Earth at the center of the Universe?

How does science work? And what's all this about quantum mechanics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
User avatar
skakos
Posts: 287
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 7:22 pm
Location: Athens, Greece
Contact:

Re: Earth at the center of the Universe?

Post by skakos »

Obvious Leo wrote:
skakos wrote:I could not agree more!

Science simply creates prediction models and tries to make the observational data fit in them. Just that. Nothing more.
The pre-Socratics had it all worked out 2600 years ago anyway, skakos, and the physicists have just been a bit slow catching up with some necessary reading. The universe is not a place at all, although it remains convenient for them to model it as such. The universe is an EVENT. From this perspective the centre of the universe is YOU because everything you observe around you lies in your own past. The further away you look, the further in your past the object of your observation lies, and this applies no matter whereabouts in the universe you observe it from.
A very interesting way of seeing things...
Obvious Leo
Posts: 4007
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 1:05 am
Location: Australia

Re: Earth at the center of the Universe?

Post by Obvious Leo »

skakos wrote:
Obvious Leo wrote:
skakos wrote:I could not agree more!

Science simply creates prediction models and tries to make the observational data fit in them. Just that. Nothing more.
The pre-Socratics had it all worked out 2600 years ago anyway, skakos, and the physicists have just been a bit slow catching up with some necessary reading. The universe is not a place at all, although it remains convenient for them to model it as such. The universe is an EVENT. From this perspective the centre of the universe is YOU because everything you observe around you lies in your own past. The further away you look, the further in your past the object of your observation lies, and this applies no matter whereabouts in the universe you observe it from.
A very interesting way of seeing things...
It's also perfectly true, as any physicist will confirm. The centre of the universe is the observer of it.
User avatar
skakos
Posts: 287
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 7:22 pm
Location: Athens, Greece
Contact:

Re: Earth at the center of the Universe?

Post by skakos »

Human is indeed the center of the Universe.
Literally and metaphorically if you ask me.
We tend to stare in awe at the Universe and yet we are the ones who give meaning to it.

(it is rather... un-intuitive to see the Sun revolving around you and insist that it is YOU who is revolving around the Sun instead)
Jaded Sage
Posts: 1098
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2015 2:00 pm

Re: Earth at the center of the Universe?

Post by Jaded Sage »

skakos wrote:Is the Sun at the center of the solar system?
Most people would argue "Yes".
And they would laugh at anyone saying otherwise.

But as Einstein said, "The struggle, so violent in the early days of science, between the views of Ptolemy and Copernicus would then be quite meaningless. Either CS [Coordinate System] 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".

Why then do we still insist that "The Sun is at the center of the solar system"? (especially when there are modern theories from modern cosmologists with Earth at the center of the universe solving many problems of modern cosmology, including the problem of dark matter - see George Ellis)

And no, it is not because the heliocentric system is more simple than the geocentric one. Actually the heliocentric system uses MORE epicycles than the geocentric! (the true breakthrough in that came with the elliptical orbits of Kepler, not with the transition to the heliocentric system)

The truth is that behind our belief that the Earth IS NOT at the center of ANYTHING, lies a deep dogmatism: We believe that we ARE NOT unique. So deep is that dogmatism rooted into our thought, that we have formulated a respective astronomy PRINCIPLE (aka "axiom", i.e. something NOT PROVEN) called "the Copernican Principle".

Based on that principle, Hubble himself postulated that Earth is NOT at the center of the UNIVERSE EVEN THOUGH HIS DATA PROVED OTHERWISE!
One can see http://harmoniaphilosophica.wordpress.c ... azj6wq-39/ for a brief analysis of arguments concerning the subject, including an analysis of the paper issued by Hubble and how he changed his initial finding based on his dogmatic beliefs.

Thoughts?
I like the way you think, good sir.
image.jpg
image.jpg (64.34 KiB) Viewed 2528 times
User avatar
skakos
Posts: 287
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 7:22 pm
Location: Athens, Greece
Contact:

Re: Earth at the center of the Universe?

Post by skakos »

Thanks! :lol: 8)
CelineK
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2015 5:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Earth at the center of the Universe?

Post by CelineK »

SpheresOfBalance wrote:
skakos wrote:Is the Sun at the center of the solar system?
Most people would argue "Yes".
And they would laugh at anyone saying otherwise.

But as Einstein said, "The struggle, so violent in the early days of science, between the views of Ptolemy and Copernicus would then be quite meaningless. Either CS [Coordinate System] 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".

