappear about 75 years after its last appearance.[4] Halley became the first person to successfully predict the return of a comet when the comet reappeared in 1759. This comet has since been known as Halley’s Comet.[5]

The link between comets and meteor showers was proven in the late 1800s, when Italian astronomer Giovanni Schiaparelli showed that the Perseid meteor shower, which occurs every August, is caused by the path of the Earth travelling through debris left by the comet Swift-Tuttle.[6] This led people to think of comets as having surfaces covered in small rocks, below a layer of ice."

"The tails of a comet are also produced by interactions between the comet and the Sun, with the dust and vapour creating two separate tails. Both tails always point away from the Sun, but the charged particles react more strongly to the Sun’s magnetic field and the solar wind, making it point directly away from the Sun. Dust particles are less affected by the Sun, and so the direction of the dust tail is curved by the orbit of the comet. The tails of a comet can extend for hundreds of millions of km."

source: http://www.thestargarden.co.uk/History-of-comets.html

The Sun and Moon are assumed to be certain distances from the Earth.

Decimal places matter. Trigonometry shows us that the Sun and Moon can easily be modeled to be many different distances away from the Earth, all depending on how one interprets astronomical observation.

Real world atmospheric aberration and demonstrable seasonal based explanations are ignored in favor of dogmatic adherence to a mathematically - math-mentally - modeled catechism.

see:  http://www.thestargarden.co.uk/Heliocentric-models-of-the-Solar-System.html

The Secret To This Solar Misdirection:

Model everything spinning around the motionless Sun. Use ad hoc patchwork to keep adjusting the base ad hoc derived solar system model until you end up with the patchwork of contradiction Cosmology of big banged and black holed, black matter multiversal nonsense of today.

The Fixed stars once sat as motionless as the fixed Sun, which was believed to sit at the center of the Universe itself. Absolute space was thought real and was thought to be Sun centric. Eventually the lack of any real experiment that could prove any of the heliocentric theory correct leads to the adoption of relativity, which is itself nothing but ad hoc hot air and propaganda based upon a refusal to accept a motionless Earth.

"Records of comet sightings date back as far as the 3rd millennium BCE (roughly 3000 BCE) which is typically referred to as the Bronze age. Ancient astronomers recorded comet sightings on clay tablets in ancient Babylon or on silk in ancient China. Throughout the world during these times comets were observed, but not understood. During these ancient times comets were thought of as bad omens or signs of something evil to come or some even believed that comets were just a phenomenon of our atmosphere and not actually in space. Either way comets were not truly understood during these times mostly because they did not fit in the astronomer’s model that the Earth is the center of the Universe. Astronomers of this time believed that everything you see in space is actually orbiting around our planet including the stars, planets, and the sun. This model was called the geocentric model (earth center) and was proposed by most astronomers including Aristotle and Ptolemy.

The first step in truly understanding what comets were was made when the Astronomer Tycho Brahe wanted to test if comets were part of the “heavens” or the earths atmosphere. Brahe decided the best way to test this is to measure the distance of the object by measuring its parallax. Parallax is the measurement of an objects distance by observing the object in two distance locations at the same time Using some geometry and trigonometry the objects distance can be calculated from these two observation points. Brahe observed the great comet of 1577 from Denmark and compared his observations with observations by other astronomers throughout Europe during that time and calculated that the comet was much further out in the “heavens” than our moon. With these calculations it was known from that point on that comets existed much further than the Earth’s atmosphere and inspired Brahe to design a hybrid heliocentric/geocentric model of the solar system.

Before Brahe did his observations in 1577 there was another astronomer that was making radical changes to the current models of the universe. In 1543 an astronomer by the name of Nicolaus Copernicus proposed that the geocentric model of the solar system that was the common model was actually wrong and that we actually exist in a heliocentric solar system (Sun center). Copernicus had a couple of great supporters in the realm of astronomy that helped push the heliocentric model. These supporters were the astronomers Galileo Galilei, who was the first astronomer to use a telescope to observe the sky, and Johannes Kepler who developed the laws of planetary motion. With this new model of the “heavens” the theory of a comet being part of the atmosphere was abandoned and also the negative beliefs of comets being a sign of something bad started to dwindle. Instead comets were starting to be observed more as a scientific inquiry.

