[CatherineMaguire]

, a proof is that no book has mentioned it

That's not a proof.

Err, ok, then what would be from your point?

[Bored chemist]

, a proof is that no book has mentioned it

That's not a proof.

Err, ok, then what would be from your point?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_evidence

The problem with your idea is obvious.
No book has ever mentioned the table in my cellar.
But it exists.

[CatherineMaguire]

table in my cellar.

Good sarcasm, but it's obvious I meant scientific books, which teach about that distance and other stuff.

[CatherineMaguire]

No distance changes happen, a proof is that no book has mentioned it.

Your school library must have a awfully pathetic astronomy section if not a single book mentions regular and cumulative orbital changes of Earth.

However, scientists predict it will happen after 50+ years

What, the laws of physics will suddenly change in 50 years, diverting Earth from its previously absolute constant orbital distance to a changing one?
That's can be proved wrong since no book mentions it.

Oh, you didn't mean that. You mean that scientists predict that this will be written in a book 50 years from now, and thus only then will Earth be allowed to change its distance from the sun.

how can I know why in the source I read once it was written that it is expected to be changes in 50 years or more? I've said just the info I found

[Bored chemist]

table in my cellar.

Good sarcasm, but it's obvious I meant scientific books, which teach about that distance and other stuff.

It's not sarcasm.
It's pointing out a flaw in logic.
The fact that something is not written down doesn't tell you if it's true or false.
In 1850 no scientific book said "E=MC^2"


In reality the distance from the Earth to the Sun is continuously changing, it gets longer and shorter in a cyclic way (there are other complexities but that's the big change).

It is closest to the Sun in January.
https://nationaltoday.com/perihelion-day/

[CatherineMaguire]

table in my cellar.

Good sarcasm, but it's obvious I meant scientific books, which teach about that distance and other stuff.

It's not sarcasm.
It's pointing out a flaw in logic.
The fact that something is not written down doesn't tell you if it's true or false.
In 1850 no scientific book said "E=MC^2"


In reality the distance from the Earth to the Sun is continuously changing, it gets longer and shorter in a cyclic way (there are other complexities but that's the big change).

It is closest to the Sun in January.
https://nationaltoday.com/perihelion-day/ [nofollow]

Have to say your example with the formula opened my eyes, you're right, sorry for stupidity...

[R2000]

You know when you`ve a good Question, when everyone's input, questions it to the last detail, and question`s everyone else`s findings.

[CatherineMaguire]

You know when you`ve a good Question, when everyone's input, questions it to the last detail, and question`s everyone else`s findings.

Err, what do you want to say?

[Bored chemist]

It's important to recognise that this is a joke.
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/7388786872784819/