Why then do we still insist that "The Sun is at the center of the solar system"? (especially when there are modern theories from modern cosmologists with Earth at the center of the universe solving many problems of modern cosmology, including the problem of dark matter - see George Ellis)

And no, it is not because the heliocentric system is more simple than the geocentric one. Actually the heliocentric system uses MORE epicycles than the geocentric! (the true breakthrough in that came with the elliptical orbits of Kepler, not with the transition to the heliocentric system)

The truth is that because our belief that the Earth IS NOT at the center of ANYTHING, lies a deep dogmatism: We believe that we ARE NOT unique. So deep is that dogmatism rooted into our thought, that we have formulated a respective astronomy PRINCIPLE (aka "axiom", i.e. something NOT PROVEN) called "the Copernican Principle".

Based on that principle, Hubble himself postulated that Earth is NOT at the center of the UNIVERSE EVEN THOUGH HIS DATA PROVED OTHERWISE!
One can see http://harmoniaphilosophica.wordpress.c ... azj6wq-39/ for a brief analysis of arguments concerning the subject, including an analysis of the paper issued by Hubble and how he changed his initial finding based on his dogmatic beliefs.

Thoughts?
For me this is simple, Stars are the energy, the engines that create all else, planets are born of accretion discs made of elements created when a star goes supernova, so stars are the centers of solar systems. As far as the universe is concerned, man can't even be 'sure' of what percentage of it he can sense, let alone it's center.
Hello to all,

since the Universe has been proven holographic and fractal by nature, any planetary system or planet, or even human being or particle can be deemed at the center of the Universe.
Obvious Leo
Posts: 4007
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 1:05 am
Location: Australia

Re: Earth at the center of the Universe?

Post by Obvious Leo »

CelineK wrote:since the Universe has been proven holographic and fractal by nature, any planetary system or planet, or even human being or particle can be deemed at the center of the Universe.
Yes. This is the point I was trying to make to skakos. We tend to think of the term "centre" as a spatial concept but the universe is not a spatial structure. The observer perceives it spatially but this is only because the observer observes a holographic projection of a purely temporal phenomenon. In a purely temporal understanding of the term everywhere in the universe then becomes its centre because everywhere is equidistant from the big bang.
Dubious
Posts: 2491
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 7:40 am

Re: Earth at the center of the Universe?

Post by Dubious »

CelineK wrote:
Hello to all,

since the Universe has been proven holographic and fractal by nature, any planetary system or planet, or even human being or particle can be deemed at the center of the Universe.
Where or when has it been proven that the Universe is "holographic and fractal by nature". From what I've read there are at least as many reasons to believe that the Universe is decidedly a non-fractal event or creation. The best assumption at this time is to simply say that there is nothing conclusive about either viewpoint.

If it is 'proven' as you claim compared to being merely theorized upon would you kindly supply a link to any new data which corroborates it?
User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5457
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: Earth at the center of the Universe?

Post by SpheresOfBalance »

Obvious Leo wrote:
SpheresOfBalance wrote:And that's exactly what I said. We only know of the observable, nothing more.
Since you blokes are agreeing with each other it strikes me that the discourse might proceed more productively without the aggro. This is actually a very important subject in applied metaphysics and one which is very poorly understood by the lay community. It's even more poorly understood by physicists, but that's a conversation I'm in the middle of elsewhere. As a philosopher of physics this saddens me because it's truly not in the least bit complicated and it's something that any layman should be able to understand if only somebody took the trouble to explain it to him properly. I'll have a crack at it.

Our traditional conceptual landscape of spaces includes such notions as distance, area and volume, which means we map our world in terms of one,two or three dimensional spaces. These spaces are mathematical abstractions constructed by our consciousness for the purpose of allowing us to comprehend the world around us. When we ask "How long is this room?" we are asking a question which can be resolved with a one-dimensional answer. "This room is ten feet long". When we ask "How big is this room?" this question can only be resolved with a two-dimensional answer. "This room is 100 square feet in area". When we ask "How much air is there in this room?" we ask a question which can only be resolved with a 3 dimensional answer. "This room contains 1000 cubic feet of air". Cognitive neuroscientists have a very good idea of how the brain processes such questions, including the specific brain structures involved in such processing , and they speak of the brain as an organ which creates for us a "cognitive map" of the world around us. In other words we don't observe our world at all. What we're actually doing is mapping it, a simple truth with which Immanuel Kant would heartily concur.

