Flat Earthers are still around

On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 8:44:21 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 7:31:59 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 6:20:29 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
Quadibloc wrote:
On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 7:29:52 AM UTC-6, Mike Collins wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 1:48:59 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:

Oriel doesn't even grasp the concept. He thinks the north and south poles
don't rotate.

The North and South poles does rotate to the central Sun as a function of
the orbital motion of the Earth in that they act as a window into the
fact that in the absence of daily rotation, all points on the Earth
surface will turn unevenly to the central Sun as a function of the
variable speed of the Earth's orbital motion.

Let's try an analogy to improve your perceptions.
Take a screwdriver and screw something to a piece of wood. When you turn
the screwdriver which part doesn't turn?

It would not have occurred to me, on the basis of material such as you are
quoting, to accuse Oriel36 of believing that the Earth's north and south poles
"do not rotate", even if his phrasing is somewhat clumsy, enough so that it
could be claimed he is saying that.

His meaning is clear - *and correct*.

The Earth rotates on an axis which intersects the Earth's surface at the North
and South poles.

Thus, the Earth's rotation imparts a local translational motion to points on
the Earth's equator on the order of 1000 miles per hour.

The North and South poles, on the other hand, _only_ rotate. Their local
*orientation* is changed by the Earth's rotation, but they don't change
their *location* as a result of this rotation.

Therefore, the Earth's north and south poles do not experience sunrise and
sunset once every 24 hours. Instead, they experience six months of light, and
six months of darkness, due to the Earth's orbital motion only.

That is what he was saying; are you claiming that's wrong? That much is a fact,
and it is this fact that he was referring to.

His attempt to use the fact to bolster his argument that the Earth rotates once
each 24 hours - instead of once each 23 hours, 56 minutes, and 4 seconds, so as
to combine with the once-a-year effect of its orbit to yield a 24 hour day - is
wrong... but that doesn't make everything he says wrong.

John Savard


I'm saying that he makes a nonsense statement that the poles do not rotate.


I say the North/South poles does not rotate as a function of diurnal
rotation with its specific maximum Equatorial speed of 1037.5 miles per
hour for a maximum circumference of 24,901 miles. The poles do rotate to
the central Sun as a function of its orbital motion hence the Sun comes
into view at the Equinox and disappears for 6 months at the opposite
Equinox. Right now the South and North poles are turning to positions
which are halfway to the circle of illumination on the Solstice.

If the rotational speed diminishes from a maximum Equatorial speed then
what speed does a person experience standing on the surface at the
North/South polar coordinates. The answer is zero miles per hour.



A person standing at the North Pole rotates once per day.
However you define day.

If you had to look at the diminishing speeds across latitudes from a
maximum at the Earth's Equator down to zero miles per hour at the poles
you would rather lose your mind than concede -

"Such arguments in support of their fixed idea as they hit upon
themselves or hear set forth by others, no matter how simple and stupid
these may be, gain their instant acceptance and applause. On the other
hand whatever is brought forward against it, however ingenious and
conclusive, they receive with disdain or with hot rage--if indeed it does
not make them ill." Galileo

You can neither express the maximum equatorial speed nor its absence at
the poles and that is one miserable existence.



I welcome Galileo's statement which describes you so well.

This is a situation which defines a round and rotating Earth as 15 degrees of rotation per hour would serve a flat Earth just as well but what makes a round Earth is the decrease in latitudinal speeds from a maximum at the Equator to zero miles per hour at the poles.

There is no goodness in any of you, not for the past people who created timekeeping out of cyclical dynamics nor for the future students who could learn how the 24 hour system and the Lat/Long system arose from the calendar system and the formatting of rotations to orbital circuits in a 365/366 days/rotations structure.

On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 8:02:19 PM UTC+1, palsing wrote:
On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 11:11:32 AM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:

If the rotational speed diminishes from a maximum Equatorial speed then what speed does a person experience standing on the surface at the North/South polar coordinates. The answer is zero miles per hour.

