You keep trying to turn this back into a three body model. The Sun is only 2.1 degrees behind strictly in relationship to an observer on the earth, in a two body model. In the two body model there is essentially no difference between two stationary objects with one of the them spinning or having one of them orbit the other object. Adding a third body invalidates the two body model.
Remember this is all based on mrjesses merry go round model. I would like you to explain to me how to determine in a two body model how you can definitively determine which body is orbiting or which body is spinning? I think this is where you are confused.
post 447[LeGrande] In other words when you look at the Sun, you are seeing it about 7 minutes behind where it actually is, but if you had a sensitive gravity sensor where would it point? At the sun you see or 7 minutes ahead of the sun you see?post 469[mrjesse] this [is] how it would be if the sun were orbiting the earth... if gravity "traveled" instantly (which I think was a basis for your question) then indeed, the sun's gravity would be 2.13 degrees ahead of its visual location... But the sun doesn't orbit the earth! Other way around!post 488[LeGrande] You seem unable or unwilling to try and grasp simple concepts that disagree with your world view. My example was simple, is the sun where it appears to be when you look at it? Or is it ahead of where it appears to be? You seem to think that it is where it appears to be, you are wrong.post 489[ECO] the sun is where mrjesse says it is.post 496[LeGrande] MrJesse is claiming that... the sun is in exactly the same place that we see it, when we see it. You seem to agree, according to your equation and statement "the sun is where mrjesse says it is." Both of you are wrong, we see the Sun where it was 8 minutes ago when the photons were emitted.post 504[mrjesse] Can you find anyone at nasa who plans space missions and who agrees with you? The more I hear of your idea the more crazy it sounds.post 525[LeGrande] LOL They all agree with me... May I suggest "Physics for Dummy's"...
[ECO] Is the moon's apparent position off by more than 2.1 degrees from its actual position? Or less?post 529[LeGrande] The lag is a little over a second.
Look LeGrande, no lag! The Sun, the moon, and the observer on Earth... all lined up.
Solar Eclipse
Solar Eclipses for Beginners
You are simply ignorant about the scientific method. Simply provide a falsifiable hypothesis to test. In other words show how Creationism can be falsified and then it will count as a credible theory, for which evidence can be shown for and against. A theory that can't be falsified, like string theory, is worthless, at best a pleasant diversion.But as we shall see, your notion of falsification is a special one: it only applies to the other guy you may be talking to.
The Sun is only 2.1 degrees behind strictly in relationship to an observer on the earth, in a two body model.
How would you falsify this hypothesis?