Galileo affair from a 21st century perspective

oriel36 wrote:
On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 10:41:44 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
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.


The working principles of astronomy at the time of Copernicus and Kepler
used the apparent motions of the planets and Sun together through the
Zodiac to ascertain the time it took the planets and Sun to make a
circuit through the background stars hence they switched the position of
the Sun with the orbital motion of the Earth and determined the Sun was stationary -

" The 10th argument,taken from the periodic times, is as follows; the
apparent movement of the Sun has 365 days which is the mean measure
between Venus' period of 225 days and Mars' period of 687 days.Therefore
does not the nature of things shout out loud that the circuits in which
those 365 days are taken up has a mean position between the circuits of
Mars and Venus around the Sun and thus this is not the circuit of the Sun
around the Earth -for none of the primary planets has its orbit arranged
around the Earth but the circuit of the Earth around the resting Sun,just
as the other planets,namely Mars and Venus,complete their own periods by
running around the Sun." Kepler

What I have done is different to the older astronomers by virtue of
adjusting perspectives to suit inner and outer planetary retrogrades and
separate resolutions. It is a genuine achievement whether people choose
to recognize it or not but then again you poor empiricists never
understood your own system let alone the working principles of astronomers.

What you have done is different to older astronomers. They were often
right, You are rarely right



Wish somebody else would begin to use contemporary tools and start to
enjoy these things as I have done for so long.

No! Your flawed perceptions stopped you perceiving what is obvious to us.
when you eventually come across some simple YouTube video you then
misunderstand it and think you have discovered something new.

















"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?

On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 11:48:34 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
oriel36 wrote:

On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 10:41:44 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:

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.





The working principles of astronomy at the time of Copernicus and Kepler

used the apparent motions of the planets and Sun together through the

Zodiac to ascertain the time it took the planets and Sun to make a

circuit through the background stars hence they switched the position of

the Sun with the orbital motion of the Earth and determined the Sun was stationary -



" The 10th argument,taken from the periodic times, is as follows; the

apparent movement of the Sun has 365 days which is the mean measure

between Venus' period of 225 days and Mars' period of 687 days.Therefore

does not the nature of things shout out loud that the circuits in which

those 365 days are taken up has a mean position between the circuits of

Mars and Venus around the Sun and thus this is not the circuit of the Sun

around the Earth -for none of the primary planets has its orbit arranged

around the Earth but the circuit of the Earth around the resting Sun,just

as the other planets,namely Mars and Venus,complete their own periods by

running around the Sun." Kepler



What I have done is different to the older astronomers by virtue of

adjusting perspectives to suit inner and outer planetary retrogrades and

separate resolutions. It is a genuine achievement whether people choose

to recognize it or not but then again you poor empiricists never

understood your own system let alone the working principles of astronomers.



What you have done is different to older astronomers. They were often

right, You are rarely right







Wish somebody else would begin to use contemporary tools and start to

enjoy these things as I have done for so long.



No! Your flawed perceptions stopped you perceiving what is obvious to us.

when you eventually come across some simple YouTube video you then

misunderstand it and think you have discovered something new.



Not only have I presented something new and enjoyable, it was done using tools which are also new and available to anyone with an interest in astronomy. The partitioning of retrogrades using separate perspectives of the role of the background stars for gauging motions would be exceptionally difficult with graphics and imaging whereas it is a cinch for observers today as we see the motion of the stars in sequence behind the central Sun due solely to the orbital motion of the Earth which leaves the background canvas for the motion of the inner planets as they swing out and then back in front of the Sun in their orbital trek -

http://www.masil-astro-imaging.com/S...age%20flat.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdFrE7hWj0A

Astronomy is always a work in progress and that is why there is such a great affection for the older astronomers as they worked with their systems to the best of their abilities. Any observer today can see Venus and Mercury wander against the background stars which themselves appear to move due to the Earth's annual motion hence the lovely addition to the work of the older astronomers who figured out why the outer planets moved temporarily backwards against the field of stars as the Earth overtakes them.

Astronomy was waiting for these visual narratives to show up however they may not appeal to cold scowling hearts who miss the spectacle for what it is.. Yes it is a new discovery and one made possible by 21st century technology but at the core of it is human curiosity and all those traits which are meant to elevate understanding of our surroundings rather than diminish them as your voodoo would have it.