Kepler struggled to explain the motion of comets because some had very elongated orbits and yet some did not. The true nature of comets orbits were understood after the publication from one man by name of Isaac Newton. Newton’s publication of Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica explained a detailed theory of universal gravity that would explain the orbits of planets, moon, and even comets. Newton’s work was supported and funded by an astronomer that would later be the pioneer of cometary orbits Edmond Halley. Halley used Newton’s mathematics to begin calculating the orbit of many different comets but began discovering that many of them have the exact same orbits. This led him to think that these comets that have the same orbit may actually just be one comet. He was the first to propose that comets may be periodic and appear in the sky in cycles based on their orbits. Halley used this theory to predict when the next time one particular comet."

source: History of Comets – Sacramento Challenger Learning Center


Orbits are a mental mirage.

"The International Space Station travels in orbit around Earth at a speed of roughly 17,150 miles per hour (that's about 5 miles per second!). This means that the Space Station orbits Earth (and sees a sunrise) once every 92 minutes!"

source: How fast does the Space Station travel? | Cool Cosmos

WITHIN A LITTLE OVER FIVE MINUTES THE SPACE STATION WOULD FALL TO THE GROUND

In five minutes time the imagined projectile or imagined space station or any other imagined physical body can do nothing but fall some 248 or so miles towards the center of the Earth. In about five minutes of time an imagined projectile would only travel some 1400 miles or so, as it fell some 248 miles towards the Earth's center.

The Earth's gravity is thought to be at some 90% strength where the International Space Station is imagined to orbit. The link below is to a calculator you can use to see for yourself that the ISS would fall towards Earth's center. By the time it's forward motion of some 5 miles a second, a fixed or constant ballistic based motion, has allowed it to cover a distance of some 1000 miles it would have fallen over 100 miles towards the center of the Earth. At 5 miles a second it would take 200 seconds for the imagined ISS to cover the distance of 1000 miles. You can use the calculator link below. Centrifuge type effects are not part of Sir Isaac Newton's reasoning, and he does admit his idea only exists as mathematical fiction as he himself has no hypothesis to put forth to explain how the falling apple is like the rising and setting Moon. Do the experiment, drop the apple and watch the rising and setting Moon and consider if one is really like the other. Newton did no real experiment, his was a fallaciously reasoned thought experiment that contradicts obvious demonstrable natural physical principles in favor of absurd mathematical modeling that represents nothing real at all.

see: Free fall (distance and velocity) Calculator - High accuracy calculation

static1.squarespace.jpg

image source: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-13u-6DwmMRs/VZvaZiPbOyI/AAAAAAAAARk/8sG15930pi8/s1600/10999522_10206011468717348_401826225573827478_o.jpg

ORBITS DO NOT EXIST

Please note that the gravity free path would not be points towards the horizon, assuming a spherical, globe shaped world.

Newton+Wrong.jpg

"The vertical force acts perpendicular to the horizontal motion and will not affect it since perpendicular components of motion are independent of each other. Thus, the projectile travels with a constant horizontal velocity and a downward vertical acceleration."

image and quote source: http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/vectors/Lesson-2/Characteristics-of-a-Projectile-s-Trajectory

ORBITS CANNOT EXIST

PLEASE NOTE:

The work and idea credited to Sir Isaac Newton relies on a spherical shaped world, which pulls all objects towards its center. This is what we call weight or falling which is itself an accelerated process. Newton assumes too, an object set in moon will stay in motion, which does make sense, this is the horizontal velocity of the cannonball, which is set at a fixed value. This motion can not effect the effect we term gravitation or gravity. Gravity's motion cannot effect the horizontal and fixed velocity of the cannonball. This is all real world ballistic physics and perhaps why Sir Isaac Newton admits he has no hypothesis for his orbital concepts.

The mind altering magic of misdirection:

Newton uses weight, the effect of gravity as the key mechanism to explain his (admitted in writing) hypothesis-less idea, The misdirection here involves ignoring how gravity actually works and ignoring ballistic physics which correctly models natural phenomena. The horizontal and vertical motions of a cannonball are demonstrably independent of each other. This is how a parabolic arc is created in the first place, were this not the case such an arc would not be possible. The bait and switch, misdirection is the key.

The book "The Birth of A New Physics" has another example that also shows the same kind of fallacious reasoning.

COMPARE: 

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method to Newton's (admitted) hypothesis less orbital musings.

