Geocentricity?

There is no "absolute truth" in either the geocentric OR the heliocentric models ! The second merely makes the equations simpler. Indeed there is no "absolute truth"....period !....and THAT is what establishes the mythological status of "god".

If there is any logic behind this statement, it's not evident...

Stuh,

Monotheists hold "God" to be "the Absolute" or "the Truth".

If "truth" is relativistic then "God" is a non-starter.

An expression can be true, false, or indeterminate...this is the only meaning of truth that I am familiar with.

When you say "there is no absolute truth," I assume that you mean that neither model is absolutely true, in that there are elements of each model which are false.

However, later in the same sentence, you seem to switch to using a different definition of the word truth, "Truth" with a capital T which is somehow synonymous with God according to monotheists (not something I've heard of before).

When you say "truth is relativistic" I assume you are again referring to the regular definition of the word truth because "Absolute Truth" is not relativistic by your definition (although it is not clear how, because regular truth is not relativistic either)

But clearly, you cannot use evidence from "truth" to pertain to "Truth" simply because the words look similar.

Stuh,

Shades of Russells paradox here !

I am saying that statements about "God" are always assigned the value "1" by believers including "His Statements", but statements in general such as about the nature of the universe can be assigned any value from 1 to 0 according to social and historical context.

There is the concept -- in quantum physics, I believe -- of the 'observer-centered universe.' In this view, the astronomical fact that the planet Earth revolves around a second-rate sun in the Milky Way Galaxy is irrelevant. We can know 'facts' only from our own point of view, from where we are physically located when we observe these things. In this sense, of course the Earth is the center of the universe (and I am the center of that center.)

Oh, btw, Walter, I've never heard of geocentricity being taught in US schools. Maybe some private religious schools, but not in the public sector.

You're joking right?

At 2005-11-16, 18h 24m 29.403s GMT, the solar longitude (position of the sun along the ecliptic around the earth) will be 234.5 degrees, based on the geocentric coordinates.

(This coordinate system is not related with any religion at all. :wink:)

Merry Andrew,

....not only in QM ....this is a major epistemological position transcendent of "naive realism".

No, Stuh, I'm not joking at all. (I also never said whether I do or do not subscribe to this position.) But, as fresco has already pointed out, the concept of the observer-centered universe is not a joke nor some kind of "flat earth" aberration. The epistemological point being made is that we must be awfully careful of what we cite as "facts" since all our "facts" are nothing more than that which we can observe from our vantage point. In theory, at least, if we lived on some other planet in some other solar system our collection of scientific "facts" could, conceivably, be quite different and all the laws of nature we cite here on Earth would seem quite ludicrous.