A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

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

Chinese lander



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 3rd 19, 08:25 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Gerald Kelleher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,551
Default Chinese lander

Orbital motion is an independent motion to daily rotation which is why the analogy of an outstretched arm continuously pointing at a centre is roughly why we see the same side of our orbiting satellite and why the Chinese lander will remain out of sight.

Achievements in engineering do not equate to astronomical achievements no more than the invention of a car affects the motions of the Earth so the gap is presently at its widest as commentators this morning announce a spinning moon along with its orbital motion.

The lunar day/night cycle is a consequence of its orbital motion alone, its divisor seen from Earth being an orbital trait just as the Earth's divisor is. Whereas the Earth turns to the Sun in two distinct ways, one due to intrinsic rotation and the other as a function of the planet's orbital motion with the Polar day/night cycle in isolation and the seasons in combination with daily rotation being the outcome of these dual surface rotations.

To hear these people talk about 'tidal locking' is a symptom of astronomical oblivion even when the engineering achievement of putting a lander on the side of the moon that doesn't face our home planet is actual.
  #2  
Old January 4th 19, 04:42 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
palsing[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,068
Default Chinese lander

On Wednesday, January 2, 2019 at 11:25:34 PM UTC-8, Gerald Kelleher wrote:

To hear these people talk about 'tidal locking' is a symptom of astronomical oblivion...


For you not to understand tidal locking is a symptom of the total lack of your education...

https://tinyurl.com/y8t4p7tr



  #3  
Old January 4th 19, 06:54 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
StarDust
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 732
Default Chinese lander

On Wednesday, January 2, 2019 at 11:25:34 PM UTC-8, Gerald Kelleher wrote:
Orbital motion is an independent motion to daily rotation which is why the analogy of an outstretched arm continuously pointing at a centre is roughly why we see the same side of our orbiting satellite and why the Chinese lander will remain out of sight.

Achievements in engineering do not equate to astronomical achievements no more than the invention of a car affects the motions of the Earth so the gap is presently at its widest as commentators this morning announce a spinning moon along with its orbital motion.

The lunar day/night cycle is a consequence of its orbital motion alone, its divisor seen from Earth being an orbital trait just as the Earth's divisor is. Whereas the Earth turns to the Sun in two distinct ways, one due to intrinsic rotation and the other as a function of the planet's orbital motion with the Polar day/night cycle in isolation and the seasons in combination with daily rotation being the outcome of these dual surface rotations.

To hear these people talk about 'tidal locking' is a symptom of astronomical oblivion even when the engineering achievement of putting a lander on the side of the moon that doesn't face our home planet is actual.


China will put a missile base on the Moon?
  #4  
Old January 4th 19, 08:43 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Gerald Kelleher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,551
Default Chinese lander

On Friday, January 4, 2019 at 3:42:12 AM UTC, palsing wrote:
On Wednesday, January 2, 2019 at 11:25:34 PM UTC-8, Gerald Kelleher wrote:

To hear these people talk about 'tidal locking' is a symptom of astronomical oblivion...


For you not to understand tidal locking is a symptom of the total lack of your education...

https://tinyurl.com/y8t4p7tr


I watched you bullied into silence so nothing worse than cowardice and especially at your age, the same for the rest here.



  #5  
Old January 4th 19, 07:12 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
palsing[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,068
Default Chinese lander

At my age I can't be easily bullied.

At your age you should already know what you don't know, but you don't... and there is a LOT that you don't know.

Of course, there is a LOT that I don't know, the difference being that I am well aware of it.
  #6  
Old January 4th 19, 10:23 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Gerald Kelleher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,551
Default Chinese lander

On Friday, January 4, 2019 at 6:13:02 PM UTC, palsing wrote:
At my age I can't be easily bullied.

At your age you should already know what you don't know, but you don't... and there is a LOT that you don't know.

Of course, there is a LOT that I don't know, the difference being that I am well aware of it.


