Is the Sun four days off center in the solar system?

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: AshOnMyTomatoes

universal (meaning the universe) evolution does.

As does earthly evolution everything has a starting point and one thing comes from another based on enough time and certain conditions are met.

Say "astrophysics" then, since we are talking about astrophysics.

a reply to: Grimpachi

oh I love you.

The intent is to figure why the elliptic course of the earth is off by four days.

The only documentation that support the four day difference is found only in the Bible. Science cannot account for it. as far as their theory/hypothesis goes it is because gravitational influences from the sun vary at different degrees if it poles therefore created the elliptical trajectories of the planets that surround it.

the later being a point no one has expressed as of four pages of this thread.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Grimpachi

oh I love you.

The intent is to figure why the elliptic course of the earth is off by four days.

The only documentation that support the four day difference is found only in the Bible. Science cannot account for it. as far as their theory/hypothesis goes it is because gravitational influences from the sun vary at different degrees if it poles therefore created the elliptical trajectories of the planets that surround it.

the later being a point no one has expressed as of four pages of this thread.

You still haven't said what you mean by "off by four days". If we're still talking about leap-year, Wikipedia is your friend.

a reply to: paradoxious

From what I read it says, "And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day" half day of light and have a day of dark pretty much lines up with a typical 24 hour day wouldn't ya say?

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: paradoxious

From what I read it says, "And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day" half day of light and have a day of dark pretty much lines up with a typical 24 hour day wouldn't ya say?

Yeah, because the authors of the Bible were describing the origins of a day. I thought we weren't talking about the Biblical creation here?

a reply to: AshOnMyTomatoes

They have now found the expansion of the universe is ACCELERATING not slowing down, so the big bang DID NOT HAPPEN.....GUESS WHAT they where wrong. The speed of light is not a constant.Man thinks he is so smart but he always fails , The unsinkable titanic.....SANK.The nuclear plant in japan "HAS SO MANY REDUNDANT SAFETY MEASURES IT CANT FAIL" less than 24 hours after watching the EXPERTS say that it blew sky high.

a reply to: AshOnMyTomatoes

the ellipsis of the earth puts the sun off center in its orbit by four days. So instead of a 360 day year we have a 364 point blah blah blah day year. roughly a little over a four day difference.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: AshOnMyTomatoes

the ellipsis of the earth puts the sun off center in its orbit by four days. So instead of a 360 day year we have a 364 point blah blah blah day year. roughly a little over a four day difference.

Wow, OK. Why would we have a 360 day year?

a reply to: supergravity

remember Einstein's speed of light was calculated if it were in a perfect vacuum However we now know that space is not a perfect vacuum.

a reply to: AshOnMyTomatoes

each day equals the degree of a perfect circle. 364 point so on and so on is an ellipsis putting the sun roughly off center by four days.

is it or not?

Does anyone know where is the center of our current orbital path around the Sun is?

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: AshOnMyTomatoes

each day equals the degree of a perfect circle. 364 point so on and so on is an ellipsis putting the sun roughly off center by four days.

is it or not?

A day and a year are entirely unrelated phenomena. An earth year with no subdivisions (days) would still be the exact same length, because it is a measurement of one complete trip around the sun. A day has nothing to do with our trip around the sun; it is the length of time it takes the Earth itself to spin completely on its axis.

The only relation between a year and a day, is that there are ROUGHLY 365 earth days in one earth year. I emphasize roughly, because the leap year phenomenon is due to a year NOT EXACTLY containing 365 days. We have to add a day every 4 years to keep the calendar correct. Even this method is imperfect.

360 degrees in a circle and 365 days in a year are also unrelated. 360 happens to divide well into many useful fractions.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
Does anyone know where is the center of our current orbital path around the Sun is?

The sun.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Grimpachi

oh I love you.

The intent is to figure why the elliptic course of the earth is off by four days.

