...What do YOU care about?

On Jan 28, 9:42 pm, Pat Flannery wrote:
Pascal Bourguignon wrote:

A star? Well, not ALL stars! There's at least one star that returns
to the same appearent position every 24 hours.

Which, when it comes down to it in real life is by far the most
important one to be concerned with.
But you're about to get jumped on for the fact that it doesn't return to
its exact same position every twenty four hours.
I don't know what exactly this guy is driving at, but whatever it is,
it's something of pretty minor import that he's totally fixated on, like
saying that Newton's laws of motion aren't right, and we should start
considering Einsteinian time dilation when we tell people that we are
going to drive over to their house at 3 PM, as our velocity in the
vehicle while driving means that our time frame and their time frame are
now slightly out of sync on arrival.
Anyway this is getting really pedantic now, but I should have realized
that something that started off as a discussion of The Book Of Job was
almost bound to be painfully trying in the end. :-)

I love the fact that you and your colleagues believe the Earth rotates
through 360 degrees in 23 hours 56 minutes 04 seconds or rather than
you justify the axial rotation of the Earth using the return of a star
to a location in that time.

People would refuse to beleive that guys who call themselves
'scientists' would actually justify the Earth's motions based on a
1461 day calendrical cycle split into 3 years of 365 days and 1 year
of 366 days.

You think it is a minor thing don't you,you think that not getting the
most fundamental coirrelation in all astronomy correct is an
inconsequential thing.I assure you that there is only one correct
value for axial rotation and how clocks keep pace with that and that
is exactly 4 minutes for each degree of rotation.

All that relativity and Newton's mechanic stuff as applied to
astronomy,it has all the symptoms of people who have basic problems
with the 24 hour day and natural/celestial phenomena.How does it feel
to be on the same level as the creationists and all wrapped up in a
neat figure of 23 hours 56 minutes 04 seconds of celestial sphere
geometry.











Pat

On Jan 28, 9:42 pm, Pat Flannery wrote:
Pascal Bourguignon wrote:

A star? Well, not ALL stars! There's at least one star that returns
to the same appearent position every 24 hours.

Which, when it comes down to it in real life is by far the most
important one to be concerned with.
But you're about to get jumped on for the fact that it doesn't return to
its exact same position every twenty four hours.
I don't know what exactly this guy is driving at, but whatever it is,
it's something of pretty minor import that he's totally fixated on, like
saying that Newton's laws of motion aren't right, and we should start
considering Einsteinian time dilation when we tell people that we are
going to drive over to their house at 3 PM, as our velocity in the
vehicle while driving means that our time frame and their time frame are
now slightly out of sync on arrival.
Anyway this is getting really pedantic now, but I should have realized
that something that started off as a discussion of The Book Of Job was
almost bound to be painfully trying in the end. :-)

I love the fact that you and your colleagues believe the Earth rotates
through 360 degrees in 23 hours 56 minutes 04 seconds or rather than
you justify the axial rotation of the Earth using the return of a star
to a location in that time.

People would refuse to beleive that guys who call themselves
'scientists' would actually justify the Earth's motions based on a
1461 day calendrical cycle split into 3 years of 365 days and 1 year
of 366 days.

You think it is a minor thing don't you,you think that not getting the
most fundamental coirrelation in all astronomy correct is an
inconsequential thing.I assure you that there is only one correct
value for axial rotation and how clocks keep pace with that and that
is exactly 4 minutes for each degree of rotation.

All that relativity and Newton's mechanic stuff as applied to
astronomy,it has all the symptoms of people who have basic problems
with the 24 hour day and natural/celestial phenomena.How does it feel
to be on the same level as the creationists and all wrapped up in a
neat figure of 23 hours 56 minutes 04 seconds of celestial sphere
geometry.











Pat

On Jan 29, 11:54 pm, "Scott Hedrick"
wrote:
"Pat Flannery" wrote in message

...

So in short... you want us to return to a geocentric concept of the
universe?

Pat- we *are* at the center of the known universe.

Not exactly true as we don't have galaxy super clusters wherever we
look.

On 30 Jan 2007 14:13:02 -0800, "Eric Chomko"
wrote:

On Jan 29, 11:54 pm, "Scott Hedrick"
wrote:
"Pat Flannery" wrote in message

...

