Letter to oriel36 - continued YET again

It seems to me that your theory – indeed any theory – is only as
strong as its weakest link.

POINT 1
I know from my own experience that there is a noticeable seasonal
variation in the position where the sun rises and sets and in the time
of sunrise and sunset even for an observer situated on the equator.
You deny this fact – based on what evidence exactly?

You wrote:
“It is a matter of precision - axial tilt or rotational orientation is
not, I repeat, not responsible for seasonal variations in daylight/
darkness, it stands to reason given that no seasonal variations occur
at the Equator in terms of daylight/darkness however the global
variation in the natural noon cycle occurs there just as it does for
all points North and South of the Equator.”

Well you are wrong in this part of your argument. Been there, seen
that! So I am faced with a situation where a central pillar of your
argument is certainly incorrect and that worries me.

POINT 2
We agree that daily rotation causes the day night cycle.

POINT 3
You declined to answer the question on the existence and/or value of
axial tilt.

POINT 4
You wrote:
“ ..so the variations in the annual daylight/darkness variations have
to be found elsewhere hence looking at the specifics of orbital
motion.”

Indeed – try looking at the concepts of daily rotation, axial tilt and
the non-circular orbit of the earth. These fully explain all your
concerns.

POINT 5
You declined to answer the question on the situation that occurs in
December when at the same time the sun doesn’t rise above the horizon
in the north polar regions while the south polar regions have 24 hours
of daylight.

You need to consider if your theory explains this fact.

You wrote:
“The extreme variations in daylight/darkness are due to both daily
rotation and orbital motion and at both poles where rotation is at its
least, within reason, those location experience a single cycle of
daylight/darkness. The global perspective ignores hemispherical
concerns by dropping axial inclination as the dynamic for seasonal
variation and puts the dynamical cause in the Earth's orbital motion
–“

This doesn’t explain the observed facts. Indeed it seems to introduce
some new factual errors (rotation at its least at the poles? Err, no,
angular rotation is constant at all latitudes) The Earth’s orbital
motion in conjunction with axial tilt does indeed cause the seasons
but then you don’t believe in axial tilt do you?

POINT 6
John Savard has dealt neatly and well with your misunderstanding
regarding Copernicus.

He wrote:
“.. Because his conclusion only follows from his premise within a
system such as that of Tycho Brahe. That is, if the inclination of the
Earth's axis, when compared to the line from the Earth to the Sun,
does not change, then the length of the day could
not alter in the course of a year. But if the orientation of the
Earth's axis remains constant, while the direction from the Earth to
the Sun changes, then an axis not perpendicular to the plane of the
orbit will cause areas close to the poles to be always in sunlight for
part of the year, and always in darkness for another part.

--
Martin Nicholson - Daventry, UK
http://www.martin-nicholson.info/index.htm
Dealing with John Greaves FAQ
http://www.geocities.com/badastrobuster/index.htm

On Sat, 25 Oct 2008 00:55:40 -0700 (PDT), ukastronomy wrote:

A bit of what you quoted from oriel36:

The global perspective ignores hemispherical
concerns by dropping axial inclination as the dynamic for seasonal
variation and puts the dynamical cause in the Earth's orbital motion

If orbital motion caused the seasons wouldn't it be winter in both
hemispheres at the same time? The earths tilt is the only explanation
for the seasons alternating in the northern and southern hemispheres.

--
Regards - Rodney Pont
The from address exists but is mostly dumped,
please send any emails to the address below
e-mail ngpsm4 (at) infohitsystems (dot) ltd (dot) uk

On Oct 25, 9:55*am, ukastronomy
wrote:
It seems to me that your theory – indeed any theory – is only as
strong as its weakest link.


I do not have a theory,I have observations showing that 'axial tilt'
is not the cause of the seasonal variations in daylight and
darkness.Rotational orientation (tilt) only determines how pronounced
the hemispherical transition is between maximum darkness and maximum
daylight when allied with daily rotation.

http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/arc...999/11/video/b

At the Equator of Uranus there are no seasonal variations in daylight/
darkness just as on Earth so figure the rest out from there as the
unique rotational orientation generates a great surface area that
behaves like the polar regions on Earth in the hemispherical
transition from winter to summer in terms of daylight/darkness
variations.



