First time view of a planet

On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 10:58:22 GMT, oriel36 wrote:

The foolish are easily pleased while the wise marvel at the great
celestial arena and the great cycles we participate in,That is the
astronomy that has been lost .

Aye, but it's a sad day when you expect people to only enjoy the cream
and throw the rest of the milk away.

On 28 Feb, 21:02, "oriel36" wrote:
On Feb 28, 6:17 pm, "John Carruthers"
wrote:

You believe the Earth's orbital path follows

You have absolutely no idea what I believe,

Sure I do !,every time i see you use a pseudo-dynamic of variable
axial tilt to explain the seasons which requires that the Earth
follow a path perpendicular to the maximum diameter of the Sun.

There you go again, you have never seen me use this purported
reasoning.
It's all in your imagination Jezza.
jc

On Mar 1, 10:17 am, "John Carruthers"
wrote:
On 28 Feb, 21:02, "oriel36" wrote: On Feb 28, 6:17 pm, "John Carruthers"
wrote:

You believe the Earth's orbital path follows

You have absolutely no idea what I believe,

Sure I do !,every time i see you use a pseudo-dynamic of variablle axial tilt to explain the seasons which requires that the Earth
follow a path perpendicular to the maximum diameter of the Sun.

There you go again, you have never seen me use this purported
reasoning.

Here you go -

http://www.astronomy.org/programs/se...ns-general.gif

You are going to have a ball with trying to get the axial orientation
to align with the orbital shadow/solar radiation boundary insofar as
that standard graphic implies that the Earth orbital path follows a
line perpendicular to the maximum diameter of the Sun hence your
variable axial tilting Earth to explain the seasons.

The actual cause of hemispherical weather patterns (seasons) as a
subset of global climate is due to the orbital motion and path of the
Earth as seen from the correct perspective -

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...easonearth.png

It is no harm that this major astronomical modification is achieved
in a forum where most are content to treat astronomy as an exercise in
magnification or are hopelessly involved in the calendrically driven
celestial sphere astrology.Pity that no real authority exists to
appreciate what the modification achieves and why it is long overdue.

As for you,well even you get a chance to promote something productive
for a change or perhaps you are content with your variable tilting
Earth ,either way,there you have it.







It's all in your imagination Jezza.
jc

oriel36 wrote:
On Mar 1, 10:17 am, "John Carruthers"
wrote:
On 28 Feb, 21:02, "oriel36" wrote: On Feb 28, 6:17 pm, "John Carruthers"
wrote:
You believe the Earth's orbital path follows
You have absolutely no idea what I believe,
Sure I do !,every time i see you use a pseudo-dynamic of variablle axial tilt to explain the seasons which requires that the Earth
follow a path perpendicular to the maximum diameter of the Sun.
There you go again, you have never seen me use this purported
reasoning.

Here you go -

http://www.astronomy.org/programs/se...ns-general.gif

You are going to have a ball with trying to get the axial orientation
to align with the orbital shadow/solar radiation boundary insofar as
that standard graphic implies that the Earth orbital path follows a
line perpendicular to the maximum diameter of the Sun hence your
variable axial tilting Earth to explain the seasons.

The actual cause of hemispherical weather patterns (seasons) as a
subset of global climate is due to the orbital motion and path of the
Earth as seen from the correct perspective -

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...easonearth.png

It is no harm that this major astronomical modification is achieved
in a forum where most are content to treat astronomy as an exercise in
magnification or are hopelessly involved in the calendrically driven
celestial sphere astrology.Pity that no real authority exists to
appreciate what the modification achieves and why it is long overdue.

As for you,well even you get a chance to promote something productive
for a change or perhaps you are content with your variable tilting
Earth ,either way,there you have it.


It's all in your imagination Jezza.
jc

First I have to say, that I am not an astronomer and don't have much
experience in this area, so bear with me as I am seeking for some very
basic explanations and not for any sophisticated expert knowledge.

I have to admit, that I had trouble to see what were you (oriel36 and
jc) arguing about, but now I suppose to understand the reason.

Here follows how I see this matter (as a layperson in the are of
astronomy):


If the 3D model of the solar system available at:

http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/academy...ystemjava.html

is right,

than it makes sense to me to choose the plane most of the planetary
orbits are within as a reference plane for showing Earths orbit (here
only Pluto seems to be out of the plane all other planets orbiting
within) and draw this plane horizontally in appropriate schemata for
explaining the reason for seasons.

Is it right that from this point of view oriel36 is wrong calling
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...easonearth.png
the right perspective, as it would be counter-intuitive to tilt the
plane of the Earths orbit so that the axis of Earth rotation gets
vertical on a picture used to explain the seasons?

