More Equinox information

There are many articles out there presently with the usual awkward
explanation for the Equinox including hideous graphics -

http://earthsky.org/

With hundreds of billions of dollar worth of graphical resources
across many thousands of research institutions including NASA,is it
too much trouble to ask one responsible person familiar with graphics
to set this image in motion in order to project a more accurate and
more enjoyable explanation for the Equinox -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Earth_precession.svg

Watching the polar coordinates act like a beacon for the orbital
behavior of the Earth over the course of an annual orbit as they turn
wrt the central Sun is more in tune with the 21st century than having
the Sun cross the celestial sphere equator and sometimes it is
dismaying to see many good 3D graphics of Earth and no proper
perspective which shows the polar coordinates turning to the central
Sun rather than the older explanations which rely on variable 'tilt'.

The orbital motion of the Earth carries the polar coordinates around
in a circle and indicative of all other locations on the planet,it
should not be anything other than a pleasant experience to put this
perspective before readers with all the information and analogies at
our disposal.

On Saturday, September 22, 2012 9:43:05 AM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:

With hundreds of billions of dollar worth of graphical resources

across many thousands of research institutions including NASA,is it

too much trouble to ask one responsible person familiar with graphics

to set this image in motion in order to project a more accurate and

more enjoyable explanation for the Equinox -



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Earth_precession.svg

There you go again, using that graphic that demonstrates PRECESSION, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the Equinox... nothing at all! Note that there are stars in the background... STARS! The graphic shows the Earth's axis moving WRT the stars, which is certainly does, over the course of 26,000 years. Over the course of a single year that axis moves NOT AT ALL, it points at Polaris constantly. You are using a graphic that is completely inappropriate for the point you are trying (and failing miserably) to demonstrate..

Here is your graphic again, this time with an actual explanation of what it represents...

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

http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphoto...41312225_n.jpg

\Paul A

On Sep 22, 7:06*pm, palsing wrote:
On Saturday, September 22, 2012 9:43:05 AM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:
With hundreds of billions of dollar worth of graphical resources

across many thousands of research institutions including NASA,is it

too much trouble to ask one responsible person familiar with graphics

to set this image in motion in order to project a more accurate and

more enjoyable explanation for the Equinox -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Earth_precession.svg

There you go again, using that graphic that demonstrates PRECESSION, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the Equinox... nothing at all! Note that there are stars in the background... STARS! The graphic shows the Earth's axis moving WRT the stars, which is certainly does, over the course of 26,000 years. Over the course of a single year that axis moves NOT AT ALL, it points at Polaris constantly.

It also changes to the central Sun as it is carried around by the
orbital behavior of the planet and so easy to ascertain using a simple
analogy and the aid of planetary comparisons.

What an amazing sight it will be when they train a telescope from the
surface of Mars towards the Earth,the phases it will witness and the
turning of the polar coordinates through the circle of illumination
just as we now can train a telescope on Venus -

http://www.masil-astro-imaging.com/S...age%20flat.jpg

No mean spirited and dour individual will ever appreciate the
spectacle for even though Uranus presently supplies the same
information,the response from the community has been less than
acceptable.



You are using a graphic that is completely inappropriate for the
point you are trying (and failing miserably) to demonstrate.

Here is your graphic again, this time with an actual explanation of what it represents...

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

http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphoto...1009909249_441...

\Paul

After your assertion this morning that the change in orientation in
the polar coordinates of Uranus is due to orbital perspectives in
tandem with the Earth's orbital motion,I think you have done enough
for one day but take comfort that others are not much better given
that Uranus is roughly 17 times further than the Earth is from the Sun
hence the East/West motion is integral to the planet just as its South
to North daily rotation is.

On Saturday, September 22, 2012 11:46:54 AM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:

After your assertion this morning that the change in orientation in

the polar coordinates of Uranus is due to orbital perspectives in

tandem with the Earth's orbital motion,I think you have done enough

for one day but take comfort that others are not much better given

that Uranus is roughly 17 times further than the Earth is from the Sun

hence the East/West motion is integral to the planet just as its South

to North daily rotation is.

No. I said the change in Uranus' apparent orientation was due to Earth's orbital motion AND Uranus'orbital motion, taken together, which is accurate. The same thing is true of ANY of the other planets, Uranus just stands out because of its goofy inclination. Saturn changes its aspect, too, we sometimes see the rings from the north, sometimes from the south, and sometimes edge-on, depending entirely of just where Saturn and the Earth are located in their respective orbits.