The 1945 Proposal by Arthur C. Clarke for Geostationary Satellite Communications link: http://lakdiva.org/clarke/1945ww/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solstice

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phases_of_Venus  •  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_standstil  •  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claimed_moons_of_Earth

https://www.space.com/23495-venus-planet-phases-explained.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analemma

Azimuth and altitude: http://www.astro.cornell.edu/academics/courses/astro201/alt_az.htm

http://aa.usno.navy.mil/cgi-bin/aa_mrst2.pl?form=1&ID=AA&year=2018&month=4&day=21&reps=5&body=6&state=DC&place=&height=

http://www.nakedeyeplanets.com/movements.htm

"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: http://www.polaris.iastate.edu/EveningStar/Unit2/unit2_sub1.htm

Demonstrable Ballistic Physics Prove Newton Wrong - Orbits Do Not Exist

"The cannonball falls the same amount of distance as it did when it was merely dropped from rest (refer to diagram below). However, the presence of gravity does not affect the horizontal motion of the projectile. The force of gravity acts downward and is unable to alter the horizontal motion."

And vice versa of course. The forward (fixed velocity) motion of a projectile cannot effect the accelerated effect of the phenomena we term "gravity".

"Let's return to our thought experiment from earlier in this lesson. Consider a cannonball projected horizontally by a cannon from the top of a very high cliff. In the absence of gravity, the cannonball would continue its horizontal motion at a constant velocity. This is consistent with the law of inertia. And furthermore, if merely dropped from rest in the presence of gravity, the cannonball would accelerate downward, gaining speed at a rate of 9.8 m/s every second. This is consistent with our conception of free-falling objects accelerating at a rate known as the acceleration of gravity. If our thought experiment continues and we project the cannonball horizontally in the presence of gravity, then the cannonball would maintain the same horizontal motion as before - a constant horizontal velocity. Furthermore, the force of gravity will act upon the cannonball to cause the same vertical motion as before - a downward acceleration. The cannonball falls the same amount of distance as it did when it was merely dropped from rest (refer to diagram below). However, the presence of gravity does not affect the horizontal motion of the projectile. The force of gravity acts downward and is unable to alter the horizontal motion. There must be a horizontal force to cause a horizontal acceleration. (And we know that there is only a vertical force acting upon projectiles.) The vertical force acts perpendicular to the horizontal motion and will not affect it since perpendicular components of motion are independent of each other. Thus, the projectile travels with a constant horizontal velocity and a downward vertical acceleration."

source: http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/vectors/Lesson-2/Characteristics-of-a-Projectile-s-Trajectory

GRAVITY CALCULATOR:

https://keisan.casio.com/exec/system/1224835316

Published by the Royal Society: Newton's Principia : the mathematical principles of natural philosophy

See Pages 512 - 53 - Link: https://archive.org/stream/newtonspmathema00newtrich#page/n517/mode/2up

https://www.etymonline.com/word/hypothesis

https://www.etymonline.com/word/jovial

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trivium

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadrivium

"The Inertia of Planets and Comets"

"The Birth of A New Physics" Supplement 12 Page 222

"Newton's statement that the motion of planets and of comets illustrates the principle of inertia may seem puzzling, since their motion is curved. Newton expected his readers to understand that such motion had two components: a linear inertial motion along the tangent to the curve,and a continual accelerated motion "of falling" toward the center (centripetal) that keeps the motion along the curve rather than flying off on a tangent. Since the motions of the planets and comets has continued for a very long time (undiminished by friction), and is likely to continue for a long time, the tangential component of their orbital motion provides the best example of inertial motion that continues on and on without sensible diminution. Terrestrial motions, such as those of projectiles, are not good examples because such motions are slowed down by air friction and do not last very long since all projectiles eventually fall down to the ground."

source: "The Birth of a New Physics" By I. Bernard Cohen

Unexamined Presumptions & Circular Reasoning Apologetics Are Not Real Science

The above statement shows the circular reasoning of the university indoctrinated and peer reviewed, Pavlovian conditioned mind. As we can see for ourselves, when we use all real world values, and we ignore the atmosphere and assume perfect (magical) vacuum, like Newton does, we can demonstrate that Newton's cannonball thought experiment can do nothing but prove his orbital musings wrong. What Newton does is explicitly ignore all demonstrable real world physics in favor of his heliocentric preference, which has no basis in the real world. What Newton does is pick and choose when real world physical principle applies and when it does not. The a priori assumption that Newton "proves" is that the rising and setting celestial lights are like falling apples. He proves this without any hypothesis and with illogical mathematics and we are told this is "science". As we can read for ourselves, there is no experiment to support the concept of orbits. All real world physical experiments demonstrate why orbits cannot exist.

