TOP 10 REASONS Why We Know the Earth is Round

TOP 10 REASONS Why We Know the Earth is Round
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_W280R_Jt8

In sci.physics Sam Wormley wrote:
TOP 10 REASONS Why We Know the Earth is Round
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_W280R_Jt8

You've posted this puerile cartoon before, ass hat, and were given lots
of flack over how puerile it is.

Your memory failing you, ass hat?



--
Jim Pennino

On Saturday, November 16, 2013 7:31:29 PM UTC-7, Sam Wormley wrote:
TOP 10 REASONS Why We Know the Earth is Round

Reason #10 hardly counts. If the Earth was flat, the other planets would just be tiny lights in the sky, having nothing in common with the Earth.

Earth wouldn't be a planet in that case, since it wouldn't wander; it would be the immovable surface defining the location of everything that is and dividing the Universe into two halves.

John Savard

On Saturday, November 16, 2013 6:31:29 PM UTC-8, Sam Wormley wrote:
TOP 10 REASONS Why We Know the Earth is Round

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_W280R_Jt8

The appreciation of the system whereby the 'average' 24 hour cycle substitutes for 'constant' rotation insofar as average/constant constitute the same thing for these purposes is up there with appreciating music compositions. The intricate scheme and the references used .

The foundation that the Earth is round and rotating at a rate of 15 degrees per hour relies on the apparent motion of a single star,in this case the annual apparent motion of Sirius and its periodic disappearance due to the orbital motion of the Earth putting the star behind the glare of the central Sun -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeQwY...cYaW1okcYgB1NR

http://danmary.org/tiki/show_image.php?id=30

The specifc error of Flamsteed and his contemporaries was to put Sirius in stellar circumpolar motion and completely ignore that the 24 hour system and Lat/Long system are founded on the average/constant progression of days/rotations within the 365/366 day format -

" Flamsteed used the star Sirius as a timekeeper correcting the sidereal time obtained from successive transits of the star into solar time, the difference of course being due to the rotation of the Earth round the Sun. Flamsteed wrote in a letter in 1677:-

.... our clocks kept so good a correspondence with the Heavens that I doubt it not but they would prove the revolutions of the Earth to be isochronical...."

http://www-history.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/...ongitude2.html


Coming to sci.astro.amateur and seeing you start a thread on how to prove the Earth is round would indeed seem condescending but for the fact that none of you ,salaried or not,recognize the Lat/Long system built around the average 24 hour day and the switching of terms from average to constant rotation.

You may all be an exception to the rule that you can't fool all the people all of the time because in well over a decade I have yet to see a single affirmation of the principles,the innovations and inventions that go into the Lat/Long system and its statement of a round and rotating Earth including the great observation in antiquity that observes Sirius to skip a day/rotation from its usual appearance after consecutive 365 days signifying that it takes an extra rotation's worth of orbital motion to complete 4 orbital circuits of the Earth.

I was up in Pasadena this morning and happened to be in a house that overlooks the Caltech grounds and supposedly the most renowned learning institution on the planet yet they cannot make sense of timekeeping and consequently the principles of a round and rotating Earth.If that is not dismaying I do not know what is !.

oriel36 wrote:
On Saturday, November 16, 2013 6:31:29 PM UTC-8, Sam Wormley wrote:
TOP 10 REASONS Why We Know the Earth is Round

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_W280R_Jt8

The appreciation of the system whereby the 'average' 24 hour cycle
substitutes for 'constant' rotation insofar as average/constant
constitute the same thing for these purposes is up there with
appreciating music compositions. The intricate scheme and the references used .

The foundation that the Earth is round and rotating at a rate of 15
degrees per hour relies on the apparent motion of a single star,in this
case the annual apparent motion of Sirius and its periodic disappearance
due to the orbital motion of the Earth putting the star behind the glare
of the central Sun -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?vîQwYr...cYaW1okcYgB1NR

http://danmary.org/tiki/show_image.php?id0

The specifc error of Flamsteed and his contemporaries was to put Sirius
in stellar circumpolar motion and completely ignore that the 24 hour
system and Lat/Long system are founded on the average/constant
progression of days/rotations within the 365/366 day format -

" Flamsteed used the star Sirius as a timekeeper correcting the sidereal
time obtained from successive transits of the star into solar time, the
difference of course being due to the rotation of the Earth round the
Sun. Flamsteed wrote in a letter in 1677:-

... our clocks kept so good a correspondence with the Heavens that I
doubt it not but they would prove the revolutions of the Earth to be isochronical..."

http://www-history.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/...ongitude2.html


Coming to sci.astro.amateur and seeing you start a thread on how to prove
the Earth is round would indeed seem condescending but for the fact that
none of you ,salaried or not,recognize the Lat/Long system built around
the average 24 hour day and the switching of terms from average to constant rotation.

You may all be an exception to the rule that you can't fool all the
people all of the time because in well over a decade I have yet to see a
single affirmation of the principles,the innovations and inventions that
go into the Lat/Long system and its statement of a round and rotating
Earth including the great observation in antiquity that observes Sirius
to skip a day/rotation from its usual appearance after consecutive 365
days signifying that it takes an extra rotation's worth of orbital motion
to complete 4 orbital circuits of the Earth.

