what's your bet?

On Dec 6, 4:22*am, oriel36 wrote:

... the Earth turns at a rate of 15 degrees per hour,that distance translates
into the turning of the equatorial distance through its 40,075 km
circumference in 24 hours.There is no external *celestial reference
for this rotation...

This is correct, with respect to the sun, no one argues this point,
and no fixed stars are needed to figure this out. There is no need for
you to bring this basic truth up again, we all understand.

But let's say you lived on a world that was totally overcast every
day, and you never, ever saw the sun, year after year and decade after
decade, etc. It is clearly not nighttime, it gets light, but the
clouds are so thick that you have no idea what the direction might be
for the source of the light. I maintain that even under these
conditions, assuming that you have some way of accurately keeping
track of the passage of time, you would eventually discover the
average 24-hour cycle that you often speak of, the 24 hours of Monday
becoming the 24 hours of Tuesday, etc.

However, every night, after it gets completely dark, the sky clears
up, and it is filled with stars, all night, every night. You use that
same timekeeping device and discover that for any star you wish to
choose, it returns to the meridian in a few minutes less than 24
hours. What would you think then? It is clear that there are 2
different cycles, one of 24 hours and one about 4 minutes less, each
and every day.

Although you might never solve this mystery, the facts remain
incontrovertible, because you yourself have determined, according to
your very own measurements, that there are 2 cycles involved. There
can be no mistake here, the timings can be made over and over again
and the results are always the same. Would there be any way at all to
prove that one cycle had any influence on the other? I don't think so,
do you? I don't think that anyone could state that, as you claim, "the
idea that the planetary dynamics of daily rotation correlates directly
with the rotation of the constellations around Polaris thereby
destroying all the information about planetary dimensions and
rotational characteristics organised around the 24 hour value.",
because, it is clear, there is no correlation between them, and no one
claims that there is, but you continue to state the opposite. Get over
it, there are (at least) 2 independent cycles, there always has been,
there always will be, and everyone knows it.

The sun and the earth just do what they have been doing for a very
long time now, and all we can do is observe the results and keep
notes... otherwise known as empirical data... and formulate theories.
So, if you want to share any new theories that you have formulated...
let's see your data and subsequent calculations... otherwise.. your
work here is done.

\Paul A

On Dec 6, 10:53*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Dec 6, 3:48 pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
oriel36 wrote:

That *'sidereal time' view exists only in the imagination -
http://wpcontent.answers.com/wikiped...al_Time_en.PNG
* *Gerald, the link you posted clearly depicts a sidereal day--a
* *rotation of exactly 360° in 86,164.09+ seconds (23h 56m 4.09+s)

* *Gerald, your homework assignment is to study these sections

* *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidereal_day

* * *1. Sidereal time and solar time
* * *2. Precession effects
* * *3. Definition
* * *4. Exact duration and its variation
* * *5. See also
* * *6. References
* * *7. External links

* *Approximate Sidereal Time
* * *http://aa.usno.navy.mil/faq/docs/GAST.php

* *Explanatory Supplement to the Astronomical Almanac - Google Books Result
* *by P. Kenneth Seidelmann - 2005 - Science - 752 pages
* *Although this paperback edition carries a 2006 copyright date, it is the
* *same material published in 1992 hardcover edition.

http://books.google.com/books?id=uJ4...al+day&printse...

How,for goodness sake,anyone can reason out 'sidereal time' using
planetary dynamics is beyond me insofar as it is literally a flat
Earth ideology which cannot express the rotation of the Earth at all
latitudes where the Earth turns 15 degrees per hour with given
geographical distances corresponding to each latitude .

* *Beauty is in the simplicity-

You are trying to pass off a crude conclusion as being simple but it
will always be crude conclusion therefore as long as the 'sidereal
time' reasoning exists and applied to planetary dynamics then so will
these holocaust conditions prevail.The ground zero for speculating
future global temperatures based on a single criteria of a minor
atmospheric gas ,as crude as you can possibly get,is back in the late
17th century attempt to model planetary dynamics and solar system
structure using timekeeping averages so the center of attention for
genuine science is not in Copenhagen but in a small newsgroup forum
where the pool of people who could handle the technical details is
smaller still.