"Newtonian principles of celestial mechanics guide our artificial satellites, our space shuttles, and every spacecraft we launch to explore the vast reaches of our solar system."

source: "The Birth of A New Physics" Chapter 7 "The Grand Design – A New Physics"  Page 148

https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Birth_of_a_New_Physics.html?id=KYChaSaReN8C&printsec=frontcover&source=kp_read_button#v=onepage&q&f=false


Orbits are a mental mirage.

The Earth's gravity is thought to be at some 90% strength where the International Space Station is imagined to orbit. The link below is to a calculator you can use to see for yourself that the ISS would fall towards Earth's center. By the time it's forward motion of some 5 miles a second, a fixed or constant ballistic based motion, has allowed it to cover a distance of some 1000 miles it would have fallen over 100 miles towards the center of the Earth. At 5 miles a second it would take 200 seconds for the imagined ISS to cover the distance of 1000 miles. You can use the calculator link below. Centrifuge type effects are not part of Sir Isaac Newton's reasoning, and he does admit his idea only exists as mathematical fiction as he himself has no hypothesis to put forth to explain how the falling apple is like the rising and setting Moon. Do the experiment, drop the apple and watch the rising and setting Moon and consider if one is really like the other. Newton did no real experiment, his was a fallaciously reasoned thought experiment that contradicts obvious demonstrable natural physical principles in favor of absurd mathematical modeling that represents nothing real at all.

see: Free fall (distance and velocity) Calculator - High accuracy calculation

(For comparison the Earth's circumference is estimated to be some 24,900 miles.)

 

NEWTON'S CONSTANT CURVE CONTRADICTS PARABOLIC (NATURAL) REALITY

Mental Misdirection:

The accelerated effect of gravity ignored in favor of billboard ball based physical explanation.

Newton illogically makes use of the average distance an object would fall for the first second of falling, from rest. He then fallaciously uses this average as some kind of constant, which only makes sense as hypothesis-less propaganda and does not make sense as anything resembling the scientific method.

The work attributed to Sir Isaac Newton erroneously describes gravity acting like an "object in motion, stays in motion" type of force, along the lines of billiards or ballistic based physics, with a fixed velocity. Gravity is demonstrably described correctly as an accelerated force.

wrong 2.jpg

Published by the Royal Society: Newton's Principia : the mathematical principles of natural philosophy

This stair stepping concept for orbits relies on the fallacious use of the average time a body falls for the first second only, starting from rest. Then magically the body starts off from rest again and falls but 5 meters during the second second of time, instead of falling an additional 15 meters as we'd expect.

Newton's work ignores real world gravity in favor of cherry picked value.

Gravity is an accelerated process that would draw a body towards the center of Earth's mass, or so Newton is supposed to have supposed. Yet the very notion of an orbit contradicts this very idea. We have to accept magical reasoning with no basis in reality. We have to accept math magical reasoning.

Gravity would be best considered as an accelerated pull or push towards what is thought to be the center of the Earth. Not a fixed velocity as Newton posits, erroneously and illogically.

Newton's imagined cannonball's straight line path would have gravity itself acting to resist its motion, were one to aim a cannon in that direction.

Please note that the gravity free path would not be points towards the horizon, assuming a spherical, globe shaped world.

The Orbital Problem:

The Illogic of Objects Falling Around The Earth or The Earth Falling Around The Sun Should Be Obvious
Yet we have been indoctrinated by cult thinking to truly believe the absurd makes sense.

8000 meters is about 5 miles. 5 meters is about 16 feet.

 

10999522_10206011468717348_401826225573827478_o.jpg

image source: http://www.philipstallings.com/2015/07/the-biblical-flat-earth-plane-truth.html

The 5 meters of fall has to stay stuck and foxed at this value. This contradicts the actual and demonstrable effect of falling which makes that value increase.

"So what launch speed does a satellite need in order to orbit the earth? The answer emerges from a basic fact about the curvature of the earth. For every 8000 meters measured along the horizon of the earth, the earth's surface curves downward by approximately 5 meters. So if you were to look out horizontally along the horizon of the Earth for 8000 meters, you would observe that the Earth curves downwards below this straight-line path a distance of 5 meters. For a projectile to orbit the earth, it must travel horizontally a distance of 8000 meters for every 5 meters of vertical fall. It so happens that the vertical distance that a horizontally launched projectile would fall in its first second is approximately 5 meters (0.5*g*t2). For this reason, a projectile launched horizontally with a speed of about 8000 m/s will be capable of orbiting the earth in a circular path. This assumes that it is launched above the surface of the earth and encounters negligible atmospheric drag. As the projectile travels tangentially a distance of 8000 meters in 1 second, it will drop approximately 5 meters towards the earth. Yet, the projectile will remain the same distance above the earth due to the fact that the earth curves at the same rate that the projectile falls. If shot with a speed greater than 8000 m/s, it would orbit the earth in an elliptical path."

