Time from Big Dipper/Polaris positions?

On Friday, July 11, 2014 1:03:58 AM UTC-4, Don Bruder wrote:
In article

-septem

ber.org,

Mike Collins wrote:

If you buy a planisphere suitable for your latitude you can work out the
time directly as long as you know the date.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...938029/skymaps

Not interested in buying anything. Just trying to verify the validity of
the "trick". Other replies elsethread figured out where I was going
wrong. Now I've got the knack of it.

http://www.vcas.org/star-wheels.html

On Friday, July 11, 2014 8:13:42 PM UTC+1, wrote:
On Friday, July 11, 2014 1:03:58 AM UTC-4, Don Bruder wrote:

In article



-septem



ber.org,



Mike Collins wrote:



If you buy a planisphere suitable for your latitude you can work out the

time directly as long as you know the date.



http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...938029/skymaps



Not interested in buying anything. Just trying to verify the validity of

the "trick". Other replies elsethread figured out where I was going

wrong. Now I've got the knack of it.



http://www.vcas.org/star-wheels.html

Rotating celestial sphere creatures have a parasitic relationship with astronomy rather than being traitors to its methods and insights for how else to explain the opposition to the most basic astronomy and terrestrial fact imaginable.

Its all a question of time and authority before your boring and inappropriate use of a clockwork celestial sphere universe is a thing of the past.

On Friday, July 11, 2014 1:52:48 PM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:

Its all a question of time and authority before your boring and inappropriate use of a clockwork celestial sphere universe is a thing of the past.

Wanna Bet? I only wager on sure things... and almost everything you claim regarding astronomy is wrong, wrong, wrong...

On Friday, July 11, 2014 10:24:29 PM UTC+1, palsing wrote:
On Friday, July 11, 2014 1:52:48 PM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:



Its all a question of time and authority before your boring and inappropriate use of a clockwork celestial sphere universe is a thing of the past.



Wanna Bet? I only wager on sure things... and almost everything you claim regarding astronomy is wrong, wrong, wrong...



I can't imagine a punishment worse than working against astronomy at a time when these visual narratives makes the insights so easy to understand. You have played no part in furthering astronomy and seemingly don't want to apart from regurgitating the same old errors made centuries ago that rolled observations up in a clockwork celestial sphere and obscured the great works that once graced the human stage.

You people have hidden behind falsehood when so much was in front of you and just in case you think this is about being right,it never was,it is simply a continuation of all other joyous works born of love -

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

On Friday, July 11, 2014 2:52:26 PM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:
On Friday, July 11, 2014 10:24:29 PM UTC+1, palsing wrote:

On Friday, July 11, 2014 1:52:48 PM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:







Its all a question of time and authority before your boring and inappropriate use of a clockwork celestial sphere universe is a thing of the past.

On Friday, July 11, 2014 11:17:03 AM UTC-6, oriel36 wrote:

You are like infants lost in the world of men,after all,anyone who equates
stellar circumpolar motion with daily rotation and then assigns an imbalance
between rotations and days ain't no astronomer or much else.

OK, we'll make sure that we equate stellar circumpolar motion with *terrestrial* rotation rather than "daily" rotation, so that we won't be contradicting ourslves when we note that this terrestrial rotation takes 23 hours and 56 minutes instead of one 24 hour day.

Happy now?

John Savard

On Friday, July 11, 2014 3:10:19 PM UTC-7, Quadibloc wrote:
On Friday, July 11, 2014 11:17:03 AM UTC-6, oriel36 wrote:



You are like infants lost in the world of men,after all,anyone who equates

stellar circumpolar motion with daily rotation and then assigns an imbalance

between rotations and days ain't no astronomer or much else.



OK, we'll make sure that we equate stellar circumpolar motion with *terrestrial* rotation rather than "daily" rotation, so that we won't be contradicting ourslves when we note that this terrestrial rotation takes 23 hours and 56 minutes instead of one 24 hour day.



Happy now?



John Savard

Gerald just refuses to recognize that "daily rotation" differs from the 24-hours day, and is ignorant of the fact that they aren't at all the same thing, what with different definitions and all... most of the things he object to are really easy to understand, given the correct perspective.

