Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
earth's tilt
31 views
Skip to first unread message
RichD
Sep 20, 2012, 9:32:55 PM9/20/12
to
When and how did astronomers determine that the earth's axis
tilts from the ecliptic, and its value?
--
Rich
tilts from the ecliptic, and its value?
--
Rich
Bast
Sep 20, 2012, 9:47:46 PM9/20/12
to
RichD wrote:
> When and how did astronomers determine that the earth's axis
> tilts from the ecliptic, and its value?
http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=AqEe3Ctsr7nZi2qH9hCEd5ebvZx4?p=When+and+how+did+astronomers+determine+that+the+earth%27s+axis+tilts+from+the+ecliptic&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8&fr=yfp-t-701
Just like Galileo is often credited for claiming the earth went around the
sun.
His research was based on Copernicus's work, and who knows where Copernicus
got the idea.
John Morriss
Sep 20, 2012, 10:01:55 PM9/20/12
to
On Thursday, September 20, 2012 9:32:56 PM UTC-4, RichD wrote:
> When and how did astronomers determine that the earth's axis
>
> tilts from the ecliptic, and its value?
The only observation needed is the difference between the maximum and minimum noon angular height of the sun over a year. You don't even need a true horizon from which to measure the height, as long as it doesn't change.
> When and how did astronomers determine that the earth's axis
>
> tilts from the ecliptic, and its value?
oriel36
Sep 21, 2012, 12:15:17 AM9/21/12
to
determination you refer to was first proposed by Copernicus
himself .It might be off-topic in a forum devoted almost exclusively
to magnification in a homocentric setting but here it is anyway -
"..the equator and the earth's axis must be understood to have a
variable inclination. For if they stayed at a constant angle, and were
affected exclusively by the motion of the center, no inequality of
days and nights would be observed."Copernicus Chapter 11 De
Revolutionibus
http://www.daviddarling.info/images/Uranus_rings_changes.jpg
The great astronomer did not have the benefit of 21st century imaging
to modify his approach which comes down to us as the 'no tilt/no
seasons' ideology when effectively he is describing equatorial
conditions as there is only residual variations in daylight/darkness
at the equatorial latitude as opposed to the North and South poles
where the variations are extreme.The greater the distance between the
rotational orientation and the ecliptic axis of any planet the more
polar the conditions or the more equatorial the climate as the
distance shrinks - this uses the Arctic/Antarctic circles as a kind of
a terrestrial boundary between equatorial and polar conditions so that
a reasonable person can see our planet has a largely equatorial
climate.
The North/South poles act like a beacon for the orbital behavior of
the Earth and while it does take a while to become comfortable with
the separate rotation to the central Sun as a component of the orbital
motion of the Earth,it does produce so many things to discuss.Rather
than the awkward 'tilt from the ecliptic', the polar coordinates turn
in a circle to the central Sun as indicative of all locations on the
planet so that axial precession has to be replaced along with the
explanation for the seasons.It is a 100% certainty that a camera
trained on the Earth from Mars will witness the Earth's polar
coordinates turn through the circle of illumination at the equinox in
such a manner -
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/43/Earth_precession.svg
Not only have you your answer,you also have the necessary imaging to
demonstrate why that 500 year old explanation needs urgent
modification in an era where climate is such an issue.I could say that
the present climate scientists don't know what they are talking
about ,not for any disagreement I have with them,only that the Earth
does have a pronounced equatorial climate and it has yet to make its
way into the wider community even though it is so much common sense.
If the rotational inclination of Uranus was applied to the Earth,the
Arctic circle would extend almost to the equator as the Earth would
have an almost total polar climate whereas it has,due to its 23 1/2
degree inclination from the ecliptic axis,a largely equatorial
climate.
Martin Brown
Sep 21, 2012, 3:30:09 AM9/21/12
to
On 21/09/2012 02:32, RichD wrote:
> When and how did astronomers determine that the earth's axis
> tilts from the ecliptic, and its value?
A reasonable list of who, what, when and where is online at:
> When and how did astronomers determine that the earth's axis
> tilts from the ecliptic, and its value?
http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1979A%26A....73..129W&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf
(I think this link should be public)
It reckons Chuo Li, China 1100BC 30
This list misses out Oenepedes, Greece 450BC 24
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Oenopides.html
--
Regards,
Martin Brown
Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway
Sep 21, 2012, 4:16:03 AM9/21/12
to
"RichD" <r_dela...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:acd441e5-9ed3-4fe1...@ph9g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
=============================================
You can do it yourself, find a large rock or boulder or
standing stone
and mark the ground where the tip of the shadow falls. Do
that
throughout the year and your sundial becomes an
astrolabe.
--
This message is brought to you from the keyboard of
Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway
Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway
oriel36
Sep 21, 2012, 5:36:28 AM9/21/12
to
On Sep 21, 8:30 am, Martin Brown <|||newspam...@nezumi.demon.co.uk>
wrote:
>
> Regards,
> Martin Brown
Years ago you could get away with that stuff but not in front of a
genuine astronomer.
In antiquity they used a shadow at the Solstice to determine the
circumference of the Earth,something quite different than daily
orientation.so your referenced paper is not only a non starter,it has
all the usual empirical pretension and none of the substance.The same
with the Galileo affair,the technical issues as the Pope understood
them was far more involved and with greater depth than shown by any of
contemporaries and I wouldn't even entertain a discussion here among
those for whom magnification constitutes astronomy and a few
mathematicians pretending to know something.
For a more comprehensive and accurate,do you hear this Brown, an
accurate use of a shadow at the solstice,there are only a very few
accurate perspectives and Stecchini,apart from his few quirks,happens
to be one of them -
"Eratosthenes was not the first to measure the circumference of the
Earth, but the first to argue, contrary to the opinion of Aristotle,
that the calculations about the circumference of the Earth could be
accepted as proven in terms of the new scientific style.
