You are cataloguers,not astronomers

"But such information will probably be of little use or interest to the
archaeologist unless it serves to amplify some historical or cultural
detail. An astronomer may not understand why his information fails to
produce excitement because he does not fully grasp that archaeology is
a social science. Few astronomers have the training to completely
understand that distinction. The astronomer will generally fail to
consider how little value an isolated astronomical fact may have to an
archaeologist in the absence of a cultural context. The different
languages of astronomy (a "hard" science) and archaeology (a social
science) foster a lack of attention on the part of the Egyptology
community for ideas presented by astronomers."

http://www.cloudbait.com/archaeo/arce2004.html

I have to laugh at distinction between 'hard' science and social
science notwithstanding that you flatter yourselves by the unwarranted
title of astronomer.

Is it not bad enough that you cataloguing freaks ruined
Copernican/Keplerian astronomy that you have to go back and destroy the
exquisite ancient wisdom.

Do you know why the Eygptians chose the angle of inclination of the
Great Pyramid as 51 degrees 50 minutes ?. It takes a
geometer/astronomer to enjoy that one but you miserable creeps,even if
you could see it do not have the capacity to enjoy it.

1.62 - 3.24 - 6.48 - 12.96 - 25.92 - 51.84.

Even though it has been years since I worked on geometric
progression,nothing gives me more pride and joy than the ancients and
to marvel at their economy and ingenuity.

Here is another one 25 - 30 - 36 - 43.2 - 51.84

All these great things that you never can enjoy because you rob the
astronomer/geometer title and turn my astronomical heritage into an
exercise in photography and gizmos.

51.84 degrees = 51 degrees 50 minutes.


The mind which is free of the empirical tyranny can enjoy the work of
men and creation without having to prove anything no more than nobody
needs to prove music or art right or wrong.Look at the first sequence
from 1.62 to 51.84 latent with significance of the two most fundamental
constants in nature ,Pi and Phi.The ancients knew how to represent all
shapes within a pyramid using the most economic value to represent it
with human architectual tolerances - 51 degrees 50 min .

The crow does not pretend to be an eagle but you and your colleague
pretend you are astronomers/geometers.To be fair there is always a
chance that someday it will happen that men will find themselves out of
the empirical rut to breathe the air of astronomers/geometers and their
insights which have been buried under 3 centuries of empirical garbage.

I hope you suffer the pain of not knowing why the Eygptians chose the
angle of inclination because nobody can teach you why and it is
specifically designed that way,just like the great Judaeo-Christian
heritage.

You suck, not post.
wrote in message
oups.com...
"But such information will probably be of little use or interest to the
archaeologist unless it serves to amplify some historical or cultural
detail. An astronomer may not understand why his information fails to
produce excitement because he does not fully grasp that archaeology is
a social science. Few astronomers have the training to completely
understand that distinction. The astronomer will generally fail to
consider how little value an isolated astronomical fact may have to an
archaeologist in the absence of a cultural context. The different
languages of astronomy (a "hard" science) and archaeology (a social
science) foster a lack of attention on the part of the Egyptology
community for ideas presented by astronomers."

http://www.cloudbait.com/archaeo/arce2004.html

I have to laugh at distinction between 'hard' science and social
science notwithstanding that you flatter yourselves by the unwarranted
title of astronomer.

Is it not bad enough that you cataloguing freaks ruined
Copernican/Keplerian astronomy that you have to go back and destroy the
exquisite ancient wisdom.

Do you know why the Eygptians chose the angle of inclination of the
Great Pyramid as 51 degrees 50 minutes ?. It takes a
geometer/astronomer to enjoy that one but you miserable creeps,even if
you could see it do not have the capacity to enjoy it.

1.62 - 3.24 - 6.48 - 12.96 - 25.92 - 51.84.

Even though it has been years since I worked on geometric
progression,nothing gives me more pride and joy than the ancients and
to marvel at their economy and ingenuity.

Here is another one 25 - 30 - 36 - 43.2 - 51.84

All these great things that you never can enjoy because you rob the
astronomer/geometer title and turn my astronomical heritage into an
exercise in photography and gizmos.

51.84 degrees = 51 degrees 50 minutes.


The mind which is free of the empirical tyranny can enjoy the work of
men and creation without having to prove anything no more than nobody
needs to prove music or art right or wrong.Look at the first sequence
from 1.62 to 51.84 latent with significance of the two most fundamental
constants in nature ,Pi and Phi.The ancients knew how to represent all
shapes within a pyramid using the most economic value to represent it
with human architectual tolerances - 51 degrees 50 min .

The crow does not pretend to be an eagle but you and your colleague
pretend you are astronomers/geometers.To be fair there is always a
chance that someday it will happen that men will find themselves out of
the empirical rut to breathe the air of astronomers/geometers and their
insights which have been buried under 3 centuries of empirical garbage.

