posted on Nov, 14 2009 @ 05:26 PM
Answer to the OP first post.
These scientific facts are showing us that relative to the measurable speed of light (as discovered scientifically) at any stationary point in space
as a reference point we would use to measure speed of light and considering the actual speed of the earth as it travels through space adding the
angular speed of any given point of it on its surface and measure the combined speeds in the relation to the same relatively static reference point in
space we used to measure light speed, we find that any point on the surface on earth travels through space with a measurable speed only 10 times
slower than the speed of the light itself. Yet the speed of light if measured from the surface of the earth it will be the same as the relatively
stationary reference point in space we both used to measure the speed of light and the combined speeds of earths rotation and earths traveling
Therefore it is a fact that we don't really know what's going about the speed of light having us as a reference point OR we don't really know what
is going on having a relatively stationary point in space as a reference point relative to us, OR we don't really don't know what's going on about
both situations, which both are the only reference we can use to observe our reality.
HOW CAN WE TALK ABOUT FACTS? If the only FACT we can deduct from the above realizations is that we can't understand *snip* about what is really going
on of how "reality" works.
1. The speed of light is generally rounded down to 186,000 miles per second. In exact terms it is 299,792,458 m/s (metres per second – that
is equal to 186,287.49 miles per second).
5. The Earth spins at 1,000 mph but it travels through space at an incredible 67,000 mph.
Facts? What facts?
I have to always laugh when science is talking about facts.
It feels like every time science has to confirm itself with a "FACT" to prove a point, the path to knowledge and understanding (relative to the
problem being examined) branches to a different direction ending up spiraling around our initial perception of the said problem, thus we end back at
where we started. That is what is wrong with current science. The way it chooses to perceive and test things. There can be no solid facts about
anything. The simplest experiment is to try to understand how light behaves. Everything is relative to what we perceive and if we can perceive it or
not, or how much of something we can perceive. We can't even explain light which is everywhere. Think about it.
[edit on 14-11-2009 by spacebot]