source: http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/circles/Lesson-4/Circular-Motion-Principles-for-Satellites

When we use math that models real world phenomena, IE ballistic based math, which simply involves the basic accelerated effect of gravity and the fixed velocity of the cannonball, we notice how Newton fibbed and how the cannonball would go no further than (around) E in the illustration (from the Principia itself) below.

Episode+48-1.jpg

Spaced Out Programming:

Newton's work relies on the incorrect use of the first second value for falling. This velocity represents an average acceleration over the course of the first second, when an object begins to fall, starting off from rest. 

"Cherry Picking Data" is not new.

Please notice how in the above description the imagined projectile impossibly only and always drops 5 meters a second. This is obviously true only for the first second of time. There is a mental bait and switch that allows the fundamentalist to cling to absurd religious faith in Newtonian orbital nonsense. The imagined international outer space program is key ego boosting myth of (post) modern times.

The above description also ignores demonstrable ballistic physics which shows us that the accelerated pull of gravitational effect is an independent motion from the forward fixed velocity momentum of any real world projectile. Imagined projectiles can fly like Superman, of course.

Total Distances - After 1 second: 5 meters • After 2 seconds: 20 meters • After 3 seconds: 45 meters

The 1:4:9 2001: Space Odyssey Mnemonic
Gravity’s accelerated effect is in proportion to 1:4:9. The first second the distance fallen is 5 meters.
After two seconds this distance is now a total of 20 meters, the projectile would have gained an additional distance of 15 meters as a result of gravity’s accelerated effect. After the third second the total distance is now 45 meters. The projectile now has gained an additional 25 meters distance. The falling projectile only covers a distance of 5 meters after the first second.

Gravity is an accelerated effect.

A dropped objects gains speed as it falls. A dropped cannonball would strike the Earth's surface in the same amount of time whether fired from the cannon or dropped from cannon barrel height.

The horizontal and vertical motions are independent from each other. One cannot effect the other. Objects cannot fall in circles around each other. Falling is towards what is supposed to be the Earth's center, and falling is an accelerated velocity. The speed of a projectile like a cannonball or imagined space station is supposed to be set at a fixed velocity, This what real world, demonstrable physical principle reveals. We have no logical reason to buy into Newtonian orbital mechanics. The accelerated falling apple proves Newton wrong.

One Second = 5 meters distance fallen (total 5 meters)

Two Seconds = 15 meters distance fallen (total 20 meters)

Three Seconds = 25 meters distance fallen (total 45 meters)*

* all numbers are rounded up

link: Free fall (distance and velocity) Calculator - High accuracy calculation

 

Newton+Wrong-2.jpg

image source: Logarithmic spiral - Wikipedia

“We said, in a mathematical way, to avoid all questions about nature or quality of this forcewhich we would not be understood to determine by any hypothesis; and therefore call it by the general name of a centripetal force, as it is a force which is directed towards some centre; and as it regards more particularly a body in that centre…”

Sir Isaac Newton

source: Newton's Principia : the mathematical principles of ... - Internet Archive

The centripetal force to which Sir Isaac Newton refers is gravity's accelerated pull. The centripetal force to which Newton refers is the accelerated effect of gravitation. This cannot be balanced with the fixed velocity of an imaged projectile, but an equal sign works magic on most minds. Mathematical equation can be used to model gibberish as easily as verbal language can.


"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


WHERE ARE ALL THE OFFICAL PHOTOGRAPHS OF PLANETS TAKEN FROM EARTH?

Why all the CGI?

WHY DOES VENUS NOT LOOK LIKE A PLANET?

Why does amateur effort show us what looks like something best described as natural electrochemical light phenomena?


URANUS

"Uranus had been observed on many occasions before its recognition as a planet, but it was generally mistaken for a star. Possibly the earliest known observation was by Hipparchos, who in 128 BC might have recorded it as a star for his star catalogue that was later incorporated into Ptolemy's Almagest.[20] The earliest definite sighting was in 1690, when John Flamsteed observed it at least six times, cataloguing it as 34 Tauri. The French astronomer Pierre Charles Le Monnierobserved Uranus at least twelve times between 1750 and 1769, including on four consecutive nights."

