Oriel - what again?

On Monday, December 31, 2012 1:57:18 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKWz3N80aHA

Pretty nice... and I'm pretty sure I saw Sirius appear from the glare of the sun in the video...

On Dec 31 2012, 10:36*pm, palsing wrote:
On Monday, December 31, 2012 1:57:18 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKWz3N80aHA

Pretty nice... and I'm pretty sure I saw Sirius appear from the glare of the sun in the video...

You couldn't help it could you,you couldn't end the year with
something other than snipes and personal attacks.

Kepler posited that the variations in the natural noon cycle were due
to the Earth's daily rotation speeding up and slowing down at various
points in the Earth's orbital cycle yet his research on variable
orbital speeds itself provides the solution along with the fact that
the polar day/night cycle requires a turning to the Sun to explain
it.How well I recall the initial strain due to its newness and
unfamiliarity to make the pieces fit but once I had the analogy and
the images of Uranus,it now can't appear otherwise and axial
precession as it was previously understood is now best served as an
annual orbital component.

http://www.daviddarling.info/images/...gs_changes.jpg

There is no external reference for daily rotation as an independent
motion and the price of these 'leap seconds' is the willful negligence
of these images which demonstrate why observers on a planet must
account for two rotations to the central Sun.

Rarely have I stopped to pay attention as to where I stand within the
community,even if it can be called that,because the technical details
and especially the observational details are before everyone
regardless of reputation or whether they get paid or not and it is
these things that should occupy people to the exclusion of all else.I
am fully aware of what has been achieved in moving research in
different areas along yet the reaction has been to shut down while
headache inducing swearing and insults don't count for anything and
never did.It beats me what the community intends to do now,continue on
the path with timekeeping and the planetary cycles as they have been
doing,as especially this 'leap second' nonsense, and nothing will be
left of astronomy while a complete and transparent overhaul raises so
many new topics and so many new approaches that effectively you have a
new 21st century astronomy.

It is not always easy to see people take the path of least resistance
as though they had a right to make light of a life that carries its
own responsibilities through a God given talent but then again maybe
that is part of it all and if I know dismay,it is one born of love of
the astronomical heritage and its transmission to students and
interested adults.

On Dec 31, 2:57*pm, oriel36 wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKWz3N80aHA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3-PyGFdcag

Good music is something we can all agree on.

John Savard

"oriel36" wrote in message
...

On Dec 31 2012, 10:36 pm, palsing wrote:
On Monday, December 31, 2012 1:57:18 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKWz3N80aHA

Pretty nice... and I'm pretty sure I saw Sirius appear from the glare of
the sun in the video...

You couldn't help it could you,you couldn't end the year with
something other than snipes and personal attacks.
==============================================
Let's start the year nicely then. What is setting between 4:44 and 4: 53,
Kelleher? Did you catch the meteor between 5:01 and 5:02? Another between
5:09 and 5:10? Again at 5:17-5:18? Quite a shower.

BTW, that's only the first movement of the Moonlight Sonata, I could play
that though it takes a strong right pinkie on the first beat of the bar.
It's the second movement that defeated my capabilities, I never had the
speed or dexterity.

I agree with palsing, I'm pretty sure I saw Sirius in the twilight in the
video. It is at time 2:52, 1/4 of the screen across and 1/3 down, shining
through the trees in x-ray. At 2:53 the trees vanish and it turns into
Jupiter.

-- This message is brought to you from the keyboard of
Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway.
When I get my O.B.E. I'll be an earlobe.

oriel36 wrote:
On Dec 31 2012, 10:36 pm, palsing wrote:
On Monday, December 31, 2012 1:57:18 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKWz3N80aHA

Pretty nice... and I'm pretty sure I saw Sirius appear from the glare of
the sun in the video...

You couldn't help it could you,you couldn't end the year with
something other than snipes and personal attacks.

Kepler posited that the variations in the natural noon cycle were due
to the Earth's daily rotation speeding up and slowing down at various
points in the Earth's orbital cycle yet his research on variable
orbital speeds itself provides the solution along with the fact that
the polar day/night cycle requires a turning to the Sun to explain
it.
No it doesn't.


How well I recall the initial strain due to its newness and
unfamiliarity to make the pieces fit but once I had the analogy and
the images of Uranus,it now can't appear otherwise

Like the Red Queen you can believe six impossible things before breakfast
but it takes an effort .




and axial
precession as it was previously understood is now best served as an
annual orbital component.

http://www.daviddarling.info/images/...gs_changes.jpg

There is no external reference for daily rotation as an independent
motion
Another if your six impossible beliefs.
The while visible universe is the external reference. You couldn't get a
better one.



and the price of these 'leap seconds' is the willful negligence
of these images which demonstrate why observers on a planet must
account for two rotations to the central Sun.

These images don't show anything new to any real astronomer. We have all
observed the orientation of Saturn's rings over time through our
telescopes.


Rarely have I stopped to pay attention as to where I stand within the
community,even if it can be called that,because the technical details
and especially the observational details are before everyone
regardless of reputation or whether they get paid or not and it is
these things that should occupy people to the exclusion of all else.I
am fully aware of what has been achieved in moving research in
different areas along yet the reaction has been to shut down while
headache inducing swearing and insults don't count for anything and
never did.
You get headaches because its difficult to ignore the evidence. The
contradiction between the real world and your conception of what it should
be is taking its toll. Your subconscious knows you are wrong and your
headaches are the result.

It beats me what the community intends to do now,continue on
the path with timekeeping and the planetary cycles as they have been
doing,as especially this 'leap second' nonsense, and nothing will be
left of astronomy while a complete and transparent overhaul raises so
many new topics and so many new approaches that effectively you have a
new 21st century astronomy.

Please write more clearly. Your sentences are getting too long and
complicated.


It is not always easy to see people take the path of least resistance
as though they had a right to make light of a life that carries its
own responsibilities through a God given talent but then again maybe
that is part of it all and if I know dismay,it is one born of love of
the astronomical heritage and its transmission to students and
interested adults.

You don't love astronomy. You have a compulsion to convert the world to
your personal delusions. If you succeeded in this science and technology
would cease since we would have to abandon almost all of physics.

It always amazes me that not very much time elapses before the Or***
subject gets resurrected once again.

It has been suggested not just once, but many times, to add this aloof
guy to your rejection filters.

It has been suggested not just once, but many times, to ignore this
aloof guy's posts because of their meaningless content.

It has been suggested not just once, but many times, that trying to have
a conversation with this guy ends up taking up unnecessary Internet
bandwidth.

It has been suggested not just once, but many times, that continuing to
reply to these unnecessary posts defeats the purpose of the kill filters
for those sensible among us who don't want to see his or others
worthless posts.

Need I go on, or has the point been made, and made, and MADE AGAIN!

I think some of you must be caught in a quantum reality where the
uncertainty principle doesn't apply because if it did, the mere mention
of this non-matching atomic signature would have gone against the
scientific principles present within your reality. Obviously, these
types of quantum realities must exist, but I don't have to subscribe to
them.

Bottom line for all who keep the Or*** phenomenon alive.... get a life,
either within the current space-time continuum or an alternate one where
the quantum realities don't overlap.

On Jan 1, 12:32*pm, Mike Collins wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Dec 31 2012, 10:36 pm, palsing wrote:
On Monday, December 31, 2012 1:57:18 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKWz3N80aHA

Pretty nice... and I'm pretty sure I saw Sirius appear from the glare of
the sun in the video...

You couldn't help it could you,you couldn't end the year with
something other than snipes and personal attacks.

Kepler posited that the variations in the natural noon cycle were due
to the Earth's daily rotation speeding up and slowing down at various
points in the Earth's orbital cycle yet his research on variable
orbital speeds itself provides the solution along with the fact that
the polar day/night cycle requires a turning to the Sun to explain
it.

No it doesn't.


It would be easy to claim a perceptual blind-spot years ago,
however,with the sequential images of Uranus at huge distances from
the Earth,astronomers would see the polar coordinates and the rings
continue to turn in a circle East to West to the central Sun and make
an entire 360 degree rotation over the eight decade orbital circuit of
that planet.

http://www.daviddarling.info/images/...gs_changes.jpg

Why the diminution of Hubble imaging ?,the ecliptic axis runs through
the center of a planet and coincident with the circle of illumination
and it is around this axis a planet's rings and polar coordinates turn
in a circle to the central Sun and much as the Earth's ecliptic axis
runs North to South and axially coincident with its circle of
illumination ,drawn here for convenience -

http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/...mericas250.jpg

There seems to be a lack of genuine resonance among readers rather
than outright opposition to the imaging and what it demonstrates,for
instance, a reader here interpreted the East/West motion of the
equatorial rings of Uranus as a perceptual shift due to the Earth's
orbital motion when the motion belongs to Uranus itself and the rings
actually do turn 360 degrees to the central Sun,if not by a simple
analogy then by direct observation.All it takes is to draw in more
facts such as the distance of Earth from the distant Uranus and then
rework in the physical consideration.

