Venusian shadow - part 2

Here's a update for my November 2005 project to capture the shadow
cast by Venus...

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/venus/s...f-venus_2.html

--
Pete
http://www.digitalsky.org.uk

On Mon, 21 May 2007 09:19:49 +0100, Pete Lawrence wrote:

Here's a update for my November 2005 project to capture the shadow
cast by Venus...

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/venus/s...f-venus_2.html

That is brilliant, thanks very much.

Norman

On May 21, 10:20 am, norman wrote:
On Mon, 21 May 2007 09:19:49 +0100, Pete Lawrence wrote:
Here's a update for my November 2005 project to capture the shadow
cast by Venus...

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/venus/s...f-venus_2.html

That is brilliant, thanks very much.

Norman

Here you go,if you want a real challenge then try and match the Solar
radiation/orbital shadow boundary with the geographical axis of the
Earth without giving the Earth a variable axial tilt.

http://www.astronomy.org/programs/se...flashlight.gif

Considering that this is the enormous conmnection between astronomy
and climatology and a huge modification of the original reasons for
the reasons I suggest you take your time trying to figure out what
moves and what does not.

Pete here is from a group who believes that the angle of inclination
of received radiation is responsible for the seasons hence the
astrological analemmas.

On May 21, 9:19 am, Pete Lawrence
wrote:
Here's a update for my November 2005 project to capture the shadow
cast by Venus...

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/venus/s...f-venus_2.html

--
Petehttp://www.digitalsky.org.uk

Dear,oh dear oh dear.Let us see -

"Then a simple experiment dawned on me that would prove once and for
all that the shadow was indeed caused by Earth's brilliant twin. By
taking a number of sequential shots on the same night, as long as the
camera and shadow casting object remained stationary, the apparent
movement of Venus in the sky should cause the shadow to move on the
wall being used as a screen."

Who would liike to inform Pete here that shadow movements are due to
the motion of the Earth,specifically axial rotation.

Correlating a radiation/shadow differential with the apparent motion
of Venus is quite a strecth.Considering that I have spent the best
part of two years trying to get participants interested in the actual
change in the Earth's solar radiation/orbital shadow boundary to
explain global climate and the seasons rather than the pseudo-dynamic
of variable axial tilt,your geocentric wishful thinking typifies why
astrological tendencies are so damaging.In short,you cannot think
straighrt.

If any of you spent some time trying to figure out how the motion of
the solar radiation/orbital shadow boundary splits the polar axis at
the Equinoxes I would not have to come here and deal with nonsense
such as analemmas and pseudo-dynamics of variable axial tilt.

oriel36 wrote:
On May 21, 9:19 am, Pete Lawrence
wrote:

Here's a update for my November 2005 project to capture the shadow
cast by Venus...

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/venus/s...f-venus_2.html

--
Petehttp://www.digitalsky.org.uk


Dear,oh dear oh dear.Let us see -


snip

Sorry, Pete, but now it's your turn .... thanks to you, I have a
(temporary) reprieve from oriel.

When you have had enough, just remind him about my analemma work and
..... things will be back to "normal" for me. :-)

Anthony.

On Mon, 21 May 2007 14:52:39 +0300, Anthony Ayiomamitis
wrote:

oriel36 wrote:
On May 21, 9:19 am, Pete Lawrence
wrote:

Here's a update for my November 2005 project to capture the shadow
cast by Venus...

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/venus/s...f-venus_2.html

--
Petehttp://www.digitalsky.org.uk


Dear,oh dear oh dear.Let us see -


snip

Sorry, Pete, but now it's your turn .... thanks to you, I have a
(temporary) reprieve from oriel.

When you have had enough, just remind him about my analemma work and
.... things will be back to "normal" for me. :-)

I don't normally see his cuckoo posts at all because he goes into a
radiation/shadow differential orbital sub-rotational framework I call
my kill file. There he's at home because there's lots of other rubbish
he can pick up tips from. You have to admire someone with so little in
their life that they can spend so much time writing drivel designed to
include keywords to bait their troll prey. Sorry, did I say admire? I
mean't pity of course ;-)

Does she (because we don't know if Gertrude is a man) still refer to
the analema as the astrological analema? Gosh, that's an impressive
bait isn't it? He's a real master ;-)
--
Pete
http://www.digitalsky.org.uk

Pete Lawrence wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2007 14:52:39 +0300, Anthony Ayiomamitis
wrote:


oriel36 wrote:

On May 21, 9:19 am, Pete Lawrence
wrote:


Here's a update for my November 2005 project to capture the shadow
cast by Venus...

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/venus/s...f-venus_2.html

--
Petehttp://www.digitalsky.org.uk


Dear,oh dear oh dear.Let us see -


snip

Sorry, Pete, but now it's your turn .... thanks to you, I have a
(temporary) reprieve from oriel.

