T
transfinitum
Guest
For what faith or moral position is geocentrism needed?
“… *it has been declared and defined to be contrary to the Holy Scripture”The 1633 papal sentence is quite specific. Galileo’s heliocentric hypothesis is condemned because:
*
The phyical arrangement of the the heavenly bodies and their dynamic relationships are the appropiate subjects of the physical sciences, not theology.
As to the first, there exists no scientific basis upon which to exclude geocentrism, if one accepts the theories of Relativity. It becomes a serviceable frame within the context of a cosmology which assumes isotropy and homogeneity (“Copernican” Principle).The first part of your sentence is true, the second is false.
If the Copernican Principle is false (and a very rapidly growing number of observations, including a major one just this week reporting the discovery of the largest structure of quasars ever observed, as well as the CMB Axis and the concentric galaxy shells reported by Hirano above, suggest that it is), then of course all scientific evidence- crucially the outcome of the Michelson Morley and Michelson Gale experiments- is consistent with Earth motionless at the center of the cosmos.
What faith or moral truth is dependent on this arrangement and relationship?
Trent defines such a consensus as irreformable.Asked and answered: The Holy Office states that Galileo is condemned on the basis of Sacred Scripture as unanimously interpreted by the Fathers.
The supreme irony is that the science is drastically tipping toward the ancient conception of the Earth in a privileged, non-random position with respect to the largest scale structures of the cosmos.