|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Parametric down-conversion in the Solar system
"palsing" wrote in message ... On Jul 28, 11:19 pm, Aleksandr Timofeev wrote: On 26 ???, 18:34, palsing wrote: On Jul 26, 12:22 am, Aleksandr Timofeev wrote: Sam, you should explain popularly difference between the synodic period and the sidereal period:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synodic...he_sidereal_an... This has been done over and over countless times. Unfortunately, Gerald has no clue concerning frames of reference, none at all, so he is finished before he has started. \Paul A It is very similar that your statement represents the facts. Whether you can point out any old message confirming your point of view? Errr... how about this very thread? If oriel's believing that the moon doesn't rotate isn't due to his fundamental inability to understand varying frames of reference, to what can it be attributed? \Paul A ================================================= If a star comes toward you at 30 km/sec and light leaves the star at 300,000 km/sec and you know all about varying frames of reference, how fast is the light coming toward you, palsy? |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Parametric down-conversion in the Solar system
On Jul 29, 2:33Â*pm, Aleksandr Timofeev
wrote: On 27 июл, 21:49, oriel36 wrote: On Jul 27, 12:49Â*pm, Aleksandr Timofeev wrote: The Moon is in synchronous rotation with Earth, always showing the same face. Newton was the only person ever to declare that the moon rotates when it doesn't hence the severity of the problem which humanity faces for although we can land a man on the moon who can look out constantly at the Earth if he so chooses (because the moon doesn't rotate) it seems that the interpretative faculties in humanity today are,to all intents and purposes,non-existent.Short and sweet - the Earth has intrinsic rotation with latitudinal variations in speed as a signature of any round and rotating body where the moon does not, “Appearance from Earth See also: Lunar phase, Earthshine, and Observing the Moon The Moon is in synchronous rotation: it rotates about its axis in about the same time it takes to orbit the Earth. The distinction between a planet and a satellite/moon is in the specifics of orbital motion around their respective centers,a planet turns 360 degrees to the central Sun whereas a moon does not rotate to the central planet,either through intrinsic rotation nor orbital motion.The Earth's polar daylight/darkness cycle indicative of the orbital trait corresponds to a 'travelling axis' stretch through the center of the Earth from Arctic to Antarctic circles wherein at the null rotational points at the polar coordinates,a person experiences roughly 6 months of darkness,6 months of daylight and a transitional period of twilight at the equinoctial orbital points as those coordinates turn through the circle of illumination with a full 360 degree turning coincident with the orbital period. The extremely well defined additional orbital turning can be seen directly from the sequence of images of Uranus, where intrinsic daily rotation runs South to North and parallel with the equatorial rings while the orbital turning runs almost East to West and seen in isolation here - http://astro.berkeley.edu/~imke/Infr..._2001_2005.jpg People who believe the nonsensical idea of lunar rotation in terms of either intrinsic rotation or orbital motion do not stand a chance of interpreting those images and assigning cause and effect by way of a major modification of known planetary dynamics.There are no Wiki articles yet to make the huge distinctions I just made in this thread between planets and moons and their orbital traits nor any dignified response.It is not just about reconstruction of astronomy through planetary and lunar dynamics but the additional insights that contemporary imaging allows so that it is possible to move away from the hideous ideas of 1465 rotations in 4 years,whether the moon or the Earth,and back into worthwhile astronomy based on spacial awareness. Maybe the crisis has passed and responsive and responsible men will pick up the pieces,I don't know yet it does mean keeping the issues front and center until a more decisiveness groups of people emerges who insist on being treated as grown-ups. This results in it nearly always keeping the same face turned towards the Earth. The Moon used to rotate at a faster rate, but early in its history, its rotation slowed and became tidally locked in this orientation as a result of frictional effects associated with tidal deformations caused by the Earth.[82] The side of the Moon that faces Earth is called the near side, and the opposite side the far side. The far side is often called the "dark side," but in fact, it is illuminated as often as the near side: once per lunar day, during the new Moon phase we observe on Earth when the near side is dark.[83] †http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchronous_rotation “In astronomy, synchronous rotation is a planetological term describing a body orbiting another, where the orbiting body takes as long to rotate on its axis as it does to make one orbit; and therefore always keeps the same hemisphere pointed at the body it is orbiting. Another way of describing it is that from the surface of the satellite, the main planet appears to be locked in place in the sky as it slowly rotates. The Moon is in synchronous rotation about the Earth. In fact, most major moons in the solar system have synchronous rotation due to tidal locking.