"Like the classical planets, Uranus is visible to the naked eye, but it was never recognised as a planet by ancient observers because of its dimness and slow orbit.[19] Sir William Herschel announced its discovery on 13 March 1781, expanding the known boundaries of the Solar System for the first time in history and making Uranus the first planet discovered with a telescope."

source:  Uranus - Wikipedia  •  Neptune - Wikipedia

NEPTUNE

"In retrospect, after it was discovered, it turned out it had been observed many times before but not recognized, and there were others who made various calculations about its location which did not lead to its observation."

"The planet Neptune was mathematically predicted before it was directly observed. With a prediction by Urbain Le Verrier, telescopic observations confirming the existence of a major planet were made on the night of September 23–24, 1846,[1] at the Berlin Observatory, by astronomer Johann Gottfried Galle (assisted by Heinrich Louis d'Arrest), working from Le Verrier's calculations. It was a sensational moment of 19th-century science, and dramatic confirmation of Newtonian gravitational theory. In François Arago's apt phrase, Le Verrier had discovered a planet "with the point of his pen".

Neptune's Origins:

"By 1847, the planet Uranus had completed nearly one full orbit since its discovery by William Herschel in 1781, and astronomers had detected a series of irregularities in its path that could not be entirely explained by Newton's law of gravitation."

"These irregularities could, however, be resolved if the gravity of a farther, unknown planet were disturbing its path around the Sun."

"In retrospect, after Neptune was discovered, it turned out it had been observed many times before but not recognized, and there were others who made various calculations about its location which did not lead to its observation. By 1847, the planet Uranus had completed nearly one full orbit since its discovery by William Herschel in 1781, and astronomers had detected a series of irregularities in its path that could not be entirely explained by Newton's law of gravitation. These irregularities could, however, be resolved if the gravity of a farther, unknown planet were disturbing its path around the Sun. In 1845, astronomers Urbain Le Verrier in Paris and John Couch Adams in Cambridge separately began calculations to determine the nature and position of such a planet. Le Verrier's success also led to a tense international dispute over priority, because shortly after the discovery George Airy, at the time British Astronomer Royal, announced that Adams had also predicted the discovery of the planet.[2] Nevertheless, the Royal Society awarded Le Verrier the Copley medal in 1846 for his achievement, without mention of Adams. The discovery of Neptune led to the discovery of its moon Triton by William Lassell just seventeen days later."

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_of_Neptune

"Some of the earliest recorded observations ever made through a telescope, Galileo's drawings on 28 December 1612 and 27 January 1613 contain plotted points that match up with what is now known to be the position of Neptune. On both occasions, Galileo seems to have mistaken Neptune for a fixed star when it appeared close—in conjunction—to Jupiter in the night sky;[19] hence, he is not credited with Neptune's discovery. At his first observation in December 1612, Neptune was almost stationary in the sky because it had just turned retrograde that day. This apparent backward motion is created when Earth's orbit takes it past an outer planet. Because Neptune was only beginning its yearly retrograde cycle, the motion of the planet was far too slight to be detected with Galileo's small telescope.[20] In July 2009, University of Melbourne physicist David Jamieson announced new evidence suggesting that Galileo was at least aware that the "star" he had observed had moved relative to the fixed stars."Planets "predicted" without heliocentric model."

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neptune#Discovery

NEPTUNE

"John Herschel almost discovered Neptune the same way his father, William Herschel, had discovered Uranus in 1781, by chance observation. In an 1846 letter to Wilhelm Struve, John Herschel states that he observed Neptune during a sweep of the sky on July 14, 1830. Although his telescope was powerful enough to resolve Neptune into a small blue disk and show it to be a planet, he did not recognize it at the time and mistook it for a star."

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_of_Neptune#Earlier_observations

"The Royal Society awarded Le Verrier the Copley medal in 1846 for his achievement, without mention of Adams, but Adams's academic reputation at Cambridge, and in society, was assured.[3] As the facts became known, some British astronomers pushed the view that the two astronomers had independently solved the problem of Neptune, and ascribed equal importance to each.[3][19] But Adams himself publicly acknowledged Le Verrier's priority and credit (not forgetting to mention the role of Galle) in the paper that he gave to the Royal Astronomical Society in November 1846:

I mention these dates merely to show that my results were arrived at independently, and previously to the publication of those of M. Le Verrier, and not with the intention of interfering with his just claims to the honours of the discovery ; for there is no doubt that his researches were first published to the world, and led to the actual discovery of the planet by Dr. Galle, so that the facts stated above cannot detract, in the slightest degree, from the credit due to M. Le Verrier.

