A Proper Gander At Propaganda

TRUTH TRANSCENDS COMMUNITY

PLEASE NOTE: This is not a conspiracy theory blog.

This website exists to serve as public resource for reverse imagineering world-wide culture, one that takes a critical look at the numerous artifacts and other types of relics that represent our shared collective international heritage. This blog is dedicated to examining social engineering and the use of tax funded governmental propaganda, and the mainstream media, as international human resource management tools.

About The AA Morris Proper Gander At Propaganda Podcast: Coming to you from one of the suburban metropolitan melting pots of international culture, outside of one of the multimedia capitals of the world, New York City, the Proper Gander at Propaganda podcast is meant to be a filter free look at our shared international cultural heritage, our shared social media infused and obsessed present, and what our children and their children could be looking forward to. This link will bring you to the podcast page of this website, with embedded squarespace audio: link: http://www.aamorris.net/podcast/

Thank you for taking the time to read this,

AA "The Proper Gander" Morris

Article Index Link  •  Tip Jar Link: For those who wish to support independent media.

Web addresses: www.aamorris.net or www.aamorris.com

Kepler Was A Con Artist: Outer Space is Fake

 

AA Morris Kepler Lies.gif

Presents: Kepler The Imaginative Liar

Born December 27, 1571

Kepler had to eat! He got paid for providing fanciful follies for wealthy and powerful elites with too much time on their hands. Or so the story goes, for all I know this man is another creature of myth more than actual fact. Whatever the details of history actually are or aren't is not something we shall concern ourselves with as we shall be providing some context as to who this figure was supposed to be, and what the works attributed to him actually are. These works are supposed to be foundational to modern astrophysics and the international space programs and we shall see it is all just a historical hoax. 

Did you know that Astronomy was always a superstitious side show? Astrology and Astronomy are the twin towers of a Platonic Light Show that have long been used to entrance a human resource into a world wide, religious faithful, human workforce. Even more elite minds are indoctrinated into a Sun centered university based cult that many mistake for science. Using the stars and mechanical clocks to figure out lines of longitude is demonstrable and repeatable science. Using the same heavens to create a World wide cult mythology that was once exemplified only in the teachings of the Church, is a con job of historical royal society proportion. Modern astrophysics is not a science. If that shocks you perhaps you might need to sit down, or stop reading, or perhaps you might need to visit this website's navigation bar or article index.

(As usual please excuse any typo you may come across.  I will correct them as I find them. Thank You. AA Morris)

Kepler was an imaginative con artist. His work lies at the foundation of all that is wrong with modern "science".

NASA & the Rest of the International Space Programs of the World are part of a long standing hoax. These are artifacts of a very real State religion most are unconscious adherents of.


Kepler's Circularly Reasoned Fantasy Cannot Replace Nor Replicate Reality

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

By WILLIAM J. BROAD Published: January 23, 1990

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

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

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

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


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

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

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


Kepler's Imagined Foci

220px-Kepler_laws_diagram.svg.jpg

The second foci: "Which scientists are still trying to determine. We know it's there though."

newtonian mechanics - Kepler's First Law of Planetary Motion: Whats ...

"Actually, both the Sun and the planets move around each other with their center of mass lying at the focus of the elliptical orbits. However, since the Sun contains 99.9% of the mass of the solar system, the center of mass is located almost at the Sun and so it looks like the planets are going around the Sun.

There is no real significance to the second (empty) foci of the elliptical orbits. The same laws that govern the orbits of planets around the Sun also govern the motion of binary stars and in that case since the masses of the two stars may be roughly equal, the foci of the elliptical orbits may not correspond physically to any object. As I explained earlier, the Sun appears at one focus ony because it is so much more massive than any of the planets and so its center lies close to the focus (which is the actual location of the center of mass)."

source: http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/physics/57-our-solar-system/planets-and-dwarf-planets/orbits/238-what-is-the-significance-of-the-second-focus-of-elliptical-orbits-of-planets-in-our-solar-system-intermediate


"There is no real significance to the second (empty) foci of the elliptical orbits."