The circumpolar rotation of the constellations acting as a gauge for
the planetary dynamic of daily rotation through 360 degrees is
astonishingly crude and humanity is paying dearly for listening to
people who have built concepts on that intellectual vacuous position
of allowing the 24 hour/calendar timekeeping averages to dictate
observations from a rotating and orbiting Earth






-Any spinning body has a sidereal day
* *independent of its orbital period. Stars, asteroids, moons, planets,
* *comets all have sidereal days.

On Friday, November 20, 2009 5:27:36 PM UTC, Sam Wormley wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Nov 20, 1:41 am, Sam Wormley wrote:


To say that the earth turns 15°/hr may be "technically" true to a
"moving reference" but any accurate gyro will confirm that the earth
rotates exactly 360° in 86,164.09+ seconds and the rotation rate is
verified by direct observation by a star returning to a meridian.

Yes I am technically correct that the planet turns at a rate of 15
degrees per hour and while I could certainly label all of you kooks
for arguing against the rotational rate per hour.I would much prefer
that people treat this as an immediate crisis,deal with it and move on
to productive things which balance interpretation with speculation.


No, you are not correct! The earth rotate 15° in 59.836174 minutes
as any accurate gyro will confirm. If this was a legal case, it would
be Gerald against the World.

In science (and astronomy) the final arbiter is observation. Observation
confirms that the earth rotates exactly 360° in 86,164.09+ seconds and
the rotation rate is verified by direct observation by a star returning
to a meridian.

You cannot deny this observable fact, Gerald.

I am curios Wormley,you were pushing the 23 hour 56 minute 04 second value even as your empirical colleagues were morphing to a new story,equally vapid of course,that involves an idealized rotation once in 24 hours back in 1820 -

"At the time of the dinosaurs, Earth completed one rotation in about 23 hours," says MacMillan, who is a member of the VLBI team at NASA Goddard. "In the year 1820, a rotation took exactly 24 hours, or 86,400 standard seconds.. Since 1820, the mean solar day has increased by about 2.5 milliseconds." NASA

Instead of investigating the roots of the 24 hour AM/PM cycle in tandem with the Lat/Long system within the 365/366 day calendar framework and the external references involved,they are now trying to cut the external references altogether by trumping up a meaningless assertion about idealized rotation back in the year 1820.

The 'new' Google groups is horrible but it does allow retrospective postings like this one where you are held accountable for your previous beliefs but in such a non confrontational way.It just goes to show how empiricism rapidly adopted the 24 hour value for rotation but still managed to screw it up.

On Tue, 2 Jul 2013 05:13:29 -0700 (PDT), oriel36
wrote, in part:

I am curios Wormley,you were pushing the 23 hour 56 minute 04 second value
even as your empirical colleagues were morphing to a new story,equally
vapid of course,that involves an idealized rotation once in 24 hours back in
1820 -

As I have explained, the NASA site you quote merely put aside the
complication that 24 hours is not the Earth's real rotation period to
concentrate on the fact that the Earth's rotation is slowing, so that
the day is getting longer. So they oversimplified by leaving out this
technical matter.

In no way is there any actual change from 23 hours, 56 minutes, and 4
second.

John Savard
http://www.quadibloc.com/index.html

On Tuesday, July 2, 2013 5:32:31 AM UTC-7, John Savard wrote:

As I have explained, the NASA site you quote merely put aside the

complication that 24 hours is not the Earth's real rotation period to

concentrate on the fact that the Earth's rotation is slowing, so that

the day is getting longer. So they oversimplified by leaving out this

technical matter.

"A little inaccuracy sometimes saves tons of explanation."
~Saki