A series of ancient authors credits Eratosthenes as having introduced
the calculation of the degree as equal to 700 stadia, but there is not
a single writer who indicates that he based himself on an empirical
survey of the ground. Contemporary scholars exalt Eratosthenes as a
great scientist and as a pioneer in mathematical geography, but none
of the ancient writers who were acquainted with his works indicate
this. If Eratosthenes had been such an innovator, Ptolemy who
discusses at length the problem of the dimensions of the Earth in the
Prolegomena to his Geography would have said at least some words to
this effect. Theon of Smyrna and Proklos, who lived in Alexandria do
not make any reference to the alleged discovery of Eratosthenes in
their extensive commentaries on ancient mathematical science. Strabo,
who had before his eyes the writings of Eratosthenes and discusses
them at length, does not ascribe to Eratosthenes any specific
achievement in the field of empirical geodesy or of theoretical
geography. Strabo mentions repeatedly the figure of 700 stadia to the
degree, but justifies it only in these words: “We suppose as
Hipparchos, that the size of the Earth is 252,000 stadia, a figure
given also by Eratosthenes.” He would not have spoken in these terms
if Eratosthenes had provided a complete mathematical demonstration."
http://www.metrum.org/measures/measurements.htm
The next time you post some reference that you pull out of thin air,be
sure to know what you are talking about first both historically and
technicallyy.
wrote:
> On 21/09/2012 02:32, RichD wrote:
>
> > When and how did astronomers determine that the earth's axis
> > tilts from the ecliptic, and its value?
>
> A reasonable list of who, what, when and where is online at:
>
> http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1979A%2...
>
> > When and how did astronomers determine that the earth's axis
> > tilts from the ecliptic, and its value?
>
> A reasonable list of who, what, when and where is online at:
>
>
> Regards,
> Martin Brown
Years ago you could get away with that stuff but not in front of a
genuine astronomer.
In antiquity they used a shadow at the Solstice to determine the
circumference of the Earth,something quite different than daily
orientation.so your referenced paper is not only a non starter,it has
all the usual empirical pretension and none of the substance.The same
with the Galileo affair,the technical issues as the Pope understood
them was far more involved and with greater depth than shown by any of
contemporaries and I wouldn't even entertain a discussion here among
those for whom magnification constitutes astronomy and a few
mathematicians pretending to know something.
For a more comprehensive and accurate,do you hear this Brown, an
accurate use of a shadow at the solstice,there are only a very few
accurate perspectives and Stecchini,apart from his few quirks,happens
to be one of them -
"Eratosthenes was not the first to measure the circumference of the
Earth, but the first to argue, contrary to the opinion of Aristotle,
that the calculations about the circumference of the Earth could be
accepted as proven in terms of the new scientific style.
A series of ancient authors credits Eratosthenes as having introduced
the calculation of the degree as equal to 700 stadia, but there is not
a single writer who indicates that he based himself on an empirical
survey of the ground. Contemporary scholars exalt Eratosthenes as a
great scientist and as a pioneer in mathematical geography, but none
of the ancient writers who were acquainted with his works indicate
this. If Eratosthenes had been such an innovator, Ptolemy who
discusses at length the problem of the dimensions of the Earth in the
Prolegomena to his Geography would have said at least some words to
this effect. Theon of Smyrna and Proklos, who lived in Alexandria do
not make any reference to the alleged discovery of Eratosthenes in
their extensive commentaries on ancient mathematical science. Strabo,
who had before his eyes the writings of Eratosthenes and discusses
them at length, does not ascribe to Eratosthenes any specific
achievement in the field of empirical geodesy or of theoretical
geography. Strabo mentions repeatedly the figure of 700 stadia to the
degree, but justifies it only in these words: “We suppose as
Hipparchos, that the size of the Earth is 252,000 stadia, a figure
given also by Eratosthenes.” He would not have spoken in these terms
if Eratosthenes had provided a complete mathematical demonstration."
http://www.metrum.org/measures/measurements.htm
The next time you post some reference that you pull out of thin air,be
sure to know what you are talking about first both historically and
technicallyy.
JT
Sep 21, 2012, 5:43:45 AM9/21/12
to
On 21 Sep, 03:47, "Bast" <faken...@nomail.invalid> wrote:
> RichD wrote:
> > When and how did astronomers determine that the earth's axis
> > tilts from the ecliptic, and its value?
>
> I guess the answer depends on who you ask.
>
> http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=AqEe3Ctsr7nZi2qH9hCEd5ebvZx4?p=Wh...
> RichD wrote:
> > When and how did astronomers determine that the earth's axis
> > tilts from the ecliptic, and its value?
>
> I guess the answer depends on who you ask.
>
>
> Just like Galileo is often credited for claiming the earth went around the
> sun.
> His research was based on Copernicus's work, and who knows where Copernicus
> got the idea.
He used data collected by Tycho Brahe
> Just like Galileo is often credited for claiming the earth went around the
> sun.
> His research was based on Copernicus's work, and who knows where Copernicus
> got the idea.
Bast
Sep 21, 2012, 8:01:30 AM9/21/12
to
after Copernicus died.
Helmut Wabnig
Sep 21, 2012, 8:11:41 AM9/21/12
to
On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 08:01:30 -0400, "Bast" <fake...@nomail.invalid>
wrote:
haha,
he meant Kepler, because he was the one who used Tyho Brahe's data.
w.
wrote:
he meant Kepler, because he was the one who used Tyho Brahe's data.
w.
JT
Sep 21, 2012, 8:33:47 AM9/21/12
to
On 21 Sep, 14:15, Helmut Wabnig <hwabnig@.- --- -.dotat> wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 08:01:30 -0400, "Bast" <faken...@nomail.invalid>
Sorry my mistake
> On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 08:01:30 -0400, "Bast" <faken...@nomail.invalid>
G=EMC^2
Sep 21, 2012, 9:56:21 AM9/21/12
to
needed to the development of life. TeBet
Bast
Sep 21, 2012, 11:03:41 AM9/21/12
to
JT wrote:
> On 21 Sep, 14:15, Helmut Wabnig <hwabnig@.- --- -.dotat> wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 08:01:30 -0400, "Bast" <faken...@nomail.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> JT wrote:
>>>> On 21 Sep, 03:47, "Bast" <faken...@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> RichD wrote:
>>>>>> When and how did astronomers determine that the earth's axis
>>>>>> tilts from the ecliptic, and its value?
>>
>>>>> I guess the answer depends on who you ask.
