Letter to oriel36

On 19 Oct, 09:19, oriel36 wrote:


The Earth orbits the Sun in a specific way insofar as a location will
turn slowly through 360 degrees with respect to the central Sun while
the separate motion of daily rotation keeps the rotational orientation
pointed in one direction in space.The combination of two separate
motions and two separate orientations generates experienced
variations on daylight and darkness everywhere but at the Equator.


I cannot see how or where you have explained in full how it is that
the rotation of the earth around the sun in combination with the axial
tilt fails to generate the observed variation in day night length
without this third factor you identify.

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

On Oct 19, 4:00*pm, ukastronomy
wrote:
On 19 Oct, 09:19, oriel36 wrote:



The Earth orbits the Sun in a specific way insofar as a location will
turn slowly through 360 degrees with respect to the central Sun while
the separate motion of daily rotation keeps the rotational orientation
pointed in one direction in space.The combination of two separate
motions and *two separate orientations generates experienced
variations on daylight and darkness everywhere but at the Equator.

I cannot see how or where you have explained in full how it is that
the rotation of the earth around the sun in combination with the axial
tilt fails to generate the observed variation in day night length
without this third factor you identify.


I have explained it so many times that I risk terminal repetition.

Here is Uranus showing daily rotation which subsequently generates its
unique rotational orientation (what you call 'axial tilt') -

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

As daily rotation,like that on Earth,can only accomplish so much such
as the day and night cycle,the seasonal variations of daylight and
darkness have to be found elsewhere.The time lapse footage consists of
both daily rotation and that 360 degree orbital component I stress is
required to explain the seasonal variations.It is an entirely seperate
motion and can be gauged by the longitudinal change in the rings with
respect to the central Sun,a motion that does not originate from the
rotational axis but is a consequence of the planet's orbital motion.

The combination of daily rotation and the orbital change in
orientation of a location with respect to the central Sun generates
the natural variations in the noon cycle where the Equation of Time
expresses the rate of change of orbital orientation in accordance with
Kepler's view of orbital geometry and motion.

So,who is an astronomer here and can verify that separate to daily
rotation and the 'tilt' it produces,a planet has an orbital motion and
it orbits the central Sun in a specific way where any given
location,separate to daily rotation and axial longitudes,will slowly
and unevenly change through 360 degrees over the course of an annual
orbit ?.Until astronomers can correctly identify the specifics of
seasional daylight\darkness variations there is no point even
approaching topics such as seasonal weather patterns or long term
climate.If anybody questions the need for Hubble,they had only look at
the benefits it brings via the images of Uranus in demonstrating the
100% geometric certainty of a modification for explaining the seasons
but that actually requires genuine astronomers who can interpret the
images correctly.

What specific problem do you have with the orbital component insofar
as there are only two ways to answer the question as to whether a
location keeps the same face to the central Sun or alters it slowly
through 360 degrees over an annual orbit ?,a change that does not
follow daily rotation or the longitude coordinates but progresses from
orbital motion,in other words,variable axial\equatorial inclination is
a pseudo-dynamic.









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

On 19 Oct, 20:30, oriel36 wrote:

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

As daily rotation,like that on Earth,can only accomplish so much such
as the day and night cycle,the seasonal variations of daylight and
darkness have to be found elsewhere.

This is where you/our/my problem lies.

You have said what you believe but not why other should believe it
too. The seasonal variations in day night length are a manifestation
of the earths axial tilt and the motion of the earth around the sun.
When the north pole is pointing more to the sun the hours of daylight
in the northern hemisphere are greater than when the north pole is
pointing away from the sun.

N N
/ sun sun /
S S


Nothing you have shown so far explains why some third component is
required. What specifically Earth related experimental evidence can
you offer to support your view?


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

On Oct 19, 10:27*pm, ukastronomy
wrote:
On 19 Oct, 20:30, oriel36 wrote:



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

As daily rotation,like that on Earth,can only accomplish so much such
as the day and night cycle,the seasonal variations of daylight and
darkness have to be found elsewhere.

This is where you/our/my problem lies.


