earth's tilt

On Sep 23, 3:12*am, oriel36 wrote:
On Sep 22, 8:02*pm, Dr J R Stockton

wrote:
In sci.astro.amateur message , Thu, 20
Sep 2012 22:11:43, Davoud posted:

I don't have time to do the searching at the moment, but I have to
think that ancient natural philosophers, whether in Greece or Persia or
China or parts unknown, knew the extent of the Earth's axial tilt.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_Axis#History.

I look at how they mangle the straightforward reasoning which connects
planetary shape with the motion and evolution of the surface crust
long after I proposed differential rotation as the key mechanism for
these planetary features.The uneven rotational gradient of the fluid
interior requires dropping the idea of the Earth as a celestial
gyroscope *and picking up observations of celestial objects with
exposed rotating fluid compositions which display differential
rotation. The polar coordinates don't act like a gyroscope nor 'tilt'
towards and away from the Sun but rather are carried around in a
circle to the central Sun by the separate orbital motion of the
Earth,this leaves the researcher free to work with daily rotation and
the fluid interior rather than being too concerned about a fixed axis
- horses for courses in other words.

For an era so concerned with climate,it is amazing that they can't
describe the Earth's climate in planetary terms,in our planet's
case,it is largely equatorial as opposed to the polar climate of
Uranus by based on the angular distance between the the daily
rotational axis and the ecliptic axis.The Wiki article is more of the
same -

"The Earth's axis remains tilted in the same direction with reference
to the background stars throughout a year (throughout its entire
orbit). This means that one pole (and the associated hemisphere of the
Earth) will be directed away from the Sun at one side of the orbit,
and half an orbit later (half a year later) this pole will be directed
towards the Sun. This is the cause of the Earth's seasons."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_Axis#History

The cause of daylight/darkness asymmetries with greater fluctuations
towards the polar coordinates is due to the changing relationship of
rotational orientation of the planet to the circle of illumination.It
is so clearly demonstrated by the images of Uranus as the hemispheres
experience extreme fluctuations in daylight/darkness across large
areas *of the planet that a thinking person can't but see that the old
idea of axial precession is an obstacle to recognizing the changing
orientation of the rotational axis to the central Sun.

I see these awkward 'tilted' explanations when it takes only a simple
imitation analogy to introduce another axis around which the polar
coordinates turn to the central Sun, a broom handle representing axial
'tilt' and the line of the body walking/orbiting a central object
representing an ecliptic axis goes a long way to accounting for the
observations of Uranus as the broom handle remains fixed to an
external point at all times as a person walks/orbits the object yet
the tilt of the broom will change to the central object/Sun as it
moves in a circle.

I wish somebody else would raise themselves to a higher standard,after
all,when you have all these guys running around announcing that the
sky is falling with climate,the same people have yet to replace the
old 'no tilt/no seasons' ideology with the new approach where a planet
falls between an equatorial and polar climate due to its inclination.



--
*(c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. *Mail via homepage. *Turnpike v6.05 *MIME.
* Web *http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ - FAQqish topics, acronyms and 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.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Moon keeps tilt from wobbling.and with wobbling there would be no
humankind. TeBet

On Sep 23, 7:47*am, "G=EMC^2" wrote:
On Sep 23, 3:12*am, oriel36 wrote:









On Sep 22, 8:02*pm, Dr J R Stockton

wrote:
In sci.astro.amateur message , Thu, 20
Sep 2012 22:11:43, Davoud posted:

I don't have time to do the searching at the moment, but I have to
think that ancient natural philosophers, whether in Greece or Persia or
China or parts unknown, knew the extent of the Earth's axial tilt.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_Axis#History.

I look at how they mangle the straightforward reasoning which connects
planetary shape with the motion and evolution of the surface crust
long after I proposed differential rotation as the key mechanism for
these planetary features.The uneven rotational gradient of the fluid
interior requires dropping the idea of the Earth as a celestial
gyroscope *and picking up observations of celestial objects with
exposed rotating fluid compositions which display differential
rotation. The polar coordinates don't act like a gyroscope nor 'tilt'
towards and away from the Sun but rather are carried around in a
circle to the central Sun by the separate orbital motion of the
Earth,this leaves the researcher free to work with daily rotation and
the fluid interior rather than being too concerned about a fixed axis
- horses for courses in other words.

For an era so concerned with climate,it is amazing that they can't
describe the Earth's climate in planetary terms,in our planet's
case,it is largely equatorial as opposed to the polar climate of
Uranus by based on the angular distance between the the daily
rotational axis and the ecliptic axis.The Wiki article is more of the
same -

"The Earth's axis remains tilted in the same direction with reference
to the background stars throughout a year (throughout its entire
orbit). This means that one pole (and the associated hemisphere of the
Earth) will be directed away from the Sun at one side of the orbit,
and half an orbit later (half a year later) this pole will be directed
towards the Sun. This is the cause of the Earth's seasons."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_Axis#History

The cause of daylight/darkness asymmetries with greater fluctuations
towards the polar coordinates is due to the changing relationship of
rotational orientation of the planet to the circle of illumination.It
is so clearly demonstrated by the images of Uranus as the hemispheres
experience extreme fluctuations in daylight/darkness across large
areas *of the planet that a thinking person can't but see that the old
idea of axial precession is an obstacle to recognizing the changing
orientation of the rotational axis to the central Sun.

