Forum:Ellipse Question, Re: Geocentrism

< Index | RW Article discussion

I was thinking about this earlier and I decided to check to see if I'm correct before making any edits regarding this.

- Start with a circle with center point X and a radius of A, and select point Y along the edge of the circle

- Using point Y as the new center, draw a circle with radius of A.

- The circle centered at Y will have the same radius, circumference, etc, as the circle centered at X

Circles Y and X are equivalent.

Now, under the same logic, is the following true:

- Start with an ellipse with a center of X, and Foci at Y and Z, and a radius at the closest point of A, and the furthest point of B.

- Select random point along the ellipse of W. This point becomes a Foci of a new ellipse, along with the nearer Foci (say, Y) from Ellipse X

- These two Foci, W and Y, become the Foci of an ellipse named V, which has a radius at the nearest point of A and the furthest point of B

Is Ellipse V equivalent to Ellipse X?

I ask because I was thinking about geocentrism, which if the geocentrist agrees about the size of the Sun and its distance from the Earth would require the Sun to travel ~93.4 million miles in orbit around the Earth a day, which for a body weighing 333,000 times that of the Earth is no small feat. Oh, and that works out to ~3.9 million MPH if the ellipse formed around the Earth is equivalent to the ellipse formed around the Sun.--Logic and Empricism (talk) 17:16, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

You might be better off asking at the saloon bar, a lot of people ignore forumspace altogether. Sophie^Wilder 19:08, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

I wondered why nothing happens here... Well, I'll ask in the saloon if I don't get a response in a few days. --Logic and Empricism (talk) 19:59, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm a bit confused by your nomenclature as an ellipse doesn't have radii. Also the velocity of a large mass is not anything special, some binary star systems rotate at phenomenal speeds. The main issue is how a large mass would orbit a vastly much smaller (x 0.000003) one. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 21:12, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

I didn't think that it did, but wikipedia claims that it has a radi at the nearest and the furthest points from the foci.--Logic and Empricism (talk) 22:05, 13 November 2012 (UTC)