Orbital dawn 2013

On Saturday, September 7, 2013 3:58:18 AM UTC+1, palsing wrote:
On Friday, September 6, 2013 3:01:39 PM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:



A biochemist should be capable of explaining to any interested observer how the body reacts to the changes in a 24 hour cycle as the Earth turns once each 24 hour day and I never stop taking this angle with people that they do not need a telescope and empirical bluffing - their bodies and all creation as it ebbs and flows with the cycles of the Earth is what makes astronomy worth pursuing and makes them natural astronomers even without knowing it.







Your contrived 1465 rotations in 1461 days is at variance with what the body experiences and that makes for a form of insanity and not the actions of a biochemist.



You are talking about this...



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circadian_rhythm



... and no one here will argue about it, it is fact, we all agree.


The way the fact is generated is just as important as the fact itself and obliterates the grotesque assertion of 1465 rotations in 1461 days.

It starts off with a basic observation,do you hear this,a basic observation that from first light of Sirius from behind the glare of the Sun,there will not follow consecutive 365 rotations until first light appears once more -

http://danmary.org/tiki/show_image.php?id=30

After the fourth 365 day cycle,Sirius will be absent by virtue that the Earth hurtling through space and around the Sun requires an extra rotation's worth of orbital motion to bring Sirius into view once more.The extra rotation equates to 1461 rotations for 4 orbital circuits and 365 1/4 rotations to one orbital circuit.

It is the only proper use of an external star with our central Sun hence the fiction of 1465 rotations for 4 orbital circuits is a grotesque statement and at variance with all known astronomical principles .

It is nothing short of criminal to invent alternative variants of the 24 hour AM/PM system in tandem with the Lat/Long system by butchering the reference systems which our ancestors created and this generation completely mismanages.

oriel36 wrote:
On Saturday, September 7, 2013 3:58:18 AM UTC+1, palsing wrote:
On Friday, September 6, 2013 3:01:39 PM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:



A biochemist should be capable of explaining to any interested observer
how the body reacts to the changes in a 24 hour cycle as the Earth
turns once each 24 hour day and I never stop taking this angle with
people that they do not need a telescope and empirical bluffing - their
bodies and all creation as it ebbs and flows with the cycles of the
Earth is what makes astronomy worth pursuing and makes them natural
astronomers even without knowing it.







Your contrived 1465 rotations in 1461 days is at variance with what the
body experiences and that makes for a form of insanity and not the
actions of a biochemist.



You are talking about this...



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circadian_rhythm



... and no one here will argue about it, it is fact, we all agree.


The way the fact is generated is just as important as the fact itself and
obliterates the grotesque assertion of 1465 rotations in 1461 days.

No the only important thing is the fact itself.




It starts off with a basic observation,do you hear this,a basic
observation that from first light of Sirius from behind the glare of the
Sun,there will not follow consecutive 365 rotations until first light appears once more -

http://danmary.org/tiki/show_image.php?id0

After the fourth 365 day cycle,Sirius will be absent by virtue that the
Earth hurtling through space and around the Sun requires an extra
rotation's worth of orbital motion to bring Sirius into view once
more.The extra rotation equates to 1461 rotations for 4 orbital circuits
and 365 1/4 rotations to one orbital circuit.

It is the only proper use of an external star with our central Sun hence
the fiction of 1465 rotations for 4 orbital circuits is a grotesque
statement and at variance with all known astronomical principles .

I fail to understand how the truth can be grotesque.


It is nothing short of criminal to invent alternative variants of the 24
hour AM/PM system in tandem with the Lat/Long system by butchering the
reference systems which our ancestors created and this generation completely mismanages.

You have this strange inability to understand cause and effect, map and
territory.
The calendar is a man made contrivance to measure the passage of time. It
doesn't control time but just maps it.
You constantly go on about am/ pm but most of the world uses the 24 hour
clock.

Here's a quote for you

It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in
delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.

Carl Sagan

On Saturday, September 7, 2013 12:06:14 PM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:

It is nothing short of criminal to invent alternative variants of the 24 hour AM/PM system in tandem with the Lat/Long system by butchering the reference systems which our ancestors created and this generation completely mismanages.

