Proof of the Earth's Rotundity

On Wednesday, October 22, 2014 2:26:18 PM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:
Read it, the whole lot of you and if you don't feel ashamed then you are not really living -

" During one orbit around the Sun, the Earth rotates about its own axis 366.26 times, creating 365.26 solar days "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth

There is no excuse whatsoever,in the entire vastness of space and all that is in it and people would choose to do this !.

Well, perspective is everything, and you have none whatsoever... too bad, because this is a very simple concept to understand. Why else would the entire world disagree with you?

On Wednesday, October 22, 2014 10:35:05 PM UTC+1, palsing wrote:
On Wednesday, October 22, 2014 2:26:18 PM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:
Read it, the whole lot of you and if you don't feel ashamed then you are not really living -

" During one orbit around the Sun, the Earth rotates about its own axis 366.26 times, creating 365.26 solar days "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth

There is no excuse whatsoever,in the entire vastness of space and all that is in it and people would choose to do this !.

Well, perspective is everything, and you have none whatsoever... too bad, because this is a very simple concept to understand. Why else would the entire world disagree with you?

When you believe that the Earth turns 1465 times in 1461 days you are solely lacking in sanity much less common sense.

That article is the central description of the Earth in Wikipedia and it is as though it could be found to be acceptable !. Even allowing that people can't feel their way through some of the more intricate aspects of the Earth's motions and their effects on terrestrial sciences there is no way upon this great planet that people could knowingly imagine more rotations than sunrises and sunsets .

Read it again -

" During one orbit around the Sun, the Earth rotates about its own axis 366..26 times, creating 365.26 solar days " Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth

An act of cruelty cannot be answered by another act of cruelty so if you all choose to believe the Earth isn't round using a proof based on latitudinal speeds then so be it but what a tragedy like no other.

On Wednesday, October 22, 2014 2:46:53 PM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:

Read it again -

" During one orbit around the Sun, the Earth rotates about its own axis 366.26 times, creating 365.26 solar days " Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth

The really sad thing here is that 100% of all the world's astronomers know this is true and can explain it in a few short minutes to small children. It appears that you can't compete in the brains department with even small children. I suggest you find a simpler hobby, this one is way too complicated for you.

On Thursday, October 23, 2014 1:42:36 AM UTC+1, palsing wrote:
On Wednesday, October 22, 2014 2:46:53 PM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:

Read it again -

" During one orbit around the Sun, the Earth rotates about its own axis 366.26 times, creating 365.26 solar days " Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth

The really sad thing here is that 100% of all the world's astronomers know this is true and can explain it in a few short minutes to small children.

You can spell the word 'sad' but ,like most here, you don't have a sense of what joy nor sadness is and that is why intelligence without inspiration can lead to destructive consequences. Who gets a sense of delight with the purpose of February 29th as one day and one rotation that corresponds to that orbital distance the Earth travels to return roughly to the same point 4 circuits earlier ?.

The question of the Earth's Equatorial speed is enough to bring the 24 hour system and the Lat/Long system into focus along with the first principles of cyclical dynamics and timekeeping in that the Earth turns 1461 times in proportion to 4 annual circuits which reduces to 365 1/4 rotations to 1 circuit.

What keeps me going in an era exclusively lost to false and distorted empirical ideologies is the enjoyment of how astronomers once thought even though some of their ideas need updating and modifying.. It is also that any single individual here can add to astronomy and make it delightful and stable once more because when a person's judgment is so tarnished to the point where not even proof of a round Earth can be discussed then you all know where you stand as individuals or as a community.

On Wednesday, October 22, 2014 3:48:44 AM UTC-6, oriel36 wrote:
the average 24 hour day substitutes for constant rotation at a rate of 15
degrees per hour by virtue of that neat ability to swap 'average' with
'constant' via the Lat/Long system.

Well, yes, one can ignore the Equation of Time, and just think in terms of the
24 hour day to understand time zones and the like.