I hope you suffer the pain of not knowing why the Eygptians chose the
angle of inclination because nobody can teach you why and it is
specifically designed that way,just like the great Judaeo-Christian
heritage.

Slow day at the office eh?

Have a good look at your cartoon creation -

http://www.pfm.howard.edu/astronomy/...S/AACHCIR0.JPG

Again,you are cataloguers and not astronomers for anyone worthy of the
title astronomer/geometer would find that sidereal conception to be a
joke .

I have no need to insult you,you are an insult to yourselves,the
astronomical discipline and worst of all,to your own kids.The first
principle of a parent is to protect their kids and not pervert them.You
creeps become celestial peeping toms but astronomy is always about
the insights of Copernicus and Kepler but you freaks jettisoned the
heritage for a telescope and left astronomy to the mathematical and
theoretical dogs.

The Earth has one independent motion with one value,I strongly suggest
you go find out what that value is .

wrote in message

The Earth has one independent motion with one value,I strongly suggest
you go find out what that value is .


Looks like you're really into planetary motions. Thats a nice pass time
Gerry.

Ed T.

Well Ed,it looks like you are really into a stationary and geocentric
Earth from looking at your posting history and the website you
reference -


http://www.astro.princeton.edu=AD/~mjuric/universe/

This is what cataloguers do and at least you make no pretense to the
contrary.The stellar and planetary universe is just so simple to your
effeminate minds when it is intricate and only for men who treat it
with both the magnificence and pitilessness that befits its stature.

Albert's attempt to make H.G. Wells 'Time Machine' something actual is
like the Da Vinci code becoming a standard for Christ and
Christianity.You freaks are like the zombies in the time machine which
make you look like ridiculous clowns who know no better.

" I made what progress I could in the language, and in addition I
pushed my explorations here and there. Either I missed some subtle
point or their language was excessively simple-almost exclusively
composed of concrete substantives and verbs. There seemed to be few, if
any, abstract terms, or little use of figurative language. Their
sentences were usually simple and of two words, and I failed to convey
or understand any but the simplest propositions. I determined to put
the thought of my Time Machine and the mystery of the bronze doors
under the sphinx as much as possible in a corner of memory, until my
growing knowledge would lead me back to them in a natural way. Yet a
certain feeling, you may understand, tethered me in a circle of a few
miles round the point of my arrival."

http://www.bartleby.com/1000/5.html

How can so many people be scammed for so long and finding themselves
ridiculous pretend they are being profound.That my dear man is
frightening initially but ultimately heartbreaking and stomachturning
..Just a few people are needed to call a halt but it must,I repeat must
originate in astronomy.

wrote:
"But such information will probably be of little use or interest to
the
archaeologist unless it serves to amplify some historical or cultural
detail."

Hmm. My response to your bizarre rant is this:

http://www.userfriendly.org/illiad/wtf.jpg

In article .com,
wrote:

"But such information will probably be of little use or interest to the
archaeologist unless it serves to amplify some historical or cultural
detail. An astronomer may not understand why his information fails to
produce excitement because he does not fully grasp that archaeology is
a social science. Few astronomers have the training to completely
understand that distinction. The astronomer will generally fail to
consider how little value an isolated astronomical fact may have to an
archaeologist in the absence of a cultural context. The different
languages of astronomy (a "hard" science) and archaeology (a social
science) foster a lack of attention on the part of the Egyptology
community for ideas presented by astronomers."

http://www.cloudbait.com/archaeo/arce2004.html

I have to laugh at distinction between 'hard' science and social
science notwithstanding that you flatter yourselves by the unwarranted
Do you know why the Eygptians chose the angle of inclination of the
Great Pyramid as 51 degrees 50 minutes ?. It takes a ....

How do you know this? I know it is quoted in some sites, but there
are others that give different values:

http://ce.eng.usf.edu/pharos/wonders/pyramid.html 145.75 x 229
http://www.unmuseum.org/kpyramid.htm 137.16 x 230.4
http://www.touregypt.net/featurestor...atpyramid1.htm 146.59 x not
stated

( Height x Base Length in meters )

The middle site gives the current height. In 820 A.D. the Arab
Caliph Abdullah Al Manum searched for the treasure of Khufu but
by this late date the treasure had long been looted. The Caliph
then tried to level the pyramid and removed *about* 30 feet from
the top. The other sites give *estimates* for the finished height.

It gets worse, in the original design the pyramids had white limestone
cladding. This has been stripped, probably starting in the 19th
Dynasty, Caliph al Manum finished the job. We simply do not know the
exact dimensions of the cladding, nor even if these dimensions were
constant along the height of the pyramid.