†the very fact that you can look out at the moon and see that it doesn't rotate should be enough but then again,you come from the same cult which is convinced there are 366 1/4 rotations in a year http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropical_year "A tropical year (also known as a solar year), for general purposes, is the length of time that the Sun takes to return to the same position in the cycle of seasons, as seen from Earth" "Mean tropical year current value The mean tropical year, as of January 1, 2000 was 365.2421897 or 365 days, 5 hours, 48 minutes, 45.19 seconds. This changes slowly; an expression suitable for calculating the length in days for the distant past is 365.2421896698 − 6.15359×10−6T − 7.29×10−10T2 + 2.64×10−10T3" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidereal_year "A sidereal year is the time taken by the Earth to orbit the Sun once with respect to the fixed stars. Hence it is also the time taken for the Sun to return to the same position with respect to the fixed stars after apparently travelling once around the ecliptic. It was equal to 365.256363004 days[1] at noon 1 January 2000 (J2000.0). This is 20m24.5128s longer than the mean tropical year at J2000.0.[1] The word "sidereal" is derived from the Latin sidus meaning "star"." "Apparent motion of the Sun against the stars As the Earth orbits the Sun, the apparent position of the Sun against the stars gradually moves along the ecliptic, passing through the twelve traditional constellations of the zodiac, and returning to its starting point after one sidereal year. This motion is difficult to observe directly because the stars cannot be seen when the Sun is in the sky. However, if one looks regularly at the sky before dawn, the annual motion is very noticeable: the last stars seen to rise are not always the same, and within a week or two an upward shift can be noted. As an example, in July in the Northern Hemisphere, Orion cannot be seen in the dawn sky, but in August it becomes visible. This effect is easier to measure than the north/south movement of the position of sunrise (except in high-latitude regions), which defines the seasonal cycle and the tropical year on which the Gregorian calendar is based. For this reason many cultures started their year on the first day a particular special star (Sirius, for instance) could be seen in the east at dawn. In Hesiod's Works and Days, the times of the year for sowing, harvest, and so on are given by reference to the first visibility of stars. Such a calendar effectively uses the sidereal year." |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Parametric down-conversion in the Solar system
On 29/07/2011 20:46, Androcles wrote:
wrote in message ... On Jul 28, 11:19 pm, Aleksandr wrote: On 26 ???, 18:34, wrote: On Jul 26, 12:22 am, Aleksandr wrote: Sam, you should explain popularly difference between the synodic period and the sidereal period:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synodic...he_sidereal_an... This has been done over and over countless times. Unfortunately, Gerald has no clue concerning frames of reference, none at all, so he is finished before he has started. \Paul A It is very similar that your statement represents the facts. Whether you can point out any old message confirming your point of view? Errr... how about this very thread? If oriel's believing that the moon doesn't rotate isn't due to his fundamental inability to understand varying frames of reference, to what can it be attributed? \Paul A ================================================= If a star comes toward you at 30 km/sec and light leaves the star at 300,000 km/sec and you know all about varying frames of reference, how fast is the light coming toward you, palsy? At 299,792,458km/s, same as all other light. |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Parametric down-conversion in the Solar system
On Jul 27, 10:49*am, oriel36 wrote:
Newton was the only person ever to declare that the moon rotates when it doesn't... a man on the moon who can look out constantly at the Earth if he so chooses (because the moon doesn't rotate)... Short and sweet - the Earth has intrinsic rotation with latitudinal variations in speed as a signature of any round and rotating body where the moon does not,the very fact that you can look out at the moon and see that it doesn't rotate should be enough Tell us, if you lived on the 'Far Side of the moon', you would have no idea that the Earth even existed, because you can only see it from the 'near side of the moon', where it is always in the sky... correct? However, from that Far Side you WOULD see the sun rise and set each month, and you WOULD see the fixed stars rise and set every month. What conclusion would you therefore come to, were you to live on the Far Side of the moon? (Note; this is not a trick question). |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Parametric down-conversion in the Solar system
On 30 июл, 01:42, oriel36 wrote:
On Jul 29, 2:33Â*pm, Aleksandr Timofeev wrote: The Moon is in synchronous rotation: it rotates about its axis in about the same time it takes to orbit the Earth. The distinction between a planet and a satellite/moon is in the specifics of orbital motion around their respective centers,a planet turns 360 degrees to the central Sun whereas a moon does not rotate to the central planet,either through intrinsic rotation nor orbital motion.The Earth's polar daylight/darkness cycle indicative of the orbital trait corresponds to a 'travelling axis' stretch through the center of the Earth from Arctic to Antarctic circles wherein at the null rotational points at the polar coordinates,a person experiences roughly 6 months of darkness,6 months of daylight and a transitional period of twilight at the equinoctial orbital points as those coordinates turn through the circle of illumination with a full 360 degree turning coincident with the orbital period. Well, please look at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZIB_leg75Q “Why does the same side of the Moon always face the Earth? The Moon has synchronous rotation: it's rotation period is the same as its period of revolution. Earth image credit: NASA†Please, your comment. |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Parametric down-conversion in the Solar system
