![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 23, 8:56*am, Paul Schlyter wrote:
On Sat, 22 Sep 2012 14:27:51 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc wrote: And this is what has Oriel so exercised. But then, he has told us that he is a Christian, and so why should I be surprised that he objects to what has been called a Faustian bargain - the one that led to the "dark, Satanic mills" of the Industrial Revolution. It's just weird that he uses the "dark Satanic mills", computers and the Internet *(both products of the industrial revolution) to propagate his ideas.... You are simply not good enough to make the distinction between mechanical innovation as opposed to the great sciences which connect astronomy to terrestrial sciences or solar system structure.Even when timekeeping provided the resolution for measuring distances and determining longitude on the surface of the planet,you are unable to mesh the two in a belief that you can model planetary dynamics using stellar circumpolar motion.Properly used,technological and mechanical innovation is a brilliant aid to understanding astronomical and terrestrial phenomena but unfortunately,as followers of Newton/ Flamsteed, your clockwork solar system based on Ra/Dec never worked. William Blake understood the inhumanity and the cult ideologies that bred it,the opportunistic attempt to hijack astronomy and apply shortcuts and distortions for little more than intellectual pretense but today it provides many of these followers with lifestyles and reputations at the expense of the great astronomical heritage and the wider community - an unthinking bunch who can't even keep one rotation of the Earth in step with one 24 hour day - "I turn my eyes to the Schools & Universities of Europe And there behold the Loom of Locke whose Woof rages dire Washd by the Water-wheels of Newton. black the cloth In heavy wreathes folds over every Nation; cruel Works Of many Wheels I view, wheel without wheel, with cogs tyrannic Moving by compulsion each other: not as those in Eden: which Wheel within Wheel in freedom revolve in harmony & peace." Jerusalem He was not the first nor the last to comment on the vicious strain of empiricism that arose from trying to model planetary motions without any care whatsoever and a conclusion plucked out of thin air.People like Poe asked themselves how an accepted theory could answer so many questions without even understanding where it came from but I assure you and everyone else here than I know exactly where it came from and why it is destructive in the extreme - "To explain: — The Newtonian Gravity — a law of Nature — a law whose existence as such no one out of Bedlam questions — a law whose admission as such enables us to account for nine-tenths of the Universal phænomena — a law which, merely because it does so enable us to account for these phænomena, we are perfectly willing, without reference to any other considerations, to admit, and cannot help admitting, as a law — a law, nevertheless, of which neither the principle nor the modus operandi of the principle, has ever yet been traced by the human analysis — a law, in short, which, neither in its detail nor in its generality, has been found susceptible of explanation at all — is at length seen to be at every point thoroughly explicable, provided we only yield our assent to —— what? To an hypothesis? Why if an hypothesis — if the merest hypothesis — if an hypothesis for whose assumption — as in the case of that pure hypothesis the Newtonian law itself — no shadow of à priori reason could be assigned — if an hypothesis, even so absolute as all this implies, would enable us to perceive a principle for the Newtonian law — would enable us to understand as satisfied, conditions so miraculously — so ineffably complex and seemingly irreconcileable as those involved in the relations of which Gravity tells us, — what rational being could so expose his fatuity as to call even this absolute hypothesis an hypothesis any longer — unless, indeed, he were to persist in so calling it, with the understanding that he did so, simply for the sake of consistency in words?" Allan Poe The reasonable person accepts that technological innovation in all its forms is separate to natural phenomena which links the celestial arena with the terrestrial arena yet the vicious strain of empiricism tried to muddy the distinction by asserting that mechanical experiments at a human level are the same as dynamics art a planetary and solar system level or the 'theory of gravity' as it is known. The magnification enthusiasts have thrown their lot in with a bunch of theorists who use the astronomical arena as a dumping ground for every imaginative whim that enters their heads instead of using imaging to clarify, and in some cases modify, the insights and methods of the great astronomers.I have kept the issue of responsibility out of the discussion as much as possible even though it looms in the background as ultimately astronomy is an enjoyable pursuit in all its aspects and only when it has come under an assault as it has from mathematical theorists does responsibility to the past and the future enter the picture. I am proud of this era and its technological innovation and the biggest user of imaging in this forum,what I am not proud of is the utter contempt shown to astronomy and its relationship to terrestrial sciences and it is not a popularity contest here,it is talent,intelligence,effort,tenacity and all the better human traits that will create the atmosphere for astronomy as an interpretative science once more from a condition of unbridled speculative junk. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 23, 3:44*am, oriel36 wrote:
The reasonable person accepts that technological innovation in all its forms is separate to natural phenomena which links the celestial arena with the terrestrial arena yet the vicious strain of empiricism tried to muddy the distinction by asserting that mechanical experiments at a human level are the same as dynamics art a planetary and solar system level or the 'theory of gravity' as it is known. Why would it be reasonable to accept the notion that the heavens work by different laws than the Earth, when the laws of the Earth, applied to the heavens, predict their motions with great accuracy? John Savard |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Why does Earth's tilt produce summers and winters? | AlexZ | Astronomy Misc | 66 | November 9th 06 05:15 AM |
Uranus and its Tilt ??? | G=EMC^2 Glazier | Misc | 3 | July 5th 06 12:14 AM |
Uranus and its Tilt ??? | G=EMC^2 Glazier | Misc | 0 | June 25th 06 02:24 PM |
Direction of the Earth's axis tilt in the x-y ecliptic plane? | canopus56 | Amateur Astronomy | 35 | March 22nd 06 10:00 PM |
sundial & Earth's tilt questions | Benoit Morrissette | Astronomy Misc | 22 | September 1st 03 08:55 AM |