Astronomical coordinates

Please give the formulae for converting from celestial coordinates to
heliocentric.
Thanks.

Jake wrote:
Please give the formulae for converting from celestial coordinates to
heliocentric.
Thanks.

Jake,
If you are an Einstein subscriber, and apply c=c+v to radar ranging of
the sun,(sic planets)
the astronomical unit varies up to 274,000kms whether measured at dawn
(radar approaching sun) or dusk (retreating).
Chances are, whatever replies you get on this, if so analysed will be
WRONG!

http://surf.de.uu.net/bookland/sci/farce/farce_6.html

Jim G
c'=c+v

JRS: In article .com
, dated Mon, 9 Jan 2006 20:07:24 local, seen in news:sci.astro,
posted :

If you are an Einstein subscriber, and apply c=c+v to radar ranging of
the sun,(sic planets)
the astronomical unit varies up to 274,000kms whether measured at dawn
(radar approaching sun) or dusk (retreating).

Since the Astronomical Unit is defined as the *mean* distance between
earth and sun, your conclusion would be wrong even if your speed
argument were otherwise correct, which it is not.

The definition does not depend on the measurement method.

Moreover, ISTR that the AU is not determined by ranging the Sun (which
has a rather uncertain surface well away from its middle) but by ranging
other planets, such as Venus.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. Turnpike v4.00 MIME. ©
Web URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ - FAQqish topics, acronyms & links;
Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.
No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.

In message , Dr John Stockton
writes
JRS: In article .com
, dated Mon, 9 Jan 2006 20:07:24 local, seen in news:sci.astro,
posted :

If you are an Einstein subscriber, and apply c=c+v to radar ranging of
the sun,(sic planets)
the astronomical unit varies up to 274,000kms whether measured at dawn
(radar approaching sun) or dusk (retreating).

Since the Astronomical Unit is defined as the *mean* distance between
earth and sun, your conclusion would be wrong even if your speed
argument were otherwise correct, which it is not.

The definition does not depend on the measurement method.

Moreover, ISTR that the AU is not determined by ranging the Sun (which
has a rather uncertain surface well away from its middle) but by ranging
other planets, such as Venus.

A bit of rummaging around on the Web shows that the definition is a lot
more complex than that. This seems typical
" the radius of an unperturbed circular orbit a massless body would
revolve about the sun in 2*(pi)/k days (i.e., 365.2568983.... days),
where k is defined as the Gaussian constant exactly equal to
0.01720209895." http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/glossary/au.html
He's wrong about c'=c+v, too. Or "not even wrong".

Jonathan Silverlight wrote:

In message , Dr John Stockton
writes
JRS: In article .com
, dated Mon, 9 Jan 2006 20:07:24 local, seen in news:sci.astro,
posted :

If you are an Einstein subscriber, and apply c=c+v to radar ranging of
the sun,(sic planets)
the astronomical unit varies up to 274,000kms whether measured at dawn
(radar approaching sun) or dusk (retreating).

Since the Astronomical Unit is defined as the *mean* distance between
earth and sun, your conclusion would be wrong even if your speed
argument were otherwise correct, which it is not.

The definition does not depend on the measurement method.

Moreover, ISTR that the AU is not determined by ranging the Sun (which
has a rather uncertain surface well away from its middle) but by ranging
other planets, such as Venus.

A bit of rummaging around on the Web shows that the definition is a lot
more complex than that. This seems typical
" the radius of an unperturbed circular orbit a massless body would
revolve about the sun in 2*(pi)/k days (i.e., 365.2568983.... days),
where k is defined as the Gaussian constant exactly equal to
0.01720209895." http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/glossary/au.html
He's wrong about c'=c+v, too. Or "not even wrong".

The AU is the average distance from the center of Earth to the center of
Sol, not the distance from the surface of Earth to the surface of Sol.
Radar has nothing to do with measuring the AU, even if it was possible
to radar-range the sun (which I don't believe for a second, and for
reasons that have nothing to do with anti-Einsteinism).

In article ,
Jake wrote:

Jonathan Silverlight wrote:

In message , Dr John Stockton
writes
JRS: In article .com
, dated Mon, 9 Jan 2006 20:07:24 local, seen in news:sci.astro,
posted :

If you are an Einstein subscriber, and apply c=c+v to radar ranging of
the sun,(sic planets)
the astronomical unit varies up to 274,000kms whether measured at dawn
(radar approaching sun) or dusk (retreating).