Using the miles-per-hour speed of the surface of the Earth, at whatever latitude you choose, is a very poor method of describing rotation. It is MUCH better to use the angular rate of change, which remains the same at all latitudes, including the poles.



Here you go, this is where your notion gets you -

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/VNqNnUJVcVs/maxresdefault.jpg

The title of this thread is 'Flat Earthers are still around' and my word isn't that a fact.

There is a lot of housekeeping attached to the sprawling history of timekeeping and its relationship with the daily and annual cycles to a close proximity however this would require people who are competent enough to follow the details of geographical separation, rate of rotation and the 24 hour system.

"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

The Equation of Time only works on the basis of a constant progression of days within the calendar framework so however admirable Huygen's exposition is, it does not include the fact that the Sun crosses the observer's meridian also on February 29th as the day and rotation which corrects for the orbital drift from the 4 previous 365 day cycles.

The motion of the Sun through the constellations was the working method of Huygens and so many before that including the original heliocentric astronomers however timekeeping is based on the annual change in position of the stars to the central Sun where they disappear from view for a number of months before emerging as a dawn observation.

People know only one half of the Longitude story and even then it is still contested by the celestial sphere crowd who simply won't recognize the maximum Equatorial speed of 1037.5 miles per hour nor the diminishing speeds either side of the Equator reflected in the 24 hour system and the Lat/long system. The greater story is the seamless progression of days and its relationship to the Earth's orbital position in space as it moves around the Sun.

Tying together a really old narrative with a newer one creates a seamless story which connects timekeeping with the great cycles of the Earth instead of destroying it all as the celestial sphere enthusiasts and their magnification concerns have done.

On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 1:15:03 PM UTC-4, palsing wrote:
On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 3:36:00 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Thursday, June 9, 2016 at 5:36:08 PM UTC-4, Mike Collins wrote:

This is getting silly! And you're also ignoring the Earth's orbital motion
and the Sun's (and Solar System's) motion relative to this star. For almost
all practical purposes it's reasonable to ignore the proper motions of
stars in amateur astronomy. Until you have to buy new star charts or
catalogues for the next epoch.

Arguing with an idiot such as palsing can be silly, but there can still be educational value in it for onlookers, even if palsing is apparently too stupid to be taught.

LOL. You're a funny guy. I've forgotten more astronomy than ....

palsing, you HAVE forgotten more astronomy than you've ever learned! You don't even seem to remember what you have WRITTEN from one moment to the next!

You might know the model numbers and prices of some of the commercially available scopes and accessories, but your knowledge of -astronomy- ...? (That stuff about signs and horoscopes ISN'T called astronomy, palsing.)

oriel36 wrote:
On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 8:02:19 PM UTC+1, palsing wrote:
On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 11:11:32 AM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:

If the rotational speed diminishes from a maximum Equatorial speed then
what speed does a person experience standing on the surface at the
North/South polar coordinates. The answer is zero miles per hour.

Using the miles-per-hour speed of the surface of the Earth, at whatever
latitude you choose, is a very poor method of describing rotation. It is
MUCH better to use the angular rate of change, which remains the same at
all latitudes, including the poles.



Here you go, this is where your notion gets you -

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/VNqNnUJVcVs/maxresdefault.jpg

The title of this thread is 'Flat Earthers are still around' and my word isn't that a fact.



One day at the South Pole.
Note how the sun and shadows seen to rotate.

Mike Collins wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 8:02:19 PM UTC+1, palsing wrote:
On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 11:11:32 AM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:

If the rotational speed diminishes from a maximum Equatorial speed then
what speed does a person experience standing on the surface at the
North/South polar coordinates. The answer is zero miles per hour.

Using the miles-per-hour speed of the surface of the Earth, at whatever
latitude you choose, is a very poor method of describing rotation. It is
MUCH better to use the angular rate of change, which remains the same at
all latitudes, including the poles.



Here you go, this is where your notion gets you -

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/VNqNnUJVcVs/maxresdefault.jpg

The title of this thread is 'Flat Earthers are still around' and my word
isn't that a fact.



