Months and Calendars in Arabic (was: Synchronic analysis of "rare"?)

Peter T. Daniels wrote:
On Dec 16, 8:43 am, wugi wrote:

I wonder if there exists some merry go round where customers like
oriel would have the choice between swinging around with noses
pointing at 1) a fixed location at the horizon, and 2) the centre of
rotation, and then applying both with a very short radius to
experience which one represents a real local rotation.
Another option is, making a movie of the moon orbiting around the
earth, and then "zooming in" upon the sole moon to make visible its
local rotation.

I think the Teacups at Disneyland (I'm picturing a rosette of several
pods on an arm on a circumference) are something like that, or perhaps
could be set to be like that, so that the rider would always face the
same direction while being spun on both the large circle (an orbit)
and an epicycle. I suspect you'g get even dizzier than if the pod you
were in weren't rotating.

Possible, it may also depend on where you can rest your eyes on, the horizon
or the machine's central area (I think the worst must be the immediate
surroundings).
Another fine example where one can see "moonwise orbiting = rotation" at
work is the Rotor:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotor_%28ride%29
eg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbb42rWSSnY
where people orbit moonwise but, as they manage to approach the rotating
centre pole, they demonstrate the transitional equivalence between orbiting
and rotation.
The Rotor is a particular example of how any *rotating* body consists of an
integral sum of *moonwise orbiting* infinitesimals. And the moon itself can
be thought of as an infinitesimal part of a virtual celestial body
encompassing the moon's orbit and rotating accordingly.

guido google wugi

oriel36 wrote:
BTW, AFAICT your answer is wrong. Since the sidereal month is the
time the Moon takes to complete one full revolution around the Earth
with respect to the background stars, it is one complete rotation
each sidereal month that would be observed from distant stars
regardless of what
Earth and Sun do and what relative positions they assume. I believe
one rotation as observed from Alpha Centauri will be closer to
27.322 days than to your 29.531 days.

pjk

You are calling the orbital motion of the moon around the Earth
'rotation',

Some people like to use the right words, funny enough.

the Earth has an orbital motion around the Sun and it also
has an intrinsic rotation which has a specific attribute of a maximum
equatorial speed diminishing to residual rotation at the North/South
poles

Aha, now I think I understand your fixation upon intrinsic rotation (I'd
thought a moment you were trying to grasp something of Coriolis
acceleration)

which distinguishes it from orbital motion and any trait
associated with orbital motion.

You mean, which actually nicely identifies one orbit with one of your
intrinsic rotations.
Take a look at the relative motion between some characteristic points in or
upon the Moon body; let r be the Moon radius and R its orbit's; during one
Moon orbit the outer point of the Moon covers a trajectory with length 2pi
(R+r), the inner point with length 2pi (R-r), the centre and, for that
matter, the Moon's "poles", an orbit's length 2pi R. With respect to the
centre and the "poles", the inner and outer points make an extra path length
of 2pi r, actually itself a (Moon radius) "orbit", ie one Moon intrinsic
rotation, taken at "Moon equatorial speed" around a "Moon rotation axis" =
pole-centre-pole (!).

So, with your seeming "day/night cycle" fixation:

N sidereal rotations = N-1 "day/night cycle" rotations + 1 orbital rotation

as can be seen in my previous example link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZIB_leg75Q
(about 8 planar ie "sidereal" rotations for about 7 "red/white" ie
"day/night" cycles.)

As all parts of the moon experience a single daylight/darkness cycle
as a consequence of its orbital motion around the Earth with this
cycle coincident with its orbital period while keeping the same face
to the Earth,the idea of lunar rotation is superfluous (I know
empiricists love that word).The imitation analogy at the beginning of
this thread is enough and if people cannot apply the analogy to the
moon's orbital motion of the Earth and still retain the nonsensical
idea then nothing can be done apart from considering it a genuine
affliction of the mind,something which makes discussion and adaption
impossible.