POINT 1
I know from my own experience that there is a noticeable seasonal
variation in the position where the sun rises and sets and in the time
of sunrise and sunset even for an observer situated on the equator.
You deny this fact – based on what evidence exactly?


That is geocentric point of view when I require a complete shift to
looking at the both motions of the Earth rather than any apparent
motion of the Sun.I know from experience in the polar regions that the
seasonal change is dramatic while latitudinal locations closer to the
Equator become less pronounced .Rather than look at seasonal
variations from a local point of view,it is far more productive to
deal with global motions first and then rework the lessons to local
observations.



You *wrote:

“It is a matter of precision - axial tilt or rotational orientation is
not, I repeat, not responsible for seasonal variations in daylight/
darkness, it stands to reason given that no seasonal variations occur
at the Equator in terms of daylight/darkness however the global
variation in the natural noon cycle occurs there just *as it does for
all points North and South of the Equator.”

Well you are wrong in this part of your argument. Been there, seen
that! So I am faced with a situation where a central pillar of your
argument is certainly incorrect and that worries me.


No need to worry ,if you want 'axial tilt' to cause the seasons then
good for you but from my seat people are not doing their jobs by
omitting a 360 degree motion with respect to the central Sun and
intrinsic to the planet with heliocentric orbital motion inferred.It
stands that in the absence of daily rotation,that separate motion
exists and when allied with daily rotation generates variations in
the natural noon cycle,something which does not require reference to
daylight/darkness but represents a single observed cycle.



POINT 2
We agree that daily rotation causes the day night cycle.


Of course,it generates day and night and gives the Earth its
rotational orientation



POINT 3
You declined to answer the question on the existence and/or value of
axial tilt.


'Axial tilt' does not generate the seasons,the rotational orientation
(tilt) determines how pronounced hemispherical seasonal variations
from polar regions to Equator where no seasonal variations exist.An
astronomer looks at the comparison between Earth and Uranus in this
respect and observationally verifies this but it still remains that a
planet slowly turns through 360 degrees with respect to the central
Sun over and above the 360 degree motion of daily rotation.



POINT 4You wrote:

“ ..so the variations in the annual daylight/darkness variations have
to be found elsewhere hence looking at the specifics of orbital
motion.”

Indeed – try looking at the concepts of daily rotation, axial tilt and
the non-circular orbit of the earth. These fully explain all your
concerns.


I do not have concerns,the wider population does in the matter of
climate change and what is causing it.Ask a climate scientist what
causes the seasons in its barest form (daylight/darkness) and the
response of 'axial tilt' does not bode well given that it is the
second most relevant experience after the day and night cycle.



POINT 5
You declined to answer the question on the situation that occurs in
December when at the same time the sun doesn’t rise above the horizon
in the north polar regions while the south polar regions have 24 hours
of daylight.


Decline,no,I give you the actual images of the Earth from Equinox to
Solstice showing the limited view of Earth from space in the absence
of daily rotation -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwTrYVBcx9s

I advised you to take the most distant view of the behavior of a
planet and then rework the lessons into that sequence of images of the
Earth

http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/arc...999/11/video/b





You need to consider if your theory explains this fact.

You wrote:

“The extreme variations in daylight/darkness are due to both daily
rotation and orbital motion and at both poles where rotation is at its
least, within reason, those location experience a single cycle of
daylight/darkness. The global perspective ignores hemispherical
concerns by dropping axial inclination as the dynamic for seasonal
variation and puts the dynamical cause in the Earth's orbital motion
–“

This doesn’t explain the observed facts. Indeed it seems to introduce
some new factual errors (rotation at its least at the poles? Err, no,
angular rotation is constant at all latitudes)

You must be kidding me !!!!!!. Wow !.

I assure you,the guy at the Equator is whizzing around in his daily
rotation at roughly 1000 miles per hour while his counterpart at the
poles is moving at a snail's pace.I have been trying to get
dynamicists to consider differential rotation for the Earth's viscous
interior based on this observation for geological purposes linking
planetary shape and crustal motion but that is another story.



The Earth’s orbital
motion in conjunction with axial tilt does indeed cause the seasons
but then you don’t believe in axial tilt do you?