Ptolemy's Model  Works: Kepler's is Fudged

"Ptolemy's model for planetary orbits (ca. 150 AD) entails the idea of an "equant" point, a location from which an imaginary observer would see the planet, along with its epicycles, move with an uniform angular velocity. The Ptolemaic worldview was superseded by Kepler's laws of planetary motion (ca. 1605). By Kepler's first law, planets move in elliptical orbits around the Sun at one focus. Kepler's second law implies that the planet sweeps out equal areas during equal intervals of time. This is a consequence of the conservation of angular momentum. The angular velocity about the attracting focus is thus variable, except for a perfectly circular orbit. The planet speeds up around its perihelion (nearest distance) and slows down around its aphelion (farthest distance). There is no mention of the "empty" focus of the ellipse in Kepler's laws. However, the realization that angular motion about the empty focus approximates the equant property was well known to astronomers in the  and  centuries. 

Determination of an elliptical planetary orbit involves repeated numerical solution of a transcendental equation, carried out in the cited Demonstration on Kepler's second law. In the present Demonstration, you can compare the accurate result to the approximate empty-focus construction, in which the planet's predicted location is shown as a blue circle. The approximation becomes more accurate for smaller values of the eccentricity and, of course, exact for a circle."

source: Empty Focus Approximation to Kepler's Second Law - Wolfram ...


The Geocentric Model of Ptolemy is The One That Best Represents The Natural World We Actually Witness

Despite centuries of propaganda conditioning that has turned reason on its allegorical head, the Ptolemaic model was never the complicated mess it was and is made out to be. The fact is the imaginative and speculative work of men like Copernicus, Kepler, Newton, Einstein and the rest of those who followed, is the obviously more complicated and in fact absurd model of the Universe. 

"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


Astrophysics is a Pyramid of Ad Hoc Patched Nonsense

The Falling Apple Proves Newton Wrong: The Falling Apple is Not Like The Rising & Setting Moon

If Copernicus had it right, we'd have never heard of Kepler. If Kepler's elliptical madness were even remotely related to the real World we actually witness, Sir Isaac Newton would never had been needed to concoct the most ridiculous comparison in the history of unreason. We have been indoctrinated to truly believe the accelerated falling apple, which is drawn towards the Earth's center, is somehow (magically) just like the rising and setting Moon. By extension we are to believe that one object can fall in circles around another by means of the very same accelerated "force" that causes apples to fall towards Earth's center. Newton's insane musings obviously defy demonstrable ballistic physics, but magical peer reviewed math is the placenta we all are supposed to accept as readily as Catholics accept the Sunday Communion wafer. Ours is a Sun based world wide culture that accepts university taught catechism over what our senses and reason obviously reveal to us.


Look Up At The Sky!

Using the stars and Sun withe mechanical clocks to come up with lines of longitude to map the World is real demonstrable science. The gaze up at the stars and imagine them to be other worlds is absurd.

see: History of longitude - Wikipedia  •  John Harrison - Wikipedia

"In English, it is earlier than astrology and originally included the senses now distributed over both words; the gradual differentiation happened 16c.-17c. In Latin and later Greek, astronomia tended to be more scientific than astrologia."

"c. 1200, "astronomy, astrology, scientific or occult study of heavenly bodies," from Old French astrenomie "astronomy, astrology," from Latin astronomia, from Greek astronomia, abstract noun from astronomos, literally "star-regulating," from astron "star" (from PIE root *ster- (2) "star") + nomos "arranging, regulating; rule, law," from PIE root *nem- "assign, allot; take." Perhaps originally with reference to mapping the constellations or movements of planets. In English, it is earlier than astrology and originally included the senses now distributed over both words; the gradual differentiation happened 16c.-17c. In Latin and later Greek, astronomia tended to be more scientific than astrologia."

source: astronomy | Origin and meaning of astronomy by Online Etymology ...


Circular Reasoning is The Order of The Day

"After 400 Years, a Challenge to Kepler:He Fabricated His Data, Scholar Says"

"The scholar, William H. Donahue, said the evidence of Kepler's scientific fakery is contained in an elaborate chart he presented to support his theory. Kepler showed that the planets move in elliptical orbits rather than in circles as Copernicus suggested. In his book describing the insight, he said it was confirmed by independent calculations of the planets' positions. In fact, Dr. Donahue says, Kepler derived the data by calculations based on the theory itself."

