#1
|
|||
|
|||
The Tides
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
The Tides
On Feb 22, 6:05*am, Sam Wormley wrote:
The Tides http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gftT3wHJGtg Unlike the pathetic mobbing I receive when I write material,I answer you with more information,new and better approaches ,more accurate historical and technical views and that is what a forum is for. http://rstl.royalsocietypublishing.o....full.pdf+html It hasn't occurred to researchers just yet that the tides are most sensitive to the Earth's dynamics and respond accordingly,on page 277 of that excellent essay of Wallis,he mentions that the natural noon inequalities, referring to the orbital points of the Earth,add a component to the annual cycle of the tides.As I am the first person to express the Equation of Time as a rate of change arising from the unequal turning of the Earth to the central Sun about a travelling ecliptic axis,this change shows up when the Earth enters its great acceleration or deceleration phases.You mightn't like it Sam,it involves modifying axial precession from a long term axial trait to an annual orbital trait and I have shown the images of Uranus in this respect to often to count. That essay by Wallis was written 20 years before a vicious strain of empiricism emerged and destroyed what was useful in using experimental sciences as an analogy to large scale cause and effect. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
The Tides
On Thursday, February 21, 2013 9:44:53 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote:
As I am the first person to express the Equation of Time as a rate of change arising from the unequal turning of the Earth to the central Sun about a travelling ecliptic axis,this change shows up when the Earth enters its great acceleration or deceleration phases. You must be kidding, of course. You are far, far from being the first person to figure this out, but as usual, you are completely off-base as to the actual reason. The rest of us know that because of the Earth's various speeds along the ecliptic at different times of the year, it takes either a little less than 24 hours or a little more than 24 hours for the Sun to attain culmination on the meridian. Regarding the equation of time, it has been fully understood for a long, long time. You have not discovered anything new. \Paul A |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
The Tides
On Feb 22, 7:18*am, palsing wrote:
On Thursday, February 21, 2013 9:44:53 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote: As I am the first person to express the Equation of Time as a rate of change arising from the unequal turning of the Earth to the central Sun about a travelling ecliptic axis,this change shows up when the Earth enters its great acceleration or deceleration phases. You must be kidding, of course. You are far, far from being the first person to figure this out, but as usual, you are completely off-base as to the actual reason. The rest of us know that because of the Earth's various speeds along the ecliptic at different times of the year, it takes either a little less than 24 hours or a little more than 24 hours for the Sun to attain culmination on the meridian. Regarding the equation of time, it has been fully understood for a long, long time. You have not discovered anything new. \Paul A The rest of us indeed !,the 'new' idea that the Earth turned once exactly in 24 hours in the year 1820 and is slowing down relative to that historical point is more of the same from the fiction generating empirical machine and impossible to contend with - no class,no intellectual integrity,no historical or referential depth,just people making assertions to fill in gaps for whatever purpose they wish,in this case the civil convenience - "At the time of the dinosaurs, Earth completed one rotation in about 23 hours," says MacMillan, who is a member of the VLBI team at NASA Goddard. "In the year 1820, a rotation took exactly 24 hours, or 86,400 standard seconds. Since 1820, the mean solar day has increased by about 2.5 milliseconds." NASA I don't think in terms of discovery,the working language of planetary dynamics requires modifications and especially when it is possible to see these things in action hence the modification from axial precession to an annual orbital component and from there into multiple other consequences.You poor soul interpreted the orbital turning of Uranus to the central Sun as a changing perspective due to the orbital motion of the Earth but I assure you that Uranus will continue to turn a full 360 degrees over the next 8 decades. http://www.daviddarling.info/images/...gs_changes.jpg This is new and it is hugely important for a range of topics from the tides to a climate spectrum and that is why urgency is needed to isolate the predictive section of astronomy from the interpretative.If you can't keep up then go your own way and enjoy your telescope but don't assume you are speaking for a group of individuals with a firm intellectual grasp on things,most likely they are welfare academics doing just enough to get away with a salary and an unwarranted reputation as 'astronomers' or 'planetary scientists'.Modern imaging is the fresh air that drives out the stale atmosphere of Royal Society empiricism,at least the vicious strain that give mathematicians and their non geometric language dominance in astronomy.This is good,this is all good. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
