A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Amateur Astronomy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

RIP, Stephen Hawking



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old March 15th 18, 08:40 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Gerald Kelleher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,528
Default RIP, Stephen Hawking

The story about Newton, the apple and planetary motion was a good one as it was nothing other than a scaled up notion on attraction dressed up in vague absolute/relative language. It was designed to obscure the overreaching objective of turning the celestial arena into a theoretical blackboard but presently it can't compete with the emergence of imaging, the internet and the weight of observations that can be put to creative and productive use.

You crowd remind me of the brexiteers in the ability to believe contradictory things, after all, once you recognize Sir Isaac's absolute/relative time as nothing more than the equalizing facility between variations in natural noon and the average 24 hour day you can't discuss it in any other terms and certainly not relativity. Much like Brexit there are no strong personalities or responsible people to take stock and rectify matters.













Ads
  #22  
Old March 15th 18, 09:50 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Anders Eklöf
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 98
Default RIP, Stephen Hawking

Gerald Kelleher wrote:

"entitled" - yeah right...

--



English is your second language so that is to be expected -

http://grammarist.com/usage/entitled-titled/


So I'm not entitled to comment on that :-)

I stand corrected.


--
I recommend Macs to my friends, and Windows machines
to those whom I don't mind billing by the hour
  #23  
Old March 16th 18, 05:34 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Gerald Kelleher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,528
Default RIP, Stephen Hawking

On Thursday, March 15, 2018 at 9:50:42 PM UTC, Anders Eklöf wrote:
Gerald Kelleher wrote:

"entitled" - yeah right...

--



English is your second language so that is to be expected -

http://grammarist.com/usage/entitled-titled/


So I'm not entitled to comment on that :-)

I stand corrected.


I am afraid that mob behavior doesn't entitle you to inspect the language of Newton and how he couched his agenda in language that his followers never understood. Trying to scale physics up to astrophysics as Newton attempted to do was such an overreaching thing so it was always going to have a limited shelf life regardless of the narrative that grew up around it.


Even if a new empirical icon shows up to replace Hawking, the story has become stale so the better option is to revisit the entire process by expanding astronomical history further back in time and approaching the actual problems of a Sun centered system that couldn't be resolved at the time of the Galileo affair.

I see people now manipulate imaging the same way they once manipulated language so people here have the power to prevent that from happening. Instead of the familiar 23 1/2 degree inclination, imaging is presented of the Earth presently with a zero degree inclination -

https://epic.gsfc.nasa.gov/


RIP astronomy.
  #24  
Old March 16th 18, 05:59 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Gerald Kelleher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,528
Default RIP, Stephen Hawking

On Wednesday, March 14, 2018 at 9:54:47 PM UTC, Mike Collins wrote:
Gerald Kelleher wrote:
On Wednesday, March 14, 2018 at 3:13:23 PM UTC, palsing wrote:
Gerald, must you hijack virtually every thread



I keep to my own topics by and large and it has been that way for quite some time.

Physics at an engineering level is fine but astrophysics, cosmology or
whatever buzz word attached to it nowadays always was contrived.

Timekeeping is easy enough despite the multiple reference systems used
through history but unfortunately Sir Isaac adopted the RA/Dec celestial
sphere system which tries to undermine timekeeping and the Lat/Long
system as it refers to the Earth's daily and orbital motions.

Sir Isaac was trying to bridge the gap by doing a hatchet job on the
Equation of Time by trying to define that timekeeping facility as time itself -

"Absolute time, in astronomy, is distinguished from relative, by the
equation of 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...The necessity of which equation, for determining the times of a
phænomenon, is evinced as well from the experiments of the pendulum
clock, as by eclipses of the satellites of Jupiter." Principia

I give you more than a brief history of timekeeping, I presented this
forum with a comprehensive perspective of 5 reference systems all the way
back to the creation of the calendar framework and the astronomical event
that determines it.

Unlike the originator of relativity as another outrigger of Newton's
absolute/relative 'definitions' who became acclaimed, the astrophysical
narrative is so burdened with voodoo and bluffing presently that Hawking
is only recognized for the headache inducing pronouncements about God.




Don’t forget his ground breaking collaboration with
Roger Penrose of Penrose tiling fame. Penrose seemed to have a much better
opinion of Stephen Hawking on TV today.



