This comic brings up a pet peeve of mine. There is absolutely nothing wrong with believing that the Sun revolves around the Earth. Nothing. Gravity is a mutual attraction between two (or more) objects, causing them to orbit each other (around their mutual center of gravity).
Thinking that the Earth has a fixed position with the Sun orbiting around it is no stupider than thinking that the position of the Sun is fixed. The Sun’s position also moves due to the gravitational pull from the planets, and because it is orbiting around the Milky Way galaxy at a tremendous speed (and our galaxy is moving too).
As Einstein pointed out, things like position and velocity depend on your point of reference. And the point of reference of almost all humans is on the Earth. So in some ways it makes more sense to say that the Sun revolves around the Earth, since to us the position of the earth is fixed relative to us.
Now, if you want to ask people a question that might show their ignorance, ask them if planets like Venus revolve around the Earth or the Sun.
14 Comments
Sorry, there are a lot of things wrong with believing that the Sun revolves around the Earth rather than our modern belief that the Earth revolves around it’s axis.
First and foremost – once you accept the sun is 93 million miles away, you would have to realize it would have to travel 3,000 miles per second in order to run through an orbit every 24 hours. That’s between 1-2% of the speed of light and you would expect to see some relativistic effects.
In truth, treating the Earth as the center of a Sun-Earth system goes against Einstein because it makes the Earth what Einstein proved it wasn’t – a fixed point in space and an absolute point of reference. Einstein’s theory says there is not and can’t be an absolute point of reference. If you had an outside observer outside the Solar System, they would see the Sun as the center of the system, but that the Sun was also moving relative to all the other stars, just like we do when we see exoplanets.
Well, I guess if you posit that the sun revolves around the earth, you’d also have to believe that the whole solar system was doing likewise, including Venus.
Kinda fits with the infantile narcissism of the whole wingnut worldview, though — humans are the only reason for all the rest of creation, other people don’t feel pain like I do, my opinion is worth more than any expert’s, etc.
And I’m an amateur astrologer — a practice which requires strict adherence to the terracentric worldview. Good luck using that worldview for anything bigger than determining what sign “retrograde” Mercury is in, though!
Long time reader, first time commenter. In general I love your posts, but as a scientist (and a physicist no less), I don’t like this one.
There’s a couple of key points that are overlooked or missing in your post. The first point I don’t like is:
“Thinking that the Earth has a fixed position with the Sun orbiting around it is no stupider than thinking that the position of the Sun is fixed. The Sun’s position also moves due to the gravitational pull from the planets.”
Relative to an observer fixed relative to the solar system but not fixed to the Earth or to the Sun, the Earth and Sun will rotate about a point located at their center of mass, as you state. But the center of mass of the Earth-Sun system is well inside of the Sun itself. So, in that frame, it would appear as if the Sun barely moves at all due to Earth’s gravitational pull. Therefore, in that frame the model of a ‘fixed’ Sun is a good one.
This leads into my second point. All of physics is an attempt to model reality, with varying amounts of success. Some attempts are very successful (general relativity, standard model) while others are less so (we still have no clue as to the real dynamics of nuclear fission, no matter which crappy model one uses). But in the end they are all models.
One of the absolutely essential things to consider in any model is Occam’s Razor. If a physical phenomenon can be equally explained using a less complicated model, we always take the simpler model. This goes against your point:
“So in some ways it makes more sense to say that the Sun revolves around the Earth, since to us the position of the earth is fixed relative to us.”
This leads to a much more complicated model for the motion of the planets, since for some reason, the other planets revolve around the Sun instead of the Earth, and there isn’t a good explanation for what that is in an Earth-centric model. Occam’s razor would eliminate it in favor of a heliocentric model. You mention this briefly in your last sentence.