The insight will stand eventually and that is a good thing.

oriel36 wrote:
On Jan 1, 12:32 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Dec 31 2012, 10:36 pm, palsing wrote:
On Monday, December 31, 2012 1:57:18 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKWz3N80aHA

Pretty nice... and I'm pretty sure I saw Sirius appear from the glare of
the sun in the video...

You couldn't help it could you,you couldn't end the year with
something other than snipes and personal attacks.

Kepler posited that the variations in the natural noon cycle were due
to the Earth's daily rotation speeding up and slowing down at various
points in the Earth's orbital cycle yet his research on variable
orbital speeds itself provides the solution along with the fact that
the polar day/night cycle requires a turning to the Sun to explain
it.

No it doesn't.


It would be easy to claim a perceptual blind-spot years ago,
however,with the sequential images of Uranus at huge distances from
the Earth,astronomers would see the polar coordinates and the rings
continue to turn in a circle East to West to the central Sun and make
an entire 360 degree rotation over the eight decade orbital circuit of
that planet.

http://www.daviddarling.info/images/...gs_changes.jpg

Why the diminution of Hubble imaging ?,the ecliptic axis runs through
the center of a planet and coincident with the circle of illumination
and it is around this axis a planet's rings and polar coordinates turn
in a circle to the central Sun and much as the Earth's ecliptic axis
runs North to South and axially coincident with its circle of
illumination ,drawn here for convenience -

http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/...mericas250.jpg

There seems to be a lack of genuine resonance among readers rather
than outright opposition to the imaging and what it demonstrates,for
instance, a reader here interpreted the East/West motion of the
equatorial rings of Uranus as a perceptual shift due to the Earth's
orbital motion when the motion belongs to Uranus itself and the rings
actually do turn 360 degrees to the central Sun,if not by a simple
analogy then by direct observation.All it takes is to draw in more
facts such as the distance of Earth from the distant Uranus and then
rework in the physical consideration.

The insight will stand eventually and that is a good thing.

Revising history again?

Here's the bit you snipped be sues you don't want to answer the questions.


oriel36 wrote:
On Dec 31 2012, 10:36 pm, palsing wrote:
On Monday, December 31, 2012 1:57:18 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKWz3N80aHA
Pretty nice... and I'm pretty sure I saw Sirius appear from the glare of
the sun in the video...

You couldn't help it could you,you couldn't end the year with something
other than snipes and personal attacks.

Kepler posited that the variations in the natural noon cycle were due to
the Earth's daily rotation speeding up and slowing down at various points
in the Earth's orbital cycle yet his research on variable orbital speeds
itself provides the solution along with the fact that the polar day/night
cycle requires a turning to the Sun to explain it.


No it doesn't.
How well I recall the initial strain due to its newness and unfamiliarity
to make the pieces fit but once I had the analogy and the images of
Uranus,it now can't appear otherwise
Like the Red Queen you can believe six impossible things before breakfast
but it takes an effort .

and axial precession as it was previously understood is now best served as
an annual orbital component.
http://www.daviddarling.info/images/...gs_changes.jpg