— Adams (1846) [27]

The criticism was soon afterwards made, that both Adams and Le Verrier had been over-optimistic in the precision they claimed for their calculations, and both had, by using Bode's law, greatly overestimated the planet's distance from the sun. Further, it was suggested that they both succeeded in getting the longitude almost right only because of a "fluke of orbital timing". This criticism was discussed in detail by Danjon (1946) [2] who illustrated with a diagram and discussion that while hypothetical orbits calculated by both LeVerrier and Adams for the new planet were indeed of very different size on the whole from that of the real Neptune (and actually similar to each other), they were both much closer to the real Neptune over that crucial segment of orbit covering the interval of years for which the observations and calculations were made, than they were for the rest of the calculated orbits. So the fact that both the calculators used a much larger orbital major axis than the reality was shown to be not so important, and not the most relevant parameter.

The new planet, at first called "Le Verrier" by François Arago, received by consensus the neutral name of Neptune. Its mathematical prediction was a great intellectual feat, but it showed also that Newton's law of gravitation, which Airy had almost called in question, prevailed even at the limits of the solar system."

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_of_Neptune#Aftermath

"The conventional wisdom that Neptune's discovery should be "credited to both Adams and Le Verrier"[28] has recently been challenged[29] putting in doubt the accounts of Airy, Challis and Adams in 1846.[30][31][32]

In 1999, Adams's correspondence with Airy, which had been lost by the Royal Greenwich Observatory, was rediscovered in Chile among the possessions of astronomer Olin J. Eggen after his death.[33] In an interview in 2003, historian Nicholas Kollerstrom concluded that Adams's claim to Neptune was far weaker than had been suggested, as he had vacillated repeatedly over the planet's exact location, with estimates ranging across 20 degrees of arc. Airy's role as the hidebound superior willfully ignoring the upstart young intellect was, according to Kollerstrom, largely constructed after the planet was found, in order to boost Adams's, and therefore Britain's, credit for the discovery.[34] A later Scientific American article by Sheehan, Kollerstrom and Waff claimed more boldly "The Brits Stole Neptune" and concluded "The achievement was Le Verrier's alone.""

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_of_Neptune#Later_analysis

"The telescope at New Berlin Observatory (1835–1913), that discovered Neptune, was an achromatic refractor of 9 Paris inch (9.6 English inches or 24.4 cm) aperture made by the late Joseph Fraunhofer's firm, Merz und Mahler. It was a high-performance telescope of its era, with one of the largest achromatic doublets available and a finely made equatorial mount, with a clockwork drive to move the 4 m (13.4′) main tube in time with Earth's rotation. Eventually the telescope was moved to the Deutsches Museum in Munich, Germany, where it can still be seen in the 21st century as an exhibit."

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_of_Neptune#Neptune_discovery_telescope

Multiple Moons of Earth

"Claims of the existence of other moons of Earth—that is, of one or more natural satellites other than the Moon that orbit Earth—have existed for some time. Several candidates have been proposed, but none have been confirmed.[1] Since the 19th century, scientists have made genuine searches for more moons, but the possibility has also been the subject of a number of dubious non-scientific speculations as well as a number of likely hoaxes. Although the Moon is Earth's only natural satellite, there are a number of near-Earth objects (NEOs) with orbits that are in resonance with Earth. These have been called, inaccurately but provocatively, "second", "third" or "other" moons of Earth. 2016 HO3, an asteroid discovered on 27 April 2016, is possibly the most stable quasi-satellite of Earth.[4] As it orbits the Sun, 2016 HO3 appears to circle around Earth as well. It is too distant to be a true satellite of Earth, but is the best and most stable example of a quasi-satellite, a type of near-Earth object. They appear to orbit a point other than Earth itself, such as the orbital path of the NEO asteroid 3753 Cruithne. Earth trojans, such as 2010 TK7, are NEOs that orbit the Sun (not Earth) on the same orbital path as Earth, and appear to lead or follow Earth along the same orbital path. Other small natural objects in orbit around the Sun may enter orbit around Earth for a short amount of time, becoming temporary natural satellites. To date, the only confirmed example has been 2006 RH120 in Earth orbit during 2006 and 2007, though further instances are already predicted."

"The first major claim of another moon of Earth was made by French astronomer Frédéric Petit, director of the Toulouse Observatory, who in 1846 announced that he had discovered a second moon in an elliptical orbit around Earth."

