![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message , Oriel36
writes DT wrote in message ... In message , Oriel36 writes You have disgraced yourselves,things known a millenia ago seem beyond you and not even one has acknowledged the error.So be it. Since I'm in the mood to rant, Gerald, and you have provided some entertainment, here's a little quiz question for you if you'd care to try it. If you adjust the rate of a clock at mid-day to record 24 hours for each 360 degree rotation of the Earth, how many days pass before the Sun rises at midnight? It's all right, I'm not expecting an answer. Who am I to dim the blinding light of your intellect with the mundane practicalities of reality? Denis Noon is a precise geometric term,it is when a longitude meridian rotates to face the Sun directly,this is kid's stuff and no offense intended. Snipped Come on Gerald! I'm not trying to be tricky, I just want you to try and think outside your particular box. I'll accept plus or minus 2 days, how's that? You understand the concept of tolerances surely? ;-) Denis -- DT Replace nospam with the antithesis of hills |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
DT wrote in message ...
In message , Oriel36 writes DT wrote in message ... In message , Oriel36 writes You have disgraced yourselves,things known a millenia ago seem beyond you and not even one has acknowledged the error.So be it. Since I'm in the mood to rant, Gerald, and you have provided some entertainment, here's a little quiz question for you if you'd care to try it. If you adjust the rate of a clock at mid-day to record 24 hours for each 360 degree rotation of the Earth, how many days pass before the Sun rises at midnight? It's all right, I'm not expecting an answer. Who am I to dim the blinding light of your intellect with the mundane practicalities of reality? Denis Noon is a precise geometric term,it is when a longitude meridian rotates to face the Sun directly,this is kid's stuff and no offense intended. Snipped Come on Gerald! I'm not trying to be tricky, I just want you to try and think outside your particular box. I'll accept plus or minus 2 days, how's that? You understand the concept of tolerances surely? ;-) Denis There is no box,there are graphic tools which can explain exactly how the 24 hour/360 degree equivalency is determined by the Earth's rotation and the fact that it is noon along any given longitude meridian on the surface of the planet. I will only note that anyone good at graphics can explain why clocks were developed as rulers of distance using the EoT computation and I assure you that I am the greatest proponent of modern graphic tools to sweep through the utter garbage where men define the Earth's 360 degree axial rotation directly to stellar circumpolar motion and the sidereal value. I suspect you would rather remain with relativistic wordplays than actually absorb what Newton wrote even when graphics are before you. http://www.pafko.com/tycho/mars.html "It is indeed a matter of great difficulty to discover, and effectually to distinguish, the true motion of particular bodies from the apparent; because the parts of that immovable space, in which those motions are performed, do by no means come under the observation of our senses. Yet the thing is not altogether desperate; for we have some arguments to guide us, partly from the apparent motions, which are the differences of the true motions; partly from the forces, which are the causes and effects of the true motion.@ Principia |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message , Oriel36
writes wrong answer snipped I suspect you would rather remain with relativistic wordplays than actually absorb what Newton wrote even when graphics are before you. Like you, there are many things I don't know, but I am sufficiently familiar with Newton's work, in the fields of political assassination as well as alchemy and 'fysiks', to know that your interpretation, along with your answer to a simple question, is entirely in error. Have you the stature to consider that you may just possibly be wrong? ;-) Denis (wanders off muttering about the state of education in this country.... When I was a boy...... bring back the birch.... a good thrashing.... bloody rail network..... you just can't get the staff these days.... need a bit of national service..... I think I'll have a nice cup of tea.) -- DT Replace nospam with the antithesis of hills |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
DT wrote in message ...
In message , Oriel36 writes wrong answer snipped I suspect you would rather remain with relativistic wordplays than actually absorb what Newton wrote even when graphics are before you. Like you, there are many things I don't know, but I am sufficiently familiar with Newton's work, in the fields of political assassination as well as alchemy and 'fysiks', to know that your interpretation, along with your answer to a simple question, is entirely in error. Have you the stature to consider that you may just possibly be wrong? ;-) Denis (wanders off muttering about the state of education in this country.... When I was a boy...... bring back the birch.... a good thrashing.... bloody rail network..... you just can't get the staff these days.... need a bit of national service..... I think I'll have a nice cup of tea.) "As regards space (and time) the universe is infinite. There are stars everywhere, so that the density of matter, although very variable in detail, is nevertheless on the average everywhere the same. In other words: However far we might travel through space, we should find everywhere an attenuated swarm of fixed stars of approximately the same kind and density. 1 This view is not in harmony with the theory of Newton. The latter theory rather requires that the universe should have a kind of centre in which the density of the stars is a maximum, and that as we proceed outwards from this centre the group-density of the stars should diminish, until finally, at great distances, it is succeeded by an infinite region of emptiness. The stellar universe ought to be a finite island in the infinite ocean of space." http://www.bartleby.com/173/30.html Cut through all the relativistic garbage and at the bottom of it are those two paragraphs. Most people who have a passing interest in the structure of the Universe would find Albert's 1920 comments to be entirely laughable yet it is still the height of fashion.The poor guy had an excuse,galaxies other than our own and stellar rotation around the galactic axis was not discovered until 1923,Albert's universe not only does not make a provision for galactic structures but more or less uses Newton to argue against it. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
DT wrote in message ...
.... Denis (wanders off muttering about the state of education in this country.... When I was a boy...... bring back the birch.... a good thrashing.... bloody rail network..... you just can't get the staff these days.... need a bit of national service..... I think I'll have a nice cup of tea.) :-D Stiff upper lip, old boy. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message , sts060
writes DT wrote in message ... ... Denis (wanders off muttering about the state of education in this country.... When I was a boy...... bring back the birch.... a good thrashing.... bloody rail network..... you just can't get the staff these days.... need a bit of national service..... I think I'll have a nice cup of tea.) :-D Stiff upper lip, old boy. Gerald reminds me of something my youngest daughter said a while ago. "I found this toy daddy, and I tried to play with it, but it was broken. Can you fix it?" I had a go, but it was too badly damaged! Denis -- DT Replace nospam with the antithesis of hills |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
ISS On-Orbit Status, 18-08-2003 | Jacques van Oene | Space Station | 10 | August 23rd 03 09:09 PM |
ISS On-Orbit Status, 11-07-2003 | Jacques van Oene | Space Station | 0 | July 13th 03 01:26 PM |
ISS On-Orbit Status, 03-07-2003 | Jacques van Oene | Space Station | 0 | July 8th 03 03:31 PM |