Bronte: "Edg, it appears that you see me as stupid."
Nooooooooo! Lacking information, er, ya, but ain't nothing to do with
your IQ. I lack tons of information in every field -- so I always feel
I'm about as uninformed as anyone else, but sometimes I do have a
piece of info that someone else doesn't. Just lucky, not smarter.
I do read a ton of astronomy and physics stuff, and I must conclude
that you are not seeing things as I've been "reading taught" to
"believe." But, I'm not seeing you as lesser, just differently
experienced.
Your statement, below, seems to not apply to the issue of the material
of earth switching its speed or direction of rotation. There is no
known spinning ball that comes to a halt and then starts up again
without some sort of physical mechanism to be a basis of it, and if
there were such, I'm pretty sure I would have read about it long ago.
Not that it is impossible to imagine, but it would be rarest of the
rare in most cases.
Bronte's statement: "Could be, and probably would be, if there were a
sudden reversal of direction. But when objects change rotation (in my
experiment) it appears they slow, then stop, then pause a bit, then
slowly start moving again in the other direction before building up
speed. There are no "crashes" on the microcosmic level, and I doubt
that there would be on the macrocosmic."
Edg: Then you say:
Bronte: "Possibly, but I don't see how a meteor hitting the earth
would be perceived as the sun rising."
Edg: "If the earth was to be made to stand still, it would have to
have its rotation slowed by some process. Only a large object
smacking into the earth could do this "instantly" -- as told in the
bible. Such a collision would melt the crust of the earth and kill
everything. But if somehow, some patch of land survived and somehow
some person survived the fiery conditions, then, yes, they'd see the
"sun stop" or "sun reverse its path," which is (as you are sure to
know) an illusion because of the earth's spin -- not the sun's
actually movement relative to the earth. (The whole solar system is
moving at a high rate of speed around the galactic core, but that
vector doesn't enter our discussion."
I didn't intend to mean that a meteor would be glowing like a sun and
be mistaken for the sun -- though, yeah, such a thing could happen,
but again -- rarely -- not seen in known human history so far. Even
the brightest meteor would be moving so fast across the sky, that one
would not immediately think it was a second sun just on that basis
alone. The atmosphere of the earth isn't all that deep, and so
friction from the atmosphere resisting the meteor's plunge has only a
few seconds to act upon the 20,000 MPH+ meteor before the meteor
crashes. Even a primative culture would say that this second sun was
not very sun-like.
Remember that the atmosphere and water are moving at the same speed as
the earth's crust, and that if the earth slows down even slightly,
then the oceans would wash up onto the continents like a bucket of
water on the front seat of your car sloshing over the brim if you
apply the brakes too quickly. So any slowing of the earth's spin has
to be over a long time, say, one mile per hour off of the 1000 MPH
spin rate decreased per day -- so three years to stop the earth
spinning -- that or risk having a world wide tsunami.
As mentioned by another poster, you may be thinking about gyroscopic
motions that do, commonly, reverse directions. This well known
dynamic could only apply to the earth if the earth's inner core were
spinning and "something" tried to "grab the crust and let the insides
keep spinning." Then you'd have a big time gyroscopic resistance to
the earth's spinning in any other way but the same direction as the
core is spinning. But the crust is so fragile that no giant hand of
God could grab it and have it stop without it cracking all to hell.
But, in Toys R Us, you can buy a ball that strengthens your wrist
muscles because it gives you exactly that dynamic -- an outer
crust/skin around a very fast inner object that is spinning. Even
though the hand holds the outer ball, the inner ball's spin resists
the hand moving in certain directions -- thus exercising the muscles.
So when I say "google it," I mean, "I don't know, but I sure think it
can be learned by just reading the top ten links google will give you
about the subject."
As for your anti-guru posts -- I have yet to respond to them, might
never in a proselytizing sense, but let me at least say I think that
there are "good gurus" in the world to whom one could safely surrender
one's life, thoughts, and actions, and though Ramana Mahrishi had no
disciples per se, I would drop everything right now and go to where he
was and hope to be allowed to sit at his feet, even though I've never
met the man except in his words in books. But, I have yet to have any
desire at all to visit Ramesh, or Gangaji, or Wayne. I've read their
books too -- I would only recommend Ramana's though.
Edg