On Jul 29, 4:55Â*pm, Aleksandr Timofeev
wrote: On 27 июл, 21:49, oriel36 wrote: On Jul 27, 12:49Â*pm, Aleksandr Timofeev wrote: [snip] The Moon is in synchronous rotation with Earth, always showing the same face. Newton was the only person ever to declare that the moon rotates when it doesn't hence the severity of the problem which humanity faces for although we can land a man on the moon who can look out constantly at the Earth if he so chooses (because the moon doesn't rotate) it seems that the interpretative faculties in humanity today are,to all intents and purposes,non-existent.Short and sweet - the Earth has intrinsic rotation with latitudinal variations in speed as a signature of any round and rotating body where the moon does not,the very fact that you can look out at the moon and see that it doesn't rotate Well, please look at:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZIB_leg75Q “Why does the same side of the Moon always face the Earth? The Moon has synchronous rotation: it's rotation period is the same as its period of revolution. Earth image credit: NASA†Please, your comment. You have already had my comment by way of an introduction to a comparison between a moon and a planet in terms of its orbital characteristics,the moon orbits the Earth with variations in latitudinal speeds while the Earth rotates to the Sun daily And turns slowly an unevenly to the central Sun about a travelling axis drawn through the center of the Earth from Arctic to Antarctic circles.This great orbital daylight/darkness cycle is experiences at the null rotational coordinates at the North/South poles in almost isolation hence the poles turn through the circle of illumination in March/ September just as the Earth daily turns through the circle of illumination in its daily rotation. Of course people who imagine the moon rotates just won't get it ,not even when actual time lapse footage of a planet with fortuitous daily and orbital characteristics expresses it clearly - http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/arc...99/11/video/b/ Instead of discussing a major modification to orbital dynamics and how this encompasses many terrestrial effects such as hemispherical fluctuations in temperature,the variations in the natural noon cycle and many other related effects which require a strict demarcation of daily and orbital dynamics,I am here amidst people who simply cannot interpret the orbital motion of the moon around the Earth even when men can actually look out at a spinning Earth more or less constantly apart from the intervention of Sunlight as the moon orbits the Earth bringing the Sun into view with each circuit. I now live close to the European observatory of Leiden yet I know there is not a single individual there who can exist comfortably with the language of astronomy even though that observatory is closely linked to great astronomical names of Huygens with Gemma Frisius in the background.I could go there and explain what absolute/relative time,space and motion means in terms of the right ascension error and the illegal attempt to circumvent the explanation of apparent planetary retrogrades by an alternative method of modelling but judging from what concerns individuals there and most other observatories,they just would know or care. |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Parametric down-conversion in the Solar system
On Jul 29, 4:58*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 7/29/11 7:27 AM, oriel36 wrote: * *The number of earth rotation in 4 astronomical years is 1464.96879+ * Can somebody,for the love of God,behave like an adult for a change and accept that Feb 29th basically is a testament to the fact that daily rotation and orbital motions are separate and are brought into a near enough proportion of 1461 rotations for 4 orbital circuits and its timekeeping equivalent of 1461 days across 4 years. The guys in the late 17th century went bananas with watches in the same way contemporaries lose it with computer modelling and although there are numerous subtleties where planetary dynamics and timekeeping meshes,one of them is not the proportion of rotations per circuit. What could possibly be worse than the utter hostility towards a simple temperature chart showing cause and effect where the 1461 days of the calendar system correspond to 4 years/4 orbital circuits and the temperature rise and fall is due to the rotation of the Earth during those 4 years ? - http://news.bbc.co.uk/weather/forecast/101? Willful ignorance is a terrible thing yet what else can it be for the descent is towards a mental affliction and I have done all in my power to avoid that type of charge, |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Parametric down-conversion in the Solar system
On 8/2/11 2:05 PM, oriel36 wrote:
On Jul 29, 4:58 pm, Sam wrote: On 7/29/11 7:27 AM, oriel36 wrote: The number of earth rotation in 4 astronomical years is 1464.96879+ Can somebody,for the love of God,behave like an adult for a change and accept that Feb 29th basically is a testament to the fact that daily rotation and orbital motions are separate and are brought into a near enough proportion of 1461 rotations for 4 orbital circuits and its timekeeping equivalent of 1461 days across 4 years. No! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
evolution of our solar-system as exo-solar-system and why global | Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 14 | July 31st 09 03:15 AM |
Our Solar System | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 1 | February 28th 07 11:20 AM |
ET in solar system | Chris | SETI | 22 | August 13th 05 05:22 AM |
Name our Solar System | [email protected] | Space Science Misc | 7 | May 12th 05 01:14 AM |
Solar concentration mirrors in the outer solar system | wlm | Policy | 26 | September 13th 04 07:54 AM |