\Paul A

On Friday, July 11, 2014 11:28:45 PM UTC+1, palsing wrote:

Gerald just refuses to recognize that "daily rotation" differs from the 24-hours day, and is ignorant of the fact that they aren't at all the same thing, what with different definitions and all... most of the things he object to are really easy to understand, given the correct perspective.


Your relationship with astronomy is parasitic and that is not unjust considering that the experience of one rotation as all the effects within a 24 hour day extended to include February 29th as the final rotation and separately the time needed to cover the distance to return the Earth roughly to the same position in space that began 4 years earlier.

You can't follow the visual narrative which makes this so and especially the appearance of the magnificent star Sirius where it moves just far enough from behind the Sun where it can be seen,due to the orbital motion of the Earth -

http://www.gautschy.ch/~rita/archast...liacsirius.JPG

What prevents you from liking how to fix the Earth's orbital position in space using the appearance of Sirius and the number of rotations is not my business, there is a good chance that proper graphics would register with observers instead of your exceptionally dumb rotating celestial sphere.

You are appealing to a science fiction nuisance and when you reach that point I would lose interest in dealing with you so don't take offence.

On Friday, July 11, 2014 4:47:38 PM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:
On Friday, July 11, 2014 11:28:45 PM UTC+1, palsing wrote:



Gerald just refuses to recognize that "daily rotation" differs from the 24-hours day, and is ignorant of the fact that they aren't at all the same thing, what with different definitions and all... most of the things he objects to are really easy to understand, given the correct perspective.





Your relationship with astronomy is parasitic and that is not unjust considering that the experience of one rotation as all the effects within a 24 hour day extended to include February 29th as the final rotation and separately the time needed to cover the distance to return the Earth roughly to the same position in space that began 4 years earlier.



You can't follow the visual narrative which makes this so and especially the appearance of the magnificent star Sirius where it moves just far enough from behind the Sun where it can be seen,due to the orbital motion of the Earth -

Virtually every star in the sky emerges from the glare of the Sun at some point in the year, and EVERY DAY for stars that are circumpolar for you or I.. Also, as you have been told before, Sirius certainly 'appears' from the glare of the Sun every year, but it is FAR from from ever being BEHIND the Sun as you so often repeat. The closest together the Sun and Sirius ever get in the sky is about 80 solar diameters, they are about 40 degrees apart! Sirius passes far below the Sun when they both culminate at the same time.

What prevents you from liking how to fix the Earth's orbital position in space using the appearance of Sirius and the number of rotations is not my business, there is a good chance that proper graphics would register with observers instead of your exceptionally dumb rotating celestial sphere.

Earth's orbital position in space can be determined by any of thousands of stars; Sirius was used by the ancients because it is by far the brightest star in the sky and corresponds closely with the flooding if the Nile. Their entire religion was centered on this star.



You are appealing to a science fiction nuisance and when you reach that point I would lose interest in dealing with you so don't take offence.

You don't have any interest in anything anyone else has to say here, when they disagree with you. It is clear to everyone here that you don't know the difference between actual science and science fiction, and with your poor attitude and inability to learn anything here, you never will. You are doomed to be ignorant of reality regarding astronomy and the other sciences for a very long time if you continue to rant against things you don't begin to understand... and I'm not holding my breath that you will change your ways anytime soon. You have no chance whatsoever of convincing even a single person of any of your wacky and perverted views, which you spew forth ad nauseum. Perhaps you should cut your losses and just move on to greener pastures somewhere else on the internet.

No one would be sorry to see you go. NO ONE!

On Saturday, July 12, 2014 2:56:10 AM UTC+1, palsing wrote:
On Friday, July 11, 2014 4:47:38 PM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:

On Friday, July 11, 2014 11:28:45 PM UTC+1, palsing wrote:







Gerald just refuses to recognize that "daily rotation" differs from the 24-hours day, and is ignorant of the fact that they aren't at all the same thing, what with different definitions and all... most of the things he objects to are really easy to understand, given the correct perspective.











