A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Amateur Astronomy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Making astronomy attractive for experimentalists



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 7th 18, 10:54 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Gerald Kelleher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,551
Default Making astronomy attractive for experimentalists

How to untangle experimentation , which is the bread and butter of theorists, from astronomy shouldn't really be as drastic as it first seems but effectively the origins of so-called celestial mechanics is overreaching at best and untenable and flawed at worst -

"Rule III. The qualities of bodies, which admit neither [intensification] nor remission of degrees, and which are found to belong to all bodies within the reach of our experiments, are to be esteemed the universal qualities of all bodies whatsoever." Newton

Having passed through a sullen and dour atmosphere in this newsgroup for the last number of decades when this specific topic is brought up, I remain hopeful that eventually it will not look like the end of astrophysics but rather a radical adjustment that will free up speculative approaches without blowing up astronomy as the scientific method tried to do.

Sacrificing electromagnetic inputs in respect to orbital motions for terrestrial ballistics (experiments) is a dead end leaving only the 'clockwork solar system' to deal with and the dangers of not checking the use of calendar based timekeeping to model planetary motions and ultimately solar system structure via orbital periods. Unlike the early 20th century where they thought time was the joker in the pack, the real issue is timekeeping and specifically the inability to relate one year to one orbital circuit of the Earth around the Sun. It stands to reason that one year with 366 days/rotations is just as valid as one year of 365 days/rotations but it does draw attention to the format which gives rise to predictive astronomy and the misuse of RA/Dec as a basis for the Earth's daily and orbital motions.

Mathematicians don't care and that is fine however the weight of new innovations provided by the internet era bursts the limitations dumped on astronomy by theorists and everyone else so that astronomy becomes more enjoyable and recognizable once again.




  #2  
Old July 8th 18, 10:46 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Gerald Kelleher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,551
Default Making astronomy attractive for experimentalists

In popular culture, a constant refrain about the eccentricity of mathematicians due to their apparent high level of intelligence contrasts sharply with their actual lack of common sense in astronomical affairs. How were mathematicians to know that their entire empirical agenda called 'astrophysics' is like a pyramid built on its apex and that only now they are experiencing the extreme mental indiscipline arising from the original flaws ?. Even within the last few decades operating in newsgroups I have seen mathematicians try to treat spiritual matters mathematically and it just looks as foolish as the inability to put astronomical observations in proper context.

There is no reason why any sane person would question the relationship between a sunrise/sunset each 24 hour day with one rotation of the planet but the original empiricists ran with Flamsteed's conclusion that circumpolar motion in tandem with timekeeping represents one rotation and therefore there are more rotations than 24 hour days each year or the astronomical equivalent of 2+2=5

" It is a fact not generally known that,owing to the difference between solar and sidereal time,the Earth rotates upon its axis once more often than there are days in the year" NASA /Harvard


The financial rewards for theorists to maintain the absurdities certainly don't help even if I have no real interest in what they do however they do hijack the term 'astronomer' for astrophysics and mathematical playthings and this is pseudo-intellectual nonsense at the expense of genuine astronomical research in the internet era -

https://www1.salary.com/Astronomer-Salaries.html


I thought some back channel would materialize but obviously it appears that a mathematical mania still prevails.







  #3  
Old July 8th 18, 10:10 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Quadibloc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,018
Default Making astronomy attractive for experimentalists

On Sunday, July 8, 2018 at 3:46:22 AM UTC-6, Gerald Kelleher wrote:

" It is a fact not generally known that,owing to the difference between solar
and sidereal time,the Earth rotates upon its axis once more often than there are
days in the year" NASA /Harvard


Apparently, they're right, since you do not yet know this fact to be true.

The Earth orbits the Sun. This orbit isn't a perfect circle; it's an ellipse.
Kepler found that out.

The Equation of Time reflects an Earth where apparent stellar circumpolar
motion... is regular like clockwork, but the elliptic shape of the Earth's
orbit, which supplies the difference between the daily cycle of the Sun and
apparent stellar circumpolar motion, causes sundials to need correction to align
with mechanical clocks.

Therefore, to explain the rotation of the Earth in the simplest terms, we
consider that its rotation should be judged relative to the distant stars
instead of relative to the Sun.

No doubt the reasons you have for thinking we shouldn't do this seem good to
you, but they are bizarre and make no sense to just about everybody else.