Since the Astronomical Unit is defined as the *mean* distance between
earth and sun, your conclusion would be wrong even if your speed
argument were otherwise correct, which it is not.

The definition does not depend on the measurement method.

Moreover, ISTR that the AU is not determined by ranging the Sun (which
has a rather uncertain surface well away from its middle) but by ranging
other planets, such as Venus.

A bit of rummaging around on the Web shows that the definition is a lot
more complex than that. This seems typical
" the radius of an unperturbed circular orbit a massless body would
revolve about the sun in 2*(pi)/k days (i.e., 365.2568983.... days),
where k is defined as the Gaussian constant exactly equal to
0.01720209895." http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/glossary/au.html
He's wrong about c'=c+v, too. Or "not even wrong".

The AU is the average distance from the center of Earth to the center of
Sol,

That was the original definition of the AU, true. But this was
changed some time in the 1800's or early 1900's, in order to not have
to adjust k (the Gaussian gravitational constant) when improved values
of the masses of the Sun and the planets were obtained. Therefore,
nowadays the average distance from the center of Earth to the center
of the Sun is considered to be slightly more than one AU -- I believe
it's something like 1.0000004 AU, so the difference from 1 AU exactly
is very small.

not the distance from the surface of Earth to the surface of Sol.

....in particular since you then would have to specify the distance
from WHICH surface point on Earth to WHICH surface pont on the Sun... :-)

Radar has nothing to do with measuring the AU,

That's wrong! Radar ranging in the 1960's gave a much better
precision in our measurements of the value of the AU. Nowadays I
believe radio ranging from interplanetary spacecraft is the preferred
method though - the difference is that the interplanetary spacecrafts
all have active radio transmitters, instead of merely being passive
reflectors.

even if it was possible to radar-range the sun (which I don't believe
for a second, and for reasons that have nothing to do with anti-Einsteinism).

Radar ranging of the Sun has its difficulties -- the Sun's radar
surface has no precise definition afaik. Therefore, in the 1960's,
one did radar ranging of nearby planets (Venus, Mars) instead, to
improve our value of the AU.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter, Grev Turegatan 40, SE-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN
e-mail: pausch at stockholm dot bostream dot se
WWW: http://stjarnhimlen.se/

Jake wrote:
Please give the formulae for converting from celestial coordinates to
heliocentric.
Thanks.

Jake,
If you are an Einstein subscriber, and apply c=c+v to radar ranging of
the sun,(sic planets)
the astronomical unit varies up to 274,000kms whether measured at dawn
(radar approaching sun) or dusk (retreating).
Chances are, whatever replies you get on this, if so analysed will be
WRONG!

http://surf.de.uu.net/bookland/sci/farce/farce_6.html

Jim G
c'=c+v

In message .com,
writes

Jake wrote:
Please give the formulae for converting from celestial coordinates to
heliocentric.
Thanks.

Jake,
If you are an Einstein subscriber, and apply c=c+v to radar ranging of
the sun,(sic planets)
the astronomical unit varies up to 274,000kms whether measured at dawn
(radar approaching sun) or dusk (retreating).
Chances are, whatever replies you get on this, if so analysed will be
WRONG!

http://surf.de.uu.net/bookland/sci/farce/farce_6.html

Jim G
c'=c+v

And just what has your fantasy to do with the original post, troll?
Plonk.

Jonathan Silverlight wrote:
In message .com,
writes

Jake wrote:
Please give the formulae for converting from celestial coordinates to
heliocentric.
Thanks.

Jake,
If you are an Einstein subscriber, and apply c=c+v to radar ranging of
the sun,(sic planets)
the astronomical unit varies up to 274,000kms whether measured at dawn
(radar approaching sun) or dusk (retreating).
Chances are, whatever replies you get on this, if so analysed will be
WRONG!

http://surf.de.uu.net/bookland/sci/farce/farce_6.html

Jim G
c'=c+v

And just what has your fantasy to do with the original post, troll?
Plonk.

You do not use the astronomical unit for measuring between coordinates?
You do not care, that the unit of measurement varies?(when analysed per
AE ism)
You do not care what the air quality is, as long as your head remains
safely and securely up Einsteins arse?

Jim G
c'=c+v

Five replies to this thread and not one of them addressing the original
subject matter.

How sadly illustrative of what sci.astro has become.