[Rama Set]

I am getting at providing an accurate CGI representation of a moving solar system, according to the scientists...you know, real "sciency," based on Newton/Kepler/Einstein math...

I don’t know if that exists

Of course it does. Take any CGI model of a stationary solar system, set it running on your computer screen, then get up and walk past the screen. The screen (and hence the model) is now moving relative to you.

Boom!  But unfortunately we aren't moving quite fast enough.  How about we set up a giant TV on Earth and film it from the ISS?

[totallackey]

You’ve seen a solar system can be modeled with Newton’s laws but for some reason you think that adding a velocity to the sun renders the entire enterprise impossible? Explain why that step makes the whole thing fall apart at least.

It falls apart because if it didn't fall apart you would not try to deflect the topic to a model that doesn't depict the sun moving.

[totallackey]

You don't know the solar system is supposedly moving throughout the galaxy?

I do know that but I don’t know why you’d expect any solar system model to account for it.

Truth in advertising.

Because it makes no difference to the movements of the planets or moons in the solar system.
Why would you add unnecessary complication to a model when it isn’t needed?

To depict the whole of the model.

Then why did this:
get out?

I don’t know what you mean by “get out” but I assume that animation was done to explain to the layman the fact that the solar system is moving.

In other words, it was done to depict the truth, except it didn't use the truth.

I am getting at providing an accurate CGI representation of a moving solar system, according to the scientists...you know, real "sciency," based on Newton/Kepler/Einstein math...

I don’t know if that exists, to be honest I’m not sure what anyone would do it for.
Maybe someone has but I’m not going to look for one. I’m not sure what you think it would prove. An accurate model of the solar system - and we have those - should give enough confidence in the laws of physics which underpin it.

It doesn't exist.

Because the sun is not moving throughout a galaxy, the earth doesn't revolve around the sun, and the math of Newton/Kepler/Einstein is all BS.

[Rama Set]

You’ve seen a solar system can be modeled with Newton’s laws but for some reason you think that adding a velocity to the sun renders the entire enterprise impossible? Explain why that step makes the whole thing fall apart at least.

It falls apart because if it didn't fall apart you would not try to deflect the topic to a model that doesn't depict the sun moving.

I tried, but you obviously have nothing of substance to say on the topic. Take it easy.

[totallackey]

You’ve seen a solar system can be modeled with Newton’s laws but for some reason you think that adding a velocity to the sun renders the entire enterprise impossible? Explain why that step makes the whole thing fall apart at least.

It falls apart because if it didn't fall apart you would not try to deflect the topic to a model that doesn't depict the sun moving.

I tried, but you obviously have nothing of substance to say on the topic. Take it easy.

Well, admittedly, defining substance can be difficult at times if you are trying to achieve consensus.

That is why I tried to restrict the topic to the subject matter I introduced.

That of a moving solar system.

I see you didn't have one to offer which is not surprising.

[stack]

Because the sun is not moving throughout a galaxy, the earth doesn't revolve around the sun, and the math of Newton/Kepler/Einstein is all BS.

And you're basing that statement on what? You realize it's just you saying that without backing it up so what's the point of saying it to begin with? I think we know what your opinion is.

You've been shown this before. It's super cool:

Check out the American Museum of Natural History - Hayden Planetarium ‘Digital Universe'

Download:

https://www.openspaceproject.com/

You can render simulations like this one they did of the solar system moving through the milky way:



All Newtonian/Keplarian, just the way you like it.

[totallackey]

Because the sun is not moving throughout a galaxy, the earth doesn't revolve around the sun, and the math of Newton/Kepler/Einstein is all BS.

And you're basing that statement on what? You realize it's just you saying that without backing it up so what's the point of saying it to begin with? I think we know what your opinion is.

You've been shown this before. It's super cool:

Check out the American Museum of Natural History - Hayden Planetarium ‘Digital Universe'

Download:

https://www.openspaceproject.com/

You can render simulations like this one they did of the solar system moving through the milky way:



All Newtonian/Keplarian, just the way you like it.

Highly entertaining, yet nowhere near what was presented in the OP.

I didn't see the sun moving once in the video, nor was any planet depicted in orbit.

