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?

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."

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.

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).

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.

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.

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,

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!