De ce sa acceptam geocentrismul? Doar fiindca asa scrie sau pare a scrie/se sugereaza in Biblie? Biblia este departe de a fi o carte perfecta, cum idolatru o vad fiii Reformei. Biblia este importanta doar prin mesajul mantuitor.
Teoria miscarii pamantului in jurul saoarelui pare sa aiba si alte "argumente experimentale", mai convingatoare decat cele discutate pana acum - dar trebuie verificate/masurate efectiv pt a ne convinge ca nu e vorba de intoxicari.
Rezervele mele vin totusi din faptul ca in ultimii 300-400 de ani nu a fost o dezbatere reala intre oamenii de stiinta. Problema a fost tratata de puterea lumeasca doar cu argumente propagandistice. La fel ca darwinismul.
Prin urmare trebuie inventariate toate argumentele conceptiei geocentrice, pt a se putea compara ambele conceptii.
Acum "modelarea matematica" poate demonstra orice, pornind de la "principii" / "legi" stabilite pe "baza faptelor experimentale" si a "observatiilor empirice".
Ramane de vazut, de ce Galileo Galilei a revenit la conceptia geocentrica; ce argumente a avut.
De aici trebuie sa porneasca viitoarele dezbateri stiintifice; pt ca nu a facut-o doar din motive pur religioase.
SECOLUL AL XVII LEA RAMANE ULTIMUL MOMENT IN ISTORIA EUROPEI, CAND S-A MAI PUTUT DEZBATE OBIECTIV TEORIA GEOCENTRICA vs HELUIOCENTRICA. TAVALUGUL ILUMINIST CE A URMAT A INSTITUIT TOTALITARISMUL "DOGMATIC" SCIENTIST ANTIRELIGIOS IMPUS IDEOLOGIC !
Cum arata cuv Seraphim Rose, ideologilor globalisti nu le convine teoria darwinista, dar nu au alta care sa o integreze in ideologia momentului.
Pai aici trebuie sa punem si celelalte "teorii stiitifice", conceptii despre lume.
PS In momentul in care teoria heliocentrica se extinde cu teoria big-bangul-ului (argumentata "deplasarea spre rosu a spectrului", dar care admite si alte explicatii trecute premeditat sub tacere), cu varsta de miliarde de ani a pamantului, cu evolutia, atunci nu mai pot fi neutru.
Si atunci unde se deschide cutia Pandorei ? Care este linia rosie pesta care nu se poate trece ?
PS2: Pe wikipedia in engleza am gasit faptul ca problema helopcentrism-geocentrism a pus probleme si evreilor "ortodocsi".
E vorba de Vechiul Testament si de traditiile talmudice, Maimonide, calculul unor sarbatori. Se sugera ca tot mai multi "evrei unltraortodocsi" abandoneaza sistemul heliocentric in favoarea celui geocentric. Argumentul stiintific invocat uin wiky: teoria relativitatii a lui Einstein permite ca pamantul sa fie punct de referinta si prin urmare putem descrie matematic ecuatia orbitei soarelui fata de acest "sistem de origine a axelor de coordonate care este centru pamantului".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geocentric_model
Orthodox Judaism
Some Orthodox Jewish leaders, particularly the Lubavitcher Rebbe, maintain a geocentric model of the universe based on the aforementioned Biblical verses and an interpretation of Maimonides to the effect that he ruled that the earth is orbited by the sun.[64][65] The Lubavitcher Rebbe also explained that geocentrism is defensible based on the theory of Relativity, which establishes that "when two bodies in space are in motion relative to one another, ... science declares with absolute certainty that from the scientific point of view both possibilities are equally valid, namely that the earth revolves around the sun, or the sun revolves around the earth."[66]
While geocentrism is important in Maimonides' calendar calculations,[67] the great majority of Jewish religious scholars, who accept the divinity of the Bible and accept many of his rulings as legally binding, do not believe that the Bible or Maimonides command a belief in geocentrism.[65][68]
However, there is some evidence that geocentrist beliefs are becoming increasingly common among Orthodox Jews.[64][65]
The Zohar implies: "The entire world and those upon it, spin round in a circle like a ball,' both those at the bottom of the ball and those at the top. All God's creatures, wherever they live on the different parts of the ball, look different (in color, in their features) because the air is different in each place, but they stand erect as all other human beings.
Therefore there are places in the world where, when some have light, others have darkness; when some have day, others have night.
[64] Nussbaum, Alexander (2007-12-19). "Orthodox Jews & science: An empirical study of their attitudes toward evolution, the fossil record, and modern geology". Skeptic Magazine. Retrieved 2008-12-18.
[65] Nussbaum, Alexander (January–April 2002). "Creationism and geocentrism among Orthodox Jewish scientists". Reports of the National Center for Science Education: 38–43.
[66] Schneersohn, Menachem Mendel; Gotfryd, Arnie (2003). Mind over Matter: The Lubavitcher Rebbe on Science, Technology and Medicine. Shamir. pp. 76ff.; cf. xvi-xvii, 69, 100–1, 171–2, 408ff. ISBN 9789652930804.
[67] Sefer Zemanim: Kiddush HaChodesh: Chapter 11". Mishneh Torah. Translated by Touger, Eliyahu. Chabad-Lubavitch Media Center. Halacha 13–14.
[68] Rabinowitz, Avi (1987). "EgoCentrism and GeoCentrism; Human Significance and Existential Despair; Bible and Science; Fundamentalism and Skepticalism". Science & Religion. Retrieved 2013-12-01. Published in Branover, Herman; Attia, Ilana Coven, eds. (1994). Science in the Light of Torah: A B'Or Ha'Torah Reader. Jason Aronson. ISBN 9781568210346.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geocentric_model
Relativity
Albert Einstein and Leopold Infeld wrote in The Evolution of Physics (1938): "Can we formulate physical laws so that they are valid for all CS (=coordinate systems), not only those moving uniformly, but also those moving quite arbitrarily, relative to each other? If this can be done, our difficulties will be over. We shall then be able to apply the laws of nature to any CS. The struggle, so violent in the early days of science, between the views of Ptolemy and Copernicus would then be quite meaningless. Either CS could be used with equal justification. The two sentences, “the sun is at rest and the earth moves", or "the sun moves and the earth is at rest", would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different CS. Could we build a real relativistic physics valid in all CS; a physics in which there would be no place for absolute, but only for relative, motion? This is indeed possible!"[45]
[45] Einstein, Albert (1938). The Evolution of Physics (1966 ed.). New York: Simon & Schuster. p. 212. ISBN 0-671-20156-5.