The trouble with 'quadrature'

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 6:25:20 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote:

Call yourselves astronomers if that is what you want but at least teach these people who show up at these star parties how to use the moon's phases to designate its orbital position around the Earth with a planetary equivalent as Venus will show its half phase at the greatest distance from the Sun and that means like this -

http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cms/cpg...longationB.jpg

No, this graphic absolutely does not show Venus (or Mercury) at its greatest elongation, this graphic is fatally flawed... this only shows those planets at their quadrature... NOT THE SAME THING.

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 6:43:26 PM UTC-8, palsing wrote:
On Sunday, December 14, 2014 6:25:20 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote:

Call yourselves astronomers if that is what you want but at least teach these people who show up at these star parties how to use the moon's phases to designate its orbital position around the Earth with a planetary equivalent as Venus will show its half phase at the greatest distance from the Sun and that means like this -

http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cms/cpg...longationB.jpg

No, this graphic absolutely does not show Venus (or Mercury) at its greatest elongation, this graphic is fatally flawed... this only shows those planets at their quadrature... NOT THE SAME THING.

Give yourselves awards and tell the entire world you are astronomers but geometry always is the final abitrar between fraudulent/cult behavior and genuine astronomy.

The maximum distance between Venus and the central Sun,and observed from a moving Earth, is when it is at half light/ half dark phase and that alone makes you an astronomer otherwise it is all damage and chaos.

The great astronomers just did not have the visual tools to bridge the difference between inner and outer planetary perspectives hence the less productive use of elongation but with phases dictating the conclusion it is right and just to modify the older perspectives to 21st century views.

Astronomers indeed !.basically a life lived like a cruel joke.

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 8:23:10 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote:
On Sunday, December 14, 2014 6:43:26 PM UTC-8, palsing wrote:
On Sunday, December 14, 2014 6:25:20 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote:

Call yourselves astronomers if that is what you want but at least teach these people who show up at these star parties how to use the moon's phases to designate its orbital position around the Earth with a planetary equivalent as Venus will show its half phase at the greatest distance from the Sun and that means like this -

http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cms/cpg...longationB.jpg

No, this graphic absolutely does not show Venus (or Mercury) at its greatest elongation, this graphic is fatally flawed... this only shows those planets at their quadrature... NOT THE SAME THING.

Give yourselves awards and tell the entire world you are astronomers but geometry always is the final abitrar between fraudulent/cult behavior and genuine astronomy.

The maximum distance between Venus and the central Sun,and observed from a moving Earth, is when it is at half light/ half dark phase and that alone makes you an astronomer otherwise it is all damage and chaos.

Exactly correct. Exactly. Half light/ half dark is the moment of greatest elongation.

The great astronomers just did not have the visual tools to bridge the difference between inner and outer planetary perspectives hence the less productive use of elongation but with phases dictating the conclusion it is right and just to modify the older perspectives to 21st century views.

However, you are not using those visual tools correctly. CLEARLY, if you are viewing Venus in the night sky and exactly half the planet is illuminated and half is not, the the Sun must be exactly at a right angle to the Sun, as seen from Earth. Otherwise, you would NOT see exactly half the planet in light and half in dark.

So, just which of your very own graphics shows an arrangement that has a 90-degree angle from the Earth to Venus to the Sun?

This one? http://themcclungs.net/astronomy/images/gelongation.gif

Or, this one? ttp://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cms/cpg15x/albums/userpics/elongationB.jpg

Astronomers indeed !.basically a life lived like a cruel joke.

Indeed!

On Sunday, December 14, 2014 8:48:06 PM UTC-8, palsing wrote:
On Sunday, December 14, 2014 8:23:10 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote:
On Sunday, December 14, 2014 6:43:26 PM UTC-8, palsing wrote:
On Sunday, December 14, 2014 6:25:20 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote:

Call yourselves astronomers if that is what you want but at least teach these people who show up at these star parties how to use the moon's phases to designate its orbital position around the Earth with a planetary equivalent as Venus will show its half phase at the greatest distance from the Sun and that means like this -

http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cms/cpg...ongationB..jpg

No, this graphic absolutely does not show Venus (or Mercury) at its greatest elongation, this graphic is fatally flawed... this only shows those planets at their quadrature... NOT THE SAME THING.