You and everyone else are looking at the same observable facts... how it is that you come to different conclusions most of the time? How is it that you are correct and tens of thousands of others are wrong?

http://a6.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphot... 1775006_n.jpg

\Paul A

"palsing" wrote in message ...
On Saturday, September 22, 2012 11:46:54 AM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:

After your assertion this morning that the change in orientation in

the polar coordinates of Uranus is due to orbital perspectives in

tandem with the Earth's orbital motion,I think you have done enough

for one day but take comfort that others are not much better given

that Uranus is roughly 17 times further than the Earth is from the Sun

hence the East/West motion is integral to the planet just as its South

to North daily rotation is.

No. I said the change in Uranus' apparent orientation was due to Earth's orbital motion AND Uranus'orbital motion, taken together, which is accurate. The same thing is true of ANY of the other planets, Uranus just stands out because of its goofy inclination. Saturn changes its aspect, too, we sometimes see the rings from the north, sometimes from the south, and sometimes edge-on, depending entirely of just where Saturn and the Earth are located in their respective orbits.

You and everyone else are looking at the same observable facts... how it is that you come to different conclusions most of the time? How is it that you are correct and tens of thousands of others are wrong?

================================================== =
As usual, bigot palsing, you appeal to the majority opinion of a minority.
How is it that you are correct and thousands of millions of others have
never seen Uranus or Christ in whom they believe or Einstein in whom
you believe?

- This message is brought to you from the keyboard of
Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway

On Sep 22, 10:43*am, oriel36 wrote:
is it
too much trouble to ask one responsible person familiar with graphics
to set this image in motion in order to project a more accurate and
more enjoyable explanation for the Equinox -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Earth_precession.svg

I thought that image would be the exact opposite of what you favor,
since it shows the Earth's axis tilting - changing its orientation.

Which it does for precession, but which it does not do for the
seasons; instead, the axis stays pointing in the same direction, but
the Earth moves to the other side of the Sun - as I though you
emphasized as well.

John Savard

On Sep 22, 8:47*pm, palsing wrote:
On Saturday, September 22, 2012 11:46:54 AM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:
After your assertion this morning that the change in orientation in

the polar coordinates of Uranus is due to orbital perspectives in

tandem with the Earth's orbital motion,I think you have done enough

for one day but take comfort that others are not much better given

that Uranus is roughly 17 times further than the Earth is from the Sun

hence the East/West motion is integral to the planet just as its South

to North daily rotation is.

No. I said the change in Uranus' apparent orientation was due to Earth's orbital motion AND Uranus'orbital motion, taken together, which is accurate..

You are not the first to propose this even though Uranus is
1,600,000,000 million miles away with an orbital period of over 8
decades.It is easier to use the broom analogy to work through the
details of the polar coordinates turning to the central Sun as they
are carried around by the orbital behavior of the planet hence the
motion of Uranus is not influenced by any perspective attributable to
the Earth's orbital motion and the polar coordinates actually do turn
as an integral part of the orbital motion of the planet itself.

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

A reasonable person has every reason to believe that the rings and
polar coordinates will keep on turning East to West and in a circle to
the central Sun while the rotational orientation remains fixed
throughout the orbital cycle just as the Earth rotational orientation
does.

An unreasonable person would believe that the change in orientation in
the rings was influenced by the orbital perspective from a moving
Earth instead of solely a property of the orbital behavior of Uranus.



The same thing is true of ANY of the other planets, Uranus just
stands out because of its goofy inclination. Saturn changes its
aspect, too, we sometimes see the rings from the north, sometimes from
the south, and sometimes edge-on, depending entirely of just where
Saturn and the Earth are located in their respective orbits.


Again,the rings of Uranus will continue to turn through 360 degrees to
the central Sun in an East to West direction,this turning is the sole
property of Uranus itself.Uranus has a polar inclination,this is the
way astronomers must consider the issue as an equatorial inclination
replaces the old 'no tilt/no seasons' ideology of old.



You and everyone else are looking at the same observable facts... how it is that you come to different conclusions most of the time? How is it that you are correct and tens of thousands of others are wrong?


Tens of thousands are paid to do a job they are not doing properly and
I have to do for them.This is not a century ago where a person has to
die and slowly get their work accepted and then mangled,this is the
21st century where people with a real love and a talent for astronomy
can come forward and make a difference leaving the sour and narrow
minded to do what they have always done.



http://a6.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphot...42521359110656...

\Paul A