Since it's cloudy

ROCK ON FINLAND

Colin Dawson wrote:
ROCK ON FINLAND

For those not knowing what the presumed subject here (Eurovision Song
Contest) was:
http://www.eurovision.tv/english/index.htm

Claudio

"Claudio Grondi" wrote in message
...
Colin Dawson wrote:
ROCK ON FINLAND
For those not knowing what the presumed subject here (Eurovision Song
Contest) was:
http://www.eurovision.tv/english/index.htm

Claudio


Yep, I was feeling rather childish.

"Colin Dawson" wrote in message
. uk...

"Claudio Grondi" wrote in message
...
Colin Dawson wrote:
ROCK ON FINLAND
For those not knowing what the presumed subject here (Eurovision Song
Contest) was:
http://www.eurovision.tv/english/index.htm

Claudio


Yep, I was feeling rather childish.


It is difficult for me to understand why any person who reads this
particular newsgroup, with its always erudite and intelligent members can
possibly have any interest at all in the Eurovision Song Contest. For
goodness' sake man, do you not realise that Big Brother was on the other
side?

"John Brockbank" wrote in message
...

"Colin Dawson" wrote in message
. uk...

"Claudio Grondi" wrote in message
...
Colin Dawson wrote:
ROCK ON FINLAND
For those not knowing what the presumed subject here (Eurovision Song
Contest) was:
http://www.eurovision.tv/english/index.htm

Claudio


Yep, I was feeling rather childish.


It is difficult for me to understand why any person who reads this
particular newsgroup, with its always erudite and intelligent members can
possibly have any interest at all in the Eurovision Song Contest. For
goodness' sake man, do you not realise that Big Brother was on the other
side?


Oh damm.

Colin Dawson wrote:
ROCK ON FINLAND

Try real astronomy if its cloudy -

Epitome Of Copernican Astronomy by JOHANNES KEPLER


Finally by what arguments do you prove that the centre of the Sun which
is at the midpoint of the planetary spheres and bears their whole
system - does not revolve in some annual movement,as Brahe wishes,but
in accordance with Copernicus sticks immobile in one place,while the
centre of the Earth revolves in an annual movement.


Argument 10


" The 10th argument,taken from the periodic times, is as follows; the
apparent movement of the Sun has 365 days which is the mean measure
between Venus' period of 225 days and Mars' period of 687
days.Therefore does not the nature of things shout out loud that the
circuits in which those 365 days are taken up has a mean position
between the circuits of Mars and Venus around the Sun and thus this is
not the circuit of the Sun around the Earth -for none of the primary
planets has its orbit arranged around the Earth,as Brahe admits,but the
circuit of the Earth around the resting Sun,just as the other
planets,namely Mars and Venus,complete their own periods by running
around the Sun."


Johannes Kepler


_______________________________________________


PHENOMENON IV.
"That the fixed stars being at rest, the periodic times of the five
primary planets, and (whether of the sun about the earth, or) of the
earth about the sun, are in the sesquiplicate proportion of their mean
distances from the sun.

This proportion, first observed by Kepler, is now received by all
astronomers; for the periodic times are the same, and the dimensions of
the orbits are the same, whether the sun revolves about the earth, or
the earth about the sun. And as to the measures of the periodic times,
all astronomers are agreed about them. But for the dimensions of the
orbits, Kepler and Bullialdus, above all others, have determined them
from observations with the greatest accuracy; and the mean distances
corresponding to the periodic times differ but insensibly from those
which they have assigned, and for the most part fall in between them;
as we may see from the following table." newton


* http://members.tripod.com/~gravitee/phaenomena.htm


If you can manage to tell the difference between the wonderful
reasoning of Kepler in support of Copernican heliocentricity against
the Newtonian twisting of that reasoning for quasi-geocentricity (Earth
around Sun/Sun around Earth) then perhaps you can clear the cloud that
is hanging over astronomy.

Only a person with a devotion for obfuscation would stand by and
watch a great astronomer's reasoning turned into rubbish.

This reads like a bad translation from German. Or possibly Latvian.
Unfortunately, EVERYTHING has been lost in translation.
"oriel36" wrote in message
oups.com...

Colin Dawson wrote:
ROCK ON FINLAND

Try real astronomy if its cloudy -

Epitome Of Copernican Astronomy by JOHANNES KEPLER


Finally by what arguments do you prove that the centre of the Sun which
is at the midpoint of the planetary spheres and bears their whole
system - does not revolve in some annual movement,as Brahe wishes,but
in accordance with Copernicus sticks immobile in one place,while the
centre of the Earth revolves in an annual movement.


Argument 10


" The 10th argument,taken from the periodic times, is as follows; the
apparent movement of the Sun has 365 days which is the mean measure
between Venus' period of 225 days and Mars' period of 687
days.Therefore does not the nature of things shout out loud that the
circuits in which those 365 days are taken up has a mean position
between the circuits of Mars and Venus around the Sun and thus this is
not the circuit of the Sun around the Earth -for none of the primary
planets has its orbit arranged around the Earth,as Brahe admits,but the
circuit of the Earth around the resting Sun,just as the other
planets,namely Mars and Venus,complete their own periods by running
around the Sun."


