AN ANSWER TO ROCK BRENTWOOD

22/12/07 17:58

Yanick Toutain

The materialist analysis (Newton's analysis) of the place where is New York is very simple.

The town is on an absolute place. Then, one second after, the town is 5000 km far away.

New York has an absolute motion from an absolute place to another absolute place.

There is a vector from NY1 to NY2.

The length of the vector is around 1/60 of the length of vector-speed of light.

(1/60 is approximate but not far)

In one second, each part of the Earth have a motion. That motion has a speed.

The speed is 5000 +/- 29.7 +- 0.565 km/s

(absolute speed of the Sun +/- revolution speed of the earth +/- rotation speed of the Earth )

(with a light corrective in cosinus for inclination)

I have written a text about the distance between us (today) and the battle of Waterloo (YOU can find it on usenet)

My position is the position of Newton.

And you must argument against Newton himself with true arguments if you want to participate to the new scientific revolution.

The only difference between Newton and me is the fact that I am more Newtonist than Newton:

On the 3rd of July (at the aphelia point), the photons leaves the Sun and will describe a vector of 152 millions of kilometres.

BUT

During the motion, the Earth is also moving (in the absolute space).

That motion is probably a motion equal to 152 millions of kilometres divided by 60.(Aïn Al Rami hypothesis)

(152 105 142/59.819 = 2542756,35 km)

The delay of the motion of the photon is 507.37 seconds.

During that delay, the delay of the travel of the photons in the absolute space (of Democritos), it is impossible for the Earth to stay immobile.

The Earth is also moving during 507 seconds, from a point E1 to a point E2.

After that delay, the observer on the Earth can see the Sun at the absolute place S1!

He can't see the sun at the absolute place S2!

To resume : when the Sun is on the absolute place S1, at the same time, the Earth is on the absolute place E1.

The signal (photons) leaves the position S1 and goes to the position E2.

The signal arrive on the Earth after a delay; during that delay the Earth has had a motion from E1 to E2.

This is the basis of the new materialist revolution.

And I have describe some experiences to find the absolute speed of the Earth, the absolute speed of the Sun etc...

The last one is very simple : To take two photographs at the same time :

A photograph (of the moon) from the Earth

And a photograph (of the Earth) from the Moon.

You will know the difference between the length of the photons Earth-Moon and the photons Moon-Earth.

The key of Newton's dream is here.

Best materialist salutations

Yanick Toutain

===================

=====================================================

The Galilean principle of relativity, you see, also entails an even greater relativity for spatial positions -- the relativity of Genidentity. Genidentity is the term logicians use to refer to the concept of a point at one time being the "same place" as a point at another time. Thus, most peoples' notion of genidentity is such that New York in 2001 is the "same place" as New York in 2008.

Le principe Galilean de relativité, vous voyez, entraîne aussi une relativité même plus grande pour des positions spatiales - la relativité de Genidentity. Genidentity est l'utilisation de logiciens de terme pour se référer au concept d'un point à un temps pour d'être "la même place" qu'un point à un autre temps. Ainsi, la notion de la plupart peuples de genidentity est tel que New York en 2001 est "la même place" que New York en 2008.

But if motion is relative, then the "sameness" vs. "differentness" of place is too! It would be just as valid, for instance, to say that New York in 2001 is the "same place" as some place in the middle of outer space today where the Earth "used to be" before it "moved away" from that place.

Mais si le mouvement est relatif, donc "l'identité" contre "le fait d'être différent" de place est aussi! Il serait de même que valable, par exemple, dire que New York en 2001 est "la même place" que quelque place au milieu du cosmos aujourd'hui où la Terre "a eu l'habitude d'être" avant qu'il "ne se"soit éloigné"de cette place.

Thus, there is no longer any cohesive concept of a point, in the sense of a position that endures in time. The very genidentity of points (the prerequisite to defining spatial geometry) is lost.

Ainsi, il n'y a plus de concept cohésif d'un point, dans le sens d'une position qui supporte à temps. Genidentity même de points (la chose préalable à la définition de la géométrie spatiale) est perdu.