Of course, with your day/night cycle obsession it would make tough living on
satellites where this is absent or not obvious, eg,
where the Sun may at times "begin the day" rising hesitantly, changing its
mind and setting back before re-emerging more decidedly, say, Mercury;
where the rotation axis is tilted so badly wrt the orbit that there is no
clear cycle, say, Uranus;
where the Sun would be that far that there is no obvious "day", but an
obvious stellar cycle indeed, say, Pluto
etc etc

guido google wugi

On Dec 24, 7:07*am, "wugi" wrote:

So, with your seeming "day/night cycle" fixation:


You mean the irritation with people who cannot express with confidence
that the day/night cycle and one 24 hour rotation are one and the
same,that there are 365 such cycles in a non-leap year and 366 days
and rotations in a leap year.


N sidereal rotations = N-1 "day/night cycle" rotations + 1 orbital rotation


It is not an exercise in squirming,you believe there are 366 1/4
rotations in 365 1/4 days through the 'sidereal time' ideology hence
your inability to explain what the Feb 29th leap day does in context
of the calendar system and as a rough fit with daily and orbital
dynamics.There is no advantage to tackling the late 17th century error
without first looking at the ancient calendar system ,a system every
person here will use here today and while,in an intellectually playful
sort of way, it can be looked at like a jigsaw puzzle where the
components fit together to give a picture,it gives an immense
satisfaction once a few pieces come together as we already see the
full picture as a working calendar system but know little about how
the pieces fit.


as can be seen in *my previous example link:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZIB_leg75Q
(about 8 planar ie "sidereal" rotations for about 7 "red/white" ie
"day/night" cycles.)


Again,you are arguing against one day/night cycle corresponding to one
24 hour rotation by arguing for 366 1/4 rotations,in technical terms
you are trying to dump both daily and orbital dynamics into right
ascension,for a reader unfamiliar with that term it is the misuse of
the calendar system allied with stellar circumpolar motion which looks
like this -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYy0EQBnqHI



As all parts of the moon experience a single daylight/darkness cycle
as a consequence of its orbital motion around the Earth with this
cycle coincident with its orbital period while keeping the same face
to the Earth,the idea of lunar rotation is superfluous (I know
empiricists love that word).The imitation analogy at the beginning of
this thread is enough and if people cannot apply the analogy to the
moon's orbital motion of the Earth and still retain the nonsensical
idea then nothing can be done apart from considering it a genuine
affliction of the mind,something which makes discussion and adaption
impossible.

Of course, with your day/night cycle obsession....

In the 21st century and with all our technological achievements,there
should be no hesitation in expressing that one day/night cycle and one
24 hour rotation correspond to cause and effect as it is only a matter
pf taking into account what your body experiences across a calendar
cycle.Sure,it takes a lot of thinking through but there is a lot of
admiration for the original calendar builders in that one act of
genius that makes the system work and now has important consequences
for our era,that brilliant maneuver was allowing the annual cycle to
drift against the daily cycle while in planetary dynamical terms it
allows the orbital motion to drift against daily rotation.

So,it is not a matter of dazzling the reader with a blizzard of modern
time acronyms but simply putting one specific day in context as a
bedrock fact and then that genuinely curious individual can look for
the next piece and expand the picture.It is that tricky part where the
creation of the average 24 hour day and the steady progression of
these days substitute for steady rotation,hence the planet turns once
in 24 hours,that cause the great difficulty but,like everything
else,that part becomes easy with familiarity and a firm foothold on
that level.