One day at the South Pole.
Note how the sun and shadows seen to rotate.





https://youtu.be/b0HwPalX77I

This time with link.

On Saturday, June 11, 2016 at 8:08:34 AM UTC-4, Mike Collins wrote:
Mike Collins wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 8:02:19 PM UTC+1, palsing wrote:
On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 11:11:32 AM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:

If the rotational speed diminishes from a maximum Equatorial speed then
what speed does a person experience standing on the surface at the
North/South polar coordinates. The answer is zero miles per hour.

Using the miles-per-hour speed of the surface of the Earth, at whatever
latitude you choose, is a very poor method of describing rotation. It is
MUCH better to use the angular rate of change, which remains the same at
all latitudes, including the poles.



Here you go, this is where your notion gets you -

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/VNqNnUJVcVs/maxresdefault.jpg

The title of this thread is 'Flat Earthers are still around' and my word
isn't that a fact.



One day at the South Pole.
Note how the sun and shadows seen to rotate.





https://youtu.be/b0HwPalX77I

This time with link.

"It was great. I loved it. It was much better than Cats. I am going to see it again and again!" (from SNL TV show, circa 1980?)

On Saturday, June 11, 2016 at 1:08:34 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
Mike Collins wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 8:02:19 PM UTC+1, palsing wrote:
On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 11:11:32 AM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:

If the rotational speed diminishes from a maximum Equatorial speed then
what speed does a person experience standing on the surface at the
North/South polar coordinates. The answer is zero miles per hour.

Using the miles-per-hour speed of the surface of the Earth, at whatever
latitude you choose, is a very poor method of describing rotation. It is
MUCH better to use the angular rate of change, which remains the same at
all latitudes, including the poles.



Here you go, this is where your notion gets you -

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/VNqNnUJVcVs/maxresdefault.jpg

The title of this thread is 'Flat Earthers are still around' and my word
isn't that a fact.



One day at the South Pole.
Note how the sun and shadows seen to rotate.





https://youtu.be/b0HwPalX77I

This time with link.

If you are 100 foot away from the North pole it will turn through a circumference of 628 feet per day (Pi) but this value increases to 24901 mile circumference at the Equator or at a speed of 1037.5 miles per hour or a rotational rate of 15 degrees per hour.

At the North and South poles the speed is zero and can't be anything else as a function of the planet's daily rotation. If you want to give the speed of rotation at the North and South poles per hour and the distance it travels across a 24 hour period then be my guest but the fact is the decrease in speeds across latitudes from a maximum at the Equator will arrive at zero.

The thing about this Collins is that you won't drive yourself insane but you don't mind driving others that way with your notion that the North and South poles rotate as a function of daily rotation.

oriel36 wrote:
On Saturday, June 11, 2016 at 1:08:34 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
Mike Collins wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 8:02:19 PM UTC+1, palsing wrote:
On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 11:11:32 AM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:

If the rotational speed diminishes from a maximum Equatorial speed then
what speed does a person experience standing on the surface at the
North/South polar coordinates. The answer is zero miles per hour.

Using the miles-per-hour speed of the surface of the Earth, at whatever
latitude you choose, is a very poor method of describing rotation. It is
MUCH better to use the angular rate of change, which remains the same at
all latitudes, including the poles.



Here you go, this is where your notion gets you -

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/VNqNnUJVcVs/maxresdefault.jpg

The title of this thread is 'Flat Earthers are still around' and my word
isn't that a fact.



One day at the South Pole.
Note how the sun and shadows seen to rotate.





https://youtu.be/b0HwPalX77I

This time with link.

If you are 100 foot away from the North pole it will turn through a
circumference of 628 feet per day (Pi) but this value increases to 24901
mile circumference at the Equator or at a speed of 1037.5 miles per hour
or a rotational rate of 15 degrees per hour.

At the North and South poles the speed is zero and can't be anything else
as a function of the planet's daily rotation. If you want to give the
speed of rotation at the North and South poles per hour and the distance
it travels across a 24 hour period then be my guest but the fact is the
decrease in speeds across latitudes from a maximum at the Equator will arrive at zero.

