Appreceating orbital motion

Cataloguers hold to the view that the Earth keeps the same face to the
Sun over the course of an annual orbit.

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

There is no axial tilt component in the Equation of Time and it would
be nice to see an astronomer explain to cataloguers why it is not a
good idea to imagine that the Earth rotates constantly to a star every
23 hours 56 min 04 sec despite appearances.

I am sorry that I mistook this for an astronomy forum.

Easy enough to see that Uranus changes its orbital orientation to the
Sun by means of its unusual polar orientation and by analogy so does
the Earth.

What makes you justify you sidereal view for axial and orbital motion
of the Earth would also break your own charter that you are discussing
astronomy or astronomical matters.Are you absolutely sure the Earth's
rotation through 360 degrees is 23 hours 56 min 04 sec ?.

In article .com,
wrote:
I am sorry that I mistook this for an astronomy forum.

It is. It's just that your definition of astronomy differs from the one
that the majority hold, in particular the members of this group, and
every professional astronomy association you care to name.

Oh, and as regards your attempts to disparage astronomers as
"cataloguers" have you stopped to think what the word "astronomy"
actually means; what its etymology is?

What makes you justify you sidereal view for axial and orbital motion
of the Earth would also break your own charter that you are discussing
astronomy or astronomical matters.Are you absolutely sure the Earth's
rotation through 360 degrees is 23 hours 56 min 04 sec ?.

With respect to the "fixed" stars, yes, I'm quite happy with that. And
I haven't noticed any conflict with my religion either.

I'm also quite willing to accept that you are not happy with it, so
please just quietly hold your view, and let us quietly hold ours.

Tim

astronomer explain to cataloguers why it is not a
good idea to imagine that the Earth rotates constantly to a star every
23 hours 56 min 04 sec despite appearances.

You should take this directly to the commercial telescope drive
manufacturers. They will be more than grateful for your insights (as
well as the major observatories) and will laud you to the heavens. No
longer do we need different drive rates (solar,sidereal, lunar, King
etc). Are you suggesting that time itself warps dependant on what
class of object is being observed ? I suppose they effect cancels out
as different observers look in different directions ?
The rub comes when we all look the same way, the fabric of time will
be stressed torsionally. We could name the new drive rate so
engendered the "Kelleher Time With A Twist" rate.
I wish you Sir a good "day".
jc


--
http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/jc_atm/

An astronomer would be capable of acknowledging the March 21st
alignment where the changing orbital orientation of the Earth runs
parallel with axial longitude coordinates at 90 degrees to the
Sun/Earth line.

http://www.mhhe.com/physsci/astronom...ages/04f15.jpg

Cataloguers frame the Equinox as the motion of the Sun across
Equatorial latitudes at 90 degrees to the polar axis.

http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/astronomy/Equinox.html

Since the emergence of Copernican/Keplerian cosmology it should be
taken for granted that the natural unequality from one noon to the next
noon by means of the axial and orbital motion of the Earth is due to
the changing rate of orbital orientation to the Sun as constant axial
rotation is passing through it.

Why vandalise the Equation of Time correction by determining that there
is an equatorial orientation (axial tilt) component when it was simply
a fudge by Flamsteed, Maskelyne and cataloguers to reduce celestial
coordinates to terrestial coordinates.

The vandalism emerges from the hijacking of astronomy by theorists
begining with Newton.In their eagerness to demonstrate the Earth's
constant axial rotation to a celestial sphere they created the
impression of mean Sun/Earth distances which Newton exploited as a
geocentric/heliocentric orbital equivalency.In short,the reasons you
cataloguers imagine that the Earth's axial rotation through 360 degrees
corresponds to 23 hours 56 min 04 sec is because it would be fatal to
Newtonian concepts which conveniently drop axial and orbital motions as
independent of each other.

You are quietly supporting an intellectual holocaust,it surfaces every
time when somebody comes here and declares how little engineers
understand relativity or the general population are led to believe that
Newton inherited the work of astronomers.I will not remain quiet
because intentional pretensiousness influences children to accept
insincerity while outwardly telling the world it stands for objective
fact and no civilisation can support that.

