Polar astronomy

Lots of innovations to consider during the period of polar twilight after the March Equinox at the South Pole station. The same principles apply to polar sunset as they do at habitable latitudes as objects close to the central Sun will appear during that period to the left of the sun for an extended period of about 6 continuous weeks before polar darkness sets in.

On the Solstice neither Venus nor Mercury will be observed for the same reason that at daily rotational midnight, the body of the Earth prevents objects close to the Sun from being observed.


Polar twilight would not only present unique challenges but also unique opportunities including observational innovations relating to orbital elements as rotation is residual in the North pole region (zero at the North polar latitude itself). Just a normal perspective in an era that is less so.

On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 13:01:36 -0800 (PST), Gerald Kelleher wrote:

Lots of innovations to consider during the period of polar twilight after the March Equinox at the South Pole station. The same principles apply to polar sunset as they do at habitable latitudes as objects close to the central Sun will appear during that period to the left of the sun for an extended period of about 6 continuous weeks before polar darkness sets in.

On the Solstice neither Venus nor Mercury will be observed for the same reason that at daily rotational midnight, the body of the Earth prevents objects close to the Sun from being observed.

Polar twilight would not only present unique challenges but also unique opportunities including observational innovations relating to orbital elements as rotation is residual in the North pole region (zero at the North polar latitude itself). Just a normal perspective in an era that is less so.

I'm a poor writer, as no doubt many here have noticed on more than one
occaision; but what you publish here is indecipherable.

Haven't you considered how much your choice to not take the time to
organize your topics into complete subjects that you then explain in a
systematic and through way - hurts your agenda?

You can't do what you claim to want to do - on Usenet. We are not a
bunch of neo lithic tribal-types sitting around the campfire groping for
answers in darkness. We don't want to go back to that - even if you do.


--
Email address is a Spam trap.

Bill:
Haven't you considered how much your choice to not take the time to
organize your topics into complete subjects that you then explain in a
systematic and through way - hurts your agenda?

He's a troll and his agenda is to reel in people like you. I would say
that he has been splendidly successful at fulfilling his agenda.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

On Thursday, March 1, 2018 at 5:23:29 PM UTC-8, Davoud wrote:
Bill:
Haven't you considered how much your choice to not take the time to
organize your topics into complete subjects that you then explain in a
systematic and through way - hurts your agenda?

He's a troll and his agenda is to reel in people like you. I would say
that he has been splendidly successful at fulfilling his agenda.

Also, his knowledge of astronomy is woefully off the tracks...

On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 17:43:11 -0800 (PST), palsing wrote:

Also, his knowledge of astronomy is woefully off the tracks...

Appologies if my reply to you know who seems naieve. I simply will not
reveal my reason for replying to his post.

If he reponds to me in his typical fashion - please, everyone, do
yourselves a favor and just look the other way.
--
Email address is a Spam trap.

Bill:
Haven't you considered how much your choice to not take the time to
organize your topics into complete subjects that you then explain in a
systematic and through way - hurts your agenda?

Davoud:
He's a troll and his agenda is to reel in people like you. I would say
that he has been splendidly successful at fulfilling his agenda.

palsing:
Also, his knowledge of astronomy is woefully off the tracks...

You missed the point. There is no way to judge what he knows or doesn't
know about astronomy; he's not here for astronomy, he's here for
trolling. If he were an expert on all things astronomical (and he could
be, you know) he would have to conceal that fact. Because he's not here
for astronomy, he's here as a troll.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 22:41:22 -0500, Davoud wrote:

You missed the point. There is no way to judge what he knows or doesn't
know about astronomy; he's not here for astronomy, he's here for
trolling. If he were an expert on all things astronomical (and he could
be, you know) he would have to conceal that fact. Because he's not here
for astronomy, he's here as a troll.

You can't take a hint.
I'm not going to reveal anything.
Feel free to castigate me; but that is how is has to be.
--
Email address is a Spam trap.

