Does the sky revolve around the Earth?

Today's APOD would have you believe so:
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

Enjoy :^))

On Saturday, July 16, 2016 at 10:18:52 AM UTC-5, Razzmatazz wrote:
Today's APOD would have you believe so:
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

Enjoy :^))

For a more detailed explanation of the pictu
http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Star-Tra...Oinoe-2016.htm

Razzmatazz:
Today's APOD would have you believe so:
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

Enjoy :^))

And...

For a more detailed explanation of the pictu
http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Star-Tra...Oinoe-2016.htm

Yes, very nice. No surprise that Anthony is still turning out beautiful
and creative photos.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

Anthony's photos are amazing...

On Saturday, July 16, 2016 at 8:18:52 AM UTC-7, Razzmatazz wrote:
Today's APOD would have you believe so:
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

Enjoy :^))

Photo looks like my old vinyl records! (o:
http://i.imgur.com/XR2rIxf.jpg

On Saturday, July 16, 2016 at 4:18:52 PM UTC+1, Razzmatazz wrote:
Today's APOD would have you believe so:
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

Enjoy :^))

The moon orbits the Earth hence its reflected light creates a day/night cycle within a polar day/night cycle -

http://www.usap.gov/videoclipsandmaps/spwebcam.cfm

http://www.moongiant.com/phase/today/

It is one of two locations on the surface of the planet that bypasses the diurnal day/night cycle.

People are never too old to enjoy something new leaving those behind who imagine identifying objects in a star trail framework is all humanity is fit for.

Once upon a time when I served as an area science fair judge I encountered a similar (though less artistic) photograph. The student's hypothesis was that the North Star was precisely in line with Earth's axis of rotation – located directly above Earth's north pole.

As with Anthony's image on APOD, the student's image showed a small arc for the North Star's trail. He concluded, based on his own photographic evidence, that his hypothesis was correct! After providing due praise for the project and the photo, I pointed out that the North Star was not precisely above Earth's north pole – and his own photograph provided proof. The student's teacher, who just happened to be nearby, came over and tried to defend the student's conclusion by pointing out that the North Star was in the center of the pattern of star trails. . .

Does the sky revolve around the Earth? The answer depends on one's perspective. A viable argument could be made in support of either a 'yes' or a 'no' answer with a different set of physical laws supporting each position. That being said, the physical laws appear to be far simpler if we assume the 'no' answer to be the correct answer.

OTOH: If the sky revolves around the Earth, then everything more distant than Neptune is exceeding the 'local' speed of light. Perhaps there's hope after all for superluminal space travel ;-)

Sketcher,
To sketch is to see.

On Saturday, July 16, 2016 at 9:18:52 AM UTC-6, Razzmatazz wrote:
Today's APOD would have you believe so:
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

Enjoy :^))

On Saturday, July 16, 2016 at 4:43:39 PM UTC-5, Sketcher wrote:
Once upon a time when I served as an area science fair judge I encountered a similar (though less artistic) photograph. The student's hypothesis was that the North Star was precisely in line with Earth's axis of rotation – located directly above Earth's north pole.

As with Anthony's image on APOD, the student's image showed a small arc for the North Star's trail. He concluded, based on his own photographic evidence, that his hypothesis was correct! After providing due praise for the project and the photo, I pointed out that the North Star was not precisely above Earth's north pole – and his own photograph provided proof. The student's teacher, who just happened to be nearby, came over and tried to defend the student's conclusion by pointing out that the North Star was in the center of the pattern of star trails. . .

Does the sky revolve around the Earth? The answer depends on one's perspective. A viable argument could be made in support of either a 'yes' or a 'no' answer with a different set of physical laws supporting each position. That being said, the physical laws appear to be far simpler if we assume the 'no' answer to be the correct answer.

OTOH: If the sky revolves around the Earth, then everything more distant than Neptune is exceeding the 'local' speed of light. Perhaps there's hope after all for superluminal space travel ;-)

Warp Drive Mr. Sulu!!


Sketcher,
To sketch is to see.

On Saturday, July 16, 2016 at 9:18:52 AM UTC-6, Razzmatazz wrote:
Today's APOD would have you believe so:
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

Enjoy :^))

Sketcher:
Does the sky revolve around the Earth? The answer depends on one's
perspective. A viable argument could be made in support of either a 'yes'
or a 'no' answer with a different set of physical laws supporting each
position. That being said, the physical laws appear to be far simpler if
we assume the 'no' answer to be the correct answer.

True enough for formulation of physical laws, and certainly an
expression of objective reality. As a practical matter, though, I have
to consider that the sky *appears* to revolve around the earth. As seen
by me, my telescope mount stays fixed on the Earth and in the course of
an evening its RA axis rotates to follow the *apparent* motion of
celestial objects as they revolve around the fixed Earth. How can I
prove with just my GEM and my two eyes that it is the Earth that is
revolving, and not the heavens?

I'm not mathematically qualified to argue this, but I read once in a
physics book that, given only one's two eyes, it is impossible to
determine whether the Earth rotates on its axis once each day or the
Earth remains fixed while the Sun completes an orbit of the Earth once
each day.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

On Sunday, July 17, 2016 at 5:07:29 AM UTC+1, Davoud wrote:
Sketcher:
Does the sky revolve around the Earth? The answer depends on one's
perspective. A viable argument could be made in support of either a 'yes'
or a 'no' answer with a different set of physical laws supporting each
position. That being said, the physical laws appear to be far simpler if
we assume the 'no' answer to be the correct answer.

True enough for formulation of physical laws, and certainly an
expression of objective reality. As a practical matter, though, I have
to consider that the sky *appears* to revolve around the earth. As seen
by me, my telescope mount stays fixed on the Earth and in the course of
an evening its RA axis rotates to follow the *apparent* motion of
celestial objects as they revolve around the fixed Earth. How can I
prove with just my GEM and my two eyes that it is the Earth that is
revolving, and not the heavens?


Here is what you do, you look at your telescope as it tracks a star in circumpolar motion and realize that it is not a geocentric observation but a homocentric one as any axis on at any latitude will do. In this case the sky is not seen to rotate around the Earth but around you as RA takes no consideration of latitudinal speeds which represent 1037.5 miles per hour at the Equator and zero at the North and South poles.






I'm not mathematically qualified to argue this, but I read once in a
physics book that, given only one's two eyes, it is impossible to
determine whether the Earth rotates on its axis once each day or the
Earth remains fixed while the Sun completes an orbit of the Earth once
each day.


Mathematically qualified indeed !, it takes nothing more than the ability to count in order to fix how many times the planet turns to arrive at the correct conclusions. Empiricists like to say 'time is the joker in the pack' but they are being silly, the real culprit is timekeeping and the fact that a year doesn't constitute an annual circuit within the timekeeping format. With 3 years of 365 days/rotations and 1 year of 366 days/rotations it becomes clear where empiricists find it difficult to handle the foundations of timekeeping based on cyclical references and predictions made within the calendar framework.