April 8

Voyager and Relative Motion

The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits.

(Ecclesiastes 1:6) KJV

People today, by and large, mistakenly believe that Geocentrosphericity has been disproved and that heliocentricity is true.

The assumption is that one excludes the possibility of the other. Sadly, this illustrates that people today, by and large, can’t think for themselves. Geocentrospheric and heliocentric models are two ways to explain the same observations. They coexist.

  • If you were on the sun, you’d be observing heliocentricity.
  • Since you’re not, you’re on the Earth, you’re observing Geocentrosphericity.

Understanding relative motion is the power to comprehend that heliocentric and Geocentrospheric models coexist. The Geocentrospheric model is empirical. The heliocentric model is theoretical. Nobel Prize winning astrophysicist Fred Hoyle is quoted as saying:

“We know that the difference between a heliocentric theory and a geocentric theory is one of relative motion only, and that such a difference has no physical significance.”

— Sir Fred Hoyle in Astronomy and Cosmology, 1975, p. 416.

Fred was both right and wrong. The difference between heliocentric and Geocentrospheric is simply a matter of the frame of reference, but it has a physical component. The assumption of either heliocentric or Geocentrospheric effects the calculations necessary to derive values for the mass of the sun and other planetary bodies. Incidentally, we call this Newton’s Switcheroo.

Newton’s Switcheroo

  1. Assuming heliocentricity
    • the mass of the sun is 1.9E+30 kg
  2. Assuming Geocentrosphericity
    • the mass of the sun is 1.9E+19 kg

The difference between them is the factor 9.87E-12. Matty’s Constant. We use the same math:

  • Kepler’s 3rd law of planetary motion and
  • Newton’s law of universal gravitation,

However, by starting the calculation with the assumption Geocentrosphericity we don’t have the problem of trying to resolve why a massive sun would orbit a tiny Earth. In Matty’s Paradigm the sun is smaller than the Earth by the same factor by which the Earth is smaller than the sun in the popular science paradigm (SciPop).

Of the many things that people throw out as supposedly proof of heliocentricity one that has come up many times is Doppler shift in transmissions from the Voyager spacecraft.

The story goes that the distance to the Voyagers decreases at certain times during the year and this is detectable. The explanation is that for a period of time each year, as the Earth orbits the sun, it’s traveling in the same direction as the Voyagers as they recede into space, but it’s moving faster than they are. The Earth starts to catch up with them.

This isn’t proof of heliocentricity, it’s simply the way that you rationalize the observation from the heliocentric frame of reference. The Geocentrospheric explanation is that the Earth is stationary and the flight path of the Voyagers includes annual epicycles. The epicycles are caused by the relative motion of the sun.

There’s an excellent example which shows how ridiculously easy it is to get a computer model to switch back forth from heliocentric to Geocentrospheric.

Voyager I and II Flight Path

  1. You will need a desktop browser.
  2. Use the sidebar on the right to show the options.
  3. Select earth as the frame of reference.
    • Bingo!
    • Now you can see the flight path of the Voyagers, and the other planetary bodies, as they epicycle through space in a Geocentrospheric computer model.

The Planets Today


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: