Review of video commentary

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01QWC-rZcfE

It is quite a sight these days to see these guys try their hand at proof of the Earth's orbital motion by appealing to the changes in positions of the stars but unfortunately reference the changes from horizon to horizon instead of their transition from evening to morning appearance or more accurately, the line-of-sight perspective where they transition from left to right of the Sun. Of course they lean on old familiar ways using not only the Sun's apparent motion through the Zodiac but also frame it in RA/Dec terms where the Sun also 'wanders' with the planets.

No need to go any further and the usual attempt to explain seasonal variations in terms of 'tilt'. The planet has two distinct day/night cycles from two distinct rotational causes but the less competent bypass the Sun as a reference and appeal to a celestial sphere to draw their conclusions.

I don't mind that these guys now use proof of the Earth's orbital motion using the Sun and background stars but they are still stuck in celestial sphere mode which undoes the productive perspective and still shows they are only learning something available here for quite some time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01QWC-rZcfE

The great Christian saying for those who never met Christ in the flesh is what kindness does so it is not a dictate or a reaction against something external -

"What hast thou that thou hast not received from God? and if thou hast received it, why dost thou glory as if thou hadst not received it?"


People are now trying to explain the shift in the stars using the orbital motion of the Earth however they should take a few tips if they are going to do it without the counsel found in this forum.

From horizon to horizon is perhaps 40 miles where I live so this local patch has to make a leap to a global scale before anyone tries to make sense of the transition of the stars from left to right of the Sun or even the distance traveled by a location from when the Sun exits the circle of illumination and comes into view and re-enters the circle of illumination later as the Sun turns out of sight.

At the Equator the distance traveled by a location from exit to re-entering the circle of illumination is 12,450 miles with noon, when the location is midway to the circle of illumination, about 6,225 miles traveled. The day/rotation is anchored to noon for this reason as there is no comparable reference from twilight to dawn. The idea here is so remove the idea of the stars above and below the horizon and the transition from evening to morning appearance due solely to the Earth's orbital motion.


Everything is basically captured in the following graphic by incorporating evening/morning appearance of the planets and then applying the same principle to the background stars by using the Sun as a central reference for both -

https://www.universetoday.com/wp-con...Dec27-2013.jpg


Dawn and twilight are meant to act like daily solar eclipse effects as the distance of observer to horizon provides a sunshade to what is to the left of the Sun (twilight) and the left of the Sun (dawn). It keeps everything central and humming along rather than appealing to risings and settings about and below a local horizon.

There is no point in half learning something when a full explanation provides a much more enjoyable experience. The video tutorial was done by a guy with the help of over a dozen people in a graphics team but a composition is only as good as the composer. At least someone is coming to appreciate the outlines of what was done in this newsgroup and not for the first time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01QWC-rZcfE

The great Christian saying for those who never met Christ in the flesh is what kindness does for a person so the saying is not a dictate nor a reaction against something external -

"What hast thou that thou hast not received from God? and if thou hast received it, why dost thou glory as if thou hadst not received it?"


People are now trying to explain the shift in the stars parallel to the orbital plane using the orbital motion of the Earth however they should take a few tips if they are going to do it without the counsel found over the years in this newsgroup.

From horizon to horizon is perhaps 40 miles where I live so a person has to take a perceptual leap to transfer this local patch to a global scale before anyone tries to make sense of the transition of the stars from left to right of the Sun. it also helps understand the distance traveled by a location from when their location exits the circle of illumination and the Sun comes into view until the location re-enters the circle of illumination later as the Sun turns out of sight.

At the Equator the distance traveled by a location from exit to re-entering the circle of illumination is 12,450 miles with the noon event, when the location is midway to the circle of illumination, and has traveled 6,225 miles. The day/rotation is anchored to noon for this reason as there is no comparable reference for the rotation of the location from twilight to dawn. The idea here is so remove the idea of the stars above and below the horizon and shift the focus to the seasonal transition from evening to morning appearance of the stars due solely to the Earth's orbital motion.


Everything is basically captured in the following graphic by incorporating evening/morning appearance of the planets and then applying the same principle to the background stars by using the Sun as a central reference for both -

https://www.universetoday.com/wp-con...Dec27-2013.jpg

Venus and Mercury transition due to their own motion in both directions whereas the stars transition from left/evening to right/morning due solely to our planet's orbital motion.

Dawn and twilight are meant to act like daily solar eclipse effects as the distance of observer to horizon provides a sunshade to what is to the left of the Sun (twilight) and the right of the Sun (dawn). It keeps everything central and humming along rather than appealing to risings and settings about and below a local horizon which that video comment does.

There is no point in half learning something when a full explanation provides a much more enjoyable experience. The video tutorial was done by a guy with the help of over a dozen people in a graphics team but a composition is only as good as the composer. At least someone is coming to appreciate the outlines of what was done in this newsgroup and not for the first time.