Venusian shadow - part 2

On Mon, 21 May 2007 15:42:41 +0300, Anthony Ayiomamitis
wrote:

Tim Duke wrote:

For once in my life, I was away on business during a new moon (usually when
i go away, it's a full moon - never seem to time it right).

Unfortunately I was sent out to the carribean island of Bonaire near the
coast of Venezuela. By some fate, the potential client that I was visisting
was into astronomy and took my up to the top of the island where it was
absolutely pitch black!

First time I had seen the southern cross and Omega Centauri! Venus was very
high in the sky and I was actually able to cast a shadow of my hand on to a
sheet of paper. I was so chuffed!!!

Tim/Pete,

There must be a way to nail this task so that there is no doubt about
the success of such a project. Time for my thinking cap to go on ....

That's why I animated the shadow. If there was ever any doubt it was
caused by sky glow, the motion of the shadow caused by the apparent
motion of Venus in the sky has eliminated this. There is room for one
further project but I'll leave that for update 3 ;-)

--
Pete
http://www.digitalsky.org.uk

On May 21, 4:43 am, oriel36 wrote:
On May 21, 9:19 am, Pete Lawrence
wrote:

Here's a update for my November 2005 project to capture the shadow
cast by Venus...

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/venus/s...f-venus_2.html

--
Petehttp://www.digitalsky.org.uk

Dear,oh dear oh dear.Let us see -

"Then a simple experiment dawned on me that would prove once and for
all that the shadow was indeed caused by Earth's brilliant twin. By
taking a number of sequential shots on the same night, as long as the
camera and shadow casting object remained stationary, the apparent
movement of Venus in the sky should cause the shadow to move on the
wall being used as a screen."

Who would liike to inform Pete here that shadow movements are due to
the motion of the Earth,specifically axial rotation.

Who would like to try to get oriel to understand the meaning of the
word "apparent" in Pete's paragraph?

Austin

On May 21, 12:52 pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis
wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On May 21, 9:19 am, Pete Lawrence
wrote:

Here's a update for my November 2005 project to capture the shadow
cast by Venus...

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/venus/s...f-venus_2.html

--
Petehttp://www.digitalsky.org.uk

Dear,oh dear oh dear.Let us see -

snip

Sorry, Pete, but now it's your turn .... thanks to you, I have a
(temporary) reprieve from oriel.

When you have had enough, just remind him about my analemma work and
.... things will be back to "normal" for me. :-)

Anthony.

Have you figured out yet that you are analemma photgraphing is just a
late 17th century hoax,a silly attempt to determine the Earths motions
using a clock.

It must be something else to have the no variable tilt at the Equator
and a huge variation in tilt at the poles in order to achieve your
analemma.

Pete,he has no astronomical pedigree but your analemmatic images
do,albeit and astyrological one.

On May 21, 1:09 pm, Pete Lawrence
wrote:
On Mon, 21 May 2007 14:52:39 +0300, Anthony Ayiomamitis





wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On May 21, 9:19 am, Pete Lawrence
wrote:

Here's a update for my November 2005 project to capture the shadow
cast by Venus...

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/venus/s...f-venus_2.html

--
Petehttp://www.digitalsky.org.uk

Dear,oh dear oh dear.Let us see -

snip

Sorry, Pete, but now it's your turn .... thanks to you, I have a
(temporary) reprieve from oriel.

When you have had enough, just remind him about my analemma work and
.... things will be back to "normal" for me. :-)

I don't normally see his cuckoo posts at all because he goes into a
radiation/shadow differential orbital sub-rotational framework I call
my kill file. There he's at home because there's lots of other rubbish
he can pick up tips from. You have to admire someone with so little in
their life that they can spend so much time writing drivel designed to
include keywords to bait their troll prey. Sorry, did I say admire? I
mean't pity of course ;-)

Does she (because we don't know if Gertrude is a man) still refer to
the analema as the astrological analema? Gosh, that's an impressive
bait isn't it? He's a real master ;-)
--
Petehttp://www.digitalsky.org.uk- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I wonder what goes through your small minds when you encounter the
work of a real astronomer -

http://www.xs4all.nl/~adcs/Huygens/06/kort-E.html

The creation of the 24 hour day by real astronomers by using natural
noon and the Equation of Time tables is such an astronomical jewel
that only the most ignorant people on the planet would believe that
each noon cycle is exactly 24 hours,in order to justify why a star
returns in 23 hours 56 minutes 04 seconds -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidereal_time

The same people who used orbital comparisons between the Earth and the
other planets to extract so much information have had their work
temporarily destroyed by idiots who draw a correlation between axial
rotation of the Earth and the motion of the planet Venus in terms of
radiation received.How screwed up is that !!!!.