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

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

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

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

for more about the calculus of indivisibles please seeCavalieri's principle - Wikipedia


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

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


Kepler's Imperfect Method

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

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


Kepler's Logic is Hard To Follow

"Kepler published the first two laws in 1609 in a work aptly titled New Astronomy. The third appeared ten years later in a book about cosmology, called The Harmony of the World. Both of these works are now available in English translation (see the bibliography) but neither is exactly an easy read. Indeed Kepler himself admits as much in the New Astronomy, saying in the second paragraph of his Introduction: "I myself, a professional mathematician, on re-reading my own work find it strains my mental powers to recall to mind from the figures the meanings of the demonstrations, meanings which I myself originally put into the figures and the text from my mind. But when I attempt to remedy the obscurity of the material by putting in extra words, I see myself falling into the opposite fault of becoming chatty in something mathematical."

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

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

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


Labeling An Idea a "Law" is not Science, It is Propaganda

This is an example of advertising. This is religion. Like the Ten Commandments.

"The orbit of every planet is an ellipse with the Sun at one of the two foci."

source: Kepler's laws of planetary motion - Wikipedia

Copernicus' circular heliocentric model didn't match observation and didn't make the proverbial cut. Kepler's Sun centered musings needed some extra fudging by means of a magical and undefined and most unscientific "second foci". Kepler's work is a joke and it has little relationship to the real world.


"The Sun was a metaphor for God, around Whom all else revolves."

"Kepler heard their reverberations, studying, besides theology, Greek and Latin, music and mathematics. In the geometry of Euclid he thought he glimpsed an image of perfection and cosmic glory. He was later to write: ‘Geometry existed before the Creation. It is co-eternal with the mind of God . . . Geometry provided God with a model for the Creation . . . Geometry is God Himself.’

Source: COSMOS by Carl Sagan


"A heliocentric universe resonated with Kepler’s religious sense, and he embraced it with fervor. The Sun was a metaphor for God, around Whom all else revolves."

"In 1589, Kepler left Maulbronn to study for the clergy at the great university in Tubingen and found it a liberation. Confronted by the most vital intellectual currents of the time, his genius was immediately recognized by his teachers - one of whom introduced the young man to the dangerous mysteries of the Copernican hypothesis. A heliocentric universe resonated with Kepler’s religious sense, and he embraced it with fervor. The Sun was a metaphor for God, around Whom all else revolves. Before he was to be ordained, he was made an attractive offer of secular employment, which - perhaps because he felt himself indifferently suited to an ecclesiastical career - he found himself accepting. He was summoned to Graz, in Austria, to teach secondary school mathematics, and began a little later to prepare astronomical and meteorological almanacs and to cast horoscopes. ‘God provides for every animal his means of sustenance,’ he wrote. ‘For the astronomer, He has provided astrology.

"There were only six planets known in Kepler’s time: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn. Kepler wondered why only six? Why not twenty, or a hundred? Why did they have the spacing between their orbits that Copernicus had deduced? No one had ever asked such questions before. There were known to be five regular or ‘platonic’ solids, whose sides were regular polygons, as known to the ancient Greek mathematicians after the time of Pythagoras. Kepler thought the two numbers were connected, that the reason there were only six planets was because there were only five regular solids, and that these solids, inscribed or nested one within another, would specify the distances of the planets from the Sun. In these perfect forms, he believed he had recognized the invisible supporting structures for the spheres of the six planets. He called his revelation The Cosmic Mystery. The connection between the solids of Pythagoras and the disposition of the planets could admit but one explanation: the Hand of God, Geometer."

