Eight inches of snow,

On Dec 24, 11:11*am, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 10:59:29 -0800 (PST), oriel36

wrote:
Daily rotation gives the Earth its 'tilt' -

http://www.robertreeves.com/star_tra...06_9pm-6am.jpg

Nice image, but it has nothing to do with tilt.


Funny,funny,funny !

Rotational orientation (tilt) is a consequence of rotation so here I
am now trying to explain the day and night cycle and having to produce
time lapse footage.The reference for daily rotation is normally the
central Sun and variations in the natural noon cycles which combines
both the daily turning of the planet with the slow orbital change to
alter the length of each noon cycle but the point here is that daily
rotation keeps the Earth pointed in one direction in space and does
nothing else -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTTDWhky9HY

I see the people from Mensa are included in the newsgroup header so
how it comes to be that I am now reduced to explaining how daily
rotation is related to the images of star trails and 'rotational
orientation (tilt) is remarkable in itself.

oriel36 wrote:

I see the people from Mensa are included in the newsgroup header so
how it comes to be that I am now reduced to explaining how daily
rotation is related to the images of star trails and 'rotational
orientation (tilt) is remarkable in itself.

wreck.org.mensa has few of mensa caliber reading or posting.
It's not much different from the make believe scientists
posting so frequently to the sci newsgroups. Rather has
to do with eternal September, I'm afraid.

On Dec 24, 5:11*pm, Sanforized wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
I see the people from Mensa are included in the newsgroup header so
how it comes to be that I am now reduced to explaining how daily
rotation is related to the images of star trails and 'rotational
orientation (tilt) is remarkable in itself.

wreck.org.mensa has few of mensa caliber reading or posting.
It's not much different from the make believe scientists
posting so frequently to the sci newsgroups. Rather has
to do with eternal September, I'm afraid.

I am genuinely dismayed at the inability to interpret the images of
Uranus which allow for planetary comparisons in order to extract a
better understanding of what causes the seasons on Earth and as a
point of departure for climate studies.You originally stated that
little is known regarding the cause climate change and whether it is
a human influenced thing or naturally occuring and I concur with the
additional information demonstrating just how little is actually known
to the point that not even the basic seasonal cycle is explained
correctly.In this respect,the problem may not be climate change alone
but actually those investigating the matter for if you ask them what
the dynamic is for the Earth's seasons they will exclaim 'Tilt' ! (or
disguise it as 'obliquity) without the slightest regard for physical
considerations of that statement.

Ultimately it is not all about climate,global warming ect but rather
the genuine enjoyment of observations which modern imaging allows and
putting images in context -

http://astro.berkeley.edu/~imke/Infr..._2001_2005.jpg


The unitelligent now strut around and try to diminish those of simple
faith,they twist history to their own ends and make a nuisance of
themselves with astronomical arguments they do not have a feel
for,create speculate junk which has great novelty value but no
substance and turn the celestial arena into a conceptual monster
rather than the magnificent arena which it actually is.Copernicus
never feared Church censure,he feared what would happen to his
insights in the hands of those who would use it to promote their own
version of 'intelligence' -

"And they did so, it seems to me, not, as some suppose, because they
were in some way jealous about their teachings, which would be spread
around; on the contrary, they wanted the very beautiful thoughts
attained by great men of deep devotion not to be ridiculed by those
who are reluctant to exert themselves vigorously in any literary
pursuit unless it is lucrative; or if they are stimulated to the
nonacquisitive study of philosophy by the exhortation and example of
others, yet because of their dullness of mind they play the same part
among philosophers as drones among bees. When I weighed these
considerations, the scorn which I had reason to fear on account of the
novelty and unconventionality of my opinion almost induced me to
abandon completely the work which I had undertaken. " Copernicus

ibits.org/calendars/year-text-Copernicus.html

Modern imaging offers a way out of a mess that men have created for
themselves,the insights are just as spectacular,the consequences are
just as important but it all relies on whether people can intepret the
images and put them in correct context such as using planetary
comparisons to extract a correct explanation for seasonal variations.

oriel36 wrote:
On Dec 24, 5:11 pm, Sanforized wrote:

oriel36 wrote:

I see the people from Mensa are included in the newsgroup header so
how it comes to be that I am now reduced to explaining how daily
rotation is related to the images of star trails and 'rotational
orientation (tilt) is remarkable in itself.

wreck.org.mensa has few of mensa caliber reading or posting.
It's not much different from the make believe scientists
posting so frequently to the sci newsgroups. Rather has
to do with eternal September, I'm afraid.