The Tides
"oriel36" wrote in message
... "At the time of the dinosaurs, Earth completed one rotation in about 23 hours," says MacMillan, who is a member of the VLBI team at NASA Goddard. "In the year 1820, a rotation took exactly 24 hours, or 86,400 standard seconds. Since 1820, the mean solar day has increased by about 2.5 milliseconds." NASA I don't think ================================================== ==== Of course not. Who even suggested an ignorant thug like you COULD think? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
The Tides
On Thursday, February 21, 2013 10:51:03 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote:
You poor soul interpreted the orbital turning of Uranus to the central Sun as a changing perspective due to the orbital motion of the Earth but I assure you that Uranus will continue to turn a full 360 degrees over the next 8 decades. No, it won't, wrt the fixed stars. Yes, it will, wrt the Sun. You have a big problem with perspective, which is nothing new, you just don't 'get it' at all. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
The Tides
On Feb 23, 1:42*am, palsing wrote:
On Thursday, February 21, 2013 10:51:03 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote: You poor soul interpreted the orbital turning of Uranus to the central Sun *as a changing perspective due to the orbital motion of the Earth but I assure you that Uranus will , continue to turn a full 360 degrees over the next 8 decades. No, it won't, wrt the fixed stars. Yes, it will, wrt the Sun. You have a big problem with perspective, which is nothing new, you just don't 'get it' at all. My goodness,even with contemporary imaging making it a 100% observational certainty,I have to struggle to maintain the new component that explains why natural noon cycles vary and why we have the seasons.Of course,nothing remotely close to these events have ever occurred in human history where a small group ran with a mistake that locked planetary dynamics into stellar circumpolar motion - this is dysfunctional on a scale that is dismaying .You poor soul believed that the change in perspective of the rings was due to the motion of the Earth instead of being intrinsic to the planet itself but the distance between Earth and Uranus is such that not only is it impossible,a simple imitation analogy positively identifies a separate turning to the central Sun aside from daily rotation. Take comfort that you colleagues appear no better or worse than you. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
The Tides
On Feb 23, 1:42*am, palsing wrote:
On Thursday, February 21, 2013 10:51:03 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote: You poor soul interpreted the orbital turning of Uranus to the central Sun *as a changing perspective due to the orbital motion of the Earth but I assure you that Uranus will continue to turn a full 360 degrees over the next 8 decades. No, it won't, wrt the fixed stars. Yes, it will, wrt the Sun. You have a big problem with perspective, which is nothing new, you just don't 'get it' at all. In an era of mediocrity |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
The Tides
On Feb 23, 1:42*am, palsing wrote:
On Thursday, February 21, 2013 10:51:03 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote: You poor soul interpreted the orbital turning of Uranus to the central Sun *as a changing perspective due to the orbital motion of the Earth but I assure you that Uranus will continue to turn a full 360 degrees over the next 8 decades. No, it won't, wrt the fixed stars. Yes, it will, wrt the Sun. You have a big problem with perspective, which is nothing new, you just don't 'get it' at all. In an era of mediocrity,at least in the area of astronomy and terrestrial sciences,men become comfortable with lies in order to survive for their own ends rather than thrive and add to human understanding of their surroundings.The spirited individual has no comfort zone nor requires one as the natural landscape of creativity and productivity is one of transient information moving across disciplines,something opening up glimpses of possibilities and at other times obliterating falsehoods and distortions. How much information does one simple series of images reveal across so many disciplines,anything from a climate spectrum to cyclical tides to the modification of axial precession - http://www.daviddarling.info/images/...gs_changes.jpg The unmoderated Usenet looks like the most hostile environment for creativity yet more gets accomplished here than the sum total of all research institutions and organizations that deal with astronomy/ terrestrial sciences.The principles behind the mechanism which links the spherical deviation of the planet with plate tectonics was developed here using the 100% observational certainty that all exposed viscous compositions display differential rotation and when applied to the Earth's interior it surfaces on the crust as clues and effects.The distant hills of geomagnetic signatures arise from the