"Ptolemy believed that the Earth was at the center of the universe; that the Sun, Moon, planets and stars went around the Earth. This is the most natural idea in the world. The Earth seems steady, solid, immobile, while we can see the heavenly bodies rising and setting each day. Every culture has leaped to the geocentric hypothesis. As Johannes Kepler wrote, ‘It is therefore impossible that reason not previously instructed should imagine anything other than that the Earth is a kind of vast house with the vault of the sky placed on top of it; it is motionless and within it the Sun being so small passes from one region to another, like a bird wandering through the air.’ But how do we explain the apparent motion of the planets - Mars, for example, which had been known for thousands of years before Ptolemy’s time? (One of the epithets given Mars by the ancient Egyptians was sekded-ef em khetkhet, which means ‘who travels backwards,’ a clear reference to its retrograde or loop-the-loop apparent motion.) Ptolemy’s model of planetary motion can be represented by a little machine, like those that, serving a similar purpose, existed in Ptolemy’s time.* The problem was to figure out a ‘real’ motion of the planets, as seen from up there, on the ‘outside,’ which would reproduce with great accuracy the apparent motion of the planets, as seen from down here, on the ‘inside.’ * Four centuries earlier, such a device was constructed by Archimedes and examined and described by Cicero in Rome, where it had been carried by the Roman general Marcellus, one of whose soldiers had, gratuitously and against orders, killed the septuagenarian scientist during the conquest of Syracuse. The planets were imagined to go around the Earth affixed to perfect transparent spheres. But they were not attached directly to the spheres, but indirectly, through a kind of off-center wheel. The sphere turns, the little wheel rotates, and, as seen from the Earth, Mars does its loop-the-loop. This model permitted reasonably accurate predictions of planetary motion, certainly good enough for the precision of measurement available in Ptolemy’s day, and even many centuries later. "

Source: COSMOS by Carl Sagan

tumblr_inline_o6caz2XKCQ1ttbdeg_540.gif

Much is made of Mar's imagined "retrograde motion".

There is no "loop-the-loop" as long described. We can simply describe the motion of Mars as speeding up and slowing down as it circles the Earth. This light in the sky never actually moves backwards. The position of Mars during retrograde is the same kind of phenomena that the analemma of the Sun models.

analemma.jpg

Analemma

"In astronomy, an analemma ... is a diagram showing the variation of the position of the Sun in the sky over the course of a year, as viewed at a fixed time of day and from a fixed location on the Earth. The north–south component of the analemma is due to change of the Sun's declination caused by the tilt of the Earth's axis, and the east–west component is due to nonuniform rate of change of the Sun's right ascension, governed by combined effects of axial tilt and Earth's orbital eccentricity. The diagram has the form of a slender figure eight, and can often be found on globes of the Earth."

analemma.jpg

"It is possible to photograph the analemma by keeping a camera at a fixed location and orientation and taking multiple exposures throughout the year, always at the same clock time (and accounting for daylight saving time, when and where applicable). Diagrams of analemmas frequently carry marks that show the position of the Sun at various closely spaced dates throughout the year. Analemmas with date marks can be used for various practical purposes. Without date marks, they are of little use, except as decoration. Analemmas (as they are known today) have been used in conjunction with sundials since the 18th century to convert between apparent and mean solar time. Prior to this, the term referred to any tool or method used in the construction of sundials.  Although the term analemma usually refers to the Earth's solar analemma, it can be applied to other celestial bodies as well."

source: Analemma - Wikipedia

image sources: DC Entertainment "Superman The Movie" and Wikipedia.

It's about time. Modern Astrophysics is cartoon physics.

The analemma shows us why the solstices are a huge problem for the heliocentric based model. The Solar System model fails to replicate anything real. The solstices are when the Sun returns to the same altitude in the sky for multiple days. This would be impossible were the Earth rotating and orbiting the Sun. In order to accept all the apologetics for the mainstream model, you have to ignore common sense. The adherents to the mainstream Cosmological catechism have to ignore real phenomena like atmospheric refraction when it suits their prejudicial points of view. They also ignore all other explanations in favor of a very narrow set of ideas that reinforce official positions. The effect of the State sponsored educational system is clear. Modern science is filled with superstitious propaganda that is sold as demonstrable "theory".

see: Sidereal time - Wikipedia  •  Solar time - Wikipedia

The Ptolemaic Model is the More Elegant One

The Geocentric Model best represents the Natural World.

Despite all hype and ad hoc apologetics to the contrary, the obvious and overlooked truth is that the mainstream astrophysical model is a patchwork of conflicting ideas from different ages. All are based on superstitions and not observations. Observation is made to fit with prejudice. The mainstream model is obviously the more complicated one. University taught and State sponsored Cosmology is an illogical mess of fantasy sold as fact. Between the Big Bang, black holes, time space, quantum foam, multiverses, dark matter and dark energy, not to mention all the imagined particles and empty space, we have quite a contradictory mess. The simpler model that actually represents reality is the Ptolemaic one.