Utter failure...

[Tumeni]

I see depictions of orbits up to around the 55sec point.

Why don't you see them?

[totallackey]

I see depictions of orbits up to around the 55sec point.

Why don't you see them?

I meant to write "orbits around a moving sun."

Regardless, all you see are lines.

I don't count that as a depiction of a orbit.

[JSS]

This is a CGI representation of the solar system traipsing about the galaxy, with the planets dutifully in tow.

Please note it is not to scale, and also please note it is not legitimate as it does not utilize Newton/Kepler/Einstein math or laws in its formulation.

The question is this...

Where is the model that actually does use Newton/Kepler/Einstein that I can see on my computer screen?

I mean, this is a pretty cool screen saver, but I want the real "sciency," one touted by heliocentrists across the flat earth plane...

I booted up Universe Sandbox, loaded the inner solar system then gave the whole system movement.  Here are some images from the simulation, and these are to scale as requested, all the planets sun and moon have the correct size and gravity and the program is fully simulated with Newtonian mechanics.



Here is a closeup of the Earth and Moon.  You can't see them as separate lines in the above image due to the scale.  The solar system is a big place!



I have to admit I haven't loaded Universe Sandbox up for some time, was fun to play around with again.

[totallackey]

This is a CGI representation of the solar system traipsing about the galaxy, with the planets dutifully in tow.

Please note it is not to scale, and also please note it is not legitimate as it does not utilize Newton/Kepler/Einstein math or laws in its formulation.

The question is this...

Where is the model that actually does use Newton/Kepler/Einstein that I can see on my computer screen?

I mean, this is a pretty cool screen saver, but I want the real "sciency," one touted by heliocentrists across the flat earth plane...

I booted up Universe Sandbox, loaded the inner solar system then gave the whole system movement.  Here are some images from the simulation, and these are to scale as requested, all the planets sun and moon have the correct size and gravity and the program is fully simulated with Newtonian mechanics.



Here is a closeup of the Earth and Moon.  You can't see them as separate lines in the above image due to the scale.  The solar system is a big place!



I have to admit I haven't loaded Universe Sandbox up for some time, was fun to play around with again.

Yeah...those links you posted look like a white page...quite amazing...

Look...do you see where I clearly identified in my OP the words "not to scale."

I presented this image:

And I wrote: Please note it is not to scale, and also please note it is not legitimate as it does not utilize Newton/Kepler/Einstein math or laws in its formulation.

So, I know it is not to scale.

The problem is this.

Your Newton/Kepler/Einstein math cannot render such an image, not due to scale, but due to the fact, the orbits would not work and all the stuff claimed by heliocentrists would fall apart in front of the eyes of the observers...pity.

[Rama Set]

This of course completely ignores that you have been shown simulations of orbits in this thread using Newton's equations.  Its very sad when your position requires you to ignore evidence while you provide none.

[JSS]

Yeah...those links you posted look like a white page...quite amazing...

Look...do you see where I clearly identified in my OP the words "not to scale."

I presented this image:

And I wrote: Please note it is not to scale, and also please note it is not legitimate as it does not utilize Newton/Kepler/Einstein math or laws in its formulation.

So, I know it is not to scale.

The problem is this.

Your Newton/Kepler/Einstein math cannot render such an image, not due to scale, but due to the fact, the orbits would not work and all the stuff claimed by heliocentrists would fall apart in front of the eyes of the observers...pity.

I don't know what to tell you, they show up for me.  I even used the same hosting service that's your image was on to make sure you could see it.

Below are links to the images.  I'll attach the first one to this reply as well.

Yes, I saw you said your example was not to scale, which is why I specified that mine was.

https://ibb.co/BBqd6Nx

https://ibb.co/d5nqrC6

[totallackey]

This of course completely ignores that you have been shown simulations of orbits in this thread using Newton's equations.  Its very sad when your position requires you to ignore evidence while you provide none.

I think it wise to ignore evidence that doesn't fit the criteria of the OP.

Please note the words: Sun moving, with planets dutifully in tow.

[totallackey]

Yeah...those links you posted look like a white page...quite amazing...

Look...do you see where I clearly identified in my OP the words "not to scale."