I tell you what the world knows now -

"Put more plainly, pretend you're Earth, watching Mercury run around a track. As it runs its loop, it will start out moving from the left side of your field of vision to your right. Then, it rounds the corner and, although not moving backward, is now running from right to left. This analogy is oversimplified because it doesn't take into account the fact that Earth is also moving, but it gives a good idea of how this optical illusion plays out. All of the planets exhibit apparent retrograde motion, although it plays out slightly differently for planets farther from the sun than Earth versus those, like Mercury, that are closer to the sun than Earth." CBS news

To be fair to whoever wrote that piece, they are deficient when judging "slightly differently" as the direct/retrograde motions or the actual looping motions of Venus and Mercury are entirely different to the illusory loops of the slower moving planets for reasons that were given here over the years..

Considering that direct/retrograde motions haven't been touched since Copernicus first accounted for the motions of the slower moving planets, I take great satisfaction in partitioning the perspectives that the wider world is beginning to accept.

In case people doubt that the original Sun centred astronomers made the distinction, there is always Galileo and Kepler to demonstrate that they didn't -

"Now what is said here of Jupiter is to be understood of Saturn and Mars also. In Saturn these retrogressions are somewhat more frequent than in Jupiter, because its motion is slower than Jupiter's, so that the Earth overtakes it in a shorter time. In Mars they are rarer, its motion being faster than that of Jupiter, so that the Earth spends more time in catching up with it. Next, as to Venus and Mercury, whose circles are included within that of the Earth, stoppings and retrograde motions appear in them also, due not to any motion that really exists in them, but to the annual motion of the Earth. This is acutely demonstrated by Copernicus . . ." Galileo



  #7  
Old January 5th 19, 01:52 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
RichA[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,076
Default Chinese lander

On Friday, 4 January 2019 00:54:21 UTC-5, StarDust wrote:
On Wednesday, January 2, 2019 at 11:25:34 PM UTC-8, Gerald Kelleher wrote:
Orbital motion is an independent motion to daily rotation which is why the analogy of an outstretched arm continuously pointing at a centre is roughly why we see the same side of our orbiting satellite and why the Chinese lander will remain out of sight.

Achievements in engineering do not equate to astronomical achievements no more than the invention of a car affects the motions of the Earth so the gap is presently at its widest as commentators this morning announce a spinning moon along with its orbital motion.

The lunar day/night cycle is a consequence of its orbital motion alone, its divisor seen from Earth being an orbital trait just as the Earth's divisor is. Whereas the Earth turns to the Sun in two distinct ways, one due to intrinsic rotation and the other as a function of the planet's orbital motion with the Polar day/night cycle in isolation and the seasons in combination with daily rotation being the outcome of these dual surface rotations.

To hear these people talk about 'tidal locking' is a symptom of astronomical oblivion even when the engineering achievement of putting a lander on the side of the moon that doesn't face our home planet is actual.


China will put a missile base on the Moon?


Well, considering American put a man on the moon 49 years ago, and the Chinese just put a probe on it, maybe in FIVE HUNDRED years they'll have a base..
  #8  
Old January 5th 19, 02:08 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
StarDust
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 732
Default Chinese lander

On Friday, January 4, 2019 at 4:52:42 PM UTC-8, RichA wrote:
On Friday, 4 January 2019 00:54:21 UTC-5, StarDust wrote:
On Wednesday, January 2, 2019 at 11:25:34 PM UTC-8, Gerald Kelleher wrote:
Orbital motion is an independent motion to daily rotation which is why the analogy of an outstretched arm continuously pointing at a centre is roughly why we see the same side of our orbiting satellite and why the Chinese lander will remain out of sight.

Achievements in engineering do not equate to astronomical achievements no more than the invention of a car affects the motions of the Earth so the gap is presently at its widest as commentators this morning announce a spinning moon along with its orbital motion.