There is a good reason why there is no clear distinction between
global climate and hemispherical weather of Spring/Summer/Fall/Winter
and the distinction would have prevented the climate modelers from
running amok in the belief that we are in dire straits and that humans
have control over global temperatures,the reason is that
interpretative astronomy was almost lost due to speculative sciences
that take the name of astronomy.People who can exist comfortably with
the explanation for a day/night cycle and 24 hour rotation that is Feb
29th as a reflection of 365 1/4 days and rotations in a year will
light up that side of their reasoning which was always there thereby
returning a balance to a world that badly needs it.









it would make tough living on
satellites where this is absent or not obvious, eg,
where the Sun may at times "begin the day" rising hesitantly, changing its
mind and setting back before re-emerging more decidedly, say, Mercury;
where the rotation axis is tilted so badly wrt the orbit that there is no
clear cycle, say, Uranus;






where the Sun would be that far that there is no obvious "day", but an
obvious stellar cycle indeed, say, Pluto
etc etc

guido google wugi

oriel36 wrote:
On Dec 24, 7:07 am, "wugi" wrote:

Of course, with your day/night cycle obsession....

In the 21st century and with all our technological achievements,there
should be no hesitation (...)

You wrote the following nicely away ...

So,it is not a matter of dazzling the reader with a blizzard of modern
time acronyms (...)

I can't help you're dazzled, where your first encountered school pupil
isn't.

it would make tough living on
satellites where this is absent or not obvious, eg,
where the Sun may at times "begin the day" rising hesitantly,
changing its
mind and setting back before re-emerging more decidedly, say,
Mercury;
where the rotation axis is tilted so badly wrt the orbit that there
is no
clear cycle, say, Uranus;
where the Sun would be that far that there is no obvious "day", but
an
obvious stellar cycle indeed, say, Pluto

+ any earlier stage of the moon cycle where its orbit would correspond to
1+epsilon or 1-epsilon rotations

etc etc

.... but here it's back: I wish you a funny virtual life on any of such
non-day-night-cycle satellites :-o)
Over and out, anyway, as we know nobody is going to convince you and vice
versa, and to the impossible (such as teaching the unteachable) nobody is
obliged.

guido google wugi

ditto

On Dec 24, 11:53*am, "wugi" wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Dec 24, 7:07 am, "wugi" wrote:
Of course, with your day/night cycle obsession....

In the 21st century and with all our technological achievements,there
should be no hesitation (...)

You wrote the following nicely away ...

So,it is not a matter of dazzling the reader with a blizzard of modern
time acronyms (...)

I can't help you're dazzled, where your first encountered school pupil
isn't.

*it would make tough living on
satellites where this is absent or not obvious, eg,
where the Sun may at times "begin the day" rising hesitantly,
changing its
mind and setting back before re-emerging more decidedly, say,
Mercury;
where the rotation axis is tilted so badly wrt the orbit that there
is no
clear cycle, say, Uranus;
where the Sun would be that far that there is no obvious "day", but
an
obvious stellar cycle indeed, say, Pluto

+ any earlier stage of the moon cycle where its orbit would correspond to
1+epsilon or 1-epsilon rotations

etc etc

... but here it's back: I wish you a funny virtual life on any of such
non-day-night-cycle satellites :-o)
Over and out, anyway, as we know nobody is going to convince you and *vice
versa, and to the impossible (such as teaching the unteachable) nobody is
obliged.

guido google wugi

ditto

A lot of junk has flowed through astronomy over the last few centuries
and should it happen that men look at the correspondence between a 24
hour rotation,a day/night cycle that is Feb 29th and put the first
piece together,then we are back on the road to intellectual stability
after a long and dark period where men actually believed there are 366
1/4 rotations in 365 1/4 days.

As a Christian,it is a tradition to offer a gift on this day and there
is nothing better than an intellectual jigsaw puzzle at this time of
the year,some people go quicker than others,some use different pieces
first but the picture is always the same - the Earth turns no more
than a full 365 times in an orbital year,the refined value is 365 1/4
rotations in 365 1/4 days and is grouped in an arithmetic series of
365 and 366 days and rotations that is the calendar cycle.