I was up in Pasadena this morning and happened to be in a house that
overlooks the Caltech grounds and supposedly the most renowned learning
institution on the planet yet they cannot make sense of timekeeping and
consequently the principles of a round and rotating Earth.If that is not
dismaying I do not know what is !.

Here's a video for you to watch.

http://youtu.be/xX96xng7sAE

On Sun, 17 Nov 2013 06:48:19 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc
wrote:
On Saturday, November 16, 2013 7:31:29 PM UTC-7, Sam Wormley wrote:
TOP 10 REASONS Why We Know the Earth is Round
Reason #10 hardly counts. If the Earth was flat, the other planets
would just be tiny lights in the sky, having nothing in common with
the Earth.

Earth wouldn't be a planet in that case, since it wouldn't wander;
it would be the immovable surface defining the location of everything
that is and dividing the Universe into two halves.

John Savard

Aren't your confusing the shape of the Earth with the size of the
Earth here?

On Sunday, November 17, 2013 10:42:47 AM UTC-7, Paul Schlyter wrote:

Aren't your confusing the shape of the Earth with the size of the
Earth here?

If it's flat, but no one will ever fall off the edge of it, its size is obvious. Of course, the Universe could be of finite size, and there's the matter of being enclosed by the firmament.

John Savard

"Quadibloc" wrote in message
...

On Sunday, November 17, 2013 10:42:47 AM UTC-7, Paul Schlyter wrote:

Aren't your confusing the shape of the Earth with the size of the
Earth here?

If it's flat, but no one will ever fall off the edge of it, its size is
obvious. Of course, the Universe could be of finite size, and there's the
matter of being enclosed by the firmament.

John Savard
================================================== ========
Why do people use big words that I don't understand?
1) What's a firmament?
2) If the universe is everything by definition, how can it be finite?

-- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway

On Sunday, November 17, 2013 6:18:35 PM UTC-8, Lord Androcles wrote:
"Quadibloc" wrote in message

...



On Sunday, November 17, 2013 10:42:47 AM UTC-7, Paul Schlyter wrote:



Aren't your confusing the shape of the Earth with the size of the

Earth here?



If it's flat, but no one will ever fall off the edge of it, its size is

obvious. Of course, the Universe could be of finite size, and there's the

matter of being enclosed by the firmament.



John Savard

================================================== ========

Why do people use big words that I don't understand?

1) What's a firmament?

2) If the universe is everything by definition, how can it be finite?



-- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway

AFAIK, "firmament" is simply the sky...

\Paul A

"palsing" wrote in message
...

On Sunday, November 17, 2013 6:18:35 PM UTC-8, Lord Androcles wrote:
"Quadibloc" wrote in message

...



On Sunday, November 17, 2013 10:42:47 AM UTC-7, Paul Schlyter wrote:



Aren't your confusing the shape of the Earth with the size of the

Earth here?



If it's flat, but no one will ever fall off the edge of it, its size is

obvious. Of course, the Universe could be of finite size, and there's the

matter of being enclosed by the firmament.



John Savard

================================================== ========

Why do people use big words that I don't understand?

1) What's a firmament?

2) If the universe is everything by definition, how can it be finite?



-- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway

AFAIK, "firmament" is simply the sky...

\Paul A

===============================================
"Simply" is another big word that I don't understand.

"The firmament is the sky, conceived as a solid dome.[1] According to
Genesis, God created the firmament to separate the "waters above" the earth
(the source of rain) from those below (in the underworld). The word is
anglicised from Latin firmamentum, which appears in the Vulgate."
Source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firmament

3) What's a "simply"? Is it an adjective for the duoverb "solid dome"?
AFAIK the firmament must be congealed aether.
Whatever the luminiferous aether is, it must be soluble in water, like
gelatine. Then when god squeezes the rain out it firms up and becomes
firmament, right?

Perhaps Kelleher will know.

Are you skipping over "finite universe" filled with aether ?

Perhaps Kelleher will know that too.
BWT, what's the volume ratio of this cepheid?
http://mb-soft.com/public2/cepheid.html
I reckon if we take the minimum radius as r km, then the maximum radius R
must be the integral from t = 0 to t = 260,000 seconds of v(t).dt where
v(t) ranges from
4.3 to 38.5 km/sec. Then we'll get the volume 4/3 pi.R^3, the volume of a
sphere, which "simply" incredulous. Or do I mean incredible? Big words are
so scary.

synonyms: unbelievable, beyond belief, hard to believe, scarcely
credible, unconvincing, far-fetched, strained, laboured, implausible,
improbable, highly unlikely, not in the least likely, questionable, dubious,
doubtful, inconceivable, unthinkable, unimaginable, impossible, astonishing,
astounding, breathtaking, staggering, absurd, preposterous, phenomenal,
extraordinary;

There must be some other explanation.

-- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway