Our orbital motion

The standard presentation of the relationship between rotational
orientation and orbital motion can be seen in the following image -

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...tObliquity.png

As the Earth orbits the Sun,the line representing the solar radiation/
orbital shadow boundary is always perpendicular from an orbital
perspective -

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ima...iner10_big.jpg

From a rotational orientation perspective it looks different -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwTrYVBcx9s

Returning to the mariner image of the Earth,what occurs from Solstice
to Equinox is that a location slowly turns in a counter direction to
axial rotation,the distance between the polar axis and the orbital
shadow boundary narrows until at the equinox that slow orbital turning
brings the orbital shadow/solar radiation boundary in line with
rotational orientation.

Humans are limited to processing one motion and orientation at a time
and that is where the breakthrough occured. Variable axial/equatorial
inclination tries to do what it takes two motions and orientation to
achieve and the missing component was hidden in the orbital motion of
the Earth until observations of Uranus allowed that missing component
to be revealed clearly -

http://asymptotia.com/wp-images/2007...anus_rings.jpg

It looks like Uranus has an enormous annual precession but an
observer on Uranus would see the rotational orientation of the planet
always point in the same direction, as Earth does to Polaris, over the
course of an annual orbit.The answer is to treat the observed motion
of the Equatorial rings with respect to the Sun as a product of
orbital motion,recognising the human limitation and then applying the
lessons to the Earth in many new ways.

People could use some good news and to believe that astronomers have a
good handle on the basic motions of the Earth.We all inherit the
mistakes of the past few centuries but modern imaging not just exposes
the mistakes but shows more productive approaches.

I am curious as to why you don't write this material up and submit it
to a peer reviewed scientific journal for publication.

In that way a new group of people who might not see your frequent
posting to this group would have a chance to evaluate what you have to
say.

Martin Nicholson, Daventry, England.
http://www.martin-nicholson.info/1/1a.htm

On Mar 6, 8:29*am, ukastronomy
wrote:
I am curious as to why you don't write this material up and submit it
to a peer reviewed scientific journal for publication.


Are you kidding me !,the usenet is the toughest peer review system in
existence as many have come to find out , while many come to the
groups to expound their knowledge,they have found out just how limited
or erroneous their perspective can be In this respect,the orbital
component will be there whether it gets the stamp of affirmation or
not,I am not dictatting its presence but rather observations of the
Earth from space allied with the sequence of images of Uranus dictate
it.

This mateial is for astronomers who are not really into taking 10
minute challenges but who like the more adventurous frontiers of
astronomy,not these wide sweeping gestures about the universe at huge
scales,things moving at rapid speeds or speculative elements and
forces where you can get away with saying anything but this astronomy
is up close and personal .


In that way a new group of people who might not see your frequent
posting to this group would have a chance to evaluate what you have to
say.


Evaluate to your heart's content,the fact is that the Earth has a
rotational orientation but not a variable axial tilt to the orbital
plane,Sun or any other reference you care to promote.The more
expansive will simply take a look at the images of Uranus and apply
the lessons to the Earth ,the newest addition is that a location
turns through 360 degrees with respect to the Sun over the course of
an annual orbit quite apart from diurnal rotation.

I do not have any complaints about peer review,when a teenager learns
why there are variations in daylight/darkness throughout the year
everywhere but at the Equator or why the natural noon cycles are
unequal and the answer is a new orbital component ,that is the only
satisfaction I care about and I mean that.






Martin Nicholson, Daventry, England.http://www.martin-nicholson.info/1/1a.htm

They are not specifically tied to what I say,they are tied to what
observations dictate and while many never learn the difference

On Mar 6, 8:29 pm, ukastronomy
wrote:
I am curious as to why you don't write this material up and submit it
to a peer reviewed scientific journal for publication.

In that way a new group of people who might not see your frequent
posting to this group would have a chance to evaluate what you have to
say.

Martin Nicholson, Daventry, England.http://www.martin-nicholson.info/1/1a.htm

Martin,

Ignore Oriel's outgassings. He's a nutcase.

Klazmon

On Mar 7, 2:55*pm, Llanzlan Klazmon wrote:
On Mar 6, 8:29 pm, ukastronomy
wrote:

I am curious as to why you don't write this material up and submit it
to a peer reviewed scientific journal for publication.

