A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

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

Polar astronomy



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old March 3rd 18, 09:25 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Anders Eklöf
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 98
Default Polar astronomy

Davoud wrote:

Bill:
Haven't you considered how much your choice to not take the time to
organize your topics into complete subjects that you then explain in a
systematic and through way - hurts your agenda?


He's a troll and his agenda is to reel in people like you. I would say
that he has been splendidly successful at fulfilling his agenda.


Reel in to what purpose?

As far as I can tell all he does is to explain what we all already know,
in a way that none of us understands. Quite a feat, really,

--
I recommend Macs to my friends, and Windows machines
to those whom I don't mind billing by the hour
Ads
  #12  
Old March 3rd 18, 10:31 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Gerald Kelleher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,372
Default Polar astronomy

On Saturday, March 3, 2018 at 8:25:15 PM UTC, Anders Eklöf wrote:
Davoud wrote:

Bill:
Haven't you considered how much your choice to not take the time to
organize your topics into complete subjects that you then explain in a
systematic and through way - hurts your agenda?


He's a troll and his agenda is to reel in people like you. I would say
that he has been splendidly successful at fulfilling his agenda.


Reel in to what purpose?

As far as I can tell all he does is to explain what we all already know,
in a way that none of us understands. Quite a feat, really,

--
I recommend Macs to my friends, and Windows machines
to those whom I don't mind billing by the hour


These comments give me a lot of satisfaction as once you are shown how it is done it all becomes common knowledge and easy. The illusory vs actual loops of the planets owes a lot to astrophotographers and animation so have no problem commending others for their efforts -

https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap031216.html

VS

http://www.popastro.com/images/plane...ary%202012.jpg

To account for the Earth's orbital motion in tandem with the loop created by Venus brings a new perspective in where the direct/retrogrades of the inner planets do not occur against a stationary background as the outer direct/retrogrades do. This is because the stars close to the Sun (where the smaller circumferences of Venus and Mercury inhabit) transition from left to right of the Sun as a consequence of the Earth's orbital motion -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdFrE7hWj0A

This would be for the real astronomical purists.









  #13  
Old March 4th 18, 03:58 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Quadibloc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,925
Default Polar astronomy

On Saturday, March 3, 2018 at 1:25:15 PM UTC-7, Anders Eklöf wrote:

As far as I can tell all he does is to explain what we all already know,
in a way that none of us understands. Quite a feat, really,


Well, I wouldn't quite say that this is what he does.

It's true he is talking about subjects that we all understand quite well; that the
Earth orbits the Sun like all the other planets, as Copernicus said, contrary to
what the ancients believed.

But he isn't trying to tell us what we already know to be true. He is instead
trying to tell us things we know to be false.

He is trying to tell us that...

the Moon does not rotate, and

the Earth rotates once every 24 hours, not once every 23 hours, 56 minutes, and
4 seconds.

That is because referencing the rotational motion of a planet or satellite to
the fixed stars, instead of that body's primary, is, for some reason,
illegitimate.

Perhaps because the normal solar day is far more important in daily life than
the sidereal day?

Because if one goes over the Sun's head, relating the Earth's rotation directly
to the stars, then one is implicitly denying Copernicus, because only if the
Earth did not orbit the Sun would it be in the privileged position of being
referenced to the stars as the Sun went around it?

I think that latter sentence comes as close to his real reason as I can come.

I try to explain to him that the "sidereal day" need not be viewed as doing any
such thing - and it's needed, because to describe the Earth's rotation in
physical terms, we can't envisage it slowing down and speeding up on a regular
annual basis to produce the effects seen in the Equation of Time.

But - and this is the other thing we know to be false that he seeks to convince
us of - he will have none of that, as in his opinion, astronomy, properly so
called, involves appreciating the heavens through an intuitive facility, and not
through crass materialistic empiricism or mathematical gobbledy-gook.

So he is not merely confusing, he is substantively mistaken.

John Savard
  #14  
Old March 4th 18, 04:00 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Quadibloc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,925
Default Polar astronomy

On Friday, March 2, 2018 at 3:05:53 PM UTC-7, Gerald Kelleher wrote:
On Thursday, March 1, 2018 at 10:43:34 PM UTC, Bill wrote:


Haven't you considered how much your choice to not take the time to
organize your topics into complete subjects that you then explain in a
systematic and through way - hurts your agenda?


Tell me, what agenda is that ?