But if you want to avoid fuzzing over the details by treating the average as
though it were constant, but instead explain the actual motions in detail, then
you need to understand the causes of the Equation of Time - that takes a clear
understanding of the actual mathematics, and knowing that the Earth rotates in
a constant 23 hours, 56 minutes, and 4 seconds against the (approximately!)
fixed stars _then_ becomes relevant.

You want astronomy to remain simply an inspirational pastime, with a "thus far
and no further" to serious investigation of planetary motions. We would never
have discovered Neptune listening to people like you.

John Savard

On Thursday, October 23, 2014 2:34:31 PM UTC-6, Lord Androcles wrote:
"Quadibloc" wrote in message
...

We would
never
have discovered Neptune listening to people like you.

Funny, I don't recall seeing "Savard" as a co-discoverer of Neptune in any
1846 newspaper. Perhaps one need to be a pompous arsehole to belong to "we".

It should have been obvious from context that I was not employing the royal "we", but instead "we" meant the human race as a whole.

John Savard

I marvel at modern advancements and have every reason to after having my spine put back together last year by surgeons yet amid all these great wonders is this incredibly crude ideology which positively refuses to believe the Earth's 24901 mile circumferences turns once in 24 hours or at an Equatorial speed of 1037.5 miles per hour.

The same rubbish which cannot affirm a round Earth through its latitudinal speeds is the same one that imagines that there are more rotation than sunrises and sunsets within an orbital circuit -

" During one orbit around the Sun, the Earth rotates about its own axis 366..26 times, creating 365.26 solar days " Main Earth article in Wikipedia

The calendar,in dynamical terms , represents the number of rotations within an orbital circuit with the Gregorian reform representing that although the leap day rotation returns the Earth back roughly to the same position in space within an 4 annul circuit framework of 365 days and rotations, it is not exact hence a further refinement within the structure. It took certain nations hundreds of years to adopt the necessary Gregorian refinement so historically it is possible to see why the necessary corrections and modifications won't be made easily today.

The last thing I would wish to do is start talking about a type of slavery that chains people to ideas where even the proof of a round Earth is denied for exceptionally poor reasoning using watches however freedom from this slavery does require effort and sacrifice among those who see why astronomy robbed of its spirit is a weapon for self-serving ends rather than a way to appreciate the relationship between the individual and the Universal.

On 10/23/14 12:43, Lord Androcles wrote:


"Quadibloc" wrote in message
...
You want astronomy to remain simply an inspirational pastime, with a
"thus far
and no further" to serious investigation of planetary motions. We would
never
have discovered Neptune listening to people like you.

John Savard

================================================== =============
Funny, I don't recall seeing "Savard" as a co-discoverer of Neptune in
any 1846 newspaper. Perhaps one need to be a pompous arsehole to belong
to "we".

Neptune would have been swept up by the Bonner Durchmusterung in the
1850s, although they might have mistaken it for a star. Certainly a
comparison of the BD to the plates of the Astrographic Catalogue
(difficult but not impossible in the 1890s) would have done the trick.
In other words, its discovery would have been like that of Uranus.

BTW, I can claim to be a co-discoverer of Neptune in a strange sort of
way. A few years ago I took a few exposures of Neptune (and Triton) and
submitted the astrometry to the Minor Planet Center along with all my
other asteroid observations that night -- and the MPC gave Neptune a
provisional designation! Gareth and I had a good chuckle about it, and
then he went off and upgraded the software so it wouldn't happen again.

-- Bill

On Friday, October 24, 2014 5:01:03 PM UTC+1, Bill Owen wrote:
On 10/23/14 12:43, Lord Androcles wrote:


"Quadibloc" wrote in message
...
You want astronomy to remain simply an inspirational pastime, with a
"thus far
and no further" to serious investigation of planetary motions. We would
never
have discovered Neptune listening to people like you.

John Savard

================================================== =============
Funny, I don't recall seeing "Savard" as a co-discoverer of Neptune in
any 1846 newspaper. Perhaps one need to be a pompous arsehole to belong
to "we".