Give yourselves awards and tell the entire world you are astronomers but geometry always is the final abitrar between fraudulent/cult behavior and genuine astronomy.

The maximum distance between Venus and the central Sun,and observed from a moving Earth, is when it is at half light/ half dark phase and that alone makes you an astronomer otherwise it is all damage and chaos.

Exactly correct. Exactly. Half light/ half dark is the moment of greatest elongation.


The half light/half dark phase is created by a tangent between the faster moving Venus and the slower moving Earth with the central Sun creating the pivot angle of 90 Degrees designating the widest point between Venus and the Sun -

http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cms/cpg...longationB.jpg

http://astrobob.areavoices.com/files...1-1024x707.jpg

The original heliocentric astronomers used relative motions between the Earth and inner planets with a right angle triangle centered on the planet -

http://www.wadhurstastro.co.uk/was20...s/image014.jpg

I did use the wrong graphic previously so you are excused therefore this time the second graphic above reflects the original view of Copernicus and the one that requires modification -

http://www.webexhibits.org/calendars...opernicus.html

The rule is that Venus is at its widest point from the Sun when seen from Earth at half light/half dark phase when its is tangential to the Sun/Earth line with the Sun as the central reference for increasing and diminishing angles.

On Monday, December 15, 2014 3:43:20 AM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote:

The rule is that Venus is at its widest point from the Sun when seen from Earth at half light/half dark phase when its is tangential to the Sun/Earth line with the Sun as the central reference for increasing and diminishing angles.

You better go look up the definition of 'tangent', because you are completely misusing it in your ramblings. Trust me, Venus can not be tangential to the Sun-Earth line unless it in front of the Sun or behind the Sun.

You really have no clue...

At what point do observers gain the perspective where they see the motions of the inner planets around the Sun with the distinctive complete set of phases to help the observer appreciate where that planet is in respect to our orbital position ?.

The narrative is already present in the form of phases and in some places they take the common sense view that Venus is at right angles to the Earth using the central Sun as a reference when it is at half light/half dark phase at its widest point.

http://astrobob.areavoices.com/files...1-1024x707.jpg

The Earth's orbital input is setting up the Sun as a central reference hence the departure from the original heliocentric perspective that the observed retrograde motion of Venus is based on relative speeds as with the outer planets -

"For here one may understand, by attentive observation, why Jupiter appears to have a larger progression and retrogression than Saturn, and smaller than Mars, and again why Venus has larger ones than Mercury; why such a doubling back appears more frequently in Saturn than in Jupiter, and still more rarely in Mars and Venus than in Mercury; and furthermore why Saturn, Jupiter and Mars are nearer to the Earth when in opposition than in the region of their occultations by the Sun and re-appearance . . . . All these phenomena proceed from the same cause, which lies in the motion of the Earth." De Revolutionibus

I am certain observers already know the necessary of partitioning between inner and outer planets along perspective lines,if not by retrogrades then phase changes,luminosity variations and all those things that make a telescope so useful.

On Monday, December 15, 2014 3:26:53 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote:

The narrative is already present in the form of phases and in some places they take the common sense view that Venus is at right angles to the Earth using the central Sun as a reference when it is at half light/half dark phase at its widest point.

http://astrobob.areavoices.com/files...1-1024x707.jpg

That graphic, while essentially correct, is very misleading when trying to determine Venus' greatest elongation as seen from the surface of the Earth. In order to see Venus exactly 1/2 illuminated, in that graphic you would need to be standing about where that right-hand arrow is located, about where the words 'morning sky' are printed. The line from the Earth to Venus and the line from Venus to the Sun must be at 90-degrees, otherwise we wouldn't see exactly 1/2 of Venus. In order to be drawn correctly, that graphic should really be showing a little more than half of Venus, since it is really showing quadrature, where the 90-degree angle goes from Earth to the Sun and then to Venus.

You have already shown the correct graphics for greatest elongation, here....

http://www.wadhurstastro.co.uk/was20...s/image014.jpg and here....

http://themcclungs.net/astronomy/images/gelongation.gif

.... why do you reject them now? did you read this...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elongation_(astronomy)

.... where it is pretty clear, and says... "In astronomy, a planet's elongation is the angle between the Sun and the planet, with Earth as the reference point. The greatest elongation of a given planet occurs when this inner planet's position, in its orbital path to the Sun, is at tangent to the observer on Earth."