A few years ago you would probably have received your sought after
adulation but in the presence of a real astronomer,all you can do is
highlight that you and Anthony here are just astrophotographers with
either geocentric or astrological perspectives.

Like to continue with the motion of shadows and the Earth's motions or
do you really wish to imagine that Venus has an apparent motion ?.

Here is the faster Venus overtaking the slower orbitally moving
Earth with the central Sun as a backdrop in case you have severe
difficulties with Copernican reasoning -

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...6-08_07-44.jpg

There is no apparent motion of Venus unless you are a geocentric freak
like Anthony here ,the motions of Venus are seen directly from an
orbitally moving Earth hence your correlation between the motion of a
shadow and Venus is hardly the reasoning of an astronomer.

On May 21, 2:27 pm, AustinMN wrote:
On May 21, 4:43 am, oriel36 wrote:





On May 21, 9:19 am, Pete Lawrence
wrote:

Here's a update for my November 2005 project to capture the shadow
cast by Venus...

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/venus/s...f-venus_2.html

--
Petehttp://www.digitalsky.org.uk

Dear,oh dear oh dear.Let us see -

"Then a simple experiment dawned on me that would prove once and for
all that the shadow was indeed caused by Earth's brilliant twin. By
taking a number of sequential shots on the same night, as long as the
camera and shadow casting object remained stationary, the apparent
movement of Venus in the sky should cause the shadow to move on the
wall being used as a screen."

Who would liike to inform Pete here that shadow movements are due to
the motion of the Earth,specifically axial rotation.

Who would like to try to get oriel to understand the meaning of the
word "apparent" in Pete's paragraph?

Austin- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Venus does noit have an apparent motion,neither does Mercury,Mars
Jupiter or any of the other planets.The original heliocentric
astronomers did not have telescopes to use the motion of the inner
planets as they overtake the slower Earth as a way of affirming
heliocentric motion for the Earth and the other planets ,they used the
observed behavior of the outer planets against the stellar background
and by giving the Earth an orbital motion.,it allowed them to infer a
common heliocentric motion.

Pete here is correlating the motion of a shadow directly to the motion
of Venus when it is actually axial rotation he is looking at.With the
acknowledgement that the orbital motion of the Earth accounts for the
behavior of the planets nobody ever thinks about apparent motions of
the 'planets' except astrologers or what amounts to the same
thing,correlating the Earth axial rotation with the position of a
planet.

On May 21, 1:58 pm, Pete Lawrence
wrote:
On Mon, 21 May 2007 15:42:41 +0300, Anthony Ayiomamitis





wrote:
Tim Duke wrote:

For once in my life, I was away on business during a new moon (usually when
i go away, it's a full moon - never seem to time it right).

Unfortunately I was sent out to the carribean island of Bonaire near the
coast of Venezuela. By some fate, the potential client that I was visisting
was into astronomy and took my up to the top of the island where it was
absolutely pitch black!

First time I had seen the southern cross and Omega Centauri! Venus was very
high in the sky and I was actually able to cast a shadow of my hand on to a
sheet of paper. I was so chuffed!!!

Tim/Pete,

There must be a way to nail this task so that there is no doubt about
the success of such a project. Time for my thinking cap to go on ....

That's why I animated the shadow. If there was ever any doubt it was
caused by sky glow, the motion of the shadow caused by the apparent
motion of Venus in the sky has eliminated this.

When the Western heliocentric astronomers talked of apparent planetary
motions they refered to the long term plotted positions that exclude
axial rotation.

"With regard to the apparent motions of the Sun and Moon, it is
perhaps possible to deny what is said about the motion of the Earth,
although I do not see how the explanation of precession is to be
transferred to the sphere of the stars. But if anyone desires to look
either to the order and harmony of the system of the spheres, or to
ease and elegance and a complete explanation of the causes of the
phenomena, by no other hypotheses will he demonstrate more neatly and
correctly the apparent motions of the remaining planets. For all these
phenomena appear to be linked most nobly together, as by a golden
chain; and each of the planets, by its position and order and very
inequality of its motion, bears witness that the Earth moves. . . . "
Rheticus

http://www.graviton.demon.co.uk/5planetsNr3520.jpg

The long term orbital motions of the planets and the speed at which
the Earth overtakes them and the inner ones overtake the Earth along
with 'transits' affirms that the Earth's orbital motion is between
Venus and Mars.The conjunctions above give no background context to
the Earth's motions or those of the other planets,it is only when the
Earth's orbital motion is considered ,then the system straightens out.