The orbital component is intrinsic to the planet itself over and above
orbital motion around the central Sun.That insight took incredible
effort, even with the images of Uranus in front of me ,and it takes a
lot of familiarity to become comfortable with the specifics of orbital
motion aside from daily rotation.




POINT 6
John Savard has dealt neatly and well with your misunderstanding
regarding Copernicus.


Well,that didn't take long and while I commended you before for
speaking for yourself and not allowing others to speak for you,you
lose that right automatically - this is the way things work for you
and anyone else.





He wrote:

“.. Because his conclusion only follows from his premise within a
system such as that of Tycho Brahe. That is, if the inclination of the
Earth's axis, when compared to the line from the Earth to the Sun,
does not change, then the length of the day could
not alter in the course of a year. But if the orientation of the
Earth's axis remains constant, while the direction from the Earth to
the Sun changes, then an axis not perpendicular to the plane of the
orbit will cause areas close to the poles to be always in sunlight for
part of the year, and always in darkness for another part.

--
Martin Nicholson - Daventry, UKhttp://www.martin-nicholson.info/index.htm
Dealing with John Greaves FAQhttp://www.geocities.com/badastrobuster/index.htm

On Oct 25, 3:01*pm, "Rodney Pont"
wrote:
On Sat, 25 Oct 2008 00:55:40 -0700 (PDT), ukastronomy wrote:

A bit of what you quoted from oriel36:

The global perspective ignores hemispherical
concerns by dropping axial inclination as the dynamic for seasonal
variation and puts the dynamical cause in the Earth's orbital motion

If orbital motion caused the seasons wouldn't it be winter in both
hemispheres at the same time? The earths tilt is the only explanation
for the seasons alternating in the northern and southern hemispheres.


What is the problem with considering the specifics of orbital motion
in the absence of daily rotation ?

If any given location on the planet will experience a single cycle of
daylight/darkness over the course of an annual orbital cycle,this 360
degree change has to be considered with the 360 degree daily
rotation with respect to the central Sun in generating both the
variations in the natural noon cycles and seasonal variations in
daylight/darkness.

There are two 360 degree motions intrinsic to the planet itself with
the orbital change in orientation of any given location directly
observed -

http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/arc...999/11/video/b

Is there something so fundamentally repugnant in that overlooked
orbital component that has people blurting out 'axial tilt' which is
only rotational orientation and does not cause the seasonal
variations ?.The specific way a planet orbits the Sun is fascinating
and whether you know it or not,this new component is a rather large
modification to planetary dynamics.






--
Regards - Rodney Pont
The from address exists but is mostly dumped,
please send any emails to the address below
e-mail *ngpsm4 (at) infohitsystems (dot) ltd (dot) uk

the unique rotational orientation

a.k.a. "tilt"
--
Curtis Croulet
Temecula, California
33°27'59"N, 117°05'53"W

On Sat, 25 Oct 2008 15:51:27 -0700 (PDT), oriel36
wrote, in part:

Is there something so fundamentally repugnant in that overlooked
orbital component that has people blurting out 'axial tilt' which is
only rotational orientation and does not cause the seasonal
variations ?.The specific way a planet orbits the Sun is fascinating
and whether you know it or not,this new component is a rather large
modification to planetary dynamics.

But it is the rotational orientation that determines how the two 360
degree motions combine, and the kind of seasonal variations they
produce!

John Savard
http://www.quadibloc.com/index.html

On Oct 26, 12:57*am, "Curtis Croulet"
wrote:
the unique rotational orientation

a.k.a. "tilt"
--
Curtis Croulet
Temecula, California
33°27'59"N, 117°05'53"W

Comparisons between the rotational orientation of Uranus and Earth
clearly demonstrate that this fixed inclination does not generate the
seasons but only alters the way the seasons are experienced in the
respective hemispheres either side of the Equator while at the Equator
no seasonal differences occur for either planet,at least in the barest
seasonal terms of daylight/darkness.

Have you got that clear ?,axial tilt does not cause the seasons,the
specific way a planet orbits the central Sun with an intrinsic 360
degree motion with respect to the central Sun causes hemispherical
variations in daylight/darkness when allied with daily rotation.

