The March Equinox 2012

oriel36 wrote:
On Mar 21, 1:48 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Mar 21, 8:07 am, Mike Collins wrote:

So what you are actually saying is this: Let's ignore the fact that the sun
is visible at both poles on the equinox because it invalidates Oriels
infantile theories

With all due respect to atmospheric refraction and its effects in many
areas,the immense and noble discipline of planetary dynamics focuses
attention of the polar coordinates turning through the circle of
illumination and into their respective orbital cycles of day or
night.While the observers for refraction are many,the audience for the
orbital dynamic are few.

Everything from the annual tidal cycles to the observed variations in
natural noon are contingent on knowing that the polar coordinates act
like a beacon into the orbital behavior of the planet,a particularly
21st century view which incorporates the emerging astronomy of
planetary comparisons.

Let's try some planetary comparisons then,

http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf071/sf071a06.htm
Describes the " hot poles" of mercury. Mercury's sidereal day explains this
phenomenon perfectly.
Lets see your explanation.

Observers here have spent the best part of 6 years ignoring
conclusive observations that the daily rotational alignment of Uranus
remains fixed in one direction in its annual orbit just as the
alignment of the Earth is to Polaris,the polar coordinates turn in a
circle to the central Sun and can be seen to do so -

http://www.daviddarling.info/images/...gs_changes.jpg

The South to North daily rotation of Uranus combines with the East to
West quasi-rotation to the central Sun generating a uniquely polar
climate on Uranus while the Earth's climate is largely Equatorial and
with less than a 30% polar influence as there is a 23 1/2 degree
separation between the intrinsic rotational axis and the traveling
orbital axis while the angle of Uranus is close to 90 degrees.

While not directly at the polar coordinates,these webcams at 77
degrees S which would have enjoyed constant sunlight for the last 6
months are now descending into darkness -

http://www.usap.gov/videoclipsandmaps/mcmwebcam.cfm

An astronomer should be capable of explaining the transition from
polar daylight to polar darkness without the slightest hesitation
rather than rely on the older and less productive 'tilt' to the Sun
explanation or some variation on that theme.So,planetary comparisons
reveal information that would otherwise be difficult to attain,I know
this because the effort it took to disentangle the orbital trait from
daily rotation was considerable yet once the major obstacle was
overcome and modern imaging along with terrestrial effects arrive,the
perceptual burden vanishes or almost so.

For the longest time I have wished that this new approach to the
equinoxes be handled in a more dignified manner but perhaps this is
the way new discoveries emerge,I just can't see any reason to maintain
an awkward view that won't answer anything and expose a type of apathy
out there -

"An equinox occurs twice a year, when the tilt of the Earth's axis is
inclined neither away from nor towards the Sun, the center of the Sun
being in the same plane as the Earth's equator." Wikipedia

Conclusive observations demo treating the effect of the actual tilt of
Uranus.
Stop making simple things complicated.

On Mar 21, 3:37*pm, Mike Collins wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Mar 21, 1:48 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Mar 21, 8:07 am, Mike Collins wrote:

So what you are actually saying is this: Let's ignore the fact that the sun
is visible at both poles on the equinox because it invalidates Oriels
infantile theories

With all due respect to atmospheric refraction and its effects in many
areas,the immense and noble discipline of planetary dynamics focuses
attention of the polar coordinates turning through the circle of
illumination and into their respective orbital cycles of day or
night.While the observers for refraction are many,the audience for the
orbital dynamic are few.

Everything from the annual tidal cycles to the observed variations in
natural noon are contingent on knowing that the polar coordinates act
like a beacon into the orbital behavior of the planet,a particularly
21st century view which incorporates the emerging astronomy of
planetary comparisons.

Let's try some planetary comparisons then,

http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf071/sf071a06.htm
Describes the " hot poles" of mercury. Mercury's sidereal day explains this
phenomenon perfectly.
Lets see your explanation.

Observers here *have spent the best part of 6 years ignoring
conclusive observations that the daily rotational alignment of Uranus
remains fixed in one direction in its annual orbit just as the
alignment of the Earth is to Polaris,the polar coordinates turn in a
circle to the central Sun and can be seen to do so -

http://www.daviddarling.info/images/...gs_changes.jpg

The South to North daily rotation of Uranus combines with the East to
West quasi-rotation to the central Sun generating a uniquely polar
climate on Uranus while the Earth's climate is largely Equatorial and
with less than a 30% polar influence as there is a 23 1/2 degree
separation between the intrinsic rotational axis and the traveling
orbital axis while the angle of Uranus is close to 90 degrees.

While not directly at the polar coordinates,these webcams at 77
degrees S which would have enjoyed constant sunlight for the last 6
months are now descending into darkness -

http://www.usap.gov/videoclipsandmaps/mcmwebcam.cfm

An astronomer should be capable of explaining the transition from
polar daylight to polar darkness without the slightest hesitation
rather than rely on the older and less productive 'tilt' to the Sun
explanation or some variation on that theme.So,planetary comparisons
reveal information that would otherwise be difficult to attain,I know
this because the effort it took to disentangle the orbital trait from
daily rotation was considerable yet once the major obstacle was
overcome and modern imaging along with terrestrial effects arrive,the
perceptual burden vanishes or almost so.

For the longest time I have wished that this new approach to the
equinoxes be handled in a more dignified manner but perhaps this is
the way new discoveries emerge,I just can't see any reason to maintain
an awkward view that won't answer anything and expose a type of apathy
out there -

"An equinox occurs twice a year, when the tilt of the Earth's axis is
inclined neither away from nor towards the Sun, the center of the Sun
being in the same plane as the Earth's equator." Wikipedia

Conclusive observations demo treating the effect * * *of the actual tilt of
Uranus.
Stop making simple things complicated.

Would you care to see video evidence of the South to North rotation to
the central Sun and the East to West quasi-rotation which arises from
a planet's orbital motion and around which the daily polar coordinates
turn ? -

http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/arc...99/11/video/b/

Those two rotations explain why we have variations in the natural noon
cycle and ultimately into effects such as the annual inputs into tidal
fluctuations and thankfully the original empiricists conceded they
couldn't account for variations in natural noon -

"According to the second cause, if operating singly, we should have
the longest daies at the two Solstices in June and December, and the
two shortest at the Æquinoxes in March and September; which would at
those times give occasion of four Annual High-waters.But the true
Inequality of the Natural Days, arising from a Complication of those
two causes, sometimes crossing and sometimes promoting each other
though we should find some increases or decreases of the Natural daies
at all those seasons answerable to the respective causes (and perhaps
of Tides proportionably thereunto) yet the longest and shortest
natural daies absolutely of the whole year (arising from this
complication of Causes) are about those times of Allhalontide and
Candlemas; (or not far from them) about which those Annual High-tides
are found to be: As will appear by the Tables of Æquation of Natural
daies. And therefore I think, we may with very good reason cast this
Annual Period upon that cause, or rather complication of causes. For
(as we before shewed in the Menstrual and Diurnam) there will, by this
inequality of Natural daies, arise a Physical Acceleration and
Retardation of the Earths Mean motion, and accordingly a casting of
the Waters backward or forward; either of which, will cause an
Accumulation or High water.'Tis true, that these longest and shortest
daies, do (according to the Tables, some at least) fall rather before,
than after Allhallontide and Candlemas (sometimes) those high Tydes:
And it is not yet so well agreed amongst Astronomers are all the
Causes (and in what degrees) of the Inequality of Natural daies; but
that there be diversities among them, about the true time"John Wallis

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Philos...me_1/Number_16

Now empiricists can revisit the tides armed with a better perspective
of dynamics where variations in natural noon reflect the planet
speeding up and slowing down through observations,it doesn't matter if
they agree with me or not,the variations and their cause is there in
the video or the time lapse sequence of Uranus and applied to the
Earth as a matter of course.