Physics is a branch of mathematics which has been specifically designed to model this cognitive map. The spaces which we construct in our minds to map our world are not a property of the world at all but a property of the apparatus we use with which to map it. This is a completely uncontroversial proposition in philosophy. It has formed the backbone of the philosophy of knowledge since the time of the pre-Socratics and there hasn't been a single major school of philosophy since that time which has attempted to contradict it.

However I do reckon that it's high time that somebody broke this news to the physicists because unfortunately the geeks have unwisely chosen to conflate the map with the territory it's mapping. The poor old layman is therefore being offered models of the universe which make not the slightest lick of sense to him. The layman is RIGHT. These models make no fucking sense and that's the reason why.
Pretty sound reasoning Leo, except that you speak as if our minds are somehow foreign, separate from the universe. In fact we are star stuff, we are born of the universe, the universe is inside each of us. Sure we are limited. Of all the electromagnetic energy we can only sense a small portion, ROY G BIV, white light! But that does not mean that what we can sense is somehow detached, separate from the physics of the universe, rather in fact our sensing is a part of the physics of the universe, it's a resultant, an effect. It can be no other way, unless you're a god fearing person, believing he placed us special entities here. As a matter of fact if you could shrink yourself very small, sensing the micro as if it were our current macro, they would appear very much the same. That we can't see invisible stuff like dark energy or dark matter is immaterial. It doesn't change that which we can see. And if what we can't sense taints the understanding of what we can sense, so what? It's not as if we're finished trying to understand things yet. In time, in sequence, as life changes we shall probably be capable of mapping, as you call it, everything, which does not necessarily mean we are somehow separate from that which we sense. Of course it is true that some of our beliefs are separate form the truth of things, that's obvious considering differing beliefs of such things, as it's often true that multiple beliefs cannot be true at the same time, but not always.

As being that which is of the universe, we are closer to the truth of the universe, than you might want to acknowledge because of your closeness to your views. Which doesn't mean they are necessarily flawed, but of course you're biased. Which of course is one of the main reasons humans sometimes fail in understanding the absolute truth of the universe. And you may be a part of it either way, only time, sequence, change, shall allow us to know absolutely which is the case.

I shall just never buy into the assertion that our accomplishments up to this point are somehow foreign to the truth of things because we are separate from it, as in fact we are not. It's a very shallow argument. That we are currently relatively young, is a far better one.
CelineK
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2015 5:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Earth at the center of the Universe?

Post by CelineK »

Dubious wrote:
CelineK wrote:
Hello to all,

since the Universe has been proven holographic and fractal by nature, any planetary system or planet, or even human being or particle can be deemed at the center of the Universe.
Where or when has it been proven that the Universe is "holographic and fractal by nature". From what I've read there are at least as many reasons to believe that the Universe is decidedly a non-fractal event or creation. The best assumption at this time is to simply say that there is nothing conclusive about either viewpoint.

If it is 'proven' as you claim compared to being merely theorized upon would you kindly supply a link to any new data which corroborates it?
here are a few links to start with. But there are plenty of them on the internet. What to think of the "sit experiment" which concludes that matter is a lot more fluid when not observed? As for the fractal universe, it only becomes obvious when grasping the geometry embedded in it. A few months ago, astronomers discovered the Phi Ration in Universe, and spiral galaxies observe the Fibonacci Sequence, also found in nature on earth. Just an example.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnvM_YAwX4I
http://www.technewsworld.com/story/72804.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... ction.html
CelineK
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2015 5:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Earth at the center of the Universe?

Post by CelineK »

Obvious Leo wrote:
CelineK wrote:since the Universe has been proven holographic and fractal by nature, any planetary system or planet, or even human being or particle can be deemed at the center of the Universe.
Yes. This is the point I was trying to make to skakos. We tend to think of the term "centre" as a spatial concept but the universe is not a spatial structure. The observer perceives it spatially but this is only because the observer observes a holographic projection of a purely temporal phenomenon. In a purely temporal understanding of the term everywhere in the universe then becomes its centre because everywhere is equidistant from the big bang.
Sorry I hadnt read the whole thread before posting.

ditto, I concur. I read that you mention the big bang, are you familiar with the Electric Universe Theory? If not, look up for the Thunderbolts presentation on youtube, its pretty compelling IMHO. Its anti big bang and black holes theories though.
Dubious
Posts: 2491
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 7:40 am

Re: Earth at the center of the Universe?

