“The Principle” Interview With Dr. Wolfgang Smith Galileo Was Wrong

[Hugh_Farey]

He held the theory of heliocentrism as a fact, rather as the theory that it was.

Yes indeed. Quite so. Thank you. And he was condemned for holding that opinion, because it was (declared the Church) a false opinion.

 

[buffalo]

Yes indeed. Quite so. Thank you. And he was condemned for holding that opinion, because it was (declared the Church) a false opinion.

Cardinal Bellarmine did not forbid Galileo from musing about heliocentrism. The Pope allowed him to put forth arguments for and against it. Then he insulted the Pope with Simplico. The Holy Office handled the Galileo case. In the end Galileo was wrong. The sun is not the center of the universe and it does move.

 

[Hugh_Farey]

Cardinal Bellarmine did not forbid Galileo from musing about heliocentrism. The Pope allowed him to put forth arguments for and against it. Then he insulted the Pope with Simplico. The Holy Office handled the Galileo case. In the end Galileo was wrong. The sun is not the center of the universe and it does move.

Quite so. I’m very familiar with the story of Galileo, and I dare he deserved all he got. However he was condemned for believing in the heliocentric solar system, not for being rude about the Pope.

 

[buffalo]

However he was condemned for believing in the heliocentric solar system

He could believe whatever he wanted. That was not the issue. He, without proof moved into the theological domain.

 

[Hugh_Farey]

He could believe whatever he wanted. That was not the issue. He, without proof moved into the theological domain.

No, I disagree. The wording of the sentence is explicit.

“We say, pronounce, sentence, and declare that you, the said Galileo, by reason of the matters adduced in trial, and by you confessed as above, have rendered yourself in the judgment of this Holy Office vehemently suspected of heresy, namely, of having believed and held the doctrine—which is false and contrary to the sacred and divine Scriptures—that the Sun is the center of the world and does not move from east to west and that the Earth moves and is not the center of the world; and that an opinion may be held and defended as probable after it has been declared and defined to be contrary to the Holy Scripture; and that consequently you have incurred all the censures and penalties imposed and promulgated in the sacred canons and other constitutions, general and particular, against such delinquents."

He was not permitted to believe an allegedly false doctrine.

 

[MCH1]

(declared the Church) a false opinion.

The Church had no problem with it as a theory- they were fine with Kopernikas treating is as such.

 

[Hugh_Farey]

Yup. No dispute there.

 

[goout]

It’s all relative.

 

[Darryl_B]

Then how about you feeling nothing by standing on this planet.

 

[BlackFriar]

You are the one supporting Wolfgang.
Just point us to exactly where he counters our objection in his 3? hrs of videos.
WE don’t need 1000 pages of egghead stuff that cannot be read raw.
Just a simple hh:mm:ss re his video.

 

[BlackFriar]

Do you not understand the difference between a plane accelerating and the world’s effectively constant velocity?

When did anyone ever “sit comfortably” in a plane taking off.
Surely you mean cruising at its terminal altitude (constant speed).

If you are trying to exemplify “Einstein’s Elevator” I think its best to stick with the elevator not an aeroplane at take off.

 

[Darryl_B]

I intentionally chose two situations that are not constant velocity. Anything travelling in a circle has acceleration for it has the desire to travel in a straight line and therefore receives a force upon it to make it go in a circle. Resistance is futile.

Yes I do sit comfortably on a plane taking off, resistance is futile, as is riding a roller coaster.

You find it easy to have us travelling the circumference of the earth back here to this same spot every 24 hours, but you cannot abide an airplane take-off?

But my point, the physics within the system are usually different than the physics as observed outside the system. For some reason we take physics from an armchair observatory position, and therefore find certain things difficult, which are not really that difficult at all.

 

[BlackFriar]

You find it easy to have us travelling the circumference of the earth back here to this same spot every 24 hours, but you cannot abide an airplane take-off?

Re the above perhaps the difference between 0.03m/s/s and 1m/s/s or so explains that.

By all means place a glass of water on your seat tray next time you take off rather than relying on your subjective impression of comfort levels.

Anyways, what exactly is your point with your posts re Dr W?

 

[Darryl_B]

I am not really interested in the comfort levels of a glass of water.

But my point, the physics within the system are usually different than the physics as observed outside the system. For some reason we take physics from an armchair observatory position, and therefore find certain things difficult, which are not really that difficult at all.

 

[BlackFriar]

I am not really interested in the comfort levels of a glass of water.

Then you are not a physicist.
Physicists makes objective statements that are measureable and repeatable across different participants. I will trust water spilt on your pants over subjective views of “comfort” at take off any day.

in an international airplane at take off you are travelling at what velocity…the answer is you are not travelling at all, you are just sitting comfortably in a seat…

So I have no idea what you mean by “comfort” in a plane at take off (accelerating rapidly) as opposed to reaching its ceiling height (constant speed) where your pants won’t get wet sorry.

But my point, the physics within the system are usually different than the physics as observed outside the system. For some reason we take physics from an armchair observatory position, and therefore find certain things difficult, which are not really that difficult at all.

When you can actually describe an example that more clearly makes your point do come back.

 

[Darryl_B]

You actually have no idea who I am, nor what I know, but you are not really interested in discussion are you, a sensitive subject maybe.

 

[BlackFriar]

My friend I am not really interested in the alleged or hinted status of any of the many anonymous persons I interlocute with on CAF to be honest.

You might be a rocket scientist for all I know.
But if you cannot communicate effectively then who would know and what do you expect?
And then when you try to bluff your way out of your comms mistakes that is just asking for trouble.

I may not be an actual rocket scientist but my retired colleague is.
Given I regularly beat him at chess as much as he does me at our Friday evening sessions I think I have enough intelligence to see through your gambits also.

 

[Darryl_B]

Arrogance does not need to be a by-product of intelligence. When I was young, holding my intelligence before me I told the world who it was. That does not last forever, as your retired colleague knows full well, the more you learn, the more you realize you do not know, and you probably never will. You can listen to anomalies and eventually confront them, and you can say yes, the earth operates like it is flat even though it isn’t but I have a formula for that.

And no I do not play chess. It bored my intellect.

 

[BlackFriar]

I am more interested in the topic.

When you have something clear to contribute re why Alpha Centauri daily orbiting earth is a credible Physics proposition re Dr W (as opposed to a Maths proposition) that would be good.

 

[AlNg]

Planck Satellite Confirms WMAP Findings: Universe is not Copernican

The Modern World is Faced with the Breach of a Far Reaching Paradigm

Thanks for this article. There is disagreement as to what is causing the apparent alignment of the background radiation with the plane of the solar system, but still, it is an interesting development.