There is no external reference for daily rotation as an independent motion


Another if your six impossible beliefs. The while visible universe is the
external reference. You couldn't get a better one.
and the price of these 'leap seconds' is the willful negligence of these
images which demonstrate why observers on a planet must account for two
rotations to the central Sun.
These images don't show anything new to any real astronomer. We have all
observed the orientation of Saturn's rings over time through our
telescopes.
Rarely have I stopped to pay attention as to where I stand within the
community,even if it can be called that,because the technical details and
especially the observational details are before everyone regardless of
reputation or whether they get paid or not and it is these things that
should occupy people to the exclusion of all else.I am fully aware of what
has been achieved in moving research in different areas along yet the
reaction has been to shut down while headache inducing swearing and insults
don't count for anything and never did.
You get headaches because its difficult to ignore the evidence. The
contradiction between the real world and your conception of what it should
be is taking its toll. Your subconscious knows you are wrong and your
headaches are the result.
It beats me what the community intends to do now,continue on the path with
timekeeping and the planetary cycles as they have been doing,as especially
this 'leap second' nonsense, and nothing will be left of astronomy while a
complete and transparent overhaul raises so many new topics and so many new
approaches that effectively you have a new 21st century astronomy.
Please write more clearly. Your sentences are getting too long and
complicated.
It is not always easy to see people take the path of least resistance as
though they had a right to make light of a life that carries its own
responsibilities through a God given talent but then again maybe that is
part of it all and if I know dismay,it is one born of love of the
astronomical heritage and its transmission to students and interested
adults.
You don't love astronomy. You have a compulsion to convert the world to
your personal delusions. If you succeeded in this science and technology
would cease since we would have to abandon almost all of physics.

On Jan 1, 3:02*pm, Mike Collins wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Jan 1, 12:32 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Dec 31 2012, 10:36 pm, palsing wrote:
On Monday, December 31, 2012 1:57:18 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKWz3N80aHA

Pretty nice... and I'm pretty sure I saw Sirius appear from the glare of
the sun in the video...

You couldn't help it could you,you couldn't end the year with
something other than snipes and personal attacks.

Kepler posited that the variations in the natural noon cycle were due
to the Earth's daily rotation speeding up and slowing down at various
points in the Earth's orbital cycle yet his research on variable
orbital speeds itself provides the solution along with the fact that
the polar day/night cycle requires a turning to the Sun to explain
it.

No it doesn't.

It would be easy to claim a perceptual blind-spot years ago,
however,with the sequential images of Uranus at huge distances from
the Earth,astronomers would see the polar coordinates and the rings
continue to turn in a circle East to West to the central Sun and make
an entire 360 degree rotation over the eight decade orbital circuit of
that planet.

http://www.daviddarling.info/images/...gs_changes.jpg

Why the diminution of Hubble imaging ?,the ecliptic axis runs through
the center of a planet and coincident with the circle of illumination
and it is around this axis a planet's rings and polar coordinates turn
in a circle *to the central Sun and much as the Earth's *ecliptic axis
runs North to South and axially coincident *with its circle of
illumination ,drawn here for convenience -

http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/...mericas250.jpg

There seems to be a lack of genuine resonance among readers rather
than outright opposition *to the imaging and what it demonstrates,for
instance, a reader here interpreted the East/West motion of the
equatorial rings of Uranus as a perceptual shift due to the Earth's
orbital motion when the motion belongs to Uranus itself and the rings
actually do turn 360 degrees to the central Sun,if not by a simple
analogy then by direct observation.All it takes is to draw in more
facts such as the distance of Earth from the distant Uranus and then
rework in the physical consideration.

The insight will stand eventually and that is a good thing.

Revising history again?


That is quite a bit of rewriting history to make way for the 'new'
approach which has the Earth turning exactly in 24 hours in 1820 but
then again,revising history has been a common practice of the vicious
strain of empiricism for centuries -

"At the time of the dinosaurs, Earth completed one rotation in about
23 hours," says MacMillan, who is a member of the VLBI team at NASA
Goddard. "In the year 1820, a rotation took exactly 24 hours, or
86,400 standard seconds. Since 1820, the mean solar day has increased
by about 2.5 milliseconds."

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/solarsyst...ra-second.html

Obviously those who would have influence in these matters walked out
of the forum,probably thought it was in their own best interests to
withdraw and leave the issues to their own devices,and that leaves you
few souls fighting for a 'solar vs sidereal' concept that is long
since past its shelf date and is now being bypassed for an equally
poor treatment with less an astronomical slant.

Raising the standards was always going to be the harder road and so it
remains.

Notice how carefully Oriel, over a period of some years, has avoided
explaining exactly where his views and the views of other members of
this group differ. He writes whole paragraphs - sometimes nultiple
paragraphs - hundreds of times a year but refuses to explain
something
as basic as this.

He also refuses to answer any questions designed to identify what the
difference might be.


As an example - Oriel, if you look due south at midnight on July 1st
and again at midnight on January 1st of the next year will you see
the
same stars in the same places.


Yes or no?