Despite what you may believe, I don't get any satisfaction from pointing out the fatal shortcomings in theoretical views dumped into the celestial arena as facts. The notion of a singularity was always present in a celestial sphere system just the way it is impossible for the mind to comprehend the points at the North and South poles where daily rotation ceases and direction loses all meaning.

Trying to give a singularity a physical existence as big bang/black hole is an exercise in self-deception by misusing language -

Infinite Density/Zero Volume = 0
Infinite Volume/Zero Density = 0


I found a new geometric approach which initially relies on proportions with non periodic arithmetic and bumped up to tiling patterns and eventually quasicrystals as a point of departure for considering beauty and efficiency found in all nature. It has been a private work for almost 3 decades and I still don't feel it belongs in a public forum apart from loose comments such as these.



  #25  
Old March 16th 18, 06:04 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Quadibloc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,003
Default RIP, Stephen Hawking

On Thursday, March 15, 2018 at 2:40:38 PM UTC-6, Gerald Kelleher wrote:
once you recognize Sir Isaac's absolute/relative time as nothing more than the
equalizing facility between variations in natural noon and the average 24 hour
day you can't discuss it in any other terms and certainly not relativity.


Let's try to take this one step at a time.

How can one speak of an "average 24 hour day", unless one can measure the lengths
of the 1,491 days over a four-year period, and then average those lengths?

Historically, sundials did divide the day into 24 hours before people had
pendulum clocks. There were water clocks and burning candles with graduations -
and later hourglasses - to measure uniform time, but they were not very
accurate.

But in a practical sense, if one wanted to find out how long to make a pendulum
for a clock giving the "average 24 hour day", one would have to do something
like this:

Start with a pendulum clock which tells time in some *arbitrary* unit, not
related to the calendar or the Sun at all. Then keep track of how many times the
pendulum went back and forth between, say, noon on February 29 and noon on
February 29 four years later. To ensure the count is accurate, take note of
where the hands of the clock are at intervals during this period as well,
perhaps even every day.

Perhaps the arbitrary interval chosen will be a crude approximation to the day,
so that one can meaningfully say that the pendulum clock lost 2 hours, 12
minutes, and 4 seconds over four years. And so the pendulum is adjusted
proportionately, and one now has a standard for clocks that give the average 24
hour day.

My point here is that you have claimed a wrong solution to the "chicken and the
egg" problem. Yes, sundial time long preceded average clock time. But average
clock time still had to be constructed using clock time in an independent unit
to measure sun time. So while variable sun time *historically* precedes uniform
mechanical time, uniform mechanical time still *logically* precedes sun time.

If one lived on Mars, one's sundials would undergo an Equation of Time that
oscillated with a period of one *Martian* year, which is about two Earth years.
Uniform clock time is shared between Earth and Mars, sun time is unique to each
planet.

So clock time, although the _size of its unit_ is derived from an average of
solar days, is much more than a derived equalization; it is fundamental. It is
the ground on which motion and action can be described and measured.

And now that we have said that time is not allowed to vary with the Sun, are we
"certainly" unable to accept that something else, after all, can cause it to
vary? Must we reject Einstein's "Theory of Relativity"?

Well, when he first came out with it, a lot of scientists were quite
uncomfortable with such a radical notion. But we don't have the choice of
rejecting it; it's proven by experiment. And, while it does add a complication,
the complication it adds is a necessary one *when it is relevant*, and it can be
ignored otherwise.

You would burden us with an unnecessary and irrelevant complication that cancels
out anyways.

John Savard
  #26  
Old March 21st 18, 12:55 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Chris.B[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,001
Default RIP, Stephen Hawking

On Wednesday, 14 March 2018 06:49:50 UTC+1, palsing wrote:
A brilliant life has finally come to an end at age 76. We are very lucky to have had him for so long.

\Paul A


Hawking is to be buried near Newton and Darwin as a fitting tribute to uniquely creative mind.

The trolling gob****e 1461 will be lucky to have an unmarked grave.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Stephen Hawking says... Arc Michael Misc 0 May 11th 17 02:56 AM
Stephen Hawking Gets a Telescope Davoud[_1_] Amateur Astronomy 0 February 21st 15 01:13 AM
Stephen Hawking New Theory Alok Dixit Astronomy Misc 2 November 27th 12 03:23 PM
Stephen Hawking Pat Flannery History 8 June 16th 06 11:18 AM
Stephen Hawking MoFo Amateur Astronomy 4 June 16th 06 05:56 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.