A joyful Christmas to those who feel the worse is over and that there
are enough people who care about our past and about the future to move
science in a much more productive direction.

oriel36 wrote:
On Dec 24, 11:53 am, "wugi" wrote:

it would make tough living on
satellites where this is absent or not obvious, eg,
where the Sun may at times "begin the day" rising hesitantly,
changing its
mind and setting back before re-emerging more decidedly, say,
Mercury;
where the rotation axis is tilted so badly wrt the orbit that there
is no
clear cycle, say, Uranus;
where the Sun would be that far that there is no obvious "day", but
an
obvious stellar cycle indeed, say, Pluto

+ any earlier stage of the moon cycle where its orbit would
correspond to 1+epsilon or 1-epsilon rotations

etc etc

... but here it's back: I wish you a funny virtual life on any of
such non-day-night-cycle satellites :-o)
Over and out, anyway, as we know nobody is going to convince you and
vice versa, and to the impossible (such as teaching the unteachable)
nobody is obliged.

guido google wugi

ditto

A lot of junk has flowed through astronomy over the last few centuries

Sure, but your contributions outwit it :-)

and should it happen that men look at the correspondence between a 24
hour rotation,a day/night cycle that is Feb 29th and put the first
piece together,then we are back on the road to intellectual stability
after a long and dark period where men actually believed there are 366
1/4 rotations in 365 1/4 days.

Exactly, 366 rotations wrt fixed stars for 365 rotations wrt Sun.

A joyful Christmas to those who feel the worse is over and that there
are enough people who care about our past and about the future to move
science in a much more productive direction.

You'll be surprised that I feel same, but to my mind the productive
direction, then, points not to crackpottery.
Anyway, I only react when I happen about another nice counterexample for
your misunderstandings. Here it goes. You never had a trip in some chair
lift, eg such one:
http://home.scarlet.be/~pin12499/giffls/DSC01465.JPG ?

Then you surely experienced the forced, at times shaky, rotation as you
enter in the half moon-wise orbit around the turning wheel? A fine example
of how a moonwise rotational orbit marries the orbiting circumference of a
rotating body. (see also my ref to the Rotor elsewhere).

Have a nice day/nightless stay on tilted Uranus, or at the wintery Southpole
with beautiful rotating stellar night skies.

guido google wugi

On Dec 25, 9:23*pm, "wugi" wrote:

Exactly, 366 rotations wrt fixed stars for 365 rotations wrt Sun.


A living nightmare has similar attributes to a dreaming nightmare
insofar as the irritation experienced comes from the bewilderment at
the lack of intellectual cohesion in an awakened or dreaming state,you
maintain 366 1/4 rotations in 365 1/4 days and there is no possible
way to link cause and effect which is normally understood through the
24 hour rotation and day/night cycle of Feb 29th where 365 1/4 days
and rotations balance out with one orbital circuit.There is a genuine
satisfaction in putting 24 hours of rotation in context of the
calendar system yet none of the readers in all 3 forums can do it and
that is quite something regardless of the perceived technical
difficulties and they really don't amount to much.

What becomes of science,history or anything else when not even the
idea that 24 hours of rotation causes a day/night cycle survives as a
fundamental fact !,it is not so much wrong as completely dismaying as
nothing else survives,not history of the calendar builders,not
calendar reform,not the links to planetary dynamics nor terrestrial
effects in climate,geology or any other discipline,the great longitude
story which relies on the rotation of the Earth once in 24 hours is
ignored and that includes adventure and invention,all the heroes of
our race become diminished or are used as puppets for novelties.

All of it can be undone for what else can happen,that men would
willingly carry on with something as bad as an imbalance between daily
rotation and the day/night cycle.It happens that intelligent people
cannot maintain a falsehood for any great length of time,at least
those who encounter something as magnificent as the calendar system
with its leap day correction and while people withdraw or remain quiet
hoping this topic will disappear,it diminishes our race by inaction as
this generation sees the error and the resolution for the first time
since it happened in the late 17th century.

So,who will express their intelligence by affirming 365 1/4 rotations
in 365 1/4 days thereby putting themselves in sync with both science
and history ?,it is not a big ask but there it is.