On Mar 21, 9:47*am, oriel36 wrote:

Now empiricists can revisit the tides armed with a better perspective
of dynamics where variations in natural noon reflect the planet
speeding up and slowing down through observations,

The Equation of Time reflects the inclination of the Earth's axis to
the Ecliptic, and the elliptical orbit of the Earth, interacting with
a *uniform* rotation of the Earth.

The tides reflect differences in the Sun's gravity and the Moon's
gravity on opposite sides of the Earth.

We know this, and it works out quite well. The theory you cite from an
old reference did *not* work out, and so it was discarded. This is how
science advances: we open our eyes to the book of Nature. You can
condemn this as "empiricism" all you want, but it's the only way to
move forward reliably.

John Savard

I see these sci-fi addicts attach themselves to my posts and it is
fine,it was a hard lesson I learned and I have been careful to look up
a user's profile ever since before responding and I do discriminate
between participants based on certain criteria as even the most mean
spirited are more men then those who descend into obscene comments and
those who support them.

The sci-fi addicts came disturbingly close to the centers of political
power before the fuss over human control over global temperatures or
'terraforming' abated after late 2009 -

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...g-john-holdren

Leaving all that behind there is genuinely climate science to look
forward to and that means picking up astronomy where it left off with
Kepler's insight that planets speed up and slow down at different
points in their orbit.Although Kepler was familiar with the variations
in the natural noon cycle and ascribed it to variations in the Earth's
rotational speed ,his other insight into variable orbital speeds
actually accounts for the variations by focusing on the polar day/
night cycles and from there into the orbital behavior of the planet
and its quasi-rotation to the central Sun.

There is something appealing when looking at those polar webcams as
polar night begins to encompass the location while at 90 degrees South
the Sun has already vanished from view -

http://www.usap.gov/videoclipsandmaps/mcmwebcam.cfm

It is because our planet has largely Equatorial conditions that we
only experience a mild variation in annual fluctuations in daylight/
darkness and temperature asymmetries and studying what happens at the
poles is one way to highlight how we inherit our particular climate
from rotational and orbital traits.

oriel36 wrote:
I see these sci-fi addicts attach themselves to my posts and it is
fine,it was a hard lesson I learned and I have been careful to look up
a user's profile ever since before responding and I do discriminate
between participants based on certain criteria as even the most mean
spirited are more men then those who descend into obscene comments and
those who support them.

The sci-fi addicts came disturbingly close to the centers of political
power before the fuss over human control over global temperatures or
'terraforming' abated after late 2009 -

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...g-john-holdren

Leaving all that behind there is genuinely climate science to look
forward to and that means picking up astronomy where it left off with
Kepler's insight that planets speed up and slow down at different
points in their orbit.Although Kepler was familiar with the variations
in the natural noon cycle and ascribed it to variations in the Earth's
rotational speed ,his other insight into variable orbital speeds
actually accounts for the variations by focusing on the polar day/
night cycles and from there into the orbital behavior of the planet
and its quasi-rotation to the central Sun.

There is something appealing when looking at those polar webcams as
polar night begins to encompass the location while at 90 degrees South
the Sun has already vanished from view -

http://www.usap.gov/videoclipsandmaps/mcmwebcam.cfm

It is because our planet has largely Equatorial conditions that we
only experience a mild variation in annual fluctuations in daylight/
darkness and temperature asymmetries and studying what happens at the
poles is one way to highlight how we inherit our particular climate
from rotational and orbital traits.

This is just drivel.
If you wish anyone to take your beliefs seriously you must understand the
science.
Of course when you do understand the science you will realise that you have
been wrong.
Tell us about the length of Mercury's day.

