#1
|
|||
|
|||
The leap day
It is hard to imagine why people in this era of great technological
advancement would choose to betray the intricate structure we inherit from the great astronomers in antiquity who fixed the 24 hour day and later that value to daily rotation through 360 degrees,who took these daily cycles and rotations and determined 365 1/4 rotations for an annual/orbital circuit and then to craft the structure of a leap day in order to maintain a steady progression of 24 hour days into a steady progression of years using these days.Who would marvel at the 6 hour orbital drift through Mar 1st from year to year with the 1461 st rotation of Feb 29th that brings the rotations back in sync corresponding to 4 cycles of 365 1/4 rotations. You literally have to be a monster to reject this system even if nobody has to be held accountable for the error that introduced an alternative value for rotation through 360 degrees and subsequently an alternative and nonsensical amount of rotations in an orbital circuit,it is not something where it is possible to excuse yourself or hide from and who would want to ?. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
The leap day
On Oct 5, 11:43*am, oriel36 wrote:
It is hard to imagine why people in this era of great technological advancement would choose to betray the intricate structure we inherit from the great astronomers in antiquity who fixed the 24 hour day and later that value to *daily rotation through 360 degrees,who took these daily cycles and rotations and determined 365 1/4 rotations for an annual/orbital circuit and then to craft the structure of a leap day in order to maintain a steady progression of 24 hour days into a steady progression of years using these days.Who would marvel at the 6 hour orbital drift through Mar 1st from year to year with the 1461 st rotation of Feb 29th that brings the rotations back in sync corresponding to 4 cycles of 365 1/4 rotations. That's fine, but only WITH RESPECT TO THE SUN, no problem. You literally have to be a monster to reject this system... And, you would have to be a complete Idiot to reject the easily measureable sidereal day. “Human beings, like plants, grow in the soil of acceptance, not in the atmosphere of rejection” - John Powell |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
The leap day
On Oct 5, 12:43*pm, oriel36 wrote:
You literally have to be a monster to reject this system even if nobody has to be held accountable for the error that introduced an alternative value for rotation through 360 degrees and subsequently an alternative and nonsensical amount of rotations in an orbital circuit,it is not something where it is possible to excuse yourself or hide from and who would want to ? I am not rejecting the system of the calendar when I say it makes more sense to speak of the period of circumpolar stellar rotation as the rotation of the Earth. The day is the product of both orbital revolutions and the Earth's rotation. So since these two motions are added to make the solar day, it makes sense that the length of the solar day will differ from the period of rotation, since an orbital revolution also involves motion. Yes, those whose calculations gave us an accurate calendar deserve praise. Copernicus, Galileo, and Kepler all deserve praise as well. But so does Newton. It is only your confusion that prevents you from seeing this. John Savard |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
The leap day
On Oct 5, 9:26*pm, palsing wrote:
On Oct 5, 11:43*am, oriel36 wrote: It is hard to imagine why people in this era of great technological advancement would choose to betray the intricate structure we inherit from the great astronomers in antiquity who fixed the 24 hour day and later that value to *daily rotation through 360 degrees,who took these daily cycles and rotations and determined 365 1/4 rotations for an annual/orbital circuit and then to craft the structure of a leap day in order to maintain a steady progression of 24 hour days into a steady progression of years using these days.Who would marvel at the 6 hour orbital drift through Mar 1st from year to year with the 1461 st rotation of Feb 29th that brings the rotations back in sync corresponding to 4 cycles of 365 1/4 rotations. That's fine, but only WITH RESPECT TO THE SUN, no problem. No race of people have ever behaved like this,there is no parallel for the assault on some of the easiest to understand astronomical achievements such as the purpose of a leap day so unless you happen to be the most boring people on the planet,there is no way to account for the pure hostility as it requires nothing more than arithmetic. A sane person,at least one who can count,never experiences any more than 365 full rotations over a full orbital circuit insofar as the average 24 hour day corresponding to the average length of one rotation to natural noon,determines the orbital circuit as 365 days 5 hours 49 minutes,nothing more than what Huygens repeats here - "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" Huygens During the current cycle, for explain what a leap day does,daily and orbital motion began in sync on Mar 1st 2008 with the orbital cycle drifting forward on Mar 1st of each non-leap year in increments of 6 hours from year to year.On Mar 1st 6 AM 2009,the first circuit was completed where the next began and ended at noon this year with the next cycle of 365 1/4 rotations ending 6 PM 2011.After 3 non-leap years,the orbital circuit has drifted by 18 hours ahead of the average rotations so that a Feb 29th leap day rotation of 24 hours squares away 6 hours to complete 4 orbital circuits of 365 1/4 day rotations and 1461 rotations across Mar 1st 2008 and Feb 29th 2012 where the next cycle begins. You literally have to be a monster to reject this system... And, you would have to be a complete Idiot to reject the easily measureable sidereal day. At this scale, where one 24 hour rotation on Feb 29th completes 1461 rotations and it is rejected can only mean some sort of monstrous personality because it means rejecting the system which corresponds 365 1/4 rotations for an annual cycle. This is the darkest period in human intellectual history by any standard and cursed be those who are silent on this assault on human achievement should they know what the problem is and why it needs to be dealt with.As for you,well your excused as a nuisance. “Human beings, like plants, grow in the soil of acceptance, not in the atmosphere of rejection” - John Powell |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