>>
>>>>> http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=AqEe3Ctsr7nZi2qH9hCEd5ebvZx4?p=Wh...
>>
>>>>> Just like Galileo is often credited for claiming the earth went
>>>>> around the sun.
>>>>> His research was based on Copernicus's work, and who knows where
>>>>> Copernicus got the idea.
>>
>>>> He used data collected by Tycho Brahe
>>
>>> That would be a neat trick considering, I believe, Tycho Brache was
>>> born after Copernicus died.
>>
>> haha,
>> he meant Kepler, because he was the one who used Tyho Brahe's data.
>>
>> w.
>
> Sorry my mistake
"discovered" by countless people, but like naming asteroids/comets
etc.,....it's only the first person acknowledged in writing, who gets the
credit in the history books.
Sam Wormley
Sep 21, 2012, 12:23:05 PM9/21/12
to
axis with respect to the ecliptic, and with remarkable accuracy.
Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes
BTW, I very much enjoy Davoud's posting about his dad and Eratosthenes!
Chris.B
Sep 21, 2012, 1:13:46 PM9/21/12
to
On 21 Sep., 18:23, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> BTW, I very much enjoy Davoud's posting about his dad and Eratosthenes!
"My father knew Eratosthenes." has much more of a ring to it than the
>
> BTW, I very much enjoy Davoud's posting about his dad and Eratosthenes!
more familiar "My father knew Lloyd George." :-)
Anyone in a mediaeval prison must have know about the Earth's tilt
from the patch of sunlight shining through the tiny window. As would
(slow) well diggers. Assuming a clear, southerly aspect in both cases
for the sake of marauding pedants.
Encyclopaedias were the stuff of my own childhood. Now one cannot even
be bothered to search online when one can simply ask on a forum.
Thereby receiving such conflicting information that one might be
forgiven for questioning the validity of anything one might ever read
online. I blame fake, psychoactive, Chinese, prescription drugs for
many of today's problems.
hanson
Sep 21, 2012, 2:01:22 PM9/21/12
to
US expatriate "Chris.B" <chr...@nypost.dk> wrote:
>
hanson wrote:
To [1]:
Chrissy, old pal, listen: Stop taking them!... and
________ Stay away from the 3P's __________
... the Physician, the Pharmacist and the Police.
>
All three P mean well for the greater good & they
have a license to kill to do so. Unfortunately they
never even consider you to be good... ... by the
simple fact that they see you only when you
do/are/or feel no good...
>
To [2]:
That is so very true and it's heralding in a new
age of international peasant/mass/mob rule.
Posting and blogging is used by billions who
express their opinions, be they on stuff or sober.
>
The volume/loudness from the legions of these
folks drowns & overwhelms the establishment's
or the elite's interests & goals, be that legit or not.
>
OTOH, the sharpies have discovered a new tool
with this new "social networking" to rile up folks
and instigate events that fit their own agendas.
>
What we see is globalization on a much vaster
and broader scale and in very different shades
then was originally intended and envisioned...
>
But "what goes up must come down"... right?
If so, then when, why & how will that occur?
>
>
Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
Eratosthenes of Cyrene first to calculate the tilt of the Earth's
axis with respect to the ecliptic, and with remarkable accuracy.
Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes
>
>
Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
Eratosthenes of Cyrene first to calculate the tilt of the Earth's
axis with respect to the ecliptic, and with remarkable accuracy.
Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes
>
"Chris.B" wrote:
Anyone in a mediaeval prison must have know about the
Earth's tilt from the patch of sunlight shining through the
tiny window. As would (slow) well diggers. Assuming a
clear, southerly aspect in both cases for the sake of
marauding pedants.
>
Encyclopaedias were the stuff of my own childhood.
Now one cannot even be bothered to search online when
one can simply ask on a forum. Thereby receiving such
conflicting information that one might be forgiven for
questioning the validity of anything one might ever read
online. [2]
Anyone in a mediaeval prison must have know about the
Earth's tilt from the patch of sunlight shining through the
tiny window. As would (slow) well diggers. Assuming a
clear, southerly aspect in both cases for the sake of
marauding pedants.
>
Encyclopaedias were the stuff of my own childhood.
Now one cannot even be bothered to search online when
one can simply ask on a forum. Thereby receiving such
conflicting information that one might be forgiven for
questioning the validity of anything one might ever read
>
I blame fake, psychoactive, Chinese, prescription drugs
for many of today's problems. [1]
I blame fake, psychoactive, Chinese, prescription drugs
>
hanson wrote:
To [1]:
Chrissy, old pal, listen: Stop taking them!... and
________ Stay away from the 3P's __________
... the Physician, the Pharmacist and the Police.
>
All three P mean well for the greater good & they
have a license to kill to do so. Unfortunately they
never even consider you to be good... ... by the
simple fact that they see you only when you
do/are/or feel no good...
>
To [2]:
That is so very true and it's heralding in a new
age of international peasant/mass/mob rule.
Posting and blogging is used by billions who
express their opinions, be they on stuff or sober.
>
The volume/loudness from the legions of these
folks drowns & overwhelms the establishment's
or the elite's interests & goals, be that legit or not.
>
OTOH, the sharpies have discovered a new tool
with this new "social networking" to rile up folks
and instigate events that fit their own agendas.
>
What we see is globalization on a much vaster
and broader scale and in very different shades
then was originally intended and envisioned...
>
But "what goes up must come down"... right?
If so, then when, why & how will that occur?
oriel36
Sep 21, 2012, 2:35:40 PM9/21/12
to
On Sep 21, 5:23 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/20/12 8:32 PM, RichD wrote:
>
> > When and how did astronomers determine that the earth's axis
> > tilts from the ecliptic, and its value?
>
> > --
> > Rich
>
> Eratosthenes of Cyrene first to calculate the tilt of the Earth's
> axis with respect to the ecliptic, and with remarkable accuracy.
> Ref:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes
>
How sweet !,empiricists tend to manufacture history on an industrial
> On 9/20/12 8:32 PM, RichD wrote:
>
> > When and how did astronomers determine that the earth's axis
> > tilts from the ecliptic, and its value?
>
> > --
> > Rich
>
> Eratosthenes of Cyrene first to calculate the tilt of the Earth's
> axis with respect to the ecliptic, and with remarkable accuracy.
> Ref:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes
>
scale and what you and the rest are trying to discuss is rotational
orientation which does not change in terms of axial precession and to
the orbital points of solstices and equinoxes.The ancients in remote
antiquity,and I mean over 5000 years ago would have seen the
circumpolar stars still turn around Polaris as we see the same thing
today and that time scale is 20% into the great orbital cycle of the
precession of the equinoxes and not an axial trait as previously
believed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTTDWhky9HY
It doesn't occur to readers here that anyone can show up at the
neolithic monuments on the solstice or equinox and still enjoy the
same spectacle as 5000 years ago hence the observed precession cannot
be an axial trait and besides,contemporary imaging shows unequivocally
that the polar coordinates precess through 360 degrees to the central
Sun as a component of its orbital motion.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXPSFNZ9Q7E
About 2 minutes into that video you will see the planet turn to the
central Sun just as the Earth's polar coordinates act like a beacon
for the Earth's orbital behavior,a curious individual needs only a
brief analogy to extract the proper conclusion that axial precession
is unhelpful as the motion of the polar coordinates in a cycle/circle
occurs each orbital circuit.
I have never encountered a contemporary who could express the
dimensions of the Earth in tandem with rotation in that 15 degrees of
geographical separation corresponds to both 1037.5 miles at the
equator and also 1 hour time difference so that it should be the
easiest thing in the world to express that the equatorial Earth turns
1037.5 miles per hour and its 360 degree circumference in 24 hours.You
cannot imagine how bad you and your empirical colleagues look as you
insist that the Earth doesn't turn at a rate of 15 degrees per hour so
it is not the accuracy of Eratosthenes you need to consider but the
deplorable inability to accept the facts of a round and rotating
Earth.
Does it not bother any of you that you have lost the core facts or is
it just a disorder you have ?
Double-A
Sep 21, 2012, 2:54:22 PM9/21/12
to
informative and thought provoking contributions.
Double-A
Sam Wormley
Sep 21, 2012, 4:13:32 PM9/21/12
to
On 9/21/12 1:35 PM, oriel36 wrote:
> On Sep 21, 5:23 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Eratosthenes of Cyrene first to calculate the tilt of the Earth's
>> axis with respect to the ecliptic, and with remarkable accuracy.
>> Ref:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes
>>
>
> How sweet !,empiricists tend to manufacture history on an industrial
> scale and what you and the rest are trying to discuss is rotational
> orientation which does not change in terms of axial precession and to
> the orbital points of solstices and equinoxes.The ancients in remote
> antiquity,and I mean over 5000 years ago would have seen the
> circumpolar stars still turn around Polaris as we see the same thing
> today and that time scale is 20% into the great orbital cycle of the
> precession of the equinoxes and not an axial trait as previously
> believed.
>
Adapted from Carl Sagan's COSMOS book as part of a presentation
> On Sep 21, 5:23 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Eratosthenes of Cyrene first to calculate the tilt of the Earth's
>> axis with respect to the ecliptic, and with remarkable accuracy.
>> Ref:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes
>>
>
> How sweet !,empiricists tend to manufacture history on an industrial
> scale and what you and the rest are trying to discuss is rotational
> orientation which does not change in terms of axial precession and to
> the orbital points of solstices and equinoxes.The ancients in remote
> antiquity,and I mean over 5000 years ago would have seen the
> circumpolar stars still turn around Polaris as we see the same thing
> today and that time scale is 20% into the great orbital cycle of the
> precession of the equinoxes and not an axial trait as previously
> believed.
>
I gave more than a year ago:
__________________
There was once a time when our little planet seemed immense, when
it was the only world we could explore, its true size was first
worked out in a simple and ingenious way by a man who lived in
Egypt in the third century B.C.
In Alexandria, at that time, there lived a man named Eratosthenes.
One of his envious contemporaries called him Beta, the second
letter of the Greek alphabet, because, he said, Eratosthenes was
second best in the world in everything, but it seems clear that in
many fields Eratosthenes was Alpha: he was an astronomer,
historian, geographer, philosopher, poet, theater critic and
mathematician.
He was also the chief librarian of the great library of Alexandria
and one day while reading a papyrus book in the library he came
upon a curious account: far to the south, he read, at the frontier
outpost of Syene, something notable could be seen on the longest
day of the year. On June 21 the shadows of a temple column or a
vertical stick would grow shorter as noon approached and as the
hours crept towards midday the sun's rays would slither down the
sides of a deep well which, on other days would remain in shadow
and then precisely at noon columns would cast no shadows and the
sun would shine directly down into the water of the well. At that
moment the sun was exactly overhead.
It was an observation that someone else might easily have ignored:
sticks, shadows, reflections in wells, the position of the sun,
simple everyday matters, so what possible importance might they
be.
But Eratosthenes was a scientist, and his contemplations of these
homely matters changed the world, in a way, made the world.
Because Eratosthenes had the presence of mind to experiment to
actually ask whether back here near Alexandria a stick cast a
shadow near noon on June the twenty first, and it turns out sticks
do. An overly skeptical person might have said that the report
from Syene was an error but an absolutely straightforward
observation why would anyone lie on such a trivial matter?
Eratosthenes asked himself how it could be that at the same
moment a stick in Syene would cast no shadow and a stick in
Alexandria, eight hundred kilometers to the north, would cast a
very definite shadow.
If the shadow at Syene is of a certain length and the shadow at
Alexandria is the same length that also makes sense on a flat
Earth, but how could it be, Eratosthenes asked, that at the same
instant there was no shadow at Syene and a very substantial shadow
at Alexandria.
The only answer was that the surface of the earth is curved, not
only that, but the greater the curvature the bigger the difference
in the length of the shadows. The sun is so far away that its rays
are parallel when they reach the Earth. Sticks at different angles
to the sun's rays will cast shadows of different lengths for the
observed difference in the shadow length the distance between
Alexandria and Syene had to be about 7 degrees along the surface
of Earth, by that I mean if you would imagine these sticks
extending all the way down to the center of the Earth they would
there intersect at an angle of about 7 degrees, well seven degrees
is something like a fiftieth of the full circumference of the
Earth 360 degrees.