In that way a new group of people who might not see your frequent
posting to this group would have a chance to evaluate what you have to
say.

Martin Nicholson, Daventry, England.http://www.martin-nicholson.info/1/1a.htm

Martin,

Ignore Oriel's outgassings. He's a nutcase.

Klazmon

Martin treats the greater cosmos like an old English antique shop and
good for him,he will always have an audience for being a curator and
descibing the attributes of one galaxy and then on to the next.

When there is a new motion to be applied to the Earth's orbital
motion there is little time to deal with any grumbling.

Axial rotation gives the experience of daylight and darkness,it also
creates the rotational orientation of the Earth -

http://www.robertreeves.com/star_tra...6_1030P-6A.jpg

As axial rotation can only do so much,the variations in daylight /
darkness has to come from somewhere else and so it does - from the
Earth's orbital motion.That's where the change in the orientation of
the rings with respect to the Sun comes into the picture -

http://asymptotia.com/wp-images/2007...anus_rings.jpg

Nobody is being talked down to anymore,just a limpse at the
possibilities when you start putting images into correct context,such
is the power of modern imaging,the power of the internet and the
conduit of the usenet.If you were a regular here you will not get a
great shock from encountering the material and even if I concede that
a new motion is very difficult to ignore,it may not be for everybody.


Tell me what variations in daylight/darkness or go back to the same
oblivion that you came from.

On Mar 6, 7:29 am, ukastronomy
wrote:
I am curious as to why you don't write this material up and submit it
to a peer reviewed scientific journal for publication.

In that way a new group of people who might not see your frequent
posting to this group would have a chance to evaluate what you have to
say.

Martin Nicholson, Daventry, England.http://www.martin-nicholson.info/1/1a.htm

take your own advice.

oh, you did, and they rejected it?

I see.

The excellent animation of the crankshaft of an engine provides a
rough guide for how the Earth orbitally changes its orientation with
repect to the Sun while the rotational orientation,due to axial
rotation keeping the Earth pointing in obne direction in space -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YV9WkQkUHZ4

The crank pin will always point in the same direction in space
likewise the rotational orientation of a planet will serve as an
indicator for the same planetary outlook -

http://www.astro.psu.edu/users/niel/...us-seasons.jpg

The rate of change of the orbital orientation to the Sun is in
accordance with Keplerian orbital geometry ,using natural noon as a
benchmark and allied with constant axial rotation,it generates the
natural unequal noon cycles.The Equation of Time ,as the difference
between the natural noon cycle and the human devised 24 hour cycle
represents the rate of change of orbital orientation,taking axial
rotation to be constant over the course of an annual orbit.

No point in saying that I am dismayed that a genuine new orbital
component is left to drift when I completely recognise just how poorly
the insights and methods of the great astronomers,including
Copernicus,Kepler,Galileo,Ptolemy and many others are treated.

Contemporary views of the Earth's orbital motion have a location keep
the same face to the Sun like a car circling a traffic roundabout -

http://www.pfm.howard.edu/astronomy/...S/AACHCIT0.JPG

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9tMQ-jVMY4


The animation of the crankshaft of an engine provides a rough guide
for how the Earth orbitally changes its orientation with repect to the
Sun while the rotational orientation,due to axial rotation keeping the
Earth pointing in obne direction in space and in direct contrast to
the contemporary view that the Earth circles the Sun like a train on
an orbital track with no change in orientation included -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YV9WkQkUHZ4


The crank pin will always point in the same direction in space
(denoting rotatiopnal orientation) likewise the rotational
orientation of a planet will serve as an indicator for the same
orbital outlook -


http://www.astro.psu.edu/users/niel/...lass39/023-ura...


The rate of change of the orbital orientation to the Sun is in
accordance with Keplerian orbital geometry ,using natural noon as a
benchmark and allied with constant axial rotation,it generates the
natural unequal noon cycles.The Equation of Time ,as the difference
between the natural noon cycle and the human devised 24 hour cycle
represents the rate of change of orbital orientation,taking axial
rotation to be constant over the course of an annual orbit.


No point in saying that I am dismayed that a genuine new orbital
component is left to drift when I completely recognise just how poorly
the insights and methods of the great astronomers,including
Copernicus,Kepler,Galileo,Ptolemy and many others are treated.If
people really want to promote astronomy and knowledge of the Earth's
motions are included,then this is a good point of departyure.