|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
a question about Mercury
Until 1962 it was thought that Mercury's "day" was the same length as
its "year" so as to keep that same face to the Sun much as the Moon does to the Earth. But this was shown to be false in 1965 by doppler radar observations. One thing I'd love to know: just *why* did people believe this? I'd have thought there'd be no telescopes at that time that could show surface markings on Mercury, so how would anyone be able to even guess its rotation period? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
a question about Mercury
"brian" wrote in message
ups.com... Until 1962 it was thought that Mercury's "day" was the same length as its "year" so as to keep that same face to the Sun much as the Moon does to the Earth. But this was shown to be false in 1965 by doppler radar observations. One thing I'd love to know: just *why* did people believe this? I'd have thought there'd be no telescopes at that time that could show surface markings on Mercury, so how would anyone be able to even guess its rotation period? It was thought that, due to Mercury's close proximity to the Sun, tidal braking would have damped out the axial rotation and caused Mercury to face one side always towards the Sun. It's the same thing that caused the Moon's condition with respect to the Earth. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
a question about Mercury
"brian" wrote in message ups.com... Until 1962 it was thought that Mercury's "day" was the same length as its "year" so as to keep that same face to the Sun much as the Moon does to the Earth. But this was shown to be false in 1965 by doppler radar observations. One thing I'd love to know: just *why* did people believe this? Same reason they still believe in virgin births and only-one-speed-of-light for all. They are brainwashed, brainbleached and braindried-out-in-the-sun so that they repeat what they hear like sheep, all bleating the same "baa". http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/SR.GIF Nature works by democratic vote. I'd have thought there'd be no telescopes at that time that could show surface markings on Mercury, so how would anyone be able to even guess its rotation period? Anyone can guess, it's far easier than discovery. Mars had canals once instead airline routes. http://www.nasa.gov/centers/langley/...ain_Mesaba.jpg http://ssed.gsfc.nasa.gov/tharsis/canals.html Most of the world is populated by knuckle-draggers. Neanderthals see what they expect to see and if they have no way of checking then the best guess wins, and *that* is why. As to the tidal braking theory, Mercury is in an eccentric (0.2) elliptical orbit. It should oscillate back and forth like the balance wheel of a clock. http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde.../Analemmae.htm Conservation of angular momentum be damned. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
a question about Mercury
Greg Neill wrote:
"brian" wrote in message ups.com... Until 1962 it was thought that Mercury's "day" was the same length as its "year" so as to keep that same face to the Sun much as the Moon does to the Earth. But this was shown to be false in 1965 by doppler radar observations. One thing I'd love to know: just *why* did people believe this? I'd have thought there'd be no telescopes at that time that could show surface markings on Mercury, so how would anyone be able to even guess its rotation period? It was thought that, due to Mercury's close proximity to the Sun, tidal braking would have damped out the axial rotation and caused Mercury to face one side always towards the Sun. It's the same thing that caused the Moon's condition with respect to the Earth. Actually there's more to it. Mercury is best viewed in the evening sky in the spring and in the morning sky in the fall, owing to the angle which the ecliptic makes with the horizon. So suppose you're an avid Mercury observer in the Northern Hemisphere. You'll see it for a week or two in March, then about six months later you'll see it for another week or two. In those intervening six months, Mercury will have completed two revolutions (176 days is not quite half a year) and three rotations. It will be showing more or less the same face to the sun! This geometry will persist for virtually *all* the favorable apparitions in the Northern Hemisphere. Now it's difficult to discern markings on Mercury visually -- it's low in the sky, usually in twilight, and tough to see in daylight. Is it surprising that people interpreted the available observations in favor of synchronous rotation? -- Bill Owen |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Perihelion of Mercury question | Sorcerer | Astronomy Misc | 13 | January 6th 07 09:24 PM |
Perihelion of Mercury question | Sorcerer | Astronomy Misc | 114 | January 1st 07 11:36 PM |
Mercury/Gemini question | Pat Flannery | History | 25 | December 16th 06 06:14 AM |
Good morning or good evening depending upon your location. I want to ask you the most important question of your life. Your joy or sorrow for all eternity depends upon your answer. The question is: Are you saved? It is not a question of how good | OM | History | 0 | April 22nd 05 08:37 AM |
Mercury MR-3 Freedom 7 Question | Robert Conley | History | 2 | January 22nd 04 04:32 PM |