Eratosthenes knew the distance between Alexandria and Syene, he
knew it was eight hundred kilometers, why? because he hired a man
to pace out the entire distance so that he could perform the
calculation. I'm talking about now 800 kilometers times fifty is
forty thousand kilometers so that must be the circumference of the
Earth, that's how far it is to go once around the earth, that's
the right answer.
Eratosthenes's only tools were sticks, eyes, feet, and brains
plus a zest for experiment. With those tools he correctly deduced
the circumference of the Earth to high precision with an error of
only a few percent, that's pretty good figuring for twenty-two
hundred years ago.
__________________
USENET News is a discussion protocol, part of the internet, that
predates the World Wide Web, browsers and graphical interfaces by
at least ten years. I have been a participant in Physics and
Astronomy News groups for twenty years.
There is a fellow who lives somewhere in Scotland, named Gerald
Kelleher, who has the annoying habit of interrupting threads on
various topics of astronomy with his rants that scientists, such
as Isaac Newton, ruined observational astronomy in the 17th
century.
Eventually I engaged, Gerald, trying to understand why he rants
and what might be the basis of his misunderstanding. His trouble
is rooted in the Anglican interpretation of the rotation of the
earth. Gerald regularly expresses his utter contempt and disgust
that we professors and teachers of astronomy note that the earth
rotates once, four minutes shy of 24 hours. The effect can be
observed by anyone, that the stars rise in the east 4 minutes
earlier each night. School kids, using two sticks can sight any
prominent star in the nighttime sky two nights in a row and time
that the star lines up with the two sticks every 23h 56m and 4s.
We notice that the sun appears to travel south in the winter and
back north in the summer. From a fixed perspective one can see
that the sun rises and sets at a different place along the horizon
everyday, changing most rapidly near equinoxes and coming to what
seems like a standstill at the solstices. And yet it moves!
Science is all about observation and experiment. We enhance our
understand of nature all around us, by taking the time to observe
and think, often needing little more than sticks, eyes, feet, and
brains plus a zest for learning and understanding.
oriel36
Sep 21, 2012, 4:58:43 PM9/21/12
to
On Sep 21, 9:13 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Eventually I engaged, Gerald, trying to understand why he rants
> and what might be the basis of his misunderstanding. His trouble
> is rooted in the Anglican interpretation of the rotation of the
> earth. Gerald regularly expresses his utter contempt and disgust
> that we professors and teachers of astronomy note that the earth
> rotates once, four minutes shy of 24 hours.
The equatorial circumference is found to be 24901 miles which makes
> Eventually I engaged, Gerald, trying to understand why he rants
> and what might be the basis of his misunderstanding. His trouble
> is rooted in the Anglican interpretation of the rotation of the
> earth. Gerald regularly expresses his utter contempt and disgust
> that we professors and teachers of astronomy note that the earth
> rotates once, four minutes shy of 24 hours.
1037.5 miles for each 15 degrees of geographical separation.If you do
not accept that the Earth turns at a rate of 15 degrees/1037.5 miles
per hour then perhaps you can give the alternative values which
eventually are bounded within the 24901 mile circumference.I don't
express contempt for professors,they literally express contempt for
their students,astronomy and terrestrial sciences and common sense.
So,here we are in the 21st century trying unsuccessfully to explain
that the Earth turns once in 24 hours with each of these 24 hour days
keeping in step with each rotation without fail and if dismay is not
something that accompanies you day in and day out at such a huge loss
as this core fact,then we become less men much less astronomers or
teachers.
> The effect can be
> observed by anyone, that the stars rise in the east 4 minutes
> earlier each night. School kids, using two sticks can sight any
> prominent star in the nighttime sky two nights in a row and time
> that the star lines up with the two sticks every 23h 56m and 4s.
>
Earth using circumpolar motion and a system based on the 24 hour day
formatted as 365 days/366 days for that is exactly what you are
looking at.
GogoJF
Sep 21, 2012, 8:29:02 PM9/21/12
to
itself by .0077315 of; thereby, creating more "ticks" in a single day
to equal exactly 24 hours- not 23hrs., 56 mins, and 4 sec.. But...
what will this accomplish? 365.25 days in a year divided by 12 months
equals 30.4375 days to the month. How do we reconcile the perfect 24
hour day with each month and year?
GogoJF
Sep 21, 2012, 9:01:24 PM9/21/12
to
aware of it.
GogoJF
Sep 21, 2012, 9:05:18 PM9/21/12
to
second stay the same throughout the year and time in general?
oriel36
Sep 22, 2012, 3:15:45 AM9/22/12
to
the system work but as you will soon discover,it can only operate one
way and should you follow the development of the timekeeping systems
from the creation of the calendar system using two specific references
and then follow on with the development of the 24 hour AM/PM system
and the Lat/Long system using a secondary set of references you may
understand perfectly why most of the topics in this era don't really
stand up to scrutiny as error and distortions become obvious.
I passed a guy in a coffee shop yesterday reading the book on the
Longitude problem and how John Harrison provided the solution using
time and an accurate watch and I had to smile at the romance of it all
and I mean what I say,not unthinking robots with no feeling for the
principles which connect timekeeping to the great cycles of our planet
and described by Harrison himself using the 24 hour AM/PM system in
tandem with the Lat/Long system
"The application of a Timekeeper to this discovery is founded upon the
following principles: the earth's surface is divided into 360 equal
parts (by imaginary lines drawn from North to South) which are called
Degrees of Longitude; and its daily revolution Eastward round its own
axis is performed in 24 hours; consequently in that period, each of
those imaginary lines or degrees, becomes successively opposite to the
Sun (which makes the noon or precise middle of the day at each of
those degrees;) and it must follow, that from the time any one of
those lines passes the Sun, till the next passes, must be just four
minutes, for 24 hours being divided by 360 will give that quantity; so
that for every degree of Longitude we sail Westward, it will be noon
with us four minutes the later, and for every degree Eastward four
minutes the sooner, and so on in proportion for any greater or less
quantity. Now, the exact time of the day at the place where we are,
can be ascertained by well known and easy observations of the Sun if
visible for a few minutes at any time from his being ten degrees high
until within an hour of noon, or from an hour after noon until he is
only 10 degrees high in the afternoon; if therefore, at any time when
such observation is made, a Timekeeper tells us at the same moment
what o'clock it is at the place we sailed from, our Longitude is
clearly discovered." John Harrison
What Wormley and other professors who follow Flamsteed's inaccurate Ra/
Dec conclusion try to do is extend the AM/PM system to include stellar
circumpolar motion even though the return of a star in 23 hours 56
minutes 04 seconds is a trivial observation which requires no cause in
terms of planetary dynamics.Had people enough patience to revisit the
few principles which restrict the references to the return of Sirius
as an annual event for the creation of the calendar system and the
daily return of the Sun ,with its uneven periods,as the sole reference
for the daily cycle and the AM/PM and Lat/Long designations then a lot
of trouble could have been avoided and we would be discussing amazing
things.
