"Oriel36" wrote in message
m...
(George G. Dishman) wrote in message
. com...
(Oriel36) wrote in message
. com...
My goodness,it seems so long ago since you first introduced the
passage from the Principia into the discussion and while I have moved
on and expanded on the subject beyond all recognition you now would
not dare discuss Newton's absolute/relative time definition like you
did years ago,

When we previously discussed it, I assumed you were familiar
with the simpler aspects of astronomy.

I became familiar long ago with the most fundamental rotation of
all,the rotation of the Earth on its axis,one full revolution
corresponding to 24 hours.You believe the value to be 23 hrs 56 min 04
sec and this constitutes an error.

Excuse me for joining in, but what exactly are you saying?

The earth orbits the sun once every 365 1/4 days - which we call a year, and
it makes a total of 366 1/4 rotations in that time.

This means that in an average 24 hours the earth has to rotate more than 360
degrees.

If the daily rotation of the earth is measured against a 'fixed' frame, i.e.
the fixed stars; then clearly the true 360 degrees is achieved in 23hrs,
56m, 04 sec.

The equation of time is an unrelated concept, being the adjustment made to
smooth out the Solar clock to take into account the elliptical orbit
relected in the solar analemma. It enables us to have equal length seconds,
minutes days etc, throughout the year.

Newton's comments about absolute time are intended to lay out the difference
between the 'imperfect' solar time and the 'perfect' absolute time. The
point that is made is that all perfect times are equally perfect.

Clearly sidereal time, being regulated by the rotational momentum of the
earth is much closer to perfection than solar time.

In terms of these ideas, could you explain where your view differs.
Thanks