|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#101
|
|||
|
|||
The theory of gravity
On Wednesday, July 5, 2017 at 1:22:48 AM UTC-6, Gerald Kelleher wrote:
Equating planetary motion with the fall of an apple may have appeared fashionable in the late 17th century but unsuitable for 21st century observational data which requires astronomers to interpret and not mathematical theorists or experimentalists. And the world is like an apple Whirling silently in space https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKV9bK-CBXo John Savard |
#102
|
|||
|
|||
The theory of gravity
On Thursday, July 27, 2017 at 10:01:27 PM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:
On Wednesday, July 5, 2017 at 1:22:48 AM UTC-6, Gerald Kelleher wrote: Equating planetary motion with the fall of an apple may have appeared fashionable in the late 17th century but unsuitable for 21st century observational data which requires astronomers to interpret and not mathematical theorists or experimentalists. And the world is like an apple Whirling silently in space https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKV9bK-CBXo ....but seriously, dismissing Oriel36 as "crazy" is missing the point. In ancient times, people thought of the heavens as fundamentally different from things on the Earth, working by a different set of rules. After all, the Moon moves in the sky as it has for as long as anyone can remember. On Earth, things that move slow down and stop without a constant input of energy. And anything that's not sitting solidly on the ground will quickly fall down. This is a way of thinking that was overthrown by Newton - he showed how a body in orbit, even though it didn't proceed to the ground, was still "falling", because its path was a curved path around its primary instead of a straight line. To people of the modern day, it is as natural as breathing that science seeks to understand and explain things as thoroughly as it can manage - and one of the first steps is to see if the principles that work with the things we know can also be applied to what is unknown. There isn't some kind of rule that says "this is different, you can't use those principles here" - but if you go ahead and try and fail, then you haven't applied them correctly, and you can still try again. Also, it's clear enough that we are right and the ancients were wrong - or at least we're closer to the truth. We make shinier machines - and Newton's use of gravity, angular momentum, and all these other physical things for planetary motion was vindicated when perturbations allowed the position of Neptune to be predicted before anyone saw it. Oriel36 seems to be someone who has read the writings of the ancients and admired their thinking, and he has internalized their world view. He can accept Copernicus and Galileo and Kepler... but not Newton... because he is the last Aristotelian left standing! John Savard |
#103
|
|||
|
|||
The theory of gravity
On Friday, July 28, 2017 at 3:11:08 AM UTC+1, Gerald Kelleher wrote:
I do not have the time to waste This is perhaps the wrongiest statement you have ever made in a long history of wrongness. |
#104
|
|||
|
|||
The theory of gravity
In summary, Newton didn't have a theory of gravity but rather tried to reduce astronomical,its observations and insights into experimental sciences. A theory of gravity would be like Kepler's guess that implied electromagnetic forces generated by rotation of larger objects imparts orbital motion on smaller objects -
"The Sun and the Earth rotate on their own axes...The purpose of this motion is to confer motion on the planets located around them;on the six primary planets in the case of the Sun,and on the moon in the case of the Earth.On the other hand the moon does not rotate on the axis of its own body,as its spots prove " Kepler This notion survived in Royal Society circles until Newton's notion suffocated the approach although I believe Nicolas Tesla went back to considering electromagnetic influences on orbital motion. For my part I too am free to speculate as normally it is no harm and separate to my inputs into astronomy and besides, I mentioned it more than a few times throughout the few decades. The Sun has a forward motion through space as the solar system and the other stars move in a Galactic orbital circle.. It means the planets spend half their time travelling with the central Sun in that Galactic orbital motion and half their orbit travelling in the opposite direction. As orbital speeds increase closer to the Sun, the planets speed up as they are constantly deflected due to the forward orbital motion of the Sun . In other words the variable orbital speed of the Earth and other planets is a combination of heliocentric orbital motion and galactic orbital motion. It doesn't matter if it is correct or not however it does take in a wider view . The sheer volume of data over the last 50 years should have inspired individuals to actually consider the variable speeds of the planets in terms of magnetism rather than the abysmal idea that planet motions equates directly to a falling apple and the awful attempt to make predictive astronomy mesh with predictive experimentation. |
#105
|
|||
|
|||
The theory of gravity
On Monday, July 31, 2017 at 11:24:00 AM UTC-7, Gerald Kelleher wrote:
"The Sun and the Earth rotate on their own axes...The purpose of this motion is to confer motion on the planets located around them;on the six primary planets in the case of the Sun,and on the moon in the case of the Earth.On the other hand the moon does not rotate on the axis of its own body,as its spots prove " Kepler Kepler, of course, was later proven wrong about his assessment of the moon's lack of apparent rotation. The moon is tidally coupled to the Earth's own rotation, which means that its orbital and rotational motions are essentially equal. Of course, you will become enraged by such heresy, but nevertheless it is the case. “The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson |
#106
|
|||
|
|||
The theory of gravity
On Monday, July 31, 2017 at 8:03:05 PM UTC+1, palsing
