A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Amateur Astronomy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The so-called inverse square law



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 26th 18, 12:41 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Gerald Kelleher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,551
Default The so-called inverse square law

Despite comments on the demise of sci.astro.amateur, the people involved in magnification and identification have moved to moderated forums so don't have to deal with anything outside their celestial sphere hobby. It is true that the childish noiseboxes have flourished in the absence of magnification hobbyists but who reads that stuff anyway.

The statement known as 'Phenomenon IV' is quite a mouthful -

"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." Newton

The Sun moving around the Earth is a daily rotation observation while the Earth running a circuit around the Sun is an orbital motion so there is no equivalency as a matter of common sense.

It is a badge of intelligence to realize where he was getting the equivalency but unfortunately nobody else can work through the details where Huygen's creates an equivalency , not based on the Sun around the Earth and visa versa, but rather the motion of the Earth and the apparent motion of the Sun through the constellations -

"Here take notice, that the Sun or the Earth passeth the 12. Signes,
or makes an entire revolution in the Ecliptick in 365 days, 5 hours 49
min. or there about, and that those days, reckon'd from noon to noon,
are of different lenghts; as is known to all that are vers'd in
Astronomy. Now between the longest and the shortest of those days, a
day may be taken of such a length, as 365 such days, 5. hours &c. (the
same numbers as before) make up, or are equall to that revolution: And
this is call'd the Equal or Mean day, according to which the Watches
are to be set; and therefore the Hour or Minute shew'd by the Watches,
though they be perfectly Iust and equal, must needs differ almost
continually from those that are shew'd by the Sun, or are reckon'd
according to its Motion. But this Difference is regular, and is
otherwise call'd the Aequation.." Huygens

It is not possible to fit the Equation of Time(keeping) into the orbital period of the Earth as that facility relies on the noon observation hence it is an outrigger of the calendar 365/366 day format. A lot to do and nobody around to do it.
  #2  
Old January 28th 18, 01:50 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Gerald Kelleher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,551
Default The so-called inverse square law

It is a case about higher standards of reasoning rather than deal with mutterings of people who haven't an idea how Newton hijacked astronomical language to suit his overreaching experimental science agenda.

In the case of Kepler, he along with most people at that time did consider why smaller objects orbit larger objects and why objects with no rotation don't have moons or natural satellites -


"The Sun and the Earth rotate on their own axes...The purpose of this
motion is to confer motion on the planets located around them;on the
six primary planets in the case of the Sun,and on the moon in the case
of the Earth.On the other hand the moon does not rotate on the axis of
its own body,as its spots prove " Kepler

Without being sidetracked by Newton's notion that the moon rotates, it is clear what is called 'gravity assist' provides a clear picture of orbital motions with going toxic and demanding that this reduces to experimental sciences.
  #3  
Old January 28th 18, 01:57 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Gerald Kelleher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,551
Default The so-called inverse square law

* Without being sidetracked by Newton's notion that the moon rotates, it is clear what is called 'gravity assist' provides a clear picture of orbital motions without going toxic and demanding that this reduces to experimental sciences.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Inverse square law G=EMC^2TreBert Misc 17 November 8th 14 02:35 AM
Inverse Square Law ????? herbert glazier Misc 3 April 12th 11 01:52 PM
Life and the Inverse square! C and C please Jonathan Policy 15 January 25th 10 02:48 PM
inverse-square law through geometry Brian Tung Amateur Astronomy 13 November 10th 04 05:21 PM
Inverse Square Law G=EMC^2 Glazier Misc 4 January 4th 04 02:03 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.