Does oriel36 assume, that the Earth's axis of rotation goes
perpendicular to the plane of greatest diameter of the Sun? Could it be,
that this should actually be the right perspective to look at the Solar
system as this plane is supposed to be the main plane of Sun's rotation
and therefore it makes sense to tilt the planes of the planetary orbits
on the schemata to show how the solar system goes?

Is the plane Pluto is orbiting the same as the plane perpendicular to
Sun's rotation axis?

Thanks in advance for enlightening me here and sorry if (some of the)
questions don't make perfect sense (in this case please just try to
guess what I am asking for).

Claudio Grondi

On Mar 1, 3:56 pm, Claudio Grondi wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Mar 1, 10:17 am, "John Carruthers"
wrote:
On 28 Feb, 21:02, "oriel36" wrote: On Feb 28, 6:17 pm, "John Carruthers"
wrote:
You believe the Earth's orbital path follows
You have absolutely no idea what I believe,
Sure I do !,every time i see you use a pseudo-dynamic of variablle axial tilt to explain the seasons which requires that the Earth
follow a path perpendicular to the maximum diameter of the Sun.
There you go again, you have never seen me use this purported
reasoning.

Here you go -

http://www.astronomy.org/programs/se...asons-for-seas...

You are going to have a ball with trying to get the axial orientation
to align with the orbital shadow/solar radiation boundary insofar as
that standard graphic implies that the Earth orbital path follows a
line perpendicular to the maximum diameter of the Sun hence your
variable axial tilting Earth to explain the seasons.

The actual cause of hemispherical weather patterns (seasons) as a
subset of global climate is due to the orbital motion and path of the
Earth as seen from the correct perspective -

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...easonearth.png

It is no harm that this major astronomical modification is achieved
in a forum where most are content to treat astronomy as an exercise in
magnification or are hopelessly involved in the calendrically driven
celestial sphere astrology.Pity that no real authority exists to
appreciate what the modification achieves and why it is long overdue.

As for you,well even you get a chance to promote something productive
for a change or perhaps you are content with your variable tilting
Earth ,either way,there you have it.

It's all in your imagination Jezza.
jc

First I have to say, that I am not an astronomer and don't have much
experience in this area, so bear with me as I am seeking for some very
basic explanations and not for any sophisticated expert knowledge.

I have to admit, that I had trouble to see what were you (oriel36 and
jc) arguing about, but now I suppose to understand the reason.

Here follows how I see this matter (as a layperson in the are of
astronomy):

If the 3D model of the solar system available at:

http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/academy...solarsystemjav...

is right,

than it makes sense to me to choose the plane most of the planetary
orbits are within as a reference plane for showing Earths orbit (here
only Pluto seems to be out of the plane all other planets orbiting
within) and draw this plane horizontally in appropriate schemata for
explaining the reason for seasons.

Is it right that from this point of view oriel36 is wrong calling
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...easonearth.png
the right perspective, as it would be counter-intuitive to tilt the
plane of the Earths orbit so that the axis of Earth rotation gets
vertical on a picture used to explain the seasons?

Does oriel36 assume, that the Earth's axis of rotation goes
perpendicular to the plane of greatest diameter of the Sun?

For the purpose of this discussion based on the cause of seasons ,the
rotation of the Earth determines that the axis remains fixed over an
annual orbital cycle -

http://solo.colorado.edu/~walawend/A...tarTrails2.jpg

Once you recognise that axial orientation remains fixed you then try
to square the cause of the seasons with the change in the solar
radiation/orbital shadow boundary which is seen in the Wikipedia
images -

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...easonearth.png

In itself,recognising the change in the solar radiation/orbital shadow
boundary as opposed to variable axial tilt is already a major
modification however the bigger challenge,and a big puzzle for me was
how to keep axial orientation fixed to the same direction in space
while allowing the shadow/radiation boundary to alter.While not
proposing it as incontrovertible,the solution appears to be in the
orbital path of the Earth which takes the planet above and below a
line perpendicular to the maximum diameter of the central Sun.To
affirm this is far more difficult than it would first appear and to be
honest ir raises far more issues than it answers.

We are all astronomers by virtue that our existence depends on and we
live by the daily and annual cycles and I would imagine that is why
astronomy will always be close to the human heart even though it is
promoted today as solely an exercise in magnification. If you look at
the standard view of what causes the seasons using variable axial
tilt,it appears to make sense until you try to express the Equinoxes
into the same picture -

http://www.astronomy.org/programs/se...ns-general.gif

What do you move to make the axis align with the solar/orbital shadow
boundary at the Equinox ,something that will occur in a few weeks ?.

