On Mar 21, 1:48*pm, Mike Collins wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Mar 21, 8:07 am, Mike Collins wrote:

So what you are actually saying is this: Let's ignore the fact that the sun
is visible at both poles on the equinox because it invalidates Oriels
infantile theories

With all due respect to atmospheric refraction and its effects in many
areas,the immense and noble discipline of planetary dynamics focuses
attention of the polar coordinates turning through the circle of
illumination and into their respective orbital cycles of day or
night.While the observers for refraction are many,the audience for the
orbital dynamic are few.

Everything from the annual tidal cycles to the observed variations in
natural noon are contingent on knowing that the polar coordinates act
like a beacon into the orbital behavior of the planet,a particularly
21st century view which incorporates the emerging astronomy of
planetary comparisons.

Let's try some planetary comparisons then,

http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf071/sf071a06.htm
Describes the " hot poles" of mercury. Mercury's sidereal day explains this
phenomenon perfectly.
Lets see your explanation.

Observers here have spent the best part of 6 years ignoring
conclusive observations that the daily rotational alignment of Uranus
remains fixed in one direction in its annual orbit just as the
alignment of the Earth is to Polaris,the polar coordinates turn in a
circle to the central Sun and can be seen to do so -

http://www.daviddarling.info/images/...gs_changes.jpg

The South to North daily rotation of Uranus combines with the East to
West quasi-rotation to the central Sun generating a uniquely polar
climate on Uranus while the Earth's climate is largely Equatorial and
with less than a 30% polar influence as there is a 23 1/2 degree
separation between the intrinsic rotational axis and the traveling
orbital axis while the angle of Uranus is close to 90 degrees.

While not directly at the polar coordinates,these webcams at 77
degrees S which would have enjoyed constant sunlight for the last 6
months are now descending into darkness -

http://www.usap.gov/videoclipsandmaps/mcmwebcam.cfm

An astronomer should be capable of explaining the transition from
polar daylight to polar darkness without the slightest hesitation
rather than rely on the older and less productive 'tilt' to the Sun
explanation or some variation on that theme.So,planetary comparisons
reveal information that would otherwise be difficult to attain,I know
this because the effort it took to disentangle the orbital trait from
daily rotation was considerable yet once the major obstacle was
overcome and modern imaging along with terrestrial effects arrive,the
perceptual burden vanishes or almost so.

For the longest time I have wished that this new approach to the
equinoxes be handled in a more dignified manner but perhaps this is
the way new discoveries emerge,I just can't see any reason to maintain
an awkward view that won't answer anything and expose a type of apathy
out there -

"An equinox occurs twice a year, when the tilt of the Earth's axis is
inclined neither away from nor towards the Sun, the center of the Sun
being in the same plane as the Earth's equator." Wikipedia