"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


"Kepler lived in an era when there was no clear distinction between astronomy and astrology,"

"Johannes Kepler was a German mathematician, astronomer, and astrologer. Kepler is a key figure in the 17th-century scientific revolution. He is best known for his laws of planetary motion, based on his works Astronomia nova, Harmonices Mundi, and Epitome of Copernican Astronomy. These works also provided one of ..."

"Kepler lived in an era when there was no clear distinction between astronomy and astrology, but there was a strong division between astronomy (a branch of mathematics within the liberal arts) and physics (a branch of natural philosophy). "

"He was introduced to astronomy at an early age, and developed a love for it that would span his entire life. At age six, he observed the Great Comet of 1577, writing that he "was taken by [his] mother to a high place to look at it." In 1580, at age nine, he observed another astronomical event, a lunar eclipse, recording that he remembered being "called outdoors" to see it and that the moon "appeared quite red". "

"However, childhood smallpox left him with weak vision and crippled hands, limiting his ability in the observational aspects of astronomy."

"As he indicated in the title, Kepler thought he had revealed God's geometrical plan for the universe. Much of Kepler's enthusiasm for the Copernican system stemmed from his theological convictions about the connection between the physical and the spiritual; the universe itself was an image of God, with the Sun corresponding to the Father, the stellar sphere to the Son, and the intervening space between to the Holy Spirit. His first manuscript of Mysterium contained an extensive chapter reconciling heliocentrism with biblical passages that seemed to support geocentrism."

"Instead, he turned his attention to chronology and "harmony," the numerological relationships among music, mathematics and the physical world, and their astrologicalconsequences. By assuming the Earth to possess a soul (a property he would later invoke to explain how the sun causes the motion of planets), he established a speculative system connecting astrological aspects and astronomical distances to weather and other earthly phenomena. By 1599, however, he again felt his work limited by the inaccuracy of available data—just as growing religious tension was also threatening his continued employment in Graz. In December of that year, Tycho invited Kepler to visit him in Prague; on January 1, 1600 (before he even received the invitation), Kepler set off in the hopes that Tycho's patronage could solve his philosophical problems as well as his social and financial ones."

"As a spin-off from the Rudolphine Tables and the related Ephemerides, Kepler published astrological calendars, which were very popular and helped offset the costs of producing his other work—especially when support from the Imperial treasury was withheld. In his calendars—six between 1617 and 1624—Kepler forecast planetary positions and weather as well as political events; the latter were often cannily accurate, thanks to his keen grasp of contemporary political and theological tensions. By 1624, however, the escalation of those tensions and the ambiguity of the prophecies meant political trouble for Kepler himself; his final calendar was publicly burned in Graz."

"Kepler's belief that God created the cosmos in an orderly fashion caused him to attempt to determine and comprehend the laws that govern the natural world, most profoundly in astronomy. The phrase "I am merely thinking God's thoughts after Him" has been attributed to him, although this is probably a capsulized version of a writing from his hand:

Those laws [of nature] are within the grasp of the human mind; God wanted us to recognize them by creating us after his own image so that we could share in his own thoughts."

"Kepler was convinced "that the geometrical things have provided the Creator with the model for decorating the whole world". In Harmony, he attempted to explain the proportions of the natural world—particularly the astronomical and astrological aspects—in terms of music. The central set of "harmonies" was the musica universalis or "music of the spheres", which had been studied by Pythagoras, Ptolemy and many others before Kepler; in fact, soon after publishing Harmonices Mundi, Kepler was embroiled in a priority dispute with Robert Fludd, who had recently published his own harmonic theory."