I have a solution rather than a problem and if nobody is up to
recognising the modification which explains both the variations in the
natural noon cycle and seasonal daylight/darkness variations then
there is nothing I can do about it,the time lapse footage of
Uranus,which you were kind enough to keep in your response,adequately
demonstrates the additional orbital component when allied with daily
rotation causes the noon cycles to vary.



You have said what you believe but not why other should believe it
too. The seasonal variations in day night length are a manifestation
of the earths axial tilt and the motion of the earth around the sun.
When the north pole is pointing more to the sun the hours of daylight
in the northern hemisphere are greater than when the north pole is
pointing away from the sun.


The answer to the question as to whether every location on the
planet ,in the absence of daily rotation ands subsequently 'tilt',will
experience a year long cycle of daylight and darkness is answered in
the affirmative.The application of that uneven change in orientation
with respect to the central Sun when allied with constant daily
rotation and natural noon as a reference will generate the natural
inequalities.It is only a short step to applying the nerw orbital
component to seasonal daylight/darkness variations.





* N * * * * * * * * * * * * * *N
* / * * *sun * * * *sun * */
S * * * * * * * * * * * * * *S

Nothing you have shown so far explains why some third component is
required. What specifically Earth related experimental evidence can
you offer to support your view?


I do not mind descending to analogies to carry the point, and
especially using Uranus, however there is a point at which I cannot
reduce the arguments any further,it is tricky enough and I would not
expect anyone who has a love of the older 'tilting' or 'pointing'
Earth explanation to perceive that in the absence of daily rotation
the planet has a separate motion with respect to the central Sun which
shows up as the experienced daylight/darkness variations.

Here is the actual affirmation of the seperation between daily
rotation /orientation (tilt) from the orbital component which is
explicit in the change in the rings with respect to the central Sun

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

Descending to a level you are accustomed to -

http://physics.uoregon.edu/~jimbrau/...13/FG13_06.jpg

A person can even grasp the distinct way a planet orbits the central
Sun in the absence of daily rotation insofar as a crank Pin will turn
through 360 degrees for a full revolution with respect to the central
shaft -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YV9WkQkUHZ4


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

I have no reason to believe,at least at present,that this explanation
will do any better than the other ones even when the appeal to look at
the fascinating way a planet orbits the central Sun.There are shades
of electromagnetic qualities in that orbit,hints that the solar
system's galactic orbital motiion influences heliocentric orbital
geometry and who knows what else in the linkage between astronomy and
terrestrial investigations which contain clues to the
astronomical,geological and climatological history of the planet such
as paleomagnetic or temperature signutes imprinted on the planet's
geology.

No offence to the little drawing you posted in response,but I am using
the HST to carry my points for daily rotational and annual orbital
motions and somewhere in there,somebody must get the point that modern
imaging is far too advanced for concepts which require modifying or
jettisoning.

On Oct 20, 11:35*am, oriel36 wrote:

I have a solution rather than a problem and if nobody is up to
recognising the modification which explains both the variations in the
natural noon cycle and seasonal daylight/darkness variations then
there is nothing I can do about it,the time lapse footage of
Uranus,which you were kind enough to keep in your response,adequately
demonstrates the additional orbital component when allied with daily
rotation causes the noon cycles to vary.

But everyone else who looks at the pictures just sees a beautiful
confirmation of exactly what Newton was saying, of what is the current
orthodoxy. This is why you are being asked to supply a specific
explanation of the parts of your vision that differ from what is
currently accepted.

At the moment, it sounds to us like all you are saying is:

"You guys are all wrong. Here's the Solar System as it really is from
these photographs. Anyone with any sense can see that Newton is all
wet, and things should be though of as completely different, from
looking at them."

We look, and we see exactly what we would expect to see - everything
happening according to Newton. So we find your criticisms of Newton
and ourselves... tiresome... and confusing.

But you feel no need to supply what is needed for constructive
dialogue. Because we're obviously so silly that we're not worth making
an effort to argue with, while people with open minds will certainly
see, in that time-lapse photography, why you have captured the truth
of Copernicus and Kepler!

And you are surprised when the result is the equivalent of the
impolite "In your dreams!"? You shouldn't be.

John Savard