I can justify the fact that there is no external reference for constant
axial rotation through 360 degrees in 24 hours or the pace to which
equable hours,minutes and seconds are set .

Cataloguers and theorists created a mess by assuming that axial
rotation to an external reference hence rotation to inertial space as
a 'fact' and weakly supported by cataloguers as the 'true' value for
axial rotation through 360 degrees.

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

Have you any ****ing idea how many astronomical principles that were
broken so Newton could have his ballistic agenda dumped on planetary
motion ?.

I suppose you can congratulate yourself that there is nobody around who
would know the difference between Kepler's and Newton's view on the
same topic and how it all ties in with why cataloguers support the
wrong value for rotation of the Earth just to please the theorists or
maybe because of cowardice.

"PH=C6NOMENON IV.
That the fixed stars being at rest, the periodic times of the five
primary planets, and (whether of the sun about the earth, or) of the
earth about the sun, are in the sesquiplicate proportion of their mean
distances from the sun.

http://members.tripod.com/~gravitee/phaenomena.htm



"The proportion existing between the periodic times of any two planets
is exactly the sesquiplicate proportion of the mean distances of the
orbits, or as generally given,the squares of the periodic times are
proportional to the cubes of the mean distances." Kepler


Look up the term PANIS QUADRAGESIMALIS or the observed motion of Mars
as seen from Earth which Kepler used in determining planetary geometry
and motion,the chances are that you won't find it.

You will however find plenty on Newton's procedure using the sidereal
format based on the celestial sphere.

http://www.friesian.com/separat.htm

It must be great to know that there is nobody to challenge you or that
you probably don't understand what Newton did but my business has been
to return familiarity of astronomy to people as something more than
celestial birdwatching and astronomers and their insights as
wonderfully easy to appreceate.

writes but does not read the replies he
gets.

Cheers

Martin

--
Martin Frey
http://www.hadastro.org.uk
N 51 02 E 0 47

On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 12:56:51 +0000, Martin Frey
wrote:

writes but does not read the replies he
gets.

That's a surprise! Now would it be possible to stop trying to convert
him/her? I notice that the profanity has stopped. I wonder why!
--
Pete
http://www.digitalsky.org.uk

Fascinating. Now I've blocked him I only get the senssible replies.
"John Carruthers" wrote in message
...
astronomer explain to cataloguers why it is not a
good idea to imagine that the Earth rotates constantly to a star every
23 hours 56 min 04 sec despite appearances.

You should take this directly to the commercial telescope drive
manufacturers. They will be more than grateful for your insights (as
well as the major observatories) and will laud you to the heavens. No
longer do we need different drive rates (solar,sidereal, lunar, King
etc). Are you suggesting that time itself warps dependant on what
class of object is being observed ? I suppose they effect cancels out
as different observers look in different directions ?
The rub comes when we all look the same way, the fabric of time will
be stressed torsionally. We could name the new drive rate so
engendered the "Kelleher Time With A Twist" rate.
I wish you Sir a good "day".
jc


--
http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/jc_atm/

Martin Frey wrote:
writes but does not read the replies he
gets.

Cheers

Martin

--
Martin Frey
http://www.hadastro.org.uk
N 51 02 E 0 47

Have'nt I told you that an astronomer recognises the equinox as an
alignment between changing orbital orientation splitting the polar axis
at 90 degrees to the Sun/Earth line.

Cataloguers (and you all are cataloguers) with pretensions to being
astronomers recognise the equinox as the motion of the Sun along an
equatorial celestial sphere at 90 degrees to the polar axis.

The poor cataloguer diverges from the astronomer in forcing an seasonal
axial tilt component into the Equation Time whereas the correct and
obvious factor is determined by shifts in orbital longitudinal
orientation as constant axial rotation passes through it.

So,in a few weeks I am the only person to enjoy the Equinox for what it
is astronomically while cataloguers remain focused on seasonal changes.

Probably there are a few here who would feel ashamed at ignoring an
astronomical alignment and subsequently the further progress of that
longitudinal orbital orientation in the Equation of Time correction in
favor of a seasonal axial tilt one.