I presented this image:

And I wrote: Please note it is not to scale, and also please note it is not legitimate as it does not utilize Newton/Kepler/Einstein math or laws in its formulation.

So, I know it is not to scale.

The problem is this.

Your Newton/Kepler/Einstein math cannot render such an image, not due to scale, but due to the fact, the orbits would not work and all the stuff claimed by heliocentrists would fall apart in front of the eyes of the observers...pity.

I don't know what to tell you, they show up for me.  I even used the same hosting service that's your image was on to make sure you could see it.

Below are links to the images.  I'll attach the first one to this reply as well.

Yes, I saw you said your example was not to scale, which is why I specified that mine was.

https://ibb.co/BBqd6Nx

https://ibb.co/d5nqrC6

Yeah, well... nice try anyway.

None of the pictures you posted are animated gifs.

Thanks for proving my point.

[Tumeni]

Regardless, all you see are lines.

I don't count that as a depiction of a orbit.

What would the orbit be depicted with, if not a line? What would you depict it with, if asked to do so?

[Rama Set]

It only counts for him if the ball thingamagigs move on the linemabobs. That’s his standard for facts.

[JSS]

Yeah...those links you posted look like a white page...quite amazing...

Look...do you see where I clearly identified in my OP the words "not to scale."

I presented this image:

And I wrote: Please note it is not to scale, and also please note it is not legitimate as it does not utilize Newton/Kepler/Einstein math or laws in its formulation.

So, I know it is not to scale.

The problem is this.

Your Newton/Kepler/Einstein math cannot render such an image, not due to scale, but due to the fact, the orbits would not work and all the stuff claimed by heliocentrists would fall apart in front of the eyes of the observers...pity.

I don't know what to tell you, they show up for me.  I even used the same hosting service that's your image was on to make sure you could see it.

Below are links to the images.  I'll attach the first one to this reply as well.

Yes, I saw you said your example was not to scale, which is why I specified that mine was.

https://ibb.co/BBqd6Nx

https://ibb.co/d5nqrC6

Yeah, well... nice try anyway.

None of the pictures you posted are animated gifs.

Thanks for proving my point.

You never mentioned you needed an animated gif up until now, so I'm not sure what point you think it's proving.  But I'm trying to be helpful so I'll make a gif for you.  Here you go.

The software is Universe Sandbox, and anyone can buy it and play with all kinds of solar systems or even simulations of galaxies and see for themselves how Newtons laws play out. I'd highly recommend it if you're interested in this sort of thing.

[totallackey]

Regardless, all you see are lines.

I don't count that as a depiction of a orbit.

What would the orbit be depicted with, if not a line? What would you depict it with, if asked to do so?

Lines and visible object like this:

[totallackey]

Yeah...those links you posted look like a white page...quite amazing...

Look...do you see where I clearly identified in my OP the words "not to scale."

I presented this image:

And I wrote: Please note it is not to scale, and also please note it is not legitimate as it does not utilize Newton/Kepler/Einstein math or laws in its formulation.

So, I know it is not to scale.

The problem is this.

Your Newton/Kepler/Einstein math cannot render such an image, not due to scale, but due to the fact, the orbits would not work and all the stuff claimed by heliocentrists would fall apart in front of the eyes of the observers...pity.

I don't know what to tell you, they show up for me.  I even used the same hosting service that's your image was on to make sure you could see it.

Below are links to the images.  I'll attach the first one to this reply as well.

Yes, I saw you said your example was not to scale, which is why I specified that mine was.

https://ibb.co/BBqd6Nx

https://ibb.co/d5nqrC6

Yeah, well... nice try anyway.

None of the pictures you posted are animated gifs.

Thanks for proving my point.

You never mentioned you needed an animated gif up until now, so I'm not sure what point you think it's proving.  But I'm trying to be helpful so I'll make a gif for you.  Here you go.

The software is Universe Sandbox, and anyone can buy it and play with all kinds of solar systems or even simulations of galaxies and see for themselves how Newtons laws play out. I'd highly recommend it if you're interested in this sort of thing.

I see you pasted a link in your response but it doesn't render on the monitor.

Looks like you have it tagged incorrectly in your post.

Could you try again?