On Thursday, March 1, 2018 at 10:43:34 PM UTC, Bill wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 13:01:36 -0800 (PST), Gerald Kelleher wrote:

Lots of innovations to consider during the period of polar twilight after the March Equinox at the South Pole station. The same principles apply to polar sunset as they do at habitable latitudes as objects close to the central Sun will appear during that period to the left of the sun for an extended period of about 6 continuous weeks before polar darkness sets in.

On the Solstice neither Venus nor Mercury will be observed for the same reason that at daily rotational midnight, the body of the Earth prevents objects close to the Sun from being observed.

Polar twilight would not only present unique challenges but also unique opportunities including observational innovations relating to orbital elements as rotation is residual in the North pole region (zero at the North polar latitude itself). Just a normal perspective in an era that is less so.

I'm a poor writer, as no doubt many here have noticed on more than one
occaision; but what you publish here is indecipherable.

Haven't you considered how much your choice to not take the time to
organize your topics into complete subjects that you then explain in a
systematic and through way - hurts your agenda?

You can't do what you claim to want to do - on Usenet. We are not a
bunch of neo lithic tribal-types sitting around the campfire groping for
answers in darkness. We don't want to go back to that - even if you do.


Unless you haven't noticed, the neolithic astronomers 5200 years ago and their understanding of celestial motions surpass that of celestial sphere enthusiasts in so many different ways. They understood that the moon was lost to the glare of the Sun for a number of days during its monthly circuit of the Earth and preserved in a 1/4 ton stone surrounding a monument with an equinox alignment.

http://www.knowth.com/stooke/knowth4.gif

The same principle applies to the planets and stars as they become lost to the glare of the central and stationary Sun periodically, depending on whether orbital motions of the other planets are being discussed or the Earth's own orbital motion where the stars transition from an evening to morning appearance.

Now I regret that people don't take an expansive historical view of human involvement in astronomy but have boxed themselves into a narrow and manufactured history meant to promote the notions of theorists and the hobby of celestial sphere observing. I no longer maintain the pretense that society has any interest in interpretative astronomy where cause and effect match observations so I come here to the unmoderated Usenet to put form to perceptions using as much imaging as possible and with the greatest respect for older astronomical traditions.

People develop a more gentle perspective as they get older ,at least most people do while others don't or can't change as they are content with their lot.

On Thursday, March 1, 2018 at 10:43:34 PM UTC, Bill wrote:

Haven't you considered how much your choice to not take the time to
organize your topics into complete subjects that you then explain in a
systematic and through way - hurts your agenda?


Tell me, what agenda is that ?

On Friday, March 2, 2018 at 3:41:26 AM UTC, Davoud wrote:
Bill:
Haven't you considered how much your choice to not take the time to
organize your topics into complete subjects that you then explain in a
systematic and through way - hurts your agenda?

Davoud:
He's a troll and his agenda is to reel in people like you. I would say
that he has been splendidly successful at fulfilling his agenda.

palsing:
Also, his knowledge of astronomy is woefully off the tracks...

You missed the point. There is no way to judge what he knows or doesn't
know about astronomy; he's not here for astronomy, he's here for
trolling. If he were an expert on all things astronomical (and he could
be, you know) he would have to conceal that fact. Because he's not here
for astronomy, he's here as a troll.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

Well that is some piece of kit you have and I see Roland probably give you a deal on one of his celestial sphere mounts -

http://www.primordial-light.com/technique.html


With the rise of celestial sphere software like stellarium, the rise of 'explanations' based on RA/Dec follow suit in an alarming sort of way as the Earth attains a zero degree inclination while the Sun crosses the meridian going North thereby causing the circle of illumination to go vertical on the equinox ! -

https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap170319.html

What to make of such contrived nonsense !.


The RA/Dec clockwork solar system of the 17th century finds its final justification, even though it is an outrigger of the calendar framework, as a pivoting circle of illumination and by any measure that is horrific.