Johannes Kepler


_______________________________________________


PHENOMENON IV.
"That the fixed stars being at rest, the periodic times of the five
primary planets, and (whether of the sun about the earth, or) of the
earth about the sun, are in the sesquiplicate proportion of their mean
distances from the sun.

This proportion, first observed by Kepler, is now received by all
astronomers; for the periodic times are the same, and the dimensions of
the orbits are the same, whether the sun revolves about the earth, or
the earth about the sun. And as to the measures of the periodic times,
all astronomers are agreed about them. But for the dimensions of the
orbits, Kepler and Bullialdus, above all others, have determined them
from observations with the greatest accuracy; and the mean distances
corresponding to the periodic times differ but insensibly from those
which they have assigned, and for the most part fall in between them;
as we may see from the following table." newton


* http://members.tripod.com/~gravitee/phaenomena.htm


If you can manage to tell the difference between the wonderful
reasoning of Kepler in support of Copernican heliocentricity against
the Newtonian twisting of that reasoning for quasi-geocentricity (Earth
around Sun/Sun around Earth) then perhaps you can clear the cloud that
is hanging over astronomy.

Only a person with a devotion for obfuscation would stand by and
watch a great astronomer's reasoning turned into rubbish.

I agree that Newton's twisting of Keplerian reasoning is horrible ,a
simple Keplerian argument based on the Earth's motion between Mars and
Venus turns into a linguistic Newtonian nightmare.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Epitome Of Copernican Astronomy by JOHANNES KEPLER


Finally by what arguments do you prove that the centre of the Sun which
is at the midpoint of the planetary spheres and bears their whole
system - does not revolve in some annual movement,as Brahe wishes,but
in accordance with Copernicus sticks immobile in one place,while the
centre of the Earth revolves in an annual movement.


Argument 10


" The 10th argument,taken from the periodic times, is as follows; the
apparent movement of the Sun has 365 days which is the mean measure
between Venus' period of 225 days and Mars' period of 687
days.Therefore does not the nature of things shout out loud that the
circuits in which those 365 days are taken up has a mean position
between the circuits of Mars and Venus around the Sun and thus this is
not the circuit of the Sun around the Earth -for none of the primary
planets has its orbit arranged around the Earth,as Brahe admits,but the
circuit of the Earth around the resting Sun,just as the other
planets,namely Mars and Venus,complete their own periods by running
around the Sun."


Johannes Kepler

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------







Mark Dunn wrote:
This reads like a bad translation from German. Or possibly Latvian.
Unfortunately, EVERYTHING has been lost in translation.
"oriel36" wrote in message
oups.com...

Colin Dawson wrote:
ROCK ON FINLAND

Try real astronomy if its cloudy -

Epitome Of Copernican Astronomy by JOHANNES KEPLER


Finally by what arguments do you prove that the centre of the Sun which
is at the midpoint of the planetary spheres and bears their whole
system - does not revolve in some annual movement,as Brahe wishes,but
in accordance with Copernicus sticks immobile in one place,while the
centre of the Earth revolves in an annual movement.


Argument 10


" The 10th argument,taken from the periodic times, is as follows; the
apparent movement of the Sun has 365 days which is the mean measure
between Venus' period of 225 days and Mars' period of 687
days.Therefore does not the nature of things shout out loud that the
circuits in which those 365 days are taken up has a mean position
between the circuits of Mars and Venus around the Sun and thus this is
not the circuit of the Sun around the Earth -for none of the primary
planets has its orbit arranged around the Earth,as Brahe admits,but the
circuit of the Earth around the resting Sun,just as the other
planets,namely Mars and Venus,complete their own periods by running
around the Sun."


Johannes Kepler


_______________________________________________


PHENOMENON IV.
"That the fixed stars being at rest, the periodic times of the five
primary planets, and (whether of the sun about the earth, or) of the
earth about the sun, are in the sesquiplicate proportion of their mean
distances from the sun.

This proportion, first observed by Kepler, is now received by all
astronomers; for the periodic times are the same, and the dimensions of
the orbits are the same, whether the sun revolves about the earth, or
the earth about the sun. And as to the measures of the periodic times,
all astronomers are agreed about them. But for the dimensions of the
orbits, Kepler and Bullialdus, above all others, have determined them
from observations with the greatest accuracy; and the mean distances
corresponding to the periodic times differ but insensibly from those
which they have assigned, and for the most part fall in between them;
as we may see from the following table." newton


* http://members.tripod.com/~gravitee/phaenomena.htm


If you can manage to tell the difference between the wonderful
reasoning of Kepler in support of Copernican heliocentricity against
the Newtonian twisting of that reasoning for quasi-geocentricity (Earth
around Sun/Sun around Earth) then perhaps you can clear the cloud that
is hanging over astronomy.

Only a person with a devotion for obfuscation would stand by and
watch a great astronomer's reasoning turned into rubbish.