"Among many other harmonies, Kepler articulated what came to be known as the third law of planetary motion. He then tried many combinations until he discovered that (approximately) "The square of the periodic times are to each other as the cubes of the mean distances." Although he gives the date of this epiphany (March 8, 1618), he does not give any details about how he arrived at this conclusion. However, the wider significance for planetary dynamics of this purely kinematical law was not realized until the 1660s. When conjoined with Christiaan Huygens' newly discovered law of centrifugal force, it enabled Isaac Newton, Edmund Halley, and perhaps Christopher Wren and Robert Hooke to demonstrate independently that the presumed gravitational attraction between the Sun and its planets decreased with the square of the distance between them.[71] This refuted the traditional assumption of scholastic physics that the power of gravitational attraction remained constant with distance whenever it applied between two bodies, such as was assumed by Kepler and also by Galileo in his mistaken universal law that gravitational fall is uniformly accelerated, and also by Galileo's student Borrelli in his 1666 celestial mechanics."

source: Johannes Kepler - Wikipedia


Kepler: The First Science Fiction Writer

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

source: Somnium (novel) - Wikipedia

 

"The Ellipse"

"If the usual popular accounts of Kepler's Mars work are anything to go by," William H. Donahue noted in a 1988 article in the Journal of the History of Astronomy, "all he had to do was plot points on the orbit by triangulation and note that they all fall on an ellipse with one focus at the Sun." Donahue continues,  "To the few scholars who have actually studied Kepler's New astronomy (1609), however, it is clear that the points plotted do not fall so neatly." A 1968 study by Curtis Wilson indicated, Donahue notes, that Kepler "could not possibly have used the triangulation to determine the orbit, because the procedure of triangulation was too imprecise."  Rather, Kepler used the triangulation "only as a guide to his theorizing."

source: The Ellipse - Kepler's Discovery


Exercises in Apologetics: Modern So-Called "Science" is a Religious Faith with Many Unconscious Adherents

Modern science promoters must overlook obvious flaws and have to play illogical apologetic semantic games to maintain the illusion of a shred of heliocentric based integrity. The supposed "elegant" model of Copernicus needed Kepler's bizarre musings as apologetics. Newton had to come along to add more to it all. The absurd pyramid of unquestioned nonsense leads directly to the ad hoc patch work mess that is modern astrophysics. The Black Hole filled, Quantum foaming mess of galactic and multiversal nonsense would be deemed insane by men like Kepler who seem to have believed in a Universe of fixed stars centered on the Sun.

"...branch of theology which defends Christian belief," 1733, from apologetic (which is attested from early 15c. as a noun meaning "formal defense"); also see -ics."

source: https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=apologetics


"Kepler next examined the motion of the Earth using Brahe's observations of Mars."

source: http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1988JHA....19..217D 


KEPLER'S FABRICATED FIGURES: COVERING UP THE MESS IN NEW ASTRONOMY

Kepler.jpg

page 217

source: http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1988JHA....19..217D   •   1968 study

Kepler's Vicarious Hypothesis

Kepler2.jpg

page 221

source: http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1988JHA....19..217D   •   1968 study

Kepler's Mysterious "Hypothesis"

Kepler 3.jpg

page ?

source: http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1988JHA....19..217D   •   1968 study

"Kepler next examined the motion of the Earth using Brahe's observations of Mars."

"Kepler next examined the motion of the Earth using Brahe's observations of Mars. He postulated that the Earth does not move around the center of its orbit at a uniform speed.  “This is in a way surprising,” writes Donahue, “because ever since the time of Hipparchus” (second century BCE) a theory of this kind, either of an Earth or Sun moving at uniform speed depending on which was at the center, “had been used with no problems.” Even Tycho Brahe himself had approved of it on the basis of his own data. How did Kepler determine the Earth's orbit, using observations of Mars? Kepler knew that the time of Mars' orbit was 687 days. Therefore, Mars will be in the same place every 687 days. If he could find multiple observations of Mars separated by this interval of time, he could observe how the angle between Earth and Mars changed and thus learn something about the parameters of Earth's orbit."

source: http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1988JHA....19..217D   •   1968 study

"...A Fraud, A Complete Fabrication."

Kepler 4.jpg

This is but the tip of the allegorical iceberg. A lot  more to come. Heliocentric theory was always a joke. That's why modern Cosmology is a multiversal mess.

The modern patchwork of cartoonish ideas sold as astrophysics is a royal pile of steaming garbage.

"Kepler next examined the motion of the Earth using Brahe's observations of Mars."

Consider how illogical the above statement really is. The Earth is motionless as far as anyone can tell or prove despite hip to the contrary. The Michelson Gale Pearson interferometer experiment that claimed to measure's Earth's imagined rotation is another bit of propaganda, complete with fallacious mathematical equation.