The lunar day/night cycle is a consequence of its orbital motion alone, its divisor seen from Earth being an orbital trait just as the Earth's divisor is. Whereas the Earth turns to the Sun in two distinct ways, one due to intrinsic rotation and the other as a function of the planet's orbital motion with the Polar day/night cycle in isolation and the seasons in combination with daily rotation being the outcome of these dual surface rotations.

To hear these people talk about 'tidal locking' is a symptom of astronomical oblivion even when the engineering achievement of putting a lander on the side of the moon that doesn't face our home planet is actual.


China will put a missile base on the Moon?


Well, considering American put a man on the moon 49 years ago, and the Chinese just put a probe on it, maybe in FIVE HUNDRED years they'll have a base.


Back than cost $7 billion to put man on the Moon, crazy Kennedy!
US prints money like nothing!
  #9  
Old January 5th 19, 11:07 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
RichA[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,076
Default Chinese lander

On Friday, 4 January 2019 20:08:35 UTC-5, StarDust wrote:
On Friday, January 4, 2019 at 4:52:42 PM UTC-8, RichA wrote:
On Friday, 4 January 2019 00:54:21 UTC-5, StarDust wrote:
On Wednesday, January 2, 2019 at 11:25:34 PM UTC-8, Gerald Kelleher wrote:
Orbital motion is an independent motion to daily rotation which is why the analogy of an outstretched arm continuously pointing at a centre is roughly why we see the same side of our orbiting satellite and why the Chinese lander will remain out of sight.

Achievements in engineering do not equate to astronomical achievements no more than the invention of a car affects the motions of the Earth so the gap is presently at its widest as commentators this morning announce a spinning moon along with its orbital motion.

The lunar day/night cycle is a consequence of its orbital motion alone, its divisor seen from Earth being an orbital trait just as the Earth's divisor is. Whereas the Earth turns to the Sun in two distinct ways, one due to intrinsic rotation and the other as a function of the planet's orbital motion with the Polar day/night cycle in isolation and the seasons in combination with daily rotation being the outcome of these dual surface rotations.

To hear these people talk about 'tidal locking' is a symptom of astronomical oblivion even when the engineering achievement of putting a lander on the side of the moon that doesn't face our home planet is actual.

China will put a missile base on the Moon?


Well, considering American put a man on the moon 49 years ago, and the Chinese just put a probe on it, maybe in FIVE HUNDRED years they'll have a base.


Back than cost $7 billion to put man on the Moon, crazy Kennedy!
US prints money like nothing!


It was a remarkable achievement, won the space-race and probably hastened the end of the Cold War because the Soviets realized they would never have the money to keep-pace with the U.S. technologically. Plus, the spin-off technologies were massive. Compare that to the s--- that is the ISS, $180B and next to NOTHING to show for it.
  #10  
Old January 5th 19, 11:47 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Gerald Kelleher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,551
Default Chinese lander

Daily rotation and orbital motion are independent of each other but they do combine to create effects such as the hemispherical variations in temperature, daylight/darkness asymmetries and so on.

The fact is that when daily rotation and all its effects are subtracted, the entire surface of the Earth still turns once to the central Sun but this rotation is uneven and turns parallel to the orbital plane thereby changing daily rotational traits to the Sun -

http://afewbitsmore.com/img/2015_ecliptic.png


The 'tidal locking' people display only shallow reasoning or worse, after all, I still don't know what it takes to ignore the Polar/day/night cycle at the North and South Poles where daily rotation diminishes to zero yet there is a single sunrise/noon/sunset cycle each year.

 




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
Lunar Lander Jeff Findley[_6_] Policy 15 December 27th 17 12:33 AM
beagle lander aj UK Astronomy 3 October 20th 06 06:47 PM
Viking lander SSA Olaf van der Zalm History 5 August 6th 05 07:12 AM
European and Chinese space cooperation highlighted by visit of Chinese Prime Minister Jacques van Oene News 0 December 10th 04 04:29 PM
What about the lander? BenignVanilla Misc 1 March 11th 04 10:36 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.