There is no right or wrong, there is just the spirit to enjoy the spectacle and all that is gained for people who love astronomy and not merely their own pictures. https://stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov/img/total_lg.gif For once the Earth returns the favor of illuminating the side of the moon that offers the romantic spectacle on the full moon where the same craters that are lit up by the Sun become visible by the reflected light of our own planet. https://www.mythicalireland.com/anci...toneillust.gif Over 5200 years ago they understood the principle of the moon lost in the glare of the Sun for a few days and no doubt it had the created the same awe that the upcoming eclipse will on today's viewers. The solar eclipse is a miracle as it breaks the normal hard shell of familiarity where you have lost the sense of wonder of creation. I find it every day in what I do and see in walks or in the imaging provided by the big telescopes or efforts of astrophotographers. |
#107
|
|||
|
|||
The theory of gravity
On Monday, July 31, 2017 at 12:24:00 PM UTC-6, Gerald Kelleher wrote:
In summary, Newton didn't have a theory of gravity but rather tried to reduce astronomical,its observations and insights into experimental sciences. He didn't just try. He succeeded. John Savard |
#108
|
|||
|
|||
The theory of gravity
I am looking at the other thread of the astrophotographer and there isn't the slightest hint of describing the moon's orbital motion in terms of a Sun centered structure nor the positions of the three celestial bodies in relation to each other. In this case I marvel at the reflected light of the Earth on the moon's surface as the fully illuminated face of the Earth stands directly against the fully dark face of the moon at the moment of the eclipse -
https://stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov/img/total_lg.gif There is some joy in being able to reason why the same face of the moon can be seen on the eclipse much like it is seen each full moon with the difference between reflected light of the Earth for the former and direct radiation from the Sun for the latter. |
#109
|
|||
|
|||
The theory of gravity
On Monday, July 31, 2017 at 8:03:05 PM UTC+1, palsing wrote:
On Monday, July 31, 2017 at 11:24:00 AM UTC-7, Gerald Kelleher wrote: "The Sun and the Earth rotate on their own axes...The purpose of this motion is to confer motion on the planets located around them;on the six primary planets in the case of the Sun,and on the moon in the case of the Earth.On the other hand the moon does not rotate on the axis of its own body,as its spots prove " Kepler Kepler, of course, was later proven wrong about his assessment of the moon's lack of apparent rotation. The moon is tidally coupled to the Earth's own rotation, which means that its orbital and rotational motions are essentially equal. Of course, you will become enraged by such heresy, but nevertheless it is the case. The moon orbiting the Earth is no different than a car circling a traffic roundabout where one side of the car always faces the roundabout while the other side faces away .This scales up to the moon orbiting the Earth and spectacular on the solar eclipse - https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/000...endler_big.jpg https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/f...ght_corona.jpg Anyone can declare -beautiful,fantastic,amazing at the image of the moon in the other thread but these are empty words among people who never followed the understanding of the original Sun centered astronomers or indeed the ancient astronomers who were aware the moon orbiting the Earth. I don't mind what you inflict upon yourselves but it is criminally unjust to prevent the wider population from appreciating these facets of the eclipse event. |
#110
|
|||
|
|||
The theory of gravity
On Tuesday, August 1, 2017 at 1:54:41 PM UTC-6, Gerald Kelleher wrote:
The moon orbiting the Earth is no different than a car circling a traffic roundabout where one side of the car always faces the roundabout while the other side faces away. In one way that's true, that is a good general analogy to its motion. And it's true we don't say that a car on such a roundabout is spinning; it is merely being driven in a circular path - just as the Moon goes along its orbit, which is a (nearly) circular path. So why do we perversely say that the Moon rotates on its axis? When we don't say a car on a roundabout is doing any such thing? Well, for one thing, the Moon doesn't have *tires*. To move in its orbit around the Earth, it isn't... touching anything. It isn't held or grasped by anything. Not in a way that rigidly constrains which way it faces - it is free to rotate, just as the Earth, orbiting the Sun, is able to have a 24 hour day. And because the Moon's orbit is elliptical, we sometimes see a little extra of the Moon on the right or left side - libration - because the Moon doesn't always face in exactly the same way towards Earth all the time. Instead, its relationship to the stars proceeds *uniformly* by mechanical clock time, with the same *average period* as its orbit around the Earth. So it faces to the Earth, but it wiggles because its orbit isn't a perfect circle but an ellipse instead. This is why we judge the Moon's rotation (or lack thereof) in relation to the stars and not in relation to the Earth. In relation to the stars, it rotates once in about 27 1/3 days. Giving phases in 29 1/2 days, and giving a situation where one side always faces the Earth. What takes place at a constant rate by mechanical time is possibly a simple motion; that which slows down and speeds up is a compound motion. The Moon's libration and the Equation of Time for the solar day show that rotation with respect to a primary is compound, not fundamental - just as retrogrades showed Copernicus that the fundamental motions of the planets are around the Sun, not the Earth. John Savard |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) and Doppler Theory of Gravity (DTG) | kenseto[_1_] | Astronomy Misc | 159 | March 17th 11 08:50 PM |
Tesla's Dynamic Theory of Gravity: Gravity Is a Downward Push! | Double-A[_3_] | Misc | 10 | June 9th 10 06:29 PM |
Improved Relativity Theory and Doppler Theory of Gravity | kenseto[_1_] | Astronomy Misc | 38 | October 23rd 07 11:07 PM |
Dark energy, gravity, gravity pressure, gravity bubbles, a theory | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | January 4th 07 12:03 AM |
NASA Gravity Probe B Mission, Testing Einstein's Theory of Gravity Completes First Year in Space | Jacques van Oene | News | 0 | May 4th 05 10:07 PM |