The leap day
On Oct 5, 1:40*pm, oriel36 wrote:
A sane person,at least one who can count,never experiences any more than 365 full rotations over a full orbital circuit... No, that's not quite right... it should read like this; "A sane person, at least one who can count, never experiences any more than 365 full daylight/darkness cycles over a full orbital circuit..." There is a difference between a daylight/darkness cycle and a rotation... but you already know that, don't you? So, why do you pretend to be as stupid as a block wall? "The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein \Paul A |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
The leap day
On Oct 5, 8:24*pm, palsing wrote:
On Oct 5, 1:40*pm, oriel36 wrote: A sane person,at least one who can count,never experiences any more than 365 full rotations over a full orbital circuit... No, that's not quite right... it should read like this; "A sane person, at least one who can count, never experiences any more than 365 full daylight/darkness cycles over a full orbital circuit..." There is a difference between a daylight/darkness cycle and a rotation... but you already know that, don't you? So, why do you pretend to be as stupid as a block wall? He should at least be prepared to admit that there _may_ be a difference between a daylight/darkness cycle and a rotation. John Savard |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
The leap day
On Oct 6, 3:24*am, palsing wrote:
On Oct 5, 1:40*pm, oriel36 wrote: A sane person,at least one who can count,never experiences any more than 365 full rotations over a full orbital circuit... No, that's not quite right... it should read like this; "A sane person, at least one who can count, never experiences any more than 365 full daylight/darkness cycles over a full orbital circuit..." There is a difference between a daylight/darkness cycle and a rotation... It is inevitable that you would eventually say this insofar as in the envisioned nightmare world of Orwell where blind consensus rules and eventually claims 2+2= 5,the logic and arithmetic of 'sidereal time' reasoning demands the correspondence between the daylight/darkness cycle and the rotational cycle be dropped - "In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense." Orwell That is as close to your language as I will go as the correct arguments which include the Earth's two daylight/darkness cycles which in combination are responsible for both the seasons and variations in the natural noon cycles by virtue of their dynamics and their respective ways of turning to the central Sun is a million miles away from that open grave which is 'sidereal time' reasoning and the people who support it. So,the 24 hour leap day rotation and daylight/darkness cycle is the key to both the 24 hour day/daily rotation and the number of rotations that constitute an orbital cycle,that this forum full of people considering themselves astronomers have failed at this level is quite an amazing sight.Even I can't see where this goes from here but whereas you are excused by making the claim that rotation and the daylight/darkness cycle are not the same thing,you can be comforted that this consensual belief is a consequence of something that is indoctrinated rather than thought through as an individual.My indignation is therefore justified by virtue of love of what the great astronomers once achieved and not by any opposition to the dominance of this empirical monster which destroys everything it touches. but you already know that, don't you? So, why do you pretend to be as stupid as a block wall? "The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein \Paul A |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
The leap day
On 06/10/2010 04:06, Quadibloc wrote:
On Oct 5, 8:24 pm, wrote: On Oct 5, 1:40 pm, wrote: A sane person,at least one who can count,never experiences any more than 365 full rotations over a full orbital circuit... No, that's not quite right... it should read like this; "A sane person, at least one who can count, never experiences any more than 365 full daylight/darkness cycles over a full orbital circuit..." There is a difference between a daylight/darkness cycle and a rotation... but you already know that, don't you? So, why do you pretend to be as stupid as a block wall? He should at least be prepared to admit that there _may_ be a difference between a daylight/darkness cycle and a rotation. Apart from being a delusional nutter who cannot be reasoned with and should by now be kill filed. Kelleher fails to understand that the Earth going round the sun accounts for the difference he objects to. It is very much like the hands on an analogue clock problem. There are twelve hours in the day which the hour hand moves round, but the clock hands only pass over each other 11 times in a day at 0:00 1:05, 2:10, 3:15 etc. It is a fence post error in what passes for his "reasoning". Give it up you will never convince him. Regards, Martin Brown |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
The leap day
On Oct 6, 8:43*am, Martin Brown
