Quote:
Originally Posted by rtomes
LOL! 
It doesn't matter what source you use for the planets. The planetary data are known to high accuracy. You just have to use v=2*pi*r/t where r=mean radius of planets orbit and t=orbital time.
For the inner planets you get in km/s Me=47.9, Ve=35.0, Ea=29.8, Ma=24.1 and from memory Ceres is close to 18.0. When looked at as multiples of 6 km/s, the deviations are 0.1, 1.0, 0.2 and 0.1, all extremely small except venus which is a little off. |
Indeed.
And they are all multiples of 0.1 km/s, with no deviation whatsoever.
And 0.2 km/s, with only two with deviations.
And 0.3 km/s (all within 0.1 km/s)
And 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.8, 0.9, 1.0, ...
But if the predictions are 'exact', then only the first (multiples of 0.1 km/s) is consistent; given the accuracy of the input numbers, even a single deviation of 0.1 km/s is surely fatal to the hypothesis?
Quote:
|
For the stars I used a catalogue, but I won't present this as it is not as strong a case as the others.
|
If you wish to retract the claim, please say so.
If you do not retract the claim, please substantiate it.
Quote:
|
I just mention it as these things are all pervading. Once you have done all this with me you will probably start to notice these values popping up everywhere.
|
Indeed.
And I can find the following sequences of digits in the base-10 expression of pi:
1234567890
0987654321
1111111111
2222222222
24082007
....
I can find extremely strong correlations between things like
the RA of Pluto and the GDP of the USA.
And so on.
What does any of this numerology have to do with science (in general) and astronomy (in particular)?