Presumably, to communicate the truth about astronomy that has rejected it, and
instead followed people who promulgate views you believe to be mistaken.

John Savard
  #15  
Old March 4th 18, 05:43 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Davoud[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,957
Default Polar astronomy

Davoud:
He's a troll and his agenda is to reel in people like you. I would say
that he has been splendidly successful at fulfilling his agenda.


Anders Eklöf:
Reel in to what purpose?


I'm not a psychologist, not even an amateur one, so I can't tell you
what motivates a troll. The /appearance/ is, to me, that he enjoys
seeing people drawn to answer his nonsensical posts like a moth is
drawn to a flame. Some people simply cannot refrain from answering
trolls. That, too, would be a question for an expert to answer. /IMO/
they make fools of themselves and are really no better than the trolls
they are trying to "set straight."

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm
  #16  
Old March 4th 18, 08:28 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Chris.B[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,001
Default Polar astronomy

On Sunday, 4 March 2018 05:43:19 UTC+1, Davoud wrote:

I'm not a psychologist, not even an amateur one, so I can't tell you
what motivates a troll. The /appearance/ is, to me, that he enjoys
seeing people drawn to answer his nonsensical posts like a moth is
drawn to a flame. Some people simply cannot refrain from answering
trolls. That, too, would be a question for an expert to answer. /IMO/
they make fools of themselves and are really no better than the trolls
they are trying to "set straight."


A troll and his "science" are soon parted.

This one pretended to lose the plot on day one but is still revered by his doting, leather clad, virginal pedants a decade later.

Kicking a troll in the restraints of an asylum wheelchair is not an act of kindness.

It is sadomasochism.

The only use for a sharp stick in this endless, astrological[sic] "reality show" is to pierce the heart of the attention-seeking vampire.

This will have much the same effect as pulling the plug on its life support system.

"1461 Unplugged" has a nice ring to it. It could even become a 'rock' classic. ;-)

  #17  
Old March 4th 18, 08:34 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Gerald Kelleher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,372
Default Polar astronomy

Celestial sphere enthusiasts are like brexiteers, they live in the past and they see any use of imaging for 21st century research topics as an affront to their clockwork enterprise. The vast majority have retreated to the excellent moderated forums which provide them with all the information about magnification and nothing like the information that flows through this newsgroup. The theoretical 'astro-research' forum is there for the moderators to grandstand in their endeavor to torture the English language.

I don't beg attention and certainly not from nuisances and noiseboxes but this is an unmoderated forum with all its advantages and disadvantages so telling airheads to eff-off only invites trouble as I discovered from 20 years here.

The colonists are slightly different, they have yet to discover that Royal Society empiricists are a bit like the extreme British conservatives in that they project a great story but with no substance behind it, at least to where it has evolved. It is entirely different story in the late 17th century when the equatorial coordinate system emerged when astronomy in universities went into full reverse as the rotating celestial sphere system allied with accurate clocks emerged. Guys like Davoud and Peterson are from this group but nothing could be more suffocating for enjoying astronomy in the spirit of the original Sun centered astronomers.

The Brits themselves here know better, for them it is 'Piltdown man' all over again but perhaps many, many magnitudes worse. Once the game is up they should work to detach physics from the pseudoscience of astro-physics so a lot of trouble can be avoided however, from watching how Eton brexiteers behave, they would rather drink their own toilet water than adapt.

The last are the nuisances and noiseboxes but little can be said there as they are just killing time.






  #18  
Old March 4th 18, 11:51 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Gerald Kelleher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,372
Default Polar astronomy

Justifying other people's participation in this newsgroup is as much a waste of time as justifying my own hence the withdrawl of the previous post.

The Earth is traveling forward through space in such a way that the North and South poles are close to passing through the planet's circle of illumination thereby polar sunrise and sunset at the respective poles. Of course there will be days like today at the South pole when storms make observance of the one and only sunrise and sunset each year impossible nevertheless it draws attention to the polar day/night cycle and the surface rotation behind it -

https://www.usap.gov/videoclipsandmaps/spwebcam.cfm

The conclusion is straightforward enough - if daily rotation and all its effects are subtracted, the entire surface of the Earth will turn parallel to the orbital plane as a function of the orbital motion of the Earth.