The only documentation that support the four day difference is found only in the Bible. Science cannot account for it. as far as their theory/hypothesis goes it is because gravitational influences from the sun vary at different degrees if it poles therefore created the elliptical trajectories of the planets that surround it.

the later being a point no one has expressed as of four pages of this thread.

Ahh roller derby period much..... You just don't like that that works as well as "a magic guy did it"....

Oh and it's been mentioned in this thread that it's just the different gravitational pulls of the solar system.

originally posted by: AshOnMyTomatoes

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
Does anyone know where is the center of our current orbital path around the Sun is?

The sun.

The super black hole at the center of the milky way.

one more thing all diagrams of our solar system have the planets all on the same orbital level. this is not true the planets are not one the same orbital level some a slightly higher and some lower and occasionally some of them cross others path.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
one more thing all diagrams of our solar system have the planets all on the same orbital level. this is not true the planets are not one the same orbital level some a slightly higher and some lower and occasionally some of them cross others path.

Diagrams that don't show orbital inclination are generally for the purposes of teaching the order of the planets. What is your point?

originally posted by: supergravity
a reply to: AshOnMyTomatoes

They have now found the expansion of the universe is ACCELERATING not slowing down, so the big bang DID NOT HAPPEN.....GUESS WHAT they where wrong. The speed of light is not a constant.Man thinks he is so smart but he always fails , The unsinkable titanic.....SANK.The nuclear plant in japan "HAS SO MANY REDUNDANT SAFETY MEASURES IT CANT FAIL" less than 24 hours after watching the EXPERTS say that it blew sky high.

Yea too bad science hasn't found evidence of a "dark energy" to explain the acceleration of expansion.... Y'all think I should copy right dark energy since I obviously just invented it?


Hilarious

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
one more thing all diagrams of our solar system have the planets all on the same orbital level. this is not true the planets are not one the same orbital level some a slightly higher and some lower and occasionally some of them cross others path.

It is extremely difficult to produce a 3 dimensional orbital pattern on 2 dimensional paper.
2nd.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Krazysh0t

effectually is is the same the sun exploded and spun out semi-gaseous and molten material that eventually by the suns gravitational pull settle into orbits around the sun cooled and formed planets. But that does not answer why the elliptic earthly orbit exists at a four day off center to the sun.

and herein lies one of the rather large differences between the big bang and the formation of a 3rd gen solar system. The previous star that inhabited the spot where Sol now resides did indeed explode and eventually as a result of gravity, coalesced into a proto-planetary disc from which the current solar system was born. The big bang... no explosion, The BBT isn't even about the origin of the Universe, it is about the development of the Universe over time. Get yourself a library card and check out a book called 'The First Three Minutes'.

the universal big bang (still being formulated or hypothesized by science)

No, it is an accepted theory based on peer reviewed papers, experiments, observations and a whole lot of math. The number of Cosmologists who think the BBT is bunk is about the same as the number of Earth Scientists who reject Modern Evolutionary Synthesis. I.E. a fraction of 1%

is basically the same in that one mass somewhere out there exploded and spun our semi-gaseous and molten materials that eventually post created solar systems, dwarf stars, nebula's and black holes, etc etc etc.

Not even close. Some evidence in favor of the BBT includes -

a) Large-scale homogeneity
b) Hubble diagram
c) Abundances of light elements
d) Existence of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation
e) Fluctuations in the CMBR
f) Large-scale structure of the universe
g) Age of stars
h) Evolution of galaxies
i) Time dilation in supernova brightness curves
j) Tolman tests
k) Sunyaev-Zel'dovich effect
l) Integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect
m) Dark Matter
n) Dark Energy
z) Consistency


The Big Bang did not start out as you attempt to describe it

one mass somewhere out there exploded and spun our semi-gaseous and molten materials that eventually post created solar systems, dwarf stars, nebula's and black holes, etc

None of the heavy elements had formed yet, all there was to mwork with was Hydrogen, helium in various isotopes as well as some isotopes of Lithium.