Odysseus
Sep 22, 2012, 3:45:00 PM9/22/12
to
In article
<36e72cca-1519-4a44...@ib4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
GogoJF <jfgo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
<snip>
> Maybe the "second"naturally slows down and speeds up and we are not
> aware of it.
Not sure what you're getting at, but the rate of the Earth's rotation
does vary, over both longer terms (a slowing trend) and shorter (chaotic
oscillations including "nutation"); the current method of dealing with
the resulting discrepancies is the addition of "leap seconds" when
converting between UTC (formerly Greenwich time) and uniform time.
--
Odysseus
<36e72cca-1519-4a44...@ib4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
GogoJF <jfgo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
<snip>
> Maybe the "second"naturally slows down and speeds up and we are not
> aware of it.
does vary, over both longer terms (a slowing trend) and shorter (chaotic
oscillations including "nutation"); the current method of dealing with
the resulting discrepancies is the addition of "leap seconds" when
converting between UTC (formerly Greenwich time) and uniform time.
--
Odysseus
Odysseus
Sep 22, 2012, 6:16:11 PM9/22/12
to
In article <k3gh02$ds7$1...@dont-email.me>,
"Bast" <fake...@nomail.invalid> wrote:
<snip>
> Just like Galileo is often credited for claiming the earth went around the
> sun.
> His research was based on Copernicus's work, and who knows where Copernicus
> got the idea.
I attended a lecture a couple of years ago that proposed the Persian
astronomer Qushji (*) as an important influence on Copernicus'
heliocentric theory, based on similarities between their mathematical
treatments & illustrations. The connection would have been made _via_ a
friend of Copernicus' who apparently brought some astronomical treatises
back from Baghdad. There were other important critics of the Ptolemaic
system in the mediaeval Islamic world, notably al-Tusi (1201-74 CE),
some of whose writings had become available to Western scholars by the
XV century.
*) See <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Qushji>
--
Odysseus
"Bast" <fake...@nomail.invalid> wrote:
<snip>
> Just like Galileo is often credited for claiming the earth went around the
> sun.
> His research was based on Copernicus's work, and who knows where Copernicus
> got the idea.
astronomer Qushji (*) as an important influence on Copernicus'
heliocentric theory, based on similarities between their mathematical
treatments & illustrations. The connection would have been made _via_ a
friend of Copernicus' who apparently brought some astronomical treatises
back from Baghdad. There were other important critics of the Ptolemaic
system in the mediaeval Islamic world, notably al-Tusi (1201-74 CE),
some of whose writings had become available to Western scholars by the
XV century.
*) See <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Qushji>
--
Odysseus
oriel36
Sep 23, 2012, 3:12:14 AM9/23/12
to
On Sep 22, 8:02 pm, Dr J R Stockton
<reply1...@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
> In sci.astro.amateur message <200920122211433780%s...@sky.net>, Thu, 20
> Sep 2012 22:11:43, Davoud <s...@sky.net> posted:
>
>
>
> >I don't have time to do the searching at the moment, but I have to
> >think that ancient natural philosophers, whether in Greece or Persia or
> >China or parts unknown, knew the extent of the Earth's axial tilt.
>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_Axis#History>.
>
I look at how they mangle the straightforward reasoning which connects
planetary shape with the motion and evolution of the surface crust
long after I proposed differential rotation as the key mechanism for
these planetary features.The uneven rotational gradient of the fluid
interior requires dropping the idea of the Earth as a celestial
gyroscope and picking up observations of celestial objects with
exposed rotating fluid compositions which display differential
rotation. The polar coordinates don't act like a gyroscope nor 'tilt'
towards and away from the Sun but rather are carried around in a
circle to the central Sun by the separate orbital motion of the
Earth,this leaves the researcher free to work with daily rotation and
the fluid interior rather than being too concerned about a fixed axis
- horses for courses in other words.
For an era so concerned with climate,it is amazing that they can't
describe the Earth's climate in planetary terms,in our planet's
case,it is largely equatorial as opposed to the polar climate of
Uranus by based on the angular distance between the the daily
rotational axis and the ecliptic axis.The Wiki article is more of the
same -
"The Earth's axis remains tilted in the same direction with reference
to the background stars throughout a year (throughout its entire
orbit). This means that one pole (and the associated hemisphere of the
Earth) will be directed away from the Sun at one side of the orbit,
and half an orbit later (half a year later) this pole will be directed
towards the Sun. This is the cause of the Earth's seasons."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_Axis#History
The cause of daylight/darkness asymmetries with greater fluctuations
towards the polar coordinates is due to the changing relationship of
rotational orientation of the planet to the circle of illumination.It
is so clearly demonstrated by the images of Uranus as the hemispheres
experience extreme fluctuations in daylight/darkness across large
areas of the planet that a thinking person can't but see that the old
idea of axial precession is an obstacle to recognizing the changing
orientation of the rotational axis to the central Sun.
I see these awkward 'tilted' explanations when it takes only a simple
imitation analogy to introduce another axis around which the polar
coordinates turn to the central Sun, a broom handle representing axial
'tilt' and the line of the body walking/orbiting a central object
representing an ecliptic axis goes a long way to accounting for the
observations of Uranus as the broom handle remains fixed to an
external point at all times as a person walks/orbits the object yet
the tilt of the broom will change to the central object/Sun as it
moves in a circle.