Thank you very much for a response that shows an effort on your part
for I assure you that in this very important matter,what I presented
are just bare outlines for development ,the major modification being a
change in the way we view how the seasons are caused by relying on
viewing the Earth from space as a point of departure for a more
accurate treatment of the matter.















Could it be,
that this should actually be the right perspective to look at the Solar
system as this plane is supposed to be the main plane of Sun's rotation
and therefore it makes sense to tilt the planes of the planetary orbits
on the schemata to show how the solar system goes?

Is the plane Pluto is orbiting the same as the plane perpendicular to
Sun's rotation axis?

Thanks in advance for enlightening me here and sorry if (some of the)
questions don't make perfect sense (in this case please just try to
guess what I am asking for).

Claudio Grondi- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

oriel36 wrote:

[...]

Could it be,
that this should actually be the right perspective to look at the Solar
system as this plane is supposed to be the main plane of Sun's rotation
and therefore it makes sense to tilt the planes of the planetary orbits
on the schemata to show how the solar system goes?

Is the plane Pluto is orbiting the same as the plane perpendicular to
Sun's rotation axis?

Thanks in advance for enlightening me here and sorry if (some of the)
questions don't make perfect sense (in this case please just try to
guess what I am asking for).


In between on my way to some more understanding I have run into this link:

http://www.enchantedlearning.com/sub...ecliptic.shtml

If the angles given on that page are the right ones, the tilt of the
Earth rotation axis (23.5 degree) measured relative to the Ecliptic
plane is three times larger than the the tilt of the Sun rotation axis
(7 degree). Therefore, even choosing the plane perpendicular to the Sun
rotation axis as the reference plane shown in form of a horizontal line
in schemes for explaining the reason for seasons won't change the fact,
that the tilt of Earth rotation axis remains the major effect to
consider also in this new reference system.

If I understand it the right way, it appears to me, that oriel36 has a
problem with understanding the Equinoxes when given the schematics:

http://www.astronomy.org/programs/se...ns-general.gif

as he writes:

"If you look at the standard view of what causes the seasons using
variable axial tilt,it appears to make sense until you try to express the Equinoxes into the same picture"

probably because he thinks, that the Earth axial tilt is variable. In my
understanding the axial tilt of Earth in the reference system being the
Ecliptic plane remains the same all the time (let's neglect the very
slight precession effect).
At the Equinox position of Earth on its orbit around the Sun, the Earth
rotation axis is fully within the plane perpendicular to the line
connecting Earth and Sun - therefore in this special constellation the
magnitude of the Earth axis tilt won't affect the effect of having an
equal long day and night on any point on Earth at all.
To see this clearly on an extreme example it is maybe helpful to imagine
the Earth rotation axis tilted 90 degree i.e. being within the plane of
Earths orbit around the Sun - in such case both polar circles would come
together at the equator.
It could maybe also help to understand the Equinoxes to imagine how the
schematics

http://www.astronomy.org/programs/se...ns-general.gif

would look like when the Equinox positions of Earth were shown. In that
case the picture won't show any tilt of Earth rotation axis because when
a vertical line gets tilted in the plane going through the point of the
observation and this line itself, the tilt can't be seen and the line
remains visually vertical.

The link I found

http://www.enchantedlearning.com/sub...ecliptic.shtml

gives the values for tilt of Earth and Sun rotational axes and the tilt
of Pluto's orbit relative to the Ecliptic, but gives no hints about the
orientation of this tilts. I would be happy if someone could share here
a link to a 3D solar system simulation showing also both the rotation
axes of Earth and Sun and maybe also of all other planets together with
the orbiting axes of the planets.

Claudio Grondi

On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 19:42:51 +0100, in uk.sci.astronomy , Claudio
Grondi wrote:

If I understand it the right way, it appears to me, that oriel36 has a
problem with understanding the Equinoxes when given the schematics:

Oriel36 is a well-known troll. Please don't feed him.
--
Mark McIntyre

On Mar 2, 7:42 pm, Claudio Grondi wrote:
oriel36 wrote:

[...]

Could it be,
that this should actually be the right perspective to look at the Solar
system as this plane is supposed to be the main plane of Sun's rotation
and therefore it makes sense to tilt the planes of the planetary orbits
on the schemata to show how the solar system goes?

Is the plane Pluto is orbiting the same as the plane perpendicular to
Sun's rotation axis?

Thanks in advance for enlightening me here and sorry if (some of the)
questions don't make perfect sense (in this case please just try to
guess what I am asking for).

In between on my way to some more understanding I have run into this link:

http://www.enchantedlearning.com/sub...arsystem/eclip...

