RCC: Pope John Paul censors Steven Hawking

Originally posted by ivanhoe
Of course, it's called liberalism ...... 😛 😵

By maintaining that the Earth was the centre of the universe, Urban VIII became the first liberal pope.

Originally posted by XanthosNZ
Are you going to mention what happened next?

Not unless it comes up otherwise or has to brought in to support a point.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
By maintaining that the Earth was the centre of the universe, Urban VIII became the first liberal pope.

Actually, the Pope didn't say anything on the matter.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
There is no unique (or preferred) centre of the universe (that's what your site says in the first line) in relativity - any point can be chosen as centre for a particular frame of reference. So, as I said earlier, it is not wrong to call the earth the centre of the Universe.

EDIT: Leave the science to the scientists. Stick to the law.

Stick to somewhat besides anything you write about on these forums; you've shown a consistent inability to understand any concept in detail. Your statement was "it would not be wrong" to call the Earth the centre of the universe in relativity. UMM, since there is no center of the universe, it WOULD be wrong.

Got it, snotnose? Better reread that first sentence or have someone read it to ya.

Observations demonstrate that the Universe is homogenous and isotropic on the largest scales. This means that the there is no unique center or direction in the universe

Now go look up the word "isotropic" in a regular dictionary, not the one you invented.

Class A science? You???? What a joke!

Originally posted by lucifershammer
No - if I specify my frame of reference it is correct to say that the earth is the centre of the Universe. The point of relativity is that there is no preferred frame of reference.

Besides, the Church had admitted it was wrong on the matter a long time ago.

As to the importance of the position of the earth in the Universe, that was something the Church endorsed from the [pagan] Ptolemaic-Aristotelian system.

It depends entirely on where NASA are sending their rocket. If it's going to the moon, then it's fair to use the earth and moon and nothing else. If it;s goign to Mars they use the sun as the centre of the universe, not the earth. It;s too hard to make a model of the universe where the sun rotates around the earth.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
He was crazy enough to jump up and declare the Sun the centre of Universe (note that!) without providing evidence - but I doubt he was crazy enough to do what you suggest.

and was a whole load closer to the truth than the church was.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Stick to somewhat besides anything you write about on these forums; you've shown a consistent inability to understand any concept in detail. Your statement was "it would not be wrong" to call the Earth the centre of the universe in relativity. UMM, since there is no center of the universe, it WOULD be wrong.

Got it, snotnose? Better reread that gular dictionary, not the one you invented.

Class A science? You???? What a joke!

Dude!

Every frame of reference has to, you know, have, like, a coordinate system or something you can use to track where stuff is in that space in that frame. And every coordinate system has to, you know, have, like, a centre or origin that you use to say where stuff is relative to. And that origin would be, like, the centre of the Universe in that frame of reference.

So, let me see, if I had a frame of reference with the Earth at the origin of my coordinate system...

Ooh! All this science is beginning to hurt my head. Maybe I should've taken something simple - like law or something...

EDIT: Oh, and 'isotropic' has nothing to do with whether a unique centre exists or not. The gravitational field of a massive, smooth sphere is isotropic - but there is clearly a centre to that field.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
and was a whole load closer to the truth than the church was.

Maybe - but he had no evidence to support his viewpoint over competing theories. Quite the opposite - all the scientific evidence available at the time with the technology available preferred those theories over his.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
It depends entirely on where NASA are sending their rocket. If it's going to the moon, then it's fair to use the earth and moon and nothing else. If it;s goign to Mars they use the sun as the centre of the universe, not the earth. It;s too hard to make a model of the universe where the sun rotates around the earth.

Mathematically no harder than a model where the Earth goes round the sun. In practical terms, a Mars mission where radio signals have to be sent back to Earth will find it easier to use the Earth as an origin than the Sun.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Mathematically no harder than a model where the Earth goes round the sun. In practical terms, a Mars mission where radio signals have to be sent back to Earth will find it easier to use the Earth as an origin than the Sun.

So was the pope sending his rocket to Mars or the Sun?

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Maybe - but he had no evidence to support his viewpoint over competing theories. Quite the opposite - all the scientific evidence available at the time with the technology available preferred those theories over his.

This was shown to be 100% wrong in the other thread. Not surprising that you continue to repeat this particular falsehood; your posts would be almost completely empty if all the lies were removed.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Dude!

Every frame of reference has to, you know, have, like, a [i/]coordinate system[/i] or something you can use to track where stuff is in that space in that frame. And every coordinate system has to, you know, have, like, a centre or origin that you use to say where stuff is relative to. And that origin would be, like, the [i/]centre of the field of a massive, smooth sphere is isotropic - but there is clearly a centre to that field.

No, every coordinate system doesn't need a CENTER unless you are using the word "center" in a non standard manner. The articles clearly state that there is no "center of the universe" in a relativistic universe; try getting that through your thick, brain dead head.

Originally posted by no1marauder
This was shown to be 100% wrong in the other thread. Not surprising that you continue to repeat this particular falsehood; your posts would be almost completely empty if all the lies were removed.

That's utter BS. I demonstrated clearly in the other thread that the scientific evidence favoured Brahe's theory over Galileo's. You're the one spewing lies now.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
That's utter BS. I demonstrated clearly in the other thread that the scientific evidence favoured Brahe's theory over Galileo's. You're the one spewing lies now.

Haha. Nice try.

Originally posted by no1marauder
No, every coordinate system doesn't need a CENTER unless you are using the word "center" in a non standard manner. The articles clearly state that there is no "center of the universe" in a relativistic universe; try getting that through your thick, brain dead head.

Every coordinate system has a centre. That's how a coordinate system is defined - an origin (centre) and a method of determining positions relative to the origin (e.g. using a set of axes that span the space, or using some measure of distance and angle etc.)

The article says there is no unique or preferred centre of the Universe - not that you cannot specify one in a particular frame of reference.

As I said earlier, leave the science to the scientists.