![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
oriel36 wrote:
On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 9:27:04 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote: No mess here. Just you being anachronistic. The 'definitional' mess is due to the lack of astronomers insofar as any lover of the celestial arena would never have required a planet to be isolated outside the original context of their 'wandering' motions. How delicate the partitioning between inner and outer planets as they wander against the background stars from two different perspective but these insights are so fragile that they vanish for the crude observers like yourselves who never encountered an astronomical fact that your cult didn't destroy. The planets don't wander around against the background stars. They orbit the Sun. There are no fragile insights. Just predictable motions which are obvious to all those who are capable of appreciating three dimensions - that doesn't include you with your green cats. The line-of-sight observation as the orbital motion of the Earth through space generates a picture where the stars move behind the Sun in sequence - https://www.youtube.com/watch?vîQwYrfmvoQ The planets follow roughly the same route as those stars as they move along their orbital plane but the inner planets wander against the direction of the background stars as they emerge from the Sun and enter back into the Sun having reached their widest point from the Sun as seen from a moving Earth and then move in the direction of the stars for the other half of their orbits as the inner planets move in front of the central Sun - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdFrE7hWj0A You have already disgraced yourself enough by putting the Sun in circumpolar motion when the ancient astronomers up to the time of Copernicus used the apparent motion of the Sun through the constellations only as an orbital feature - But they were wrong. It's the Earth which orbits, not the Sun. "Moreover, we see the other five planets also retrograde at times, and stationary at either end [of the regression]. And whereas the sun always advances along its own direct path, they wander in various ways, straying sometimes to the south and sometimes to the north; that is why they are called "planets" [wanderers]. " Copernicus To resolve inner planetary retrogrades the more productive line-of-sight motion of the stars behind the central Sun is required in order to create the magnificent grandstand view of the motion of the inner planets as seen from Earth . To explain the retrogrades all that's needed is the ability to visualise in three dimensions - which you don't possess. Any other era and this would be a wonderful occasion which adds to the achievement of the first heliocentric astronomers so I enjoy the insight alone and in honor of those men and perhaps the experience of using new tools at a time when others can't. In any other era you would be derided as a bloody minded idiot who refused to see reason. No different to today. You should stop believing in magic. The universe is as it is. We observe it and formulate laws which describe how it functions. You get confused between laws of nature and human laws. We don't tell the planets what to do, we just deduce how they do it. Then we can see if the planets behave as those laws predict. If they don't we are wrong and must try again. You however just ignore inconvenient facts. You also decide that the whole world is conspiring to deceive you and with no perceptible motive. Does this sound like madness to you? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Galileo's commentary using 21st century tools | oriel36[_2_] | Amateur Astronomy | 1 | November 28th 13 12:31 AM |
The curse of the 21st century | Rich[_1_] | Amateur Astronomy | 1 | November 13th 07 05:09 AM |
18TH CENTURY NORMALITY, 21ST CENTURY LUNACY | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 5 | September 9th 07 09:53 AM |
21st century astronomy | oriel36 | UK Astronomy | 0 | February 5th 07 03:44 PM |