Neptune would have been swept up by the Bonner Durchmusterung in the
1850s, although they might have mistaken it for a star. Certainly a
comparison of the BD to the plates of the Astrographic Catalogue
(difficult but not impossible in the 1890s) would have done the trick.
In other words, its discovery would have been like that of Uranus.

BTW, I can claim to be a co-discoverer of Neptune in a strange sort of
way. A few years ago I took a few exposures of Neptune (and Triton) and
submitted the astrometry to the Minor Planet Center along with all my
other asteroid observations that night -- and the MPC gave Neptune a
provisional designation! Gareth and I had a good chuckle about it, and
then he went off and upgraded the software so it wouldn't happen again.

-- Bill

You have your own fiction creation machine over there at NASA Bill as they conjure up an idea of the Earth's motions as seen from Mars that just doesn't happen -

http://mars.nasa.gov/allaboutmars/nightsky/retrograde/

So what you do Bill is knock on the door of these guys and show them a simple visual narrative of the Earth's motions as seen from Mars based on the orbital motion of Venus as seen from Earth -

http://artsandstars.ens-lyon.fr/venu...es.png?lang=en

http://www.halien.com/TAS/Gallery/planet/Venus02.jpg

You see how easy it is to impress people with a proper use of the imagination as opposed to sending them in the wrong direction as your organization would have it so go impress your colleagues using proper perspectives whether it is the traits of the Earth as we stand upon it or see it from another planet. I can't invite you to the place where I do my work for it occurs within the internet as a tool rather than a location such as yours at JPL.

oriel36 wrote:
On Friday, October 24, 2014 5:01:03 PM UTC+1, Bill Owen wrote:
On 10/23/14 12:43, Lord Androcles wrote:


"Quadibloc" wrote in message
...
You want astronomy to remain simply an inspirational pastime, with a
"thus far
and no further" to serious investigation of planetary motions. We would
never
have discovered Neptune listening to people like you.

John Savard

================================================== ============
Funny, I don't recall seeing "Savard" as a co-discoverer of Neptune in
any 1846 newspaper. Perhaps one need to be a pompous arsehole to belong
to "we".

Neptune would have been swept up by the Bonner Durchmusterung in the
1850s, although they might have mistaken it for a star. Certainly a
comparison of the BD to the plates of the Astrographic Catalogue
(difficult but not impossible in the 1890s) would have done the trick.
In other words, its discovery would have been like that of Uranus.

BTW, I can claim to be a co-discoverer of Neptune in a strange sort of
way. A few years ago I took a few exposures of Neptune (and Triton) and
submitted the astrometry to the Minor Planet Center along with all my
other asteroid observations that night -- and the MPC gave Neptune a
provisional designation! Gareth and I had a good chuckle about it, and
then he went off and upgraded the software so it wouldn't happen again.

-- Bill

You have your own fiction creation machine over there at NASA Bill as
they conjure up an idea of the Earth's motions as seen from Mars that just doesn't happen -

http://mars.nasa.gov/allaboutmars/nightsky/retrograde/


NASA assume that people are able to interpret images. The animations shows
Mars in the night sky from Gale Crater but to simplify the image they
didn't include the Sun or other visible planets assuming that interested
viewers would have the sense to realise this.

Here is an animation to show you what really happened in 2003.
I have used frames about seven Earth days apart and kept the altitude of
the Sun at 30 degrees and the view due west.

http://youtu.be/BVr0qmiuaZU


So what you do Bill is knock on the door of these guys and show them a
simple visual narrative of the Earth's motions as seen from Mars based on
the orbital motion of Venus as seen from Earth -

http://artsandstars.ens-lyon.fr/venu...es.png?lang=en

http://www.halien.com/TAS/Gallery/planet/Venus02.jpg

You see how easy it is to impress people with a proper use of the
imagination as opposed to sending them in the wrong direction as your
organization would have it so go impress your colleagues using proper
perspectives whether it is the traits of the Earth as we stand upon it or
see it from another planet. I can't invite you to the place where I do my
work for it occurs within the internet as a tool rather than a location
such as yours at JPL.