Click here: There is No Evidence The Earth Spins Part One: Michelson Gale Make ... for more.

The work of men like Copernicus, Kepler, Newton, Einstein are examples of propaganda and not science. Fallaciously applied mathematics is the equivalent of grammatically correct sentences that contain gibberish as content. Peer reviewed is peer pressure. The educational system rewards for Pavlovian conditioned responses. Nobody seems interested in going back and checking the actual work of the Sainted Geniuses like Kepler and Newton. When one does, one comes away with a different perspective,


Copernicus vs Ptolemy

Copernicus created the demonstrably more complicated system as it would need to be fallaciously ad hoc patched by Kepler and Newton. The heliocentric model is not based on demonstrable natural reality but on prejudice and faith based solar supposition. The Geocentric model is the one based on actual observation.

""The idea that Copernicus used only 34 circles in his system comes from his own statement in a preliminary unpublished sketch called the Commentariolus. By the time he published De revolutionibus orbium coelestium, he had added more circles. Counting the total number is difficult, but estimates are that he created a system just as complicated, or even more so."

"Claudius Ptolemy refined the deferent-and-epicycle concept and introduced the equant as a mechanism for accounting for velocity variations in the motions of the planets. The empirical methodology he developed proved to be extraordinarily accurate for its day and was still in use at the time of Copernicus and Kepler.  Owen Gingerich describes a planetary conjunction that occurred in 1504 that was apparently observed by Copernicus. In notes bound with his copy of the Alfonsine Tables, Copernicus commented that "Mars surpasses the numbers by more than two degrees. Saturn is surpassed by the numbers by one and a half degrees." Using modern computer programs, Gingerich discovered that, at the time of the conjunction, Saturn indeed lagged behind the tables by a degree and a half and Mars led the predictions by nearly two degrees. Moreover, he found that Ptolemy's predictions for Jupiter at the same time were quite accurate. Copernicus and his contemporaries were therefore using Ptolemy's methods and finding them trustworthy well over a thousand years after Ptolemy's original work was published. When Copernicus transformed Earth-based observations to heliocentric coordinates he was confronted with an entirely new problem. The Sun-centered positions displayed a cyclical motion with respect to time but without retrograde loops in the case of the outer planets. In principle, the heliocentric motion was simpler but with new subtleties due to the yet-to-be-discovered elliptical shape of the orbits. Another complication was caused by a problem that Copernicus never solved: correctly accounting for the motion of the Earth in the coordinate transformation. In keeping with past practice, Copernicus used the deferent/epicycle model in his theory but his epicycles were small and were called "epicyclets".

In the Ptolemaic system the models for each of the planets were different and so it was with Copernicus' initial models. As he worked through the mathematics, however, Copernicus discovered that his models could be combined in a unified system. Furthermore, if they were scaled so that the Earth's orbit was the same in all of them, the ordering of the planets we recognize today easily followed from the math. Mercury orbited closest to the Sun and the rest of the planets fell into place in order outward, arranged in distance by their periods of revolution. Although Copernicus' models reduced the magnitude of the epicycles considerably, whether they were simpler than Ptolemy's is moot. Copernicus eliminated Ptolemy's somewhat-maligned equant but at a cost of additional epicycles. Various 16th-century books based on Ptolemy and Copernicus use about equal numbers of epicycles.

The idea that Copernicus used only 34 circles in his system comes from his own statement in a preliminary unpublished sketch called the Commentariolus. By the time he published De revolutionibus orbium coelestium, he had added more circles. Counting the total number is difficult, but estimates are that he created a system just as complicated, or even more so. Koestler, in his history of man's vision of the universe, equates the number of epicycles used by Copernicus at 48. The popular total of about 80 circles for the Ptolemaic system seems to have appeared in 1898. It may have been inspired by the non-Ptolemaic system of Girolamo Fracastoro, who used either 77 or 79 orbs in his system inspired by Eudoxus of Cnidus. Copernicus in his works exaggerated the number of epicycles used in the Ptolemic system; although original counts ranged to 80 circles, by Copernicus's time the Ptolemic system had been updated by Peurbach towards the similar number of 40; hence Copernicus effectively replaced the problem of retrograde with further epicycles."