I wish somebody else would raise themselves to a higher standard,after
all,when you have all these guys running around announcing that the
sky is falling with climate,the same people have yet to replace the
old 'no tilt/no seasons' ideology with the new approach where a planet
falls between an equatorial and polar climate due to its inclination.
> --
> (c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. Mail via homepage. Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
> Web <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQqish topics, acronyms and links;
> Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.
> No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.
<reply1...@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
> In sci.astro.amateur message <200920122211433780%s...@sky.net>, Thu, 20
> Sep 2012 22:11:43, Davoud <s...@sky.net> posted:
>
>
>
> >I don't have time to do the searching at the moment, but I have to
> >think that ancient natural philosophers, whether in Greece or Persia or
> >China or parts unknown, knew the extent of the Earth's axial tilt.
>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_Axis#History>.
>
I look at how they mangle the straightforward reasoning which connects
planetary shape with the motion and evolution of the surface crust
long after I proposed differential rotation as the key mechanism for
these planetary features.The uneven rotational gradient of the fluid
interior requires dropping the idea of the Earth as a celestial
gyroscope and picking up observations of celestial objects with
exposed rotating fluid compositions which display differential
rotation. The polar coordinates don't act like a gyroscope nor 'tilt'
towards and away from the Sun but rather are carried around in a
circle to the central Sun by the separate orbital motion of the
Earth,this leaves the researcher free to work with daily rotation and
the fluid interior rather than being too concerned about a fixed axis
- horses for courses in other words.
For an era so concerned with climate,it is amazing that they can't
describe the Earth's climate in planetary terms,in our planet's
case,it is largely equatorial as opposed to the polar climate of
Uranus by based on the angular distance between the the daily
rotational axis and the ecliptic axis.The Wiki article is more of the
same -
"The Earth's axis remains tilted in the same direction with reference
to the background stars throughout a year (throughout its entire
orbit). This means that one pole (and the associated hemisphere of the
Earth) will be directed away from the Sun at one side of the orbit,
and half an orbit later (half a year later) this pole will be directed
towards the Sun. This is the cause of the Earth's seasons."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_Axis#History
The cause of daylight/darkness asymmetries with greater fluctuations
towards the polar coordinates is due to the changing relationship of
rotational orientation of the planet to the circle of illumination.It
is so clearly demonstrated by the images of Uranus as the hemispheres
experience extreme fluctuations in daylight/darkness across large
areas of the planet that a thinking person can't but see that the old
idea of axial precession is an obstacle to recognizing the changing
orientation of the rotational axis to the central Sun.
I see these awkward 'tilted' explanations when it takes only a simple
imitation analogy to introduce another axis around which the polar
coordinates turn to the central Sun, a broom handle representing axial
'tilt' and the line of the body walking/orbiting a central object
representing an ecliptic axis goes a long way to accounting for the
observations of Uranus as the broom handle remains fixed to an
external point at all times as a person walks/orbits the object yet
the tilt of the broom will change to the central object/Sun as it
moves in a circle.
I wish somebody else would raise themselves to a higher standard,after
all,when you have all these guys running around announcing that the
sky is falling with climate,the same people have yet to replace the
old 'no tilt/no seasons' ideology with the new approach where a planet
falls between an equatorial and polar climate due to its inclination.
> --
> (c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. Mail via homepage. Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
> Web <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQqish topics, acronyms and links;
> Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.
> No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.
G=EMC^2
Sep 23, 2012, 8:47:25 AM9/23/12
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
Moon keeps tilt from wobbling.and with wobbling there would be no
humankind. TeBet
GogoJF
Sep 23, 2012, 6:56:41 PM9/23/12
to
HVAC
Sep 23, 2012, 7:12:06 PM9/23/12
to
On 9/23/2012 6:56 PM, GogoJF wrote:
>
>>
>> Moon keeps tilt from wobbling.and with wobbling there would be no
>> humankind. TeBet
>
> It wobbles just a little.
It's a Weeble?
>
>>
>> Moon keeps tilt from wobbling.and with wobbling there would be no
>> humankind. TeBet
>
> It wobbles just a little.
--
"OK you cunts, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo .. 变亮
GogoJF
Sep 23, 2012, 8:05:52 PM9/23/12
to
be no life on Earth.
tj Frazir
Sep 23, 2012, 8:27:59 PM9/23/12
to
Gravity is the time slope around mass.
Time is faster near mass and faster time is less mass.
So as the earth orbits the suns time slope the clock of mass is allways
slower farthest from the mass of the sun and thats more mass .
As its in orbit its top 1/2 allways has more mass. its at the same
orbital speed as the lower 1/2 but not at the same radius around the
sun.
The top has a bigger orbit then the bottom.
The top 1/2 will speed up because its in a higher orbit .
The earth tilts because the N pole is not the same mass as the bottom.
look at the moons orbit .
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
Time is faster near mass and faster time is less mass.
So as the earth orbits the suns time slope the clock of mass is allways
slower farthest from the mass of the sun and thats more mass .
As its in orbit its top 1/2 allways has more mass. its at the same
orbital speed as the lower 1/2 but not at the same radius around the
sun.
The top has a bigger orbit then the bottom.
The top 1/2 will speed up because its in a higher orbit .
The earth tilts because the N pole is not the same mass as the bottom.
look at the moons orbit .
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
HVAC
Sep 23, 2012, 8:40:47 PM9/23/12
to
On 9/23/2012 8:05 PM, GogoJF wrote:
>
>>>> Moon keeps tilt from wobbling.and with wobbling there would be no
>>>> humankind. TeBet
>>
>>> It wobbles just a little.
>>
>> It's a Weeble?
>>
>> -
>
>
>>>> Moon keeps tilt from wobbling.and with wobbling there would be no
>>>> humankind. TeBet
>>
>>> It wobbles just a little.
>>
>> It's a Weeble?
>>
>> -
>
> Ha! There is no doubt in my mind that without the moon, there would
> be no life on Earth.
Yet one more reason that the chance of life is vanishingly small in the
> be no life on Earth.
galaxy. We of the Earth are incredibly, extraordinarily lucky.