These types of insights don't come easy. It is like having scattered pieces of a puzzle that do not fit together so it sets up a period where this conceptual uneasiness is balanced by looking at all the angles involved. I would say the glimpse of a conclusion lasted about a half a second, more of a foothold than a wide sweeping understanding but then again most resolutions come this flash sort of way. Unlike the actual vs illusory loops which partition the faster and slower moving planets seen from a moving Earth and where imaging was readily available, next to nothing exists in how to isolate the planet's two day/night cycles apart and then recombine them to explain the seasons and a multitude of other effects.

I do not believe that anyone who comes to applying rotational cause to the polar day/night cycle will experience it in any less a satisfying way then I originally did hence priority is not an issue as far as I am concerned. To be fair, originality can be as exhausting as anything physical and does take its toll but that being said, as a Christian, the reward is in the intimacy of understanding itself rather than an imagined opposition I need to contend with. The current merit system wouldn't actually appreciate this but that is the way it works in Christianity, at least as it is practiced among those who wish to love creation more rather than those who want to know more about creation -

"And now hear the conclusion, Brother Leo. Above all the graces and gifts of the Holy Spirit which Christ gives to his friends is that of conquering oneself and willingly enduring sufferings, insults, humiliations, and hardships for the love of Christ. For we cannot glory in all those other marvelous gifts of God, as they are not ours but God’s, as the Apostle says: ‘What have you that you have not received?’"

http://www.swordofthespirit.net/bulwark/july2011p13.htm

  #19  
Old March 4th 18, 09:29 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Anders Eklöf
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 98
Default Polar astronomy

Gerald Kelleher wrote:

On Saturday, March 3, 2018 at 8:25:15 PM UTC, Anders Eklöf wrote:
Davoud wrote:

Bill:
Haven't you considered how much your choice to not take the time to
organize your topics into complete subjects that you then explain in a
systematic and through way - hurts your agenda?

He's a troll and his agenda is to reel in people like you. I would say
that he has been splendidly successful at fulfilling his agenda.


Reel in to what purpose?

As far as I can tell all he does is to explain what we all already know,
in a way that none of us understands. Quite a feat, really,

--
I recommend Macs to my friends, and Windows machines
to those whom I don't mind billing by the hour


These comments give me a lot of satisfaction as once you are shown how it

is done it all becomes common knowledge and easy. The illusory vs actual
loops of the planets owes a lot to astrophotographers and animation so
have no problem commending others for their efforts -

You miss my point:
We all know the fact you are trying to explain, but your explainations
don't help at all. In fact they are utterly confusing.
This should NOT give you any satisfaction at all.

--
I recommend Macs to my friends, and Windows machines
to those whom I don't mind billing by the hour
  #20  
Old March 4th 18, 11:19 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Gerald Kelleher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,372
Default Polar astronomy

On Sunday, March 4, 2018 at 8:29:08 PM UTC, Anders Eklöf wrote:


You miss my point:
We all know the fact you are trying to explain, but your explainations
don't help at all. In fact they are utterly confusing.
This should NOT give you any satisfaction at all.

--



The thing about this is once you see how to split the Earth's polar day/night cycle apart from the 24 hour day/night cycle by rotational cause, you are into an entirely different and new set of astronomical principles.

To a certain extent it doesn't matter if one other person or nobody else presently comprehends the basic principles so "we all know the fact" is meaningless to me, what matters is that astronomers recognize that the North/South polar latitudes offers an opportunity like nowhere else on the planet to re-energize terrestrial sciences.


So, the Equinox is a unique day where there are two distinct types of sunrises and sunsets as the Sun comes into view for the first time in 6 months at the North pole while the Sun will set at the South pole and due to a surface rotation separate to daily rotation.


All things come in season including the explanation you find utterly confusing so even though I may feel the time is right to research or present the topic properly, the time may not be right for those who currently call themselves astronomers. To all intents and purposes my work is done and I am left to enjoy the change in seasons as dormant nature springs to life once more and all due to the motions of the Earth, it gives me satisfaction to consider the seasons as a result of two surface rotations acting in combination so I don't have to strain myself with a 'tilting' Earth anymore but that is about it.
 




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
polar alignment MThomas Amateur Astronomy 13 August 2nd 06 01:17 PM
Polar Alignment Eric Johnson Amateur Astronomy 3 February 15th 05 06:18 PM
Polar Shift Jerry Pool Amateur Astronomy 4 January 15th 05 05:00 PM
Polar Alignment chansky Misc 6 October 27th 03 03:23 AM
Polar Alignment HELP Davey B UK Astronomy 8 October 24th 03 06:47 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2018 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.