The thing about this Collins is that you won't drive yourself insane but
you don't mind driving others that way with your notion that the North
and South poles rotate as a function of daily rotation.







As the South Pole is on land and is marked every year by a symbol of some
kind you can use it as a sundial. You will be able to see the time 24 hours
a day in summer. All you have to do is choose which meridian you want as
noon. Of course you will have to allow for the equation of time.
In the winter you can choose a circumpolar star - Sirius would be a good
choice. You just need to sight over the top of the currently pole marker
and place a pole where Sirius is. Note the time carefully and Lo! A miracle
is seen. Exactly one sidereal day later Sirius is back below the marker.
Using a sidereal time to GMT conversion gives you a really accurate clock.
An uninformed person would assume from this that the Earth turns round once
every sidereal day. How would you persuade this person that's they were
wrong?

On Saturday, June 11, 2016 at 5:29:52 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Saturday, June 11, 2016 at 1:08:34 PM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
Mike Collins wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 8:02:19 PM UTC+1, palsing wrote:
On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 11:11:32 AM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:

If the rotational speed diminishes from a maximum Equatorial speed then
what speed does a person experience standing on the surface at the
North/South polar coordinates. The answer is zero miles per hour.

Using the miles-per-hour speed of the surface of the Earth, at whatever
latitude you choose, is a very poor method of describing rotation. It is
MUCH better to use the angular rate of change, which remains the same at
all latitudes, including the poles.



Here you go, this is where your notion gets you -

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/VNqNnUJVcVs/maxresdefault.jpg

The title of this thread is 'Flat Earthers are still around' and my word
isn't that a fact.



One day at the South Pole.
Note how the sun and shadows seen to rotate.





https://youtu.be/b0HwPalX77I

This time with link.

If you are 100 foot away from the North pole it will turn through a
circumference of 628 feet per day (Pi) but this value increases to 24901
mile circumference at the Equator or at a speed of 1037.5 miles per hour
or a rotational rate of 15 degrees per hour.

At the North and South poles the speed is zero and can't be anything else
as a function of the planet's daily rotation. If you want to give the
speed of rotation at the North and South poles per hour and the distance
it travels across a 24 hour period then be my guest but the fact is the
decrease in speeds across latitudes from a maximum at the Equator will arrive at zero.

The thing about this Collins is that you won't drive yourself insane but
you don't mind driving others that way with your notion that the North
and South poles rotate as a function of daily rotation.







As the South Pole is on land and is marked every year by a symbol of some
kind you can use it as a sundial. You will be able to see the time 24 hours
a day in summer. All you have to do is choose which meridian you want as
noon. Of course you will have to allow for the equation of time.
In the winter you can choose a circumpolar star - Sirius would be a good
choice. You just need to sight over the top of the currently pole marker
and place a pole where Sirius is. Note the time carefully and Lo! A miracle
is seen. Exactly one sidereal day later Sirius is back below the marker.
Using a sidereal time to GMT conversion gives you a really accurate clock..
An uninformed person would assume from this that the Earth turns round once
every sidereal day. How would you persuade this person that's they were
wrong?

Tell me about your nightmare where the North and South poles rotate as a function of daily rotation and how far they turn in 24 hours ,after all, the poles and the Equator represent coordinates on the Earth's surface which bookend a round and rotating Earth with the known dimensions of the planet.

The people of this world should be discussing how the Sun comes into view at the Equinox, stays in view for 6 months before being absent for another 6 months as the planet rotates as a function of its orbital motion and these surface rotations are responsible for the seasons at lower latitudes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okw6Mu3mxdM


I have seen this type of behavior before as documented by John Harrison and there is even a dramatic re-enactment of his meeting with the board where he knew they never understood the ins and outs of his watch designed to maintain the facts of geographical separation,the 24 hour system and daily rotation -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scnDFP-gafc

Not since the NAZIS tried to wipe of European Jewish history have a group of people fought with such tenacity to deny something so simple and so productive in terms of longitude history and timekeeping and for specific reasons.