With your 'apparent' motions of Venus,you highlight just how deficient
contemporaries are in matters of meshing the motions of the Earth with
climatology insofar as the seasons and global climate rely heavily on
the motion of the Earth's orbital shadow over the course of an annual
orbit.








There is room for one
further project but I'll leave that for update 3 ;-)

--
Petehttp://www.digitalsky.org.uk- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On May 21, 1:42 pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis
wrote:
Tim Duke wrote:
For once in my life, I was away on business during a new moon (usually when
i go away, it's a full moon - never seem to time it right).

Unfortunately I was sent out to the carribean island of Bonaire near the
coast of Venezuela. By some fate, the potential client that I was visisting
was into astronomy and took my up to the top of the island where it was
absolutely pitch black!

First time I had seen the southern cross and Omega Centauri! Venus was very
high in the sky and I was actually able to cast a shadow of my hand on to a
sheet of paper. I was so chuffed!!!

Tim/Pete,

There must be a way to nail this task so that there is no doubt about
the success of such a project. Time for my thinking cap to go on ....

Anthony.


Before you go chasing Pete's shadows I suggest you look to your own
endeavor .The meridian line registers natural noon day after day
and then you apply the Equation of Time to equalise to 24 hour clock
noon.No figure 8,no tilting Earth,just plain natural noon and 24 hour
clock noon.

The heliocentric trick was to invent clocks which could maintain the
24 hour day and then after applying the noon correction,determine
position on the planet by using a correlation which keeps clocks in
sync with the axial cycle as 4 minutes for each degree of geographical
seperation making 24 hours/360 degrees.You have to love how they
tranfered the 'average' 24 hour day to a 'constant' axial cycle by way
of the Equation of Time.


" Draw a Meridian line upon a floor (the manner of doing which is
sufficiently known; and note, that the utmost exactness herein is not
necessary and then hang two plummets, each by a small thred or wire,
directly over the said Meridian, at the distance of some 2. feet or
more one from the other, as the smalness of the thred will admit. When
the middle of the Sun (the Eye being placed so, as to bring both the
threds into one line) appears to be in the same line exactly... you
are then immediately to set the Watch, not precisely to the hour of
12. but by so much less, as is the Aequation of the day by the Table.
"

http://www.xs4all.nl/~adcs/Huygens/06/kort-E.html

All these big institutions who now think differently than the
pragmatic reasoning of the timekeeeping astronomers -

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/1999/JennyChen.shtml

Want to know why your magnification exercisae is dying ?.It is because
people may be discovering the wonderful story of Longitude and how a
bunch of celestial sphere astrologers tried to destroy a man who
invented accurate clocks based on the principles supplied by Huygens
-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Harrison












Tim- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

oriel36 wrote:
On May 21, 1:42 pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis
wrote:

Tim Duke wrote:

For once in my life, I was away on business during a new moon (usually when
i go away, it's a full moon - never seem to time it right).

Unfortunately I was sent out to the carribean island of Bonaire near the
coast of Venezuela. By some fate, the potential client that I was visisting
was into astronomy and took my up to the top of the island where it was
absolutely pitch black!

First time I had seen the southern cross and Omega Centauri! Venus was very
high in the sky and I was actually able to cast a shadow of my hand on to a
sheet of paper. I was so chuffed!!!

Tim/Pete,

There must be a way to nail this task so that there is no doubt about
the success of such a project. Time for my thinking cap to go on ....

Anthony.



Before you go chasing Pete's shadows I suggest you look to your own
endeavor .

snip

Actually it is Venus' shadows I would like to chase. I have been
thinking about this exercise and challenge the past few hours and I am
very interested in Pete's project!

Anthony.

On May 21, 9:48 am, oriel36 wrote:
On May 21, 2:27 pm, AustinMN wrote:

Who would like to try to get oriel to understand the meaning of the
word "apparent" in Pete's paragraph?

Austin

Venus does noit have an apparent motion,neither does Mercury,Mars
Jupiter or any of the other planets.

So they don't appear to move? They just stay stationary in the sky?

Austin

On May 21, 3:19 am, Pete Lawrence
wrote:
Here's a update for my November 2005 project to capture the shadow
cast by Venus...

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/venus/s...f-venus_2.html

--
Petehttp://www.digitalsky.org.uk

A fascinating peice of work, Pete.
Thanks for the info and the post.

Ben