same source and all of this was done 6 years ago here when nobody would discuss it - the wider community tried to play catch up and created a pathetic Frankenstein's monster version of loosely cobbled together assertions. I am comfortable with the technological advances of this era and especially astronomical imaging to carry a point,a simple stretch of the imagination would apply the same orbital action to the Earth as readers see of Uranus where the polar coordinates of the Earth act like a beacon for the orbital behavior of the planet as those coordinate continue to turn in a circle to the central Sun - http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/...mericas250.jpg Unlike Galileo,I do not think the multitude are stupid,not even you,encountering this type of astronomy is as though joining a stream of thought and feeling yet who knows how a person enters that stream,when they do they will perceive astronomy and its connections to terrestrial sciences in a new light - " I think, my Kepler, we will laugh at the extraordinary stupidity of the multitude. What do you say to the leading philosophers of the faculty here, to whom I have offered a thousand times of my own accord to show my studies, but who with the lazy obstinacy of a serpent who has eaten his fill have never consented to look at planets, nor moon, nor telescope?" Galileo Answer to the images instead of attacking me. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
The Tides
oriel36 wrote:
On Feb 23, 1:42 am, palsing wrote: On Thursday, February 21, 2013 10:51:03 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote: You poor soul interpreted the orbital turning of Uranus to the central Sun as a changing perspective due to the orbital motion of the Earth but I assure you that Uranus will continue to turn a full 360 degrees over the next 8 decades. No, it won't, wrt the fixed stars. Yes, it will, wrt the Sun. You have a big problem with perspective, which is nothing new, you just don't 'get it' at all. In an era of mediocrity,at least in the area of astronomy and terrestrial sciences,men become comfortable with lies in order to survive for their own ends rather than thrive and add to human understanding of their surroundings.The spirited individual has no comfort zone nor requires one as the natural landscape of creativity and productivity is one of transient information moving across disciplines,something opening up glimpses of possibilities and at other times obliterating falsehoods and distortions. How much information does one simple series of images reveal across so many disciplines,anything from a climate spectrum to cyclical tides to the modification of axial precession - http://www.daviddarling.info/images/...gs_changes.jpg The unmoderated Usenet looks like the most hostile environment for creativity yet more gets accomplished here than the sum total of all research institutions and organizations that deal with astronomy/ terrestrial sciences.The principles behind the mechanism which links the spherical deviation of the planet with plate tectonics was developed here using the 100% observational certainty that all exposed viscous compositions display differential rotation and when applied to the Earth's interior it surfaces on the crust as clues and effects.The distant hills of geomagnetic signatures arise from the same source and all of this was done 6 years ago here when nobody would discuss it - the wider community tried to play catch up and created a pathetic Frankenstein's monster version of loosely cobbled together assertions. I am comfortable with the technological advances of this era and especially astronomical imaging to carry a point,a simple stretch of the imagination would apply the same orbital action to the Earth as readers see of Uranus where the polar coordinates of the Earth act like a beacon for the orbital behavior of the planet as those coordinate continue to turn in a circle to the central Sun - http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/...mericas250.jpg Unlike Galileo,I do not think the multitude are stupid,not even you,encountering this type of astronomy is as though joining a stream of thought and feeling yet who knows how a person enters that stream,when they do they will perceive astronomy and its connections to terrestrial sciences in a new light - " I think, my Kepler, we will laugh at the extraordinary stupidity of the multitude. What do you say to the leading philosophers of the faculty here, to whom I have offered a thousand times of my own accord to show my studies, but who with the lazy obstinacy of a serpent who has eaten his fill have never consented to look at planets, nor moon, nor telescope?" Galileo Answer to the images instead of attacking me. I wouldn't describe you as a serpent but how often do you look at the planets and moon through a telescope. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Variation in tides | n cook | UK Astronomy | 29 | June 17th 07 05:14 PM |
Article on Tides | Matthew Ota | Amateur Astronomy | 14 | June 24th 06 12:00 AM |
Tides | Starlord | Misc | 0 | June 21st 06 06:05 PM |
Spring Tides | Duncan Heenan | Misc | 6 | November 29th 05 12:53 PM |
Quakes vs Tides | Asimov | Astronomy Misc | 0 | November 3rd 04 03:54 AM |