If any institution involved with climate studies is prepared to ignore
rotational orientation (tilt) in context of the seasons and the
addition of a new orbital component over and above the motion of a
planet around the central star then nothing productive will be
achieved and much damage done.While it is incontrovertible that 'tilt'
is a factor in the seasons,its role is restricted to the degree of
variations for different latitudes excluding the Equator while the
actual dynamic is found in the orbital specifics.I will genuinely be
surprised if distinguished and highly productive meteorological
services remain with the current explanation for the seasons based on
variable 'axial tilt' where the Earth magically straightens up at the
Equinox -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taHTA7S_JGk

Again,it is up to institutions to figure this one out and I do admit
the specifics arising from the astronomical causes of the seasons can
be easily overlooked and insofar as this is quite a large
modification in replacing 'axial tilt' as the cause of the seasons,I
am prepared to park my interest in the topic in order to give this
topic the room it deserves.Shame nobody here in this forum has picked
up on it but that sometimes happens .

On Mon, 27 Oct 2008 14:03:17 -0700 (PDT), oriel36
wrote, in part:

Comparisons between the rotational orientation of Uranus and Earth
clearly demonstrate that this fixed inclination does not generate the
seasons but only alters the way the seasons are experienced in the
respective hemispheres either side of the Equator while at the Equator
no seasonal differences occur for either planet,at least in the barest
seasonal terms of daylight/darkness.

Yes, you are correct there. If the Earth just stood still, instead of
orbiting the Sun, we wouldn't have seasons.

But if the axis was strictly perpendicular to the Ecliptic, the seasons
would be expressed as a perpetual springtime, or no seasons at all, so
the orientation does help.

John Savard
http://www.quadibloc.com/index.html

Comparisons between the rotational orientation of Uranus and
Earth clearly demonstrate that this fixed inclination does not
generate the seasons but only alters the way the seasons are
experienced in the respective hemispheres either side of the
Equator while at the Equator no seasonal differences occur for
either planet,at least in the barest seasonal terms of
daylight/darkness.

In all that verbiage, you acknowledge that axial tilt causes the seasons.
That it's different at the equator than toward the poles is a logical result
of the tilt. "Alters the way" is a three-word substitute for "causes."
--
Curtis Croulet
Temecula, California
33°27'59"N, 117°05'53"W

On Oct 28, 6:37*pm, "Curtis Croulet"
wrote:
Comparisons between the rotational orientation of Uranus and
Earth clearly demonstrate that this fixed inclination does not
generate the seasons but only alters the way the seasons are
experienced in the respective hemispheres either side of the
Equator while at the Equator no seasonal differences occur for
either planet,at least in the barest seasonal terms of
daylight/darkness.

In all that verbiage, you acknowledge that axial tilt causes the seasons.

The world's meteorological services cannot accept the explanation of
'axial tilt' as the cause of the seasons when comparisons can be made
between Earth and Uranus clearly demonstrate that rotational
orientation does nothing more than determine the latitudinal severity
of daylight/darkness cycles but in of itself is not the cause of the
seasons.The clearly visible specifics of orbital motion where a planet
slowly turns 360 degrees with respect to the central Sun,a motion
that is intrinsic to the planet as an extension of orbital motion can
be seen in a spectacular fashion via the time lapse footage of Uranus
-

http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/arc...999/11/video/b





That it's different at the equator than toward the poles is a logical result
of the tilt. *"Alters the way" is a three-word substitute for "causes."
--

I need a grown man to answer a simple question - in the absence of
daily rotation or aside from daily rotation,does a location experience
a single daylight/darkness cycle over the course of an annual
orbit ?.The answer is that it does but that change does not bear an
association with the Equator/axis but arises purely from the orbital
motion of the Earth.I cannot fault you as those people who occupy
themselves with weather and climate still have to get around to
grasping this very important point.



The cause of the seasons,the second greatest experienced cycle after
the day and night cycle,arises from the orbital motion of the Earth,a
specific uneven turning of the planet with respect to the central
Sun.It takes two separate motions to create the variations in the
natural noon cycle,daily rotation and the new orbital component
intrinsic to the planet over and above orbital motion and while it is
a 100 % observational and geometric certainty,I still have a job
notifying those who are genuinely interested because those employed by
the institutions are not doing their jobs.



Curtis Croulet
Temecula, California
33°27'59"N, 117°05'53"W

I need a people to start doing their jobs and that means interpreting
the time lapse footage and applying the lessons to our planet -

http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/arc...999/11/video/b