September Equinox 2014

In article ,
oriel36 wrote:
Rightly understood, the Equinox is defined by the location of the
North/South polar coordinates where they are turned to a position where
they exist orthogonal to the Sun/Earth line.

There is no such thing as "North/South polar coordinates". That's
not what the phrase "polar coordinates" means.

That said, the definition quoted elsewhere on the newsgroup was
that the noontime sun crosses the celestial equator. Is this not
exactly the same thing, just expressed slightly differently?

--
David Goldfarb | "All love is unrequited."
|
| -- Babylon 5, "Rising Star"

On 9/22/2014 9:44 PM, David Goldfarb wrote:
In article ,
oriel36 wrote:
[...]

Since you're one of the retards responding to Oriel, you may
enjoy this which makes more sense than either you or Oriel on
the topic of North/South magnetic lines:

http://www.improbable.com/ig/winners/#ig2014

[...]
Another prize was awarded for noting that dogs only defecate when
aligned with north-south magnetic fields.
[...]

And from the Readers Comments section at the above page:

So when you're lost in a forest, watch which way your dog is
pointing when it poops. I'm sure I can market "Compass Dogs"
as a new thing.


I wonder what would happen if you don't allow a dog to align north-south.
You will cause a rip in the space time continuum and destroy the universe.


The poop comes out aligned north-south anyway, but the dog really
doesn't like it. Hurts like hell when it comes out sideways.


You don't get it. Dogs pooing north south creates the magnetic field.
Your experiment would cause the magnetic poles to shift.

On Sunday, September 21, 2014 9:48:40 PM UTC+1, palsing wrote:
On Sunday, September 21, 2014 12:52:44 PM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:

Tomorrow I will go down to an area on the East coast of Ireland where, if clear skies permit, I will watch the Sun rise in front of the entrance of a cave which is imitated inland via Loughcrew and Knowth at the Equinox and Newgrange at the Solstice. It is my own private Equinox spectacle in an area once inhabited by astronomers 5200 years ago.







http://www.knowth.com/loughcrew-equinox.htm



Now THAT is a cool event. Wish I was joining you there.

What you would pick up from the visit is that the North/South poles exist in the same position on the circle of illumination today as they did 5200 years ago on the Equinox hence the precession of the Equinox as it is presently understood based on changes in axial orientation is an invalid assertion . Precession is an intricate affair as it relies on a new change of perspective between the planets and the Sun when referenced to the background stars insofar as planets are gauged via their motion through the field of constellations whereas the motions of the stars behind the Sun is gauged via the orbital motion of the Earth. At the time of Copernicus they had the Sun and planets move through the constellations together and did not make the necessary discrimination. It is now easy enough to resolve outer planetary retrogrades and inner planetary retrogrades separately and also assign cause for precession of the Equinoxes using the apparent motion of the stars along the orbital plane and behind the Sun. In short, precession was taken care of to a large degree by the calendar correction a number of centuries ago but this is such a long story in itself.

I was at Loughcrew and in the chamber when the Sun's light penetrated the darkness for a minute on what was otherwise a cloudy affair and lit up the back recess and the motifs indented in the rock all those thousands of years ago. Obviously these are different times and people wouldn't see the point in constructing these monuments as markers for orbital events much less getting involved in providing more accurate explanations for the Solstices and Equinoxes.

Ultimately it all comes down to imaging and what it represents in terms of dynamics . You get to decide whether you wish to introduce the surface rotation of a planet as a function of its annual orbital motion through space or stick with the unproductive 'axial precession' as a long term orbital trait-

http://www.newscientist.com/data/ima...2529-1_800.jpg