Based on some *assumed* dimentions there are many fantastic claims
made about the pyramids. Unfortunately these all rest on a bed of

.... sand ( sorry about that ).

tom

BTW You're not thinking that cos ( tan ( 51.833... deg ) ) ~ 1?

--
We have discovered a therapy ( NOT a cure )
for the common cold. Play tuba for an hour.

geraldkellehe... wrote:

I have to laugh at distinction between 'hard' science and social
science notwithstanding that you flatter yourselves by the unwarranted
title of astronomer.

I have to laugh at people who won't follow sci.astro.amateur's charter:

************************************************** ****************
The sci.astro.amateur charter
-----------------------------
The original version was written by Ken Kirksey
:

What Is sci.astro.amateur?

sci.astro.amateur is forum for amateur astronomers to discuss topics of
mutual interest, with a focus on astronomical observing.

What Are Suitable Topics For sci.astro.amateur?

Discussion in sci.astro.amateur includes, but is not necessarily limited
to, the following topics:

Observing
Using the naked eye, binoculars, or telescopes
The Moon, Planets, Stars, The Sun, Comets, Deep Sky
Objects, Constellations, et. al.

Equipment
Choosing Telescopes/Binoculars
Choosing Accessories (Finders, Drives, Eyepieces, Filters,
Observatories, etc.)
Building Telescopes, Backyard Observatories, etc.

Astrophotography
Traditional
CCD
Image Processing

Astronomy Software
Planetarium Programs
Deep Sky Programs
Observatory Programs
Educational Programs

Tips & Techniques for Amateur Astronomers

Literature covering the topics listed above

What Topics Are *Not* Suitable for sci.astro.amateur?

Anything of a highly technical, theoretical, or cosmological nature G.
Seriously, one of the major reasons that sci.astro.amateur was created
was that people were tired of wading through all the black hole, origin
& fate of the universe, Steven Hawking | Carl Sagan is a twit, et. al.
kind of posts to get to the ones discussing the topics listed in this
charter. While some of the theoretical/cosmological topics may be of
interest to some amateur astronomers, discussion in sci.astro.amateur
should be pretty much limited to the PRACTICE of amateur astronomy.
We'll leave the heavy topics for sci.astro.
************************************************** ******************

Do you know why the Eygptians chose the angle of inclination of the
Great Pyramid as 51 degrees 50 minutes ?. It takes a
geometer/astronomer to enjoy that one but you miserable creeps,even if
you could see it do not have the capacity to enjoy it.

1.62 - 3.24 - 6.48 - 12.96 - 25.92 - 51.84.

Ah, yes, resorting to name-calling again. Is your position so weak that
you have to resort to such a childish defense?

--
David W. Knisely
Prairie Astronomy Club: http://www.prairieastronomyclub.org
Hyde Memorial Observatory: http://www.hydeobservatory.info/

**********************************************
* Attend the 12th Annual NEBRASKA STAR PARTY *
* July 31 - Aug. 5, 2005, Merritt Reservoir *
* http://www.NebraskaStarParty.org *
**********************************************

In article ,
(Tom Kirke) wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:
[snip]
I have to laugh at distinction between 'hard' science and social
science notwithstanding that you flatter yourselves by the unwarranted
Do you know why the Eygptians chose the angle of inclination of the
Great Pyramid as 51 degrees 50 minutes ?. It takes a ....

How do you know this? I know it is quoted in some sites, but there
are others that give different values:

http://ce.eng.usf.edu/pharos/wonders/pyramid.html 145.75 x 229
http://www.unmuseum.org/kpyramid.htm 137.16 x 230.4
http://www.touregypt.net/featurestor...atpyramid1.htm 146.59 x not
stated

( Height x Base Length in meters )

The middle site gives the current height. In 820 A.D. the Arab
Caliph Abdullah Al Manum searched for the treasure of Khufu but
by this late date the treasure had long been looted. The Caliph
then tried to level the pyramid and removed *about* 30 feet from
the top. The other sites give *estimates* for the finished height.

It gets worse, in the original design the pyramids had white limestone
cladding. This has been stripped, probably starting in the 19th
Dynasty, Caliph al Manum finished the job. We simply do not know the
exact dimensions of the cladding, nor even if these dimensions were
constant along the height of the pyramid.

Based on some *assumed* dimentions there are many fantastic claims
made about the pyramids. Unfortunately these all rest on a bed of

.... sand ( sorry about that ).

tom

BTW You're not thinking that cos ( tan ( 51.833... deg ) ) ~ 1?

I think he might be thinking about cos(51.827... deg) = 1/phi = .618...
This is probably where he got the starting point for the geometric
sequence (phi = 1.618...)

1.62 - 3.24 - 6.48 - 12.96 - 25.92 - 51.84

This is the angle at which the square of the height is the area of one
of the sides (Heroditus).

Rob Johnson
take out the trash before replying