"It was claimed to have also been reported by Lebon and Dassier at Toulouse, and by Larivière at Artenac Observatory, during the early evening of March 21, 1846. Petit proposed that this second moon had an elliptical orbit, a period of 2 hours 44 minutes, with 3,570 km (2,220 mi) apogee and 11.4 km (7.1 mi) perigee.[5] This claim was soon dismissed by his peers.[6] The 11.4 km (37,000 ft) perigee is similar to the cruising altitude of most modern airliners, and within Earth's atmosphere. Petit published another paper on his 1846 observations in 1861, basing the second moon's existence on perturbations in movements of the actual Moon.[5] This second moon hypothesis was not confirmed either. Petit's proposed moon became a plot point in Jules Verne's 1870 science fiction novel Around the Moon."

source: Claimed moons of Earth - Wikipedia


Logical Fallacies Lie At Royal Society Foundation

"The first step in truly understanding what comets were was made when the Astronomer Tycho Brahe wanted to test if comets were part of the “heavens” or the earths atmosphere. Brahe decided the best way to test this is to measure the distance of the object by measuring its parallax. Parallax is the measurement of an objects distance by observing the object in two distance locations at the same time Using some geometry and trigonometry the objects distance can be calculated from these two observation points. Brahe observed the great comet of 1577 from Denmark and compared his observations with observations by other astronomers throughout Europe during that time and calculated that the comet was much further out in the “heavens” than our moon. With these calculations it was known from that point on that comets existed much further than the Earth’s atmosphere and inspired Brahe to design a hybrid heliocentric/geocentric model of the solar system.

Before Brahe did his observations in 1577 there was another astronomer that was making radical changes to the current models of the universe. In 1543 an astronomer by the name of Nicolaus Copernicus proposed that the geocentric model of the solar system that was the common model was actually wrong and that we actually exist in a heliocentric solar system (Sun center). Copernicus had a couple of great supporters in the realm of astronomy that helped push the heliocentric model. These supporters were the astronomers Galileo Galilei, who was the first astronomer to use a telescope to observe the sky, and Johannes Kepler who developed the laws of planetary motion. With this new model of the “heavens” the theory of a comet being part of the atmosphere was abandoned and also the negative beliefs of comets being a sign of something bad started to dwindle. Instead comets were starting to be observed more as a scientific inquiry.

Kepler struggled to explain the motion of comets because some had very elongated orbits and yet some did not. The true nature of comets orbits were understood after the publication from one man by name of Isaac Newton. Newton’s publication of Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica explained a detailed theory of universal gravity that would explain the orbits of planets, moon, and even comets. Newton’s work was supported and funded by an astronomer that would later be the pioneer of cometary orbits Edmond Halley. Halley used Newton’s mathematics to begin calculating the orbit of many different comets but began discovering that many of them have the exact same orbits. This led him to think that these comets that have the same orbit may actually just be one comet. He was the first to propose that comets may be periodic and appear in the sky in cycles based on their orbits. Halley used this theory to predict when the next time one particular comet"

source: https://sacramentoclc.com/2014/10/20/history-of-comets/

This is not correct and is an example of apologetics.

The Moon can be modeled to be as far away as the Sun. The trigonometry works out so that a decimal place matters a lot.

This is an example of propaganda and a limited framing of ideas. This is also an example of illogical tangent transitioning. Misdirection is key.

This is an example of the misdirection of looking to the model instead of the actual Natural phenomena.


Freemasons established the Royal Society Guild

The Great Experiment: the early evolution of the Royal Society

Speaker: Professor Michael Hunter, Birkbeck Filmed at The Royal Society, London on Wed 08 Sep 2010 6pm - 7.30pm http://royalsociety.org/events/2010/great-experiment/


No satellites ever needed for communications.

"In radio communication, skywave or skip refers to the propagation of radio waves reflected or refracted back toward Earth from the ionosphere, an electrically charged layer of the upper atmosphere. Since it is not limited by the curvature of the Earth, skywave propagation can be used to communicate beyond the horizon , ..."

source: Skywave - Wikipedia

BBC Television received in New York - November 1938 : Alexandra ...

1938 in television - Wikipedia

The following is the only off air pre World War II BBC recording to currently exist. This was caused by bizarre weather conditions, which somehow made a BBC broadcast visible in New York.

"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: http://www.polaris.iastate.edu/EveningStar/Unit2/unit2_sub1.htm