Yet again you respond like a total idiot. The sidereal day is no more an alternative variant of the solar day than a single US dollar is to a Canadian dollar. They are not the same thing and no one claims otherwise. Again you are driving the wrong way on a one-way street and claiming that everyone else on the road is in error...

"Most of the mistakes in thinking are inadequacies of perception
rather than mistakes of logic."
- Edward de Bono

On Saturday, September 7, 2013 9:00:48 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
oriel36 wrote:

On Saturday, September 7, 2013 3:58:18 AM UTC+1, palsing wrote:

On Friday, September 6, 2013 3:01:39 PM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:







A biochemist should be capable of explaining to any interested observer

how the body reacts to the changes in a 24 hour cycle as the Earth

turns once each 24 hour day and I never stop taking this angle with

people that they do not need a telescope and empirical bluffing - their

bodies and all creation as it ebbs and flows with the cycles of the

Earth is what makes astronomy worth pursuing and makes them natural

astronomers even without knowing it.















Your contrived 1465 rotations in 1461 days is at variance with what the

body experiences and that makes for a form of insanity and not the

actions of a biochemist.







You are talking about this...







https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circadian_rhythm







... and no one here will argue about it, it is fact, we all agree.





The way the fact is generated is just as important as the fact itself and

obliterates the grotesque assertion of 1465 rotations in 1461 days.



No the only important thing is the fact itself.


With the advent of 3D imaging there will come a time when people will truly perceive the ocean of space and get a sense of 'spaceship' Earth as it hurtles around the Sun and as the solar system itself hurtles through space with all the other systems in our galaxy.

http://danmary.org/tiki/show_image.php?id=30

That observation is a property of the orbital motion of the Earth as it is shown that the Earth doesn't turn consistently every 365 days but requires and extra rotation which in turn translates into additional orbital motion to bring Sirius back into view.

There is nothing arbitrary in 1461 rotations in 1461 days,from whatever starting point in chosen,it will take 1461 rotations,to the nearest rotation,to complete 4 orbital circuits.It is not just a calendar thing,it actually happens and it takes the two most brilliant stars in the celestial arena,in this case our own Sun and Sirius,to fix the orbital cycle by the number of rotations.














It starts off with a basic observation,do you hear this,a basic

observation that from first light of Sirius from behind the glare of the

Sun,there will not follow consecutive 365 rotations until first light appears once more -



http://danmary.org/tiki/show_image.php?id0



After the fourth 365 day cycle,Sirius will be absent by virtue that the

Earth hurtling through space and around the Sun requires an extra

rotation's worth of orbital motion to bring Sirius into view once

more.The extra rotation equates to 1461 rotations for 4 orbital circuits

and 365 1/4 rotations to one orbital circuit.



It is the only proper use of an external star with our central Sun hence

the fiction of 1465 rotations for 4 orbital circuits is a grotesque

statement and at variance with all known astronomical principles .



I fail to understand how the truth can be grotesque.


A biochemist is meant to appreciate that the body and all animate creation responds to the daily cycle of the planet and a person is much more of an astronomer by watching how creation answers to the great cycles that condition their wake/sleep cycle or the great seasonal cycles.









It is nothing short of criminal to invent alternative variants of the 24

hour AM/PM system in tandem with the Lat/Long system by butchering the

reference systems which our ancestors created and this generation completely mismanages.



You have this strange inability to understand cause and effect, map and

territory.

The calendar is a man made contrivance to measure the passage of time. It

doesn't control time but just maps it.


I could grant a certain period of unfamiliarity but not for too long.You and the other nuisances have no choice - when Sirius appears behind the glare of the central Sun for the first time,it will not appear after the fourth 365 day cycle.You don't have a choice Collins nor all the other academics who insist there are 1465 rotations in 1461 days.



You constantly go on about am/ pm but most of the world uses the 24 hour

clock.



Here's a quote for you



It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in

delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.



Carl Sagan

The new crowd don't even pay you attention any more,they have tried to create a non astronomical reference for 24 hours and rotation and turn out to be worse than you are.

Even the exuberant Christian that was St Francis who looked on creation as all people should took time out to comment on those who miss the point in order to make themselves bigger than the topic they pretend to care about -

http://www2.webster.edu/~barrettb/canticle.htm