John Savard
  #4  
Old July 9th 18, 07:53 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Gerald Kelleher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,551
Default Making astronomy attractive for experimentalists

https://freshcalendars.com/calendar/...ble-Format.jpg

The inability to assign one rotation to each of those 24 hour days is perhaps not only the point at which astronomy as an intellectual discipline totally disappears insofar as cause and effect (sunrise/sunset, noon, temperature and tides risings and falling, Sun in view followed by the stars) is dependent on each rotation anchored to noon but also there is no point of departure for discussing anything else.

It doesn't matter if a person calls themselves a theorist or an empirical follower, the mania of modelling with timekeeping while losing cause and effect will create monstrosities of the mind which are unhealthy for all humanity. This is no understatement as a mind stuck in a rut can't use their normal faculties and those intuitions which make sense of the day and year as representing the motions of the Earth to the Sun and around the Sun.

As long as the original errors prevail then genuine astronomical research becomes impossible so while the narrative of mathematical theorists become more adrift from observations, the opportunity is for astronomy to emerge for those only interested in cause and effect as they experience them and then on to interpretative astronomy on a solar system scale.

People who live in their heads with characters and a narrative that supports a fiction of more rotations than 24 hour days are wasting their lives by having no connection with their experiences of the motions of the Earth and that is horrifying comparing with a flat-Earth conviction as it draws its conviction from not exercising logic, reason and experience. I can't imagine what it must feel like to live with a conviction that displays an anti-intelligence while calling it 'counter-intuitive' so the purpose for the last number of years is to present topics that should appeal to hose who are over the flaws of the late 17th century timekeeping modelling including the so-called 'inverse square law' which kicked the whole thing off.







  #5  
Old July 9th 18, 05:02 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
palsing[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,068
Default Making astronomy attractive for experimentalists

Sorry, Gerald, but sidereal rotation is not fiction, and the mania is yours alone...
  #6  
Old July 9th 18, 09:15 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Gerald Kelleher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,551
Default Making astronomy attractive for experimentalists

On Monday, July 9, 2018 at 5:02:47 PM UTC+1, palsing wrote:
Sorry, Gerald, but sidereal rotation is not fiction, and the mania is yours alone...


Being sorry is a feeling but like so many, you have no feeling for the basic astronomical fact that each day/night cycle is a result of one rotation. My sorrow and sometimes irritation about all this is balanced by walking through the woods in the evening or down at the shore at dawn before the Sun comes into view as the last of the stars and planets remain and the joy of being part of the daily rhythm which make up the spectacle of each rotation for such is inspiration in ourselves and in nature.

The innovative organizations and corporations which allows me to type and present images to the outside world suddenly becomes a 'can't do' like a mindless giant unable to use information as a conduit to tell astronomical narratives, the worst being the mindnumbing notion which ties rotation to circumpolar/sidereal/celestial sphere rotation -

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=How+long+does+i...h+to+turn+once

Doesn't matter how much wealth a person has, they will always be pseudo-intellectuals before astronomy and terrestrial sciences but most of all lose out on the spiritual/inspirational life as they journey through life on this planet.











  #7  
Old July 10th 18, 07:45 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Quadibloc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,018
Default Making astronomy attractive for experimentalists

On Monday, July 9, 2018 at 2:15:59 PM UTC-6, Gerald Kelleher wrote:
but like so many, you have no feeling for the basic astronomical fact that each
day/night cycle is a result of one rotation.


Feelings have nothing to do with it.

Apparent stellar circumpolar motion, unlike sundial time, synchronizes to
mechanical clockwork, so the *mathematics* of the Earth's rotation becomes simpler
when we use the fixed stars, not the Sun, as the reference to define rotation.

Feelings certainly do have an important place in life, but the physical sciences
are tied to mathematics and deal with that which is objective. And doing things
that way works well, yielding impressive results.

John Savard
  #8  
Old July 11th 18, 12:34 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Bill[_9_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 311
Default Making astronomy attractive for experimentalists

On Mon, 9 Jul 2018 23:45:27 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc wrote:

On Monday, July 9, 2018 at 2:15:59 PM UTC-6, Gerald Kelleher wrote:
but like so many, you have no feeling for the basic astronomical fact that each
day/night cycle is a result of one rotation.


Feelings have nothing to do with it.

Apparent stellar circumpolar motion, unlike sundial time, synchronizes to
mechanical clockwork, so the *mathematics* of the Earth's rotation becomes simpler
when we use the fixed stars, not the Sun, as the reference to define rotation.