Why are you assuming I would claim that the other planets (Venus) revolve around the Earth? And I didn’t say that the Sun revolves around the Earth once a day. That takes a year. Just because the Moon revolves around the Earth, it doesn’t orbit once a day. Speaking of the Moon, if you assume that everything revolves around the Sun, would you then say that our moon revolves around the Sun (which it does, but it also revolves around the earth). And I don’s see how assuming the Sun is a fixed point in space makes any more sense than assuming the Earth is. The Sun is orbiting our galaxy (Milky Way) at a tremendous speed.
Note, I am NOT claiming that the other planets revolve around the Earth. My point is that claiming that the Sun is fixed is just as stupid as claiming that the Earth is.
I think anyone stating that celestial bodies like stars and planets are fixed is silly. But I also think that the idea of the Sun or Earth moving around as part of a larger galaxy (and in turn as part of a larger universe) is probably completely beyond people claiming the Sun orbits the Earth. The effect of the Sun’s gravity on Earth is a lot more intense than that of the Earth’s gravity on the Sun, but this isn’t to say that the Sun is the be-all end-all of the galaxy or Universe, it’s just the focal point of our solar system.
I would definitely say bodies can revolve around two or more other bodies, as is the case with the moon as well as Earth which, as you mentioned, moves along with the sun relative to the center of the Milky Way.
“My point is that claiming that the Sun is fixed is just as stupid as claiming that the Earth is.”
Here is where I’d disagree. Claiming the Earth is fixed is a model that can explain the motion of one other object, the Sun. It can’t really account for the motion of the other planets.
Claiming the Sun is fixed is a model that can account for all of the planets, asteroid belts, etc. in our solar system. There’s still an infinite number of other things it can’t account for, but it’s certainly better than assuming the Earth is fixed. Likewise assuming that the center of the galaxy is fixed is better than assuming our Sun is fixed, but again it can’t account for many other phenomena.
Assuming the Sun is fixed is an improvement to the model of motion of the heavenly bodies compared to a fixed-Earth model. Therefore it’s not “as stupid.”
I love it when the 2 smartest guys in the room have a science faceoff. It’s sort of like when the 2 biggest kids on the block sooner or later have to face off to find out who’s the best. The science superbowl… LOL
I am shocked IK. As I stated 33 years ago, the optimal orientation of the toilet paper roll is relative to the handedness of the person on the toilet seat, whether the roll is mounted on the left or right and whether the toilet seat is affixed to the floor or ceiling. You believed in a fixed orientation then. How ironic that you are a relativist now.
As I have long believed but only just now confirmed: you are only right 99.99% of the time.
The optimal orientation of a toilet paper roll is on the shelf. Cotton washable and reusable shop wipes do the trick most of the time.
So David, what you’re saying is that IK is part of the .01%
As 2 the ? of TP orientation, David and Ebdoug have overlooked a very key point in the deployment of the paper itself. It matters greatly whether the grasping edge of the paper is positioned in the northern or southern hemiphere of said roll. Now there are 2 key thoughts and the choice might well give us a clue as to the thinking process and political orientation of the user. If one pulls from the north they can obtain an exact measure of this valuable resource, however if some 3rd party (ie. the common house cat) decides to entertain him or her self with said resource, then the issue of re-rolling comes into effect. It is a long known fact that re-rolling is significantly easier when the grasping edge of the paper is oriented in the southern hemisphere. In this position one can more easily spin the roll with an open hand utilizing a less physically demanding north to south motion. Conversely, when the roll is oriented to be grasped from the northern hemisphere one must employ an inverted hand in a south to north motion where the trailing edge of the paper is likely to interfere with the uptake.
I’m just saying, the devil’s in the details and S#!& happens.
You guys made me laugh so hard I peed my pants. Now where is that toilet paper roll?
Speaking of relativity, it is interesting to note that David Freeman and I were housemates way back in the 70s when I was going to college (hence the toilet paper roll discussions, where he was obviously wrong).
We lost touch, but he found this blog and posted a comment under his full name (not knowing IK was me). Just like the sun and the planets, what goes around comes around.
This “discussion” has made my day. “>D
“When people thought the earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together.”
Isaac Asimov illustrating the relativity of wrong.