wrote: On 06/10/2010 04:06, Quadibloc wrote: On Oct 5, 8:24 pm, *wrote: On Oct 5, 1:40 pm, *wrote: A sane person,at least one who can count,never experiences any more than 365 full rotations over a full orbital circuit... No, that's not quite right... it should read like this; "A sane person, at least one who can count, never experiences any more than 365 full daylight/darkness cycles over a full orbital circuit..." There is a difference between a daylight/darkness cycle and a rotation... but you already know that, don't you? So, why do you pretend to be as stupid as a block wall? He should at least be prepared to admit that there _may_ be a difference between a daylight/darkness cycle and a rotation. Apart from being a delusional nutter who cannot be reasoned with and should by now be kill filed. Kelleher fails to understand that the Earth going round the sun accounts for the difference he objects to. There are 365 days from Mar 1st 2010 until Feb 28th 2011 and every day a star will return to the same spot 3 minutes 56 seconds earlier than the day before, there will be 366 days from Mar 1st 2011 until Feb 29th 2012 and every day a star will still return to the same spot 3 minutes 56 seconds earlier.It means you are lying to yourselves,the return of a star using 'sidereal time' reasoning is based on the equal 24 hour day within the 365/366 day calendar system. There are 365 AM and PM designations in non-leap years and 366 in the year Mar 1st 2011 until Feb 29th 2012 signifying that rotation is locked in to natural noon with the variations in the length,I repeat,the entire length of natural noon averaged to 24 hours,no wandering Sun,no 'sidereal vs solar' junk,just a simple observation that averages to 24 hours - "Draw a Meridian line upon a floor 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." Huygens It is very much like the hands on an analogue clock problem. There are twelve hours in the day which the hour hand moves round, but the clock hands only pass over each other 11 times in a day at 0:00 1:05, 2:10, 3:15 etc. It is a fence post error in what passes for his "reasoning". The Feb 29th leap day rotation accounts for the drifting of the orbital cycles by increments of 6 hours through Mar 1st from year on year ,in this current year,what began at 12 noon ends at 6 PM on Mar 1st 2011.You 'sidereal time' freaks are trying to account for an orbital drift through stellar circumpolar motion every day ,it is much easier to understand what a 24 hour leap day rotation in rounding off 1461 rotations constituting 365 1/4 rotations per orbital circuit. Give it up you will never convince him. Regards, Martin Brown I do not convince people who can lie to themselves to such an extent that they will sacrifice arithmetic or the correspondence between the daylight/darkness cycle and daily rotation in order to maintain their 'sidereal time' indoctrination,I can appeal to those who can take a wider view of the matter and arrive at conclusions which then can be passed on to students. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
The leap day
On Oct 6, 3:39*am, oriel36 wrote:
There are 365 days from Mar 1st 2010 until Feb 28th 2011 and every day a star will return to the same spot 3 minutes 56 seconds earlier than the day before, there will be 366 days from Mar 1st 2011 until Feb 29th 2012 and every day a star will still return to the same spot 3 minutes 56 seconds earlier. Yes, that's true. There's no sudden jump once a year. We don't expect there to be one, and we think the lack of one shows that "sidereal time" is valid for the purposes we use it for. It means you are lying to yourselves,the return of a star using 'sidereal time' reasoning is based on the equal 24 hour day within the 365/366 day calendar system. We dispute your use of the term "based on". Only the size of the unit of time is determined by the averaging of the solar day. There are 365 AM and PM designations in non-leap years and 366 in the year Mar 1st 2011 until Feb 29th 2012 signifying that rotation is locked in to natural noon with the variations in the length, I don't even claim to understand what that means. Our clocks are locked in to natural noon, despite the variations in length due to the Equation of Time, because we want to sleep when it's dark. You 'sidereal time' freaks are trying to account for an orbital drift through stellar circumpolar motion every day ,it is much easier to understand what a 24 hour leap day rotation in rounding off 1461 rotations constituting 365 1/4 rotations per orbital circuit. It certainly is true that we don't need "sidereal time" to account for leap years. The length of the year in solar days is all we need, and stellar circumpolar motion doesn't enter into it at all. The only reason we're talking about leap years is that you brought them up. You're the one who somehow claims that leap years mean that the sidereal day can't be the period of the Earth's rotation. As far as we're concerned, there is no real connection between the two. What "sidereal time" helps us to understand is the Equation of Time, by letting us separate the rotation of the Earth from the daylight/ darkness cycle _subtracted_ by the Earth's annual orbital motion. Since the number of daylight/darkness cycles in a year is 365 plus an odd fraction, and this number is the number of rotations minus one due to the Earth's orbital motion, the number of rotations of the Earth and stellar circumpolar motions in a year is 366 plus an odd fraction. ***So what?*** John Savard |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The Leap Millisecond | Guy Macon | Amateur Astronomy | 17 | July 20th 07 10:12 AM |
The Leap Millisecond | Guy Macon | Astronomy Misc | 13 | June 10th 07 11:54 AM |
To Leap or Not to Leap: Scientists debate a timely issue | Sam Wormley | Amateur Astronomy | 7 | April 24th 06 08:42 AM |
LEAP YEAR, LEAP SECOND 31.12.2005, CALENDAR.=====.. | [email protected] | Amateur Astronomy | 5 | December 29th 05 03:14 AM |
Concerning the leap day | Oriel36 | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | April 29th 04 09:31 PM |