If the angles given on that page are the right ones, the tilt of the
Earth rotation axis (23.5 degree) measured relative to the Ecliptic
plane is three times larger than the the tilt of the Sun rotation axis
(7 degree). Therefore, even choosing the plane perpendicular to the Sun
rotation axis as the reference plane shown in form of a horizontal line
in schemes for explaining the reason for seasons won't change the fact,
that the tilt of Earth rotation axis remains the major effect to
consider also in this new reference system.


You may out of your depth but at least you are trying .Most
intelligent people do take note of the dilemma provided by the
standard explanation for the seasons based on variable axial tilt in
respect to the solar radiation/orbital shadow boundary -

http://www.astronomy.org/programs/se...ns-general.gif

The solution places emphasis on the alteration of the radiation/shadow
boundary whereas the less suitable explantion keeps that boundary
fixed hence the pseudo-dynamic of axial tilt as seen in the graphic
above.

It is important for the modified view allows a clear distinction
between global climate and hemispherical weather patterns (seasons).It
does not draw conclusions but allows for more productive working
principles based on actual images of the Earth from space rather than
the 17th century scaffolding of celestial sphere geometry,the source
you are using.




If I understand it the right way, it appears to me, that oriel36 has a
problem with understanding the Equinoxes when given the schematics:

http://www.astronomy.org/programs/se...asons-for-seas...

as he writes:
"If you look at the standard view of what causes the seasons using
variable axial tilt,it appears to make sense until you try to express the Equinoxes into the same picture"

probably because he thinks, that the Earth axial tilt is variable. In my
understanding the axial tilt of Earth in the reference system being the
Ecliptic plane remains the same all the time (let's neglect the very
slight precession effect).

Most participants here eventually drop the pretense of a technical
discussion as they go through the process of defending untenable
concepts and what you are doing now is predictable as I have seen this
too many times to care.You are no longer addressing me and that is
fine,my business is to make participants aware that a major
modification is neccessary to bring astronomy in line with terrestrial
sciences such as climatology by meshing them accurately using
availible images of the Earth from space.




At the Equinox position of Earth on its orbit around the Sun, the Earth
rotation axis is fully within the plane perpendicular to the line
connecting Earth and Sun - therefore in this special constellation the
magnitude of the Earth axis tilt won't affect the effect of having an
equal long day and night on any point on Earth at all.

No wonder McIntyre felt it neccessary to tell you to shut up but you
are new here and can be forgiven for not knowing the protocol.What you
do now is agree with Mark and quietly wander back into oblivion.

In any case,in a few weeks the radiation/shadow boundary denoting the
orbital path and motion of the Earth splits the geographical axis -

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...easonearth.png

This truly global view replaces the hemispherical version based on a
pseudo-dynamic of axial tilt.For those who are interested,it is easier
to grasp the modified view by looking at the relationship between
axial orientation with the radiation shadow boundary as the Earth's
orbital path crosses a line perpendicular to the maximum solar
diameter rather than the unsatisfactory view which concentrates axial
tilt at the Soltices.






To see this clearly on an extreme example it is maybe helpful to imagine
the Earth rotation axis tilted 90 degree i.e. being within the plane of
Earths orbit around the Sun - in such case both polar circles would come
together at the equator.
It could maybe also help to understand the Equinoxes to imagine how the
schematics

http://www.astronomy.org/programs/se...asons-for-seas...

would look like when the Equinox positions of Earth were shown. In that
case the picture won't show any tilt of Earth rotation axis because when
a vertical line gets tilted in the plane going through the point of the
observation and this line itself, the tilt can't be seen and the line
remains visually vertical.


You may be new to astronomy but you are an old hand at bluffing and
blustering that most here will not appreciate.Most of them already
know that the substance of seasonal weather variations is due to the
orbital path of the Earth and a change in the radiation/shadow
boundary but the modification would upset the celestial sphere
scaffolding on which their observations and 'predictions' are based.

It may have been convenient from the 17th century to retain the
framework but it is simply not worth it today,too much valuable
information ignored or going to waste in an era when meshing climate
with the motions of the Earth needs a complete overhaul






The link I found

http://www.enchantedlearning.com/sub...arsystem/eclip...

gives the values for tilt of Earth and Sun rotational axes and the tilt
of Pluto's orbit relative to the Ecliptic, but gives no hints about the
orientation of this tilts. I would be happy if someone could share here
a link to a 3D solar system simulation showing also both the rotation
axes of Earth and Sun and maybe also of all other planets together with
the orbiting axes of the planets.

Claudio Grondi

I am sure that many here are delighted to see me wind down my presence
in these newsgroups and this forum returns to a diluted form of
astronomy based on magnification.The dynamics of astronomy are all but
lost or misdirected to counter-productive concepts yet there is always
an occasion when somebody does see that the motions of the Earth make
our existence possible therefore we should pay more attention to what
is actually happening.