#41
|
|||
|
|||
All motions may be accelerated and retarded
It isn't the motions that are retarded. Clear Skies Chuck Taylor Do you observe the moon? Try http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lunar-observing/ Are you interested in understanding optics? Try http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ATM_Optics_Software/ ************************************ |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 08:12:10 GMT, Mark Ayliffe wrote:
On or about 2005-02-23, Pete Lawrence illuminated us with: On 23 Feb 2005 10:11:47 -0800, wrote: Big topic, small people ( at least so far). Big topics contain big nuts... Aren't they called Snickers now? :-) Where does Marathon fit into this then? -- Pete http://www.digitalsky.org.uk |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
"John Carruthers" wrote in message ...
"Each solar day the Earth rotates 360º with respect to the Sun. Similarly the Earth rotates 360º with respect to the background stars in a sidereal day. During each solar day, the motion of the Earth around the Sun means the Earth rotates 361º with respect to the background stars." Don't take our word for it, go out and time it for yourself. jc What you are doing is timing the motion of the Earth against an external reference,what you are incapable of compreheding is that pace originated from a Sun based reference which reflects constant axial rotation moving through variable orbital motion and orbital orientation - http://www.mhhe.com/physsci/astronom...ages/04f15.jpg Whatever drives you freaks to imagine that a clock was found under a rock and that you can begin timing the motion of the stars back to the same position as reflecting the rotation of the Earth must rank as worse than creationism or geocentricity ,it shows none of the subtleties of our astronomical heritage and the people who formatted the principles behind a clock,the calendar system,astronomical modelling and in short,the greatest achievements of humanity in investigating natural phenomena. Do you know what happens when you try to force a .986 deg axial rotational coordinate into a change in orbital displacement,you get your geocentric/heliocentric equivalency alright but astronomy becomes little more than a cartoon. http://www.nordita.dk/~steen/fysik51...s/AACHCIR0.JPG |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Have your fun but you ****ing freaks time the motion of the stars
directly to the axial rotation of the Earth and that makes you the dumdest ****ers ever to set foot on the planet.Just trying to spare your children the same miserable existence you indoctrinated maggots accepted without question. |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
"Pete Lawrence" wrote in message Aren't they called Snickers now? :-) Where does Marathon fit into this then? -- Pete http://www.digitalsky.org.uk I thought Mr Messier had something to do with this. :-) Tony |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
The one enjoyable thing is watching the Germans and particularly Mach
get fed up with Newton's thinking and imagines that absolute/relative time are philosophical concepts. Mach: on Newton's Absolute Time "This absolute time can be measured by comparison with no motion; it has therefore neither a practical nor a scientific value; and no one is justified in saying that he knows aught about it. It is an idle metaphysical conception." Mach, Analyse der Empfindungen, 6th ed. So where is English common sense or do you lot wish to follow Albert into his H.G Wells world and that wonderful early 20th century notion that man could conquer the Universe.Today responsible people are trying to save the planet but you ****ing freaks are part of the problem. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
John Carruthers wrote:
years old or american. Easy now, no need to make rash generalisations. We're not all brainless twits like him. ;-) -- ~Sayf |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Fleetie wrote:
"DH" wrote wrote: Astronomers you ain't,that much is certain.Even if you hijack the title and others do not notice you are little more than cataloguers. An astronomer has the final say on what works and what does'nt,the very fact is that my astronomical heritage is in the hands of a bunch of mathematical freaks who could'nt make an observation to save their lives let alone distinguish between perceived motions from Earth and actual motions. Powerful telescopes supply more data but they are worthless in the hands of theorists and it has been that way for centuries.Passing on Newton's empirical illness to future generations assures that astronomy will eventually die in all but name for the theorists have left you nothing left to observe. Good enough for people who have no standards , no sense of the scale and majesty of the cosmos and no way to pass that on to future generations. Poor Grammar : Hey, ****emonger, the mote in his eye, perhaps. Why the capital "G" in "Grammar"? * for the theorists have left you nothing left to observe : Wow, tautology, that's cool ! IMNSHO not an example of tautology. Unnecessary repeated word != tautology. 3/10 for Grammar, It's that capital "G" again. +1 for the tautology, which I rather enjoyed, 0/10 for making any sense whatsoever ! So you're giving him a lowly 3 for his poor grammar, but adding 1 point back again for his "tautology"? Whatb sirection are you going? Do you know? I needn't say more. Martin You're defending this sick **** ? Or just attacking me ? OK, my grammar ain't perfik, so I thought I'd have a bit of fun, lighten up FFS DH |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
On or about 2005-02-25,
Pete Lawrence illuminated us with: On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 08:12:10 GMT, Mark Ayliffe wrote: On or about 2005-02-23, Pete Lawrence illuminated us with: On 23 Feb 2005 10:11:47 -0800, wrote: Big topic, small people ( at least so far). Big topics contain big nuts... Aren't they called Snickers now? :-) Where does Marathon fit into this then? Oh phoo. I always prefer the ones without nuts anyway. Mars or Milky Way. Hey we're back on topic ;-) -- Mark Real email address | For my birthday I got a humidifier and a is mark at | de-humidifier ...I put them in the same room and let ayliffe dot org | them fight it out. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Proposal for an APO "standard:" TMBs 100mm f8 | RichA | Amateur Astronomy | 24 | November 30th 04 04:50 AM |
Fractal Wavicles and the Incomplete Standard Model | Mad Scientist | Misc | 0 | August 26th 04 07:13 AM |
The Standard of BBC reporting nowadays | James Cook | UK Astronomy | 2 | February 27th 04 12:32 PM |
Anyone had success with afocal photography using standard digital cameras? | Tim Powers | Amateur Astronomy | 2 | December 13th 03 02:28 AM |
How are 'standard' Celestron eyepieces? | Timothy O'Connor | Amateur Astronomy | 5 | November 30th 03 02:57 AM |