So in short... you want us to return to a geocentric concept of the
universe?

Pat- we *are* at the center of the known universe.

Not exactly true as we don't have galaxy super clusters wherever we
look.


That's because they only hang out at the hippest locales.
--
"How 'bout cuttin' that rebop?"
-- S. Kowalski

On Jan 30, 11:13 pm, "Eric Chomko" wrote:
On Jan 29, 11:54 pm, "Scott Hedrick"
wrote:

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message

...

So in short... you want us to return to a geocentric concept of the
universe?

Pat- we *are* at the center of the known universe.

Not exactly true as we don't have galaxy super clusters wherever we
look.

You imagine that not knowing the correct correlation between axial
rotation and clocks at 15 degrees per hour is an inconsequential thing
but it is like a cancer that rapidly spreads until you can't do
anything but watch as your concepts buckle

"Absolute time, in astronomy, is distinguished from relative, by the
equation or
correlation of the vulgar time. For the natural days are truly
unequal, though they are commonly considered as equal and used for a
measure of time; astronomers correct this inequality for their more
accurate deducing of the celestial motions".Newton

The Equation of Time equalises the global Total length of the natural
variations in a day,using noon as a gauge,to an equable 24 hour day
hence the distinctions above are correct,at least in terms of what the
Equation of Time is and what is does.In its heliocentric adaption is
keeps clocks in sync with axial rotation at 4 minutes for each degree
of rotation and that is where Newton jumps the tracks,with the help of
Flamsteed.

No engineer or doctor would ever consider basing the axial and orbital
motion of the Earth on a 1461 days cycle broken into 3 sections of 365
days and 1 section of 366 days.They might recognise the convenience
but would never dream of trying to fit the axial and annual cycle into
the calendrical convenience.Yet that is exactly what happened.

You made wide and sweeping statements about the Universe but fail to
comprehend basic details about your own planet.All that relativistic
rubbish is a symptom of the Newtonian disease which tried to fit
terrestrial ballistics into planetary motion via the Ra/Dec system, a
concept that is sub-geocentric in content and character.

On Jan 28, 9:33 am, Pat Flannery wrote:
Dr J R Stockton wrote:

Obviously you did not pay adequate attention to the signature of that
article. There is no need to duplicate a News article in Mail, and it
is ill-mannered to do so without clear indication.

Oh-oh...my bad. :-[
I didn't go to that page from its homepage, but directly to it via a
Google search on "leap year", and didn't know what I'd stumbled on.
Flush out your cookies, I'll try to avoid a repeat of this in the future.
Sorry again.
You know what's causing this of course?
Kronic Karma, just like oriel36 warned me about.
By not realizing that the clocks are out of sync with the year, I have
already doomed myself into falling into a
chrono-synclastic infundibulum and ending up who knows when and where.

Pat

A decent genuine amateur astronomer could give you and the good doctor
here a lesson in what is brilliant about the astronomical timekeeping
heritage which give us the 24 hour equable day ,the seperate calendar
system and the great heliocentric adaption to axial rotation at 4
minutes for each degree.

There is no shame in existing at the level of those who have basic
problems with the 24 hour day and natural phenomena,indeed as long as
everyone is willing to go along with constellational/celestial sphere
geometry you can wax lyrical about all those ridiculous late 17th
-20th century concepts.

Seriousely ,how does it feel to get a basic fact such as the
correlation between 24 hours and axial rotation wrong ?.When you do
find out you can join the creationists who also have problems with the
24 hour day and natural pheneomena and who love nothing better than to
wax lyrical about their conceptions.

On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 17:26:19 -0700, Paul L. Madarasz
wrote:

On 30 Jan 2007 14:13:02 -0800, "Eric Chomko"
wrote:

On Jan 29, 11:54 pm, "Scott Hedrick"
wrote:
"Pat Flannery" wrote in message

...

So in short... you want us to return to a geocentric concept of the
universe?

Pat- we *are* at the center of the known universe.

Not exactly true as we don't have galaxy super clusters wherever we
look.


That's because they only hang out at the hippest locales.

We, on the other hand, live in the arm pit of a mundane galaxy.