"Quadibloc" wrote in message
...
On Mar 21, 9:47 am, oriel36 wrote:

Now empiricists can revisit the tides armed with a better perspective
of dynamics where variations in natural noon reflect the planet
speeding up and slowing down through observations,

The Equation of Time reflects the inclination of the Earth's axis to
the Ecliptic, and the elliptical orbit of the Earth, interacting with
a *uniform* rotation of the Earth.

The tides reflect differences in the Sun's gravity and the Moon's
gravity on opposite sides of the Earth.

We know this, and it works out quite well. The theory you cite from an
old reference did *not* work out, and so it was discarded. This is how
science advances: we open our eyes to the book of Nature. You can
condemn this as "empiricism" all you want, but it's the only way to
move forward reliably.

John Savard
========================================
Ahem...
The equation of time reflects the the planet speeding up and
slowing down IN ITS ORBIT through observations, so Kelleher's
statement is correct.
The tides reflect differences in the Sun's gravity and the Moon's
gravity at the 90 degree sides of the Earth (neap tide) and on the
same side (spring tide), there being two tides a day.

On Mar 22, 9:30*am, Mike Collins wrote:

If you wish anyone to take your beliefs seriously you must understand the
science.

I know,you honestly believe I am trying to convince people but nothing
could be further from the truth,you need only a love of things to work
out the details and put them in context,anyone here could have done it
but apparently they are too busy admiring people who don't have the
imaging power and online tools that we have now.

The North/South polar coordinates do travel in a circle to the central
Sun which obviates the need for the older 'tilt' explanation which
tried to do too much with too little.The problem is not that people
cannot read it out of the sequence of images of Uranus,it is that
there is no astronomical clearinghouse for introducing the additional
component as the present batch of 'astronomers' are desperate to
prove that relativity is right or something along those lines.

You don;t have to actually understand why the new approach is
needed,you can continue on with the older and more awkward view but
once somebody sees that the polar day/night cycle requires a cycle to
explain it,they are unlikely to return to the nondescript 'tilt'
explanation.If they need to be convinced then sorry,it is simply
interpretative talent that nobody can give or teach another.




Of course when you do understand the science you will realise that you have
been wrong.
Tell us about the length of Mercury's day.

Mike Collins wrote:

oriel36 wrote:
I see these sci-fi addicts attach themselves to my posts and it is
fine,it was a hard lesson I learned and I have been careful to look up
a user's profile ever since before responding and I do discriminate
between participants based on certain criteria as even the most mean
spirited are more men then those who descend into obscene comments and
those who support them.

The sci-fi addicts came disturbingly close to the centers of political
power before the fuss over human control over global temperatures or
'terraforming' abated after late 2009 -


http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...neering-john-h
oldren

Leaving all that behind there is genuinely climate science to look
forward to and that means picking up astronomy where it left off with
Kepler's insight that planets speed up and slow down at different
points in their orbit.Although Kepler was familiar with the variations
in the natural noon cycle and ascribed it to variations in the Earth's
rotational speed ,his other insight into variable orbital speeds
actually accounts for the variations by focusing on the polar day/
night cycles and from there into the orbital behavior of the planet
and its quasi-rotation to the central Sun.

There is something appealing when looking at those polar webcams as
polar night begins to encompass the location while at 90 degrees South
the Sun has already vanished from view -

http://www.usap.gov/videoclipsandmaps/mcmwebcam.cfm

It is because our planet has largely Equatorial conditions that we
only experience a mild variation in annual fluctuations in daylight/
darkness and temperature asymmetries and studying what happens at the
poles is one way to highlight how we inherit our particular climate
from rotational and orbital traits.

This is just drivel.
If you wish anyone to take your beliefs seriously you must understand the
science.
Of course when you do understand the science you will realise that you have
been wrong.
Tell us about the length of Mercury's day.

Has everybody in this thread forgotten "DO NOT FEED!"?

--
I recommend Macs to my friends, and Windows machines
to those whom I don't mind billing by the hour