Your relationship with astronomy is parasitic and that is not unjust considering that the experience of one rotation as all the effects within a 24 hour day extended to include February 29th as the final rotation and separately the time needed to cover the distance to return the Earth roughly to the same position in space that began 4 years earlier.







You can't follow the visual narrative which makes this so and especially the appearance of the magnificent star Sirius where it moves just far enough from behind the Sun where it can be seen,due to the orbital motion of the Earth -



Virtually every star in the sky emerges from the glare of the Sun at some point in the year, and EVERY DAY for stars that are circumpolar for you or I. Also, as you have been told before, Sirius certainly 'appears' from the glare of the Sun every year, but it is FAR from from ever being BEHIND the Sun as you so often repeat. The closest together the Sun and Sirius ever get in the sky is about 80 solar diameters, they are about 40 degrees apart! Sirius passes far below the Sun when they both culminate at the same time.


Follow the visual narrative Alsing until you literally see the light.

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

The motion of Sirius and all the other stars along the ecliptic plane sets up the astronomical event where the orbital motion of the Earth puts the star far enough to one side of the central Sun that it comes into view

http://www.gautschy.ch/~rita/archast...liacsirius.JPG

There is no imperative here, if you can't understand why that event happens then you will hardly appreciate that men once noticed that it didn't always come into view after an annual cycle of 365 days but skipped a day after 4 years.

The separate motion is daily rotation and that is referenced to the central Sun insofar as the use of the annual motion of the stars and the central Sun is taken up by the orbital motion of the Earth -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ys1w9A4DrO4

Have you got this straight Alsing, the rotation of the Earth causes the Sun to rise and set each day while its orbital motion causes the stars to move periodically behind the foreground and central Sun. It happens 1461 times for 4 annual circuits to the nearest rotation and that is the parent observation that drives human timekeeping systems including the average 24 hour day or any subdivisions of it.






What prevents you from liking how to fix the Earth's orbital position in space using the appearance of Sirius and the number of rotations is not my business, there is a good chance that proper graphics would register with observers instead of your exceptionally dumb rotating celestial sphere.



Earth's orbital position in space can be determined by any of thousands of stars; Sirius was used by the ancients because it is by far the brightest star in the sky and corresponds closely with the flooding if the Nile. Their entire religion was centered on this star.


Like Collins,you are beginning to use those interpretative faculties which allows you to appreciate that the appearance of Sirius fixes the Earth's orbital position in space and the number of rotations confined within those orbital circuits. This is a good thing as if you can figure it out then what can be said for others who haven't been poisoned by the 'solar vs sidereal' fiction.









You are appealing to a science fiction nuisance and when you reach that point I would lose interest in dealing with you so don't take offence.



You don't have any interest in anything anyone else has to say here, when they disagree with you. It is clear to everyone here that you don't know the difference between actual science and science fiction, and with your poor attitude and inability to learn anything here, you never will. You are doomed to be ignorant of reality regarding astronomy and the other sciences for a very long time if you continue to rant against things you don't begin to understand... and I'm not holding my breath that you will change your ways anytime soon. You have no chance whatsoever of convincing even a single person of any of your wacky and perverted views, which you spew forth ad nauseum. Perhaps you should cut your losses and just move on to greener pastures somewhere else on the internet.



No one would be sorry to see you go. NO ONE!

Whether I stay or go after many years here doesn't really cross my mind, give me an image or graphics and I will turn it into an astronomical narrative for the purpose of making sense of the structure of the solar system or galaxy ,look at cause and effect between motions and terrestrial sciences or any number of other insights.

A parasitic view can't really act on imaging or the older texts but you sure don't mind calling yourselves 'experts' in time,space and motion that comes under the astronomical umbrella as making sense of motions in space over long periods of time. The new tools condense long term observations into more manageable form and that is the only concern for people truly interested in space as an arena that is full of motions including ours.

No need to appeal to an authority,after all, the tools are new therefore no authority exists, again, it is only a matter of time before observers get accustomed to seeing visual narratives explain all those things which jargon junkies cannot.

It is called hope Alsing.