You don't get to modify these definitions, and why would you want to do so?

There is a procedure which alters the original conception that inner planetary retrogrades are bundled with outer planetary retrogrades based on the same type of relative motions.

The largest single input into inner planetary retrogrades is the setting up of the central Sun as a fixed reference for the observed motion of the inner planets by using the apparent motion of the stars behind the Sun in sequence due to the orbital motion of the Earth -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeQwYrfmvoQ

This maintains the fixed Sun/Earth line whereby the faster moving Venus and Mercury can be gauged as they swing out from behind and in front of the Sun with particularly the phases,luminosity variations and size increase of Venus as supplementary information as a means to partition inner and outer planetary motions by perspective as opposed to the bundled view of the original heliocentric astronomers.

I would have expected the diploma and degree paper mill academics to distance themselves from the intricate reasoning that goes into this topic but I am disappointed that those who have no financial or reputation stake in the matter are not adopting the principles in either general terms or in detail. The artistic renditions of the graceful arc of Venus and its phases already are present with the additions showing the Earth's orbital input makiing it an entire narrative to follow.

On 16/12/2014 00:31, palsing wrote:
On Monday, December 15, 2014 3:26:53 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote:

The narrative is already present in the form of phases and in some places they take the common sense view that Venus is at right angles to the Earth using the central Sun as a reference when it is at half light/half dark phase at its widest point.

http://astrobob.areavoices.com/files...1-1024x707.jpg

That graphic, while essentially correct, is very misleading when trying to determine Venus' greatest elongation as seen from the surface of the Earth.

I would go so far as to say it is flat out *WRONG* as it implies the
angle Earth-Sun-Venus is 90 degrees for Venus to be half illuminated.

That is flat out wrong and may explain why Oriface has so much
difficulty understanding modern astronomy. If you rely on badly drawn
diagrams by other clueless cranks then the result is total confusion.

In order to see Venus exactly 1/2 illuminated, in that graphic you would need to be standing about where that right-hand arrow is located, about where the words 'morning sky' are printed. The line from the Earth to Venus and the line from Venus to the Sun must be at 90-degrees, otherwise we wouldn't see exactly 1/2 of Venus. In order to be drawn correctly, that graphic should really be showing a little more than half of Venus, since it is really showing quadrature, where the 90-degree angle goes from Earth to the Sun and then to Venus.

Correct! To see Venus half illuminated the Earth has to be in the plane
of the terminator on Venus and then Venus is at maximum elongation. This
quadrature occurs when the angle Earth-VENUS-Sun is 90 degrees.

It should be obvious even for a clueless muppet like Oriface that this
can easily be demonstrated with a standard lamp and a globe.

You have already shown the correct graphics for greatest elongation, here...

http://www.wadhurstastro.co.uk/was20...s/image014.jpg and here...

http://themcclungs.net/astronomy/images/gelongation.gif

... why do you reject them now? did you read this...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elongation_(astronomy)

... where it is pretty clear, and says... "In astronomy, a planet's elongation is the angle between the Sun and the planet, with Earth as the reference point. The greatest elongation of a given planet occurs when this inner planet's position, in its orbital path to the Sun, is at tangent to the observer on Earth."

You don't get to modify these definitions, and why would you want to do so?

Because he is entirely clueless.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On Tuesday, December 16, 2014 12:54:17 AM UTC-8, Martin Brown wrote:
On 16/12/2014 00:31, palsing wrote:

http://astrobob.areavoices.com/files...1-1024x707.jpg

That graphic, while essentially correct, is very misleading when trying to determine Venus' greatest elongation as seen from the surface of the Earth.

I would go so far as to say it is flat out *WRONG* as it implies the
angle Earth-Sun-Venus is 90 degrees for Venus to be half illuminated.

That is flat out wrong and may explain why Oriface has so much
difficulty understanding modern astronomy. If you rely on badly drawn
diagrams by other clueless cranks then the result is total confusion.

It is flat out wrong if it thinks it is showing greatest elongation, but it is not wrong otherwise because, well, the Sun has no choice but to illuminate only half of Venus 100% of the time! How much or how little of that illuminated disk you can see depends entirely on just where you are standing at the time... and, of course, when the angle Earth-Sun-Venus is 90 degrees, we would NOT see an equally divided disk of Venus, but rather a somewhat gibbous Venus.

\Paul A