I am genuinely dismayed at the inability to interpret the images of
Uranus which allow for planetary comparisons in order to extract a
better understanding of what causes the seasons on Earth and as a
point of departure for climate studies.

Well don't be. I covered this aspect in my discussion
that included "obvious to you." I am supportive of your
view, but not of the obviousness you attribute to it.

You originally stated that
little is known regarding the cause climate change

I never did quite say that. I've skirted around the edges
while attempting to impart the idea that there are so very
many factors we cannot be certain we really understand
all of the interactions. This is not a simple "more heat
in brings about linear changes" problem.

and whether it is
a human influenced thing or naturally occuring and I concur with the
additional information demonstrating just how little is actually known
to the point that not even the basic seasonal cycle is explained
correctly.

This and long term weather prediction combine to bring
about the origin of Chaos theory, in fact.

In this respect,the problem may not be climate change alone
but actually those investigating the matter for if you ask them what
the dynamic is for the Earth's seasons they will exclaim 'Tilt' ! (or
disguise it as 'obliquity) without the slightest regard for physical
considerations of that statement.

Many people have a favorite religion.

Ultimately it is not all about climate,global warming ect but rather
the genuine enjoyment of observations which modern imaging allows and
putting images in context -

http://astro.berkeley.edu/~imke/Infr..._2001_2005.jpg

Do you have any idea how long it takes to download something
like this with an exchange rate of 2.0 to 3.5 k/sec. I can't
do it.


Modern imaging offers a way out of a mess that men have created for
themselves,the insights are just as spectacular,the consequences are
just as important but it all relies on whether people can intepret the
images and put them in correct context such as using planetary
comparisons to extract a correct explanation for seasonal variations.

And still, that's *not* all there is. Please come back
to this subject once you've solved the much simpler
3 body problem.

Please feel free to start here.

http://www.nist.gov/dads/HTML/unsolvableProblem.html

Sanforized wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Dec 24, 5:11 pm, Sanforized wrote:

oriel36 wrote:

I see the people from Mensa are included in the newsgroup header so
how it comes to be that I am now reduced to explaining how daily
rotation
cut
Well don't be. I covered this aspect in my discussion
that included "obvious to you." I am supportive of your
view, but not of the obviousness you attribute to it.
cut
Why do you enjoy talking to a computer program???

It sounds a bit daft.

O36 has been pulling this trick for some years now
on a number of newsgroups.

Is that egg on your face??

On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 13:48:11 -0600, Sanforized
wrote:

And still, that's *not* all there is. Please come back
to this subject once you've solved the much simpler
3 body problem.

Of course, using numerical methods, the three-body problem (indeed, the
n-body problem) is easily solved. A strictly algebraic solution is a
difficult problem of interest mainly to theoretical mathematicians. Such
a solution isn't needed for practical use.

The climate is modeled in a similar fashion, although the system is
vastly more complex. Nevertheless, in the last decade we've seen
dramatic improvements in the quality of models, as determined by their
ability to recreate the patterns of the last few tens of thousands of
years. Few people working in this field doubt that the models will fail
to become highly accurate and predictive over the next few years.
_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

Sjouke Burry wrote:
Sanforized wrote:

oriel36 wrote:

On Dec 24, 5:11 pm, Sanforized wrote:

oriel36 wrote:

I see the people from Mensa are included in the newsgroup header so
how it comes to be that I am now reduced to explaining how daily
rotation

cut

Well don't be. I covered this aspect in my discussion
that included "obvious to you." I am supportive of your
view, but not of the obviousness you attribute to it.

cut
Why do you enjoy talking to a computer program???

It sounds a bit daft.

O36 has been pulling this trick for some years now
on a number of newsgroups.

Is that egg on your face??

Nope. I know this man's work going back quite a while.
If he's presently handicapped in his approach to
conversations by the abuse he's taken in sci.physics
over the years than I'm satisfied to allow him some
leeway.

In article ,
Sanforized wrote:

snip

http://astro.berkeley.edu/~imke/Infr..._2001_2005.jpg

Do you have any idea how long it takes to download something
like this with an exchange rate of 2.0 to 3.5 k/sec. I can't
do it.

76 k * 8 bits / 2.0 kbps ~= five minutes.

--
Odysseus

On Dec 27, 12:13*pm, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 13:48:11 -0600, Sanforized
wrote:

And still, that's *not* all there is. Please come back
to this subject once you've solved the much simpler
3 body problem.

Of course, using numerical methods, the three-body problem (indeed, the
n-body problem) is easily solved. A strictly algebraic solution is a
difficult problem of interest mainly to theoretical mathematicians. Such
a solution isn't needed for practical use.