Feelings certainly do have an important place in life, but the physical sciences
are tied to mathematics and deal with that which is objective. And doing things
that way works well, yielding impressive results.

John Savard


But if you were a *genuine* astronomer, you do away with with all those
tools, and you would feel the truth. ;-)
--
Email address is a Spam trap.
  #9  
Old July 11th 18, 06:41 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Gerald Kelleher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,551
Default Making astronomy attractive for experimentalists

On Wednesday, July 11, 2018 at 12:34:35 AM UTC+1, Bill wrote:
On Mon, 9 Jul 2018 23:45:27 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc wrote:

On Monday, July 9, 2018 at 2:15:59 PM UTC-6, Gerald Kelleher wrote:
but like so many, you have no feeling for the basic astronomical fact that each
day/night cycle is a result of one rotation.


Feelings have nothing to do with it.

Apparent stellar circumpolar motion, unlike sundial time, synchronizes to
mechanical clockwork, so the *mathematics* of the Earth's rotation becomes simpler
when we use the fixed stars, not the Sun, as the reference to define rotation.

Feelings certainly do have an important place in life, but the physical sciences
are tied to mathematics and deal with that which is objective. And doing things
that way works well, yielding impressive results.

John Savard


But if you were a *genuine* astronomer, you do away with with all those
tools, and you would feel the truth. ;-)
--
Email address is a Spam trap.


The hapless can't imagine that timekeeping devices have their origins in the daily and annual cycles of the planet therefore developed historically from observations which create the calendar system and specifically the number of day/night cycles within the confines of an orbital circuit. An ancient astronomer recognised a refined value of rotations for four orbital circuits or in timekeeping language 1461 days for four years using a specific astronomical observation that ultimately proves the Earth travels around the Sun. On this inviolate principle the 24 hour system and Lat/Long systems are based along with the mechanical devices themselves.

An academic community that insists there are more full rotations of the planet than 24 hour days due to a flawed celestial sphere observation in tandem with timepieces doesn't do anything other than produce a feeling of extreme irritation yet the false conclusion provides a point of departure for all these theoretical icons.

This thread is meant for those who can, at the very least, manage to anchor rotation to noon when their location is at a midway point either side of the circle of illumination while sunrise and sunset represent the Sun turning into view or out of sight due to the same rotation. The 24 hour system and the 15 degrees of rotation per hour contained in the Lat/Long system has been temporarily obscured by the solar vs sidereal fiction and the theoretical proponents who are pleased with themselves even though they represent the lowest level to which humanity has sunk in its long and distinguished astronomical history.













  #10  
Old July 11th 18, 08:50 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Chris.B[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,001
Default Making astronomy attractive for experimentalists

On Wednesday, 11 July 2018 07:41:13 UTC+2, Jerry-builder wrote:
in its long and distinguished astronomical history.


Beer crate, public park ranter demands respect of entire scientific community for long past failures to describe humble astronomical reality.

The greatest scientific and mathematical minds of our time must leave off their sea change in human thinking, of the greatest unsolved problems in human understanding of the universe. All to listen to the latest, deluded quack [nay wacko] from amongst the local public park cough orators.

You all know him as The Unique One who can't even impress beginning amateur astronomers with his [totally unique] ability to undermine the working of all their extremely commonplace, equatorial telescope mounting drives? As in: See me: See my synchronous motor and wormwheel drive, Jerry! ;-)

Perhaps the Great Masters of the ASCOM Standards Group should be made to listen to his ravings [perhaps at gunpoint?] to ensure their inclusion of the Jerry-build standards in their next software release?

https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/jerry-builder

https://ascom-standards.org/Support/Scopes.htm
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Theoreticians Are Greater Fraudsters Than Experimentalists Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 1 February 8th 17 11:36 AM
Amateur Astronomy / Telescope Making Website LarryG[_2_] Amateur Astronomy 0 March 10th 13 05:00 AM
GOOGLE IS TAKING GOOD CARE OF ME MAKING SURE I CAN NOT GET IN TO ALTASTRONOMY G=EMC^2[_2_] Misc 5 April 25th 12 02:12 AM
Amateur Telescope Making astronomy vintage FA JaneyP Astronomy Misc 0 January 2nd 07 03:30 AM
Astronomy & Telescope making mags for sale Stephen Tonkin UK Astronomy 2 January 30th 06 06:08 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.