When you have had enough, just remind him about my analemma work and
.... things will be back to "normal" for me. :-)


I don't normally see his cuckoo posts at all because he goes into a
radiation/shadow differential orbital sub-rotational framework I call
my kill file. There he's at home because there's lots of other rubbish
he can pick up tips from. You have to admire someone with so little in
their life that they can spend so much time writing drivel designed to
include keywords to bait their troll prey. Sorry, did I say admire? I
mean't pity of course ;-)

Does she (because we don't know if Gertrude is a man) still refer to
the analema as the astrological analema? Gosh, that's an impressive
bait isn't it? He's a real master ;-)

Well said (and fully quoted on purpose). I confess to not using
killfiles but I suspect it may just be time to do something similar.

I remember 10 yrs ago s.a.a. was really a great place ... it has now
become the playground for lots of nutcases with too much time on their
hands intent on being a pain in the butt and all while hiding behind a
keyboard.

Anthony.

On May 21, 1:09 pm, Pete Lawrence
wrote:
On Mon, 21 May 2007 14:52:39 +0300, Anthony Ayiomamitis





wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On May 21, 9:19 am, Pete Lawrence
wrote:

Here's a update for my November 2005 project to capture the shadow
cast by Venus...

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/venus/s...f-venus_2.html

--
Petehttp://www.digitalsky.org.uk

Dear,oh dear oh dear.Let us see -

snip

Sorry, Pete, but now it's your turn .... thanks to you, I have a
(temporary) reprieve from oriel.

When you have had enough, just remind him about my analemma work and
.... things will be back to "normal" for me. :-)

I don't normally see his cuckoo posts at all because he goes into a
radiation/shadow differential orbital sub-rotational framework I call
my kill file. There he's at home because there's lots of other rubbish
he can pick up tips from. You have to admire someone with so little in
their life that they can spend so much time writing drivel designed to
include keywords to bait their troll prey. Sorry, did I say admire? I
mean't pity of course ;-)

Does she (because we don't know if Gertrude is a man) still refer to
the analema as the astrological analema? Gosh, that's an impressive
bait isn't it? He's a real master ;-)
--
Petehttp://www.digitalsky.org.uk- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I wonder what goes through your small minds when you encounter the
work of a real astronomer -

http://www.xs4all.nl/~adcs/Huygens/06/kort-E.html

The creation of the 24 hour day by real astronomers by using natural
noon and the Equation of Time tables is such an astronomical jewel
that only the most ignorant people on the planet would believe that
each noon cycle is exactly 24 hours,in order to justify why a star
returns in 23 hours 56 minutes 04 seconds -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidereal_time

The same people who used orbital comparisons between the Earth and the
other planets to extract so much information have had their work
temporarily destroyed by idiots who draw a correlation between axial
rotation of the Earth and the motion of the planet Venus in terms of
radiation received.How screwed up is that !!!!.

A few years ago you would probably have received your sought after
adulation but in the presence of a real astronomer,all you can do is
highlight that you and Anthony here are just astrophotographers with
either geocentric or astrological perspectives.

Like to continue with the motion of shadows and the Earth's motions or
do you really wish to imagine that Venus has an apparent motion ?.

Here is the faster Venus overtaking the slower orbitally moving
Earth with the central Sun as a backdrop in case you have severe
difficulties with Copernican reasoning -

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...6-08_07-44.jpg

There is no apparent motion of Venus unless you are a geocentric freak
like Anthony here ,the motions of Venus are seen directly from an
orbitally moving Earth hence your correlation between the motion of a
shadow and Venus is hardly the reasoning of an astronomer.

On May 21, 12:52 pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis
wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On May 21, 9:19 am, Pete Lawrence
wrote:

Here's a update for my November 2005 project to capture the shadow
cast by Venus...

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/venus/s...f-venus_2.html

--
Petehttp://www.digitalsky.org.uk

Dear,oh dear oh dear.Let us see -

snip

Sorry, Pete, but now it's your turn .... thanks to you, I have a
(temporary) reprieve from oriel.

When you have had enough, just remind him about my analemma work and
.... things will be back to "normal" for me. :-)

Anthony.

Have you figured out yet that you are analemma photgraphing is just a
late 17th century hoax,a silly attempt to determine the Earths motions
using a clock.

It must be something else to have the no variable tilt at the Equator
and a huge variation in tilt at the poles in order to achieve your
analemma.

Pete,he has no astronomical pedigree but your analemmatic images
do,albeit and astyrological one.

On May 21, 4:43 am, oriel36 wrote:
On May 21, 9:19 am, Pete Lawrence
wrote:

Here's a update for my November 2005 project to capture the shadow
cast by Venus...

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/venus/s...f-venus_2.html

--
Petehttp://www.digitalsky.org.uk

Dear,oh dear oh dear.Let us see -

"Then a simple experiment dawned on me that would prove once and for
all that the shadow was indeed caused by Earth's brilliant twin. By
taking a number of sequential shots on the same night, as long as the
camera and shadow casting object remained stationary, the apparent
movement of Venus in the sky should cause the shadow to move on the
wall being used as a screen."

Who would liike to inform Pete here that shadow movements are due to
the motion of the Earth,specifically axial rotation.

Who would like to try to get oriel to understand the meaning of the
word "apparent" in Pete's paragraph?

Austin