I see these awkward 'tilted' explanations when it takes only a simple
imitation analogy to introduce another axis around which the polar
coordinates turn to the central Sun, a broom handle representing axial
'tilt' and the line of the body walking/orbiting a central object
representing an ecliptic axis goes a long way to accounting for the
observations of Uranus as the broom handle remains fixed to an
external point at all times as a person walks/orbits the object yet
the tilt of the broom will change to the central object/Sun as it
moves in a circle.

I wish somebody else would raise themselves to a higher standard,after
all,when you have all these guys running around announcing that the
sky is falling with climate,the same people have yet to replace the
old 'no tilt/no seasons' ideology with the new approach where a planet
falls between an equatorial and polar climate due to its inclination.

--
*(c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. *Mail via homepage. *Turnpike v6.05 *MIME.
* Web *http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ - FAQqish topics, acronyms and 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.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Moon keeps tilt from wobbling.and with wobbling there would be no
humankind. *TeBet

It wobbles just a little.

On 9/23/2012 6:56 PM, GogoJF wrote:


Moon keeps tilt from wobbling.and with wobbling there would be no
humankind. TeBet

It wobbles just a little.


It's a Weeble?










--
"OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo .. �亮

On Sep 23, 6:12Â*pm, HVAC wrote:
On 9/23/2012 6:56 PM, GogoJF wrote:



Moon keeps tilt from wobbling.and with wobbling there would be no
humankind. Â*TeBet

It wobbles just a little.

It's a Weeble?

--
"OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girlhttp://www.youtube..com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo.. �亮

Ha! There is no doubt in my mind that without the moon, there would
be no life on Earth.

On 9/23/2012 8:05 PM, GogoJF wrote:

Moon keeps tilt from wobbling.and with wobbling there would be no
humankind. TeBet

It wobbles just a little.

It's a Weeble?

-

Ha! There is no doubt in my mind that without the moon, there would
be no life on Earth.


Yet one more reason that the chance of life is vanishingly small in the
galaxy. We of the Earth are incredibly, extraordinarily lucky.















--
"OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo .. �亮

On Sep 23, 7:40Â*pm, HVAC wrote:
On 9/23/2012 8:05 PM, GogoJF wrote:



Moon keeps tilt from wobbling.and with wobbling there would be no
humankind. Â*TeBet

It wobbles just a little.

It's a Weeble?

-

Ha! Â*There is no doubt in my mind that without the moon, there would
be no life on Earth.

Yet one more reason that the chance of life is vanishingly small in the
galaxy. Â*We of the Earth are incredibly, extraordinarily lucky.

--
"OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girlhttp://www.youtube..com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo.. �亮

I would theorize that every star with its' hypothetical, yet for
certain revolving planets might one day produce a planet which is
capable, or had been capable of producing life. That's what I would
like to believe.

On Sep 23, 8:15Â*pm, GogoJF wrote:
On Sep 23, 7:40Â*pm, HVAC wrote:









On 9/23/2012 8:05 PM, GogoJF wrote:

Moon keeps tilt from wobbling.and with wobbling there would be no
humankind. Â*TeBet

It wobbles just a little.

It's a Weeble?

-

Ha! Â*There is no doubt in my mind that without the moon, there would
be no life on Earth.

Yet one more reason that the chance of life is vanishingly small in the
galaxy. Â*We of the Earth are incredibly, extraordinarily lucky.

--
"OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girlhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo.. �亮

I would theorize that every star with its' hypothetical, yet for
certain revolving planets might one day produce a planet which is
capable, or had been capable of producing life. Â*That's what I would
like to believe.

You like to think that every solar system tries to find a way to
produce life. It's just a natural process.

On Sep 23, 7:40Â*pm, HVAC wrote:
On 9/23/2012 8:05 PM, GogoJF wrote:



Moon keeps tilt from wobbling.and with wobbling there would be no
humankind. Â*TeBet

It wobbles just a little.

It's a Weeble?

-

Ha! Â*There is no doubt in my mind that without the moon, there would
be no life on Earth.

Yet one more reason that the chance of life is vanishingly small in the
galaxy. Â*We of the Earth are incredibly, extraordinarily lucky.

--
"OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girlhttp://www.youtube..com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo.. �亮

I think we are extremely lucky because we have captured such a large
satellite as our moon, lie in the distance where the sun may produce
the right temperature and life. The odds go on and on. We have
definitely won the lottery when it comes to our organism.