On Apr 3, 5:26*am, oriel36 wrote:

Is it so much to ask that professional career astronomers accept that
the Ra/Dec framework is a genuine observational convenience for
predicting events within the 365/366 day calendar system thereby
relieving the conceptual gridlock

Well, yes, it is too much to ask.

Because professional career astronomers aren't _noticing_ any
"conceptual gridlock". Newtonian empiricism, framehopping, and
imaginary observers seem to be working just fine for them, and,
indeed, these things form the basis *for* work which they perceive as
highly productive.

If someone like you comes out of left field to tell them that, no,
they're doing it all wrong, and _especially_ if you try to extol the
virtues of *intuition* (guided by "authority", yet!) in preference to
mathematics... no, they won't listen.

If you had something which you could explain in language they
understand, and point to as what they would gain, it might be
different.

Failing that, it seems like you simply want to set astronomy back 400
years for no good reason.

John Savard