The climate is modeled in a similar fashion, although the system is
vastly more complex. Nevertheless, in the last decade we've seen
dramatic improvements in the quality of models, as determined by their
ability to recreate the patterns of the last few tens of thousands of
years. Few people working in this field doubt that the models will fail
to become highly accurate and predictive over the next few years.
_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatoryhttp://www.cloudbait.com

Go play with your models ,you still cannot explain what causes the
variations in daylight/darkness,variations which represent the seasons
in its barest form.

Simply by making comparisions between rotational orientations of
planets such as Uranus and the Earth,it is shown that 'tilt' only
influences whether a planet experiences seasons which are either polar
or Equatorial in nature but the dynamic for seasonal changes is
strictly in the way a planet orbits the central Sun -

http://astro.berkeley.edu/~imke/Infr..._2001_2005.jpg

In total opposition to observations and particularly with direct
observations of Uranus,you numbskulls have a planet orbitally keep the
same face to the Sun in order to concoct the stupid 'sidereal time'
justification for the motions of the Earth -

http://www.pfm.howard.edu/astronomy/...S/AACHCIT0.JPG

The simple question which anyone can answer - In the absence of daily
rotation and treating orbital motion independently,does a location
keep the same face to the Sun or slowly orbitally turn through 360
degrees over an annual orbit ? .Observations of Uranus dicate the only
correct answer to a 100% certainty and I strongly suggest you and the
other Catechies recogize it.

On Dec 27, 11:48*am, Sanforized wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Dec 24, 5:11 pm, Sanforized wrote:

oriel36 wrote:

I see the people from Mensa are included in the newsgroup header so
how it comes to be that I am now reduced to explaining how daily
rotation is related to the images of star trails and 'rotational
orientation (tilt) is remarkable in itself.

wreck.org.mensa has few of mensa caliber reading or posting.
It's not much different from the make believe scientists
posting so frequently to the sci newsgroups. Rather has
to do with eternal September, I'm afraid.

I am genuinely dismayed at the inability to interpret the images of
Uranus which allow for planetary comparisons in order to extract a
better understanding of what causes the seasons on Earth and as a
point of departure for climate studies.

Well don't be. I covered this aspect in my discussion
that included "obvious to you." I am supportive of your
view, but not of the obviousness you attribute to it.

You originally stated that
little is known regarding the cause *climate change

I never did quite say that. I've skirted around the edges
while attempting to impart the idea that there are so very
many factors we cannot be certain we really understand
all of the interactions. This is not a simple "more heat
in brings about linear changes" problem.

and whether it is
a human influenced thing or naturally occuring and I concur with the
additional information demonstrating just how little is actually known
to the point that not even the basic seasonal cycle is explained
correctly.

This and long term weather prediction combine to bring
about the origin of Chaos theory, in fact.

* In this respect,the problem may not be climate change alone

but actually those investigating the matter for if you ask them what
the dynamic is for the Earth's seasons they will exclaim 'Tilt' ! (or
disguise it as 'obliquity) without the slightest regard for physical
considerations of that statement.

Many people have a favorite religion.

Ultimately it is not *all about climate,global warming ect but rather
the genuine enjoyment of observations which modern imaging allows and
putting images in context *-
http://astro.berkeley.edu/~imke/Infr..._2001_2005.jpg

Do you have any idea how long it takes to download something
like this with an exchange rate of 2.0 to 3.5 k/sec. I can't
do it.

Modern imaging offers a way out of a mess that men have created for
themselves,the insights are just as spectacular,the consequences are
just as important but it all relies on whether people can intepret the
images and put them in correct context such as using planetary
comparisons to extract a correct explanation for seasonal variations.

And still, that's *not* all there is. Please come back
to this subject once you've solved the much simpler
3 body problem.

Please feel free to start here.

http://www.nist.gov/dads/HTML/unsolvableProblem.html- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You know,I have been working on the rotational dynamics of the
interior of the Earth,specifically differential rotation of the
viscous interior composition,as it applies to the enormous 40 KM
planetary spherical deviation while I see people casually talk of
'tidal friction' slowing the Earth down as a means to account for the
'leap second' adjustment.It is a question of taste and just as you not
find rotational dynamics exciting I most certainly do.

The great thing about differential rotation is that it is an observed
generalised principle for all rotating celestial bodies with a viscous
composition whereas dynamicists currently exempt the Earth from
rotational dynamical influences in organizing the Earth's interior
around thermally driven 'convection cell' which require no reference
to planetary shape or motion.The bonus is that differential rotation
replaces 'convection cells' as the dynamic for crustal motion or
evolution.

3 body problem ? - sorry !,neither know about it or care about it even
if you find it exciting.