"Copernicus' theory was at least as accurate as Ptolemy's but never achieved the stature and recognition of Ptolemy's theory. What was needed was Kepler's elliptical theory, not published until 1609. Copernicus' work provided explanations for phenomena like retrograde motion, but really didn't prove that the planets actually orbited the Sun.

Ptolemy's and Copernicus' theories proved the durability and adaptability of the deferent/epicycle device for representing planetary motion. The deferent/epicycle models worked as well as they did because of the extraordinary orbital stability of the solar system. Either theory could be used today had Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz and Isaac Newton not invented calculus.  The first planetary model without any epicycles was that of Ibn Bajjah (Avempace) in 12th century Andalusian Spain,[16] but epicycles were not eliminated in Europe until the 17th century, when Johannes Kepler's model of elliptical orbits gradually replaced Copernicus' model based on perfect circles.

Newtonian or classical mechanics eliminated the need for deferent/epicycle methods altogether and produced more accurate theories. By treating the Sun and planets as point masses and using Newton's law of universal gravitation, equations of motion were derived that could be solved by various means to compute predictions of planetary orbital velocities and positions. Simple two-body problems, for example, can be solved analytically. More-complex n-body problems require numerical methods for solution. The power of Newtonian mechanics to solve problems in orbital mechanics is illustrated by the discovery of Neptune. Analysis of observed perturbations in the orbit of Uranus produced estimates of the suspected planet's position within a degree of where it was found. This could not have been accomplished with deferent/epicycle methods. Still, Newton in 1702 published Theory of the Moon's Motion which employed an epicycle and remained in use in China into the nineteenth century. Subsequent tables based on Newton's Theory could have approached arcminute accuracy."

source: Deferent and epicycle - Wikipedia


"the Ptolemaic model was not seriously challenged for over 1,300 years."

"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."

"While the fact that we base planetarium projectors on the Ptolemaic model of the universe that was developed almost 2,000 years ago may seem impressive, a better test of the model is how long the model was accepted by society. In this case, the Ptolemaic model was not seriously challenged for over 1,300 years. When and why it finally needed to be replaced will be described in the next subunit."

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


Copernicus Didn't Like Ptolemy's Ideas, Just Because He Found Them Distasteful.

Apolgetics Hide Problems with Copernicus

"As we discussed in the previous subunit, the Earth-centered model of the universe, refined by Ptolemy, was set firmly in place in the early part of the first millennium. It was not until 1543 that it met serious competition in the Sun-centered model of Nicolas Copernicus. Copernicus was born in 1473 in Poland and studied, among other subjects, mathematics and astronomy. He is mainly remembered for formally introducing the idea that the Sun is the center of our solar system. This heliocentric concept (sun-centered concept) was a radical idea for his time. Nearly all contemporary astronomers had adopted the Greek Earth-centered model. It was so radical a concept, in fact, that Copernicus waited until the year of his death to publish his famous essay titled, “On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres.” 

"Copernicus had two main reasons for asserting that the Sun was the center of our solar system."

"1. While the Ptolemaic model was very good at predicting the positions of the planets, it wasn't precise, and over the centuries its predictions got worse and worse."

"2. Copernicus didn't like the fact that the Ptolemaic model had big epicycles to explain the retrograde motions of the planets. He knew that this could be explained instead by having the Earth also moving around the Sun."

"The true motion of the planets around the Sun is not uniform circular motion, so Copernicus' model still needed to have epicycles. He had 1500 years of post-Ptolemy data to work with, and needed quite a lot of epicycles to make a new set of accurate predictions for the motions of the planets.  The main simplification of the Copernican model was that the retrograde loops of the planets as seen from the Earth occur naturally as a result of the Earth's motion combined with the motions of the planets.You worked on this problem in the second part of Activity Two. Here are some illustrations to consider."

source: http://www.polaris.iastate.edu/EveningStar/Unit2/unit2_sub2.htm


Which model is really the more complicated one, the one based on what we can actually observe or the one based on prejudice?

"The true motion of the planets around the Sun is not uniform circular motion, so Copernicus' model still needed to have epicycles. He had 1500 years of post-Ptolemy data to work with, and needed quite a lot of epicycles to make a new set of accurate predictions for the motions of the planets. "

source: http://www.polaris.iastate.edu/EveningStar/Unit2/unit2_sub2.htm