Post by Dubious »

CelineK wrote:
Dubious wrote:
CelineK wrote:
Hello to all,

since the Universe has been proven holographic and fractal by nature, any planetary system or planet, or even human being or particle can be deemed at the center of the Universe.
Where or when has it been proven that the Universe is "holographic and fractal by nature". From what I've read there are at least as many reasons to believe that the Universe is decidedly a non-fractal event or creation. The best assumption at this time is to simply say that there is nothing conclusive about either viewpoint.

If it is 'proven' as you claim compared to being merely theorized upon would you kindly supply a link to any new data which corroborates it?
here are a few links to start with. But there are plenty of them on the internet. What to think of the "sit experiment" which concludes that matter is a lot more fluid when not observed? As for the fractal universe, it only becomes obvious when grasping the geometry embedded in it. A few months ago, astronomers discovered the Phi Ration in Universe, and spiral galaxies observe the Fibonacci Sequence, also found in nature on earth. Just an example.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnvM_YAwX4I
http://www.technewsworld.com/story/72804.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... ction.html
Good of you post a few links and interesting they are. But even according to these articles it's still only speculation whether the Universe is holographic or fractal like. Also very interesting was that string theory in some form or another is definitely NOT dead as some have so adamantly insisted. One thing I believe we can be certain of based on how it already appears though nothing yet firmly established; if we ever get to devise an almost unbreakable model of what amounts to a TOE very little about it will seem logical to us. The Reality behind our reality will require some time to get used to.

I also found this interesting...

http://www.space.com/17234-universe-fra ... heory.html

...it's ALL interesting but nothing yet is truly understood or given credibility beyond speculation.
User avatar
skakos
Posts: 287
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 7:22 pm
Location: Athens, Greece
Contact:

Re: Earth at the center of the Universe?

Post by skakos »

Nothing is "proven" concerning the true nature of the cosmos. If this had happened, then we would surely know. The fact is that we are much based on our senses and our senses are subjective. The only thing which seems to transcend the cosmos is consciousness. And as quantum mechanics has showed, the conscious observer actually formulates the "reality" around him. In this was we are all the center - the TRUE center - of everything and Parmenides with his One is more timely than ever...
Obvious Leo
Posts: 4007
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 1:05 am
Location: Australia

Re: Earth at the center of the Universe?

Post by Obvious Leo »

skakos wrote:Nothing is "proven" concerning the true nature of the cosmos. If this had happened, then we would surely know. The fact is that we are much based on our senses and our senses are subjective. The only thing which seems to transcend the cosmos is consciousness. And as quantum mechanics has showed, the conscious observer actually formulates the "reality" around him. In this was we are all the center - the TRUE center - of everything and Parmenides with his One is more timely than ever...
If we go all the way with the rest of the pre-Socratics then modern physics is very easily put into its correct context. We can see ourselves as being at the centre of the universe but we needn't stop there because we are just made of matter and energy just like any other physical entity. Every atom within ourselves is likewise at the centre, as is every subatomic particle within the atom, as is every energy quantum which encodes for the subatomic particles. This procedure of thought not only brings Leibniz back from the conceptual wilderness but it also gives focus to John Archibald Wheeler's conviction that our cosmos must be thought of as an "it from bit" informational entity. The universe is NOT a place but an EVENT.
CelineK
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2015 5:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Earth at the center of the Universe?

Post by CelineK »

Dubious wrote:
Good of you post a few links and interesting they are. But even according to these articles it's still only speculation whether the Universe is holographic or fractal like. Also very interesting was that string theory in some form or another is definitely NOT dead as some have so adamantly insisted. One thing I believe we can be certain of based on how it already appears though nothing yet firmly established; if we ever get to devise an almost unbreakable model of what amounts to a TOE very little about it will seem logical to us. The Reality behind our reality will require some time to get used to.

I also found this interesting...

http://www.space.com/17234-universe-fra ... heory.html

...it's ALL interesting but nothing yet is truly understood or given credibility beyond speculation.

the nature of the Universe will forever remain speculations but this is a good one, IMHO... when it is embedded in nature, it is directly verifiable, plz click on link
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=fibonacci+seq ... &ia=images

ps: I know many people who claim that quantum theories are beyond the realm of the observable and thus not enticing or possibly bunk. But my assumption is that the string theory represents the geometric shapes holding everything in place so to speak.

as for the a TOE, I feel like it may be impossible to find one. In my point of view again, theories could superimpose since the Universe subjected to different dimensions, each dimension having its own sets of theories.
Post Reply