--
GogoJF
Sep 23, 2012, 9:15:13 PM9/23/12
to
certain revolving planets might one day produce a planet which is
capable, or had been capable of producing life. That's what I would
like to believe.
GogoJF
Sep 23, 2012, 9:19:48 PM9/23/12
to
produce life. It's just a natural process.
GogoJF
Sep 23, 2012, 9:23:48 PM9/23/12
to
On Sep 23, 7:40 pm, HVAC <mr.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
satellite as our moon, lie in the distance where the sun may produce
the right temperature and life. The odds go on and on. We have
definitely won the lottery when it comes to our organism.
tj Frazir
Sep 24, 2012, 2:00:59 AM9/24/12
to
without any real physics your a bunch of idiots
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
tj Frazir
Sep 26, 2012, 11:49:41 PM9/26/12
to
earth rotates because the top is in a higher orbit so its going faster
then the bottom.
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
then the bottom.
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
tj Frazir
Sep 27, 2012, 5:05:28 PM9/27/12
to
Mass is time .
No time no mass.
fast time is less mass then slow time.
mass is how long energy is at that point.
The longer the mass is there the more mass it is.
Things fall because the top side gained mass and pushes the body .
evry partical of the atom gained mass when farthest away from earth and
the lowest points in thier orbits are the least mass .
because time is a slope around mass.
Time is faster near mass.
c is constant but time is a slope.
c is constant but time is a slope around mass.
my clear steel disk is a super conductor and super hard and super
undistructable.
It dont have berrings . a laser beam spins it.
it takes a year to get a disk spinning up to speed with lasers but will
be usd for years and years.
time is slower around that disk.
i just put the disk near the bottom of the ship and the ship falls up .
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
No time no mass.
fast time is less mass then slow time.
mass is how long energy is at that point.
The longer the mass is there the more mass it is.
Things fall because the top side gained mass and pushes the body .
evry partical of the atom gained mass when farthest away from earth and
the lowest points in thier orbits are the least mass .
because time is a slope around mass.
Time is faster near mass.
c is constant but time is a slope.
c is constant but time is a slope around mass.
my clear steel disk is a super conductor and super hard and super
undistructable.
It dont have berrings . a laser beam spins it.
it takes a year to get a disk spinning up to speed with lasers but will
be usd for years and years.
time is slower around that disk.
i just put the disk near the bottom of the ship and the ship falls up .
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
tj Frazir
Sep 27, 2012, 5:07:35 PM9/27/12
to
tj Frazir
Sep 27, 2012, 5:12:43 PM9/27/12
to
it will either miss us or end us ..about 90 days
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
tj Frazir
Sep 27, 2012, 5:17:17 PM9/27/12
to
the only object in reverse orbit around te sun ive ever found.
thats our other moon 2 miles wide.
we play chicken once a year.
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
thats our other moon 2 miles wide.
we play chicken once a year.
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
tj Frazir
Sep 27, 2012, 5:11:08 PM9/27/12
to
the magnet tilt the earth .
the suns gravity turns the earth.
earths obit arond the sun is not allways flat.
venus pulls us in and jupiyer pulls us back out.
stranger even is the earths little moon..
you know we have 2 moons we only see the big one. the other one is 2
miles wide.
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
the suns gravity turns the earth.
earths obit arond the sun is not allways flat.
venus pulls us in and jupiyer pulls us back out.
stranger even is the earths little moon..
you know we have 2 moons we only see the big one. the other one is 2
miles wide.
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
tj Frazir
Sep 27, 2012, 5:21:55 PM9/27/12
to
when our other moon flatens its orbit our chancs of it hiting us gets
much bigger.
but evry 10,000 years its elipical orbit crosses out path for a few
orbits.
dont matter.
if your one of 4 billion people in the 300 cities real soon youll all
be dead.
Ill bet 700 Abombs and can raise you 1000
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
much bigger.
but evry 10,000 years its elipical orbit crosses out path for a few
orbits.
dont matter.
if your one of 4 billion people in the 300 cities real soon youll all
be dead.
Ill bet 700 Abombs and can raise you 1000
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
Bill Snyder
Sep 27, 2012, 6:01:35 PM9/27/12
to
On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 17:07:35 -0400, Gravity...@webtv.net (tj
Frazir) wrote:
>[the usual drool]
FOAD, moron. You aren't fooling anybody. And shove your
imaginary engine up your spamming, psychotic ass.
Everybody knows you have no engine, you have no yacht, you have no
money. Every post you make shows us all that you're a dumb,
illiterate bullshit artist.
--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank]
Frazir) wrote:
>[the usual drool]
FOAD, moron. You aren't fooling anybody. And shove your
imaginary engine up your spamming, psychotic ass.
Everybody knows you have no engine, you have no yacht, you have no
money. Every post you make shows us all that you're a dumb,
illiterate bullshit artist.
--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank]
tj Frazir
Sep 28, 2012, 1:51:04 AM9/28/12
to
You dont have the calaverite at middle creek falls i posted LOL.
your a poor dumbass and i dont give a fuck what you think
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
your a poor dumbass and i dont give a fuck what you think
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
Bill Snyder
Sep 28, 2012, 9:34:29 AM9/28/12
to
On Fri, 28 Sep 2012 01:51:04 -0400, Gravity...@webtv.net (tj
Frazir) wrote:
>[the usual drivel]
FOAD, moron. You aren't fooling anybody. And shove your
imaginary engine up your spamming, psychotic ass.
Everybody knows you have no engine, you have no yacht, you have no
money. Every post you make shows us all that you're a dumb,
illiterate bullshit artist.
And you can't even fool the Relfdroid any more. That must suck,
to be a crap-slinger who can't even fool the world's biggest born
sucker. Or maybe you get some kind of kick out of having everyone
laughing at you.
Frazir) wrote:
>[the usual drivel]
FOAD, moron. You aren't fooling anybody. And shove your
imaginary engine up your spamming, psychotic ass.
Everybody knows you have no engine, you have no yacht, you have no
money. Every post you make shows us all that you're a dumb,
illiterate bullshit artist.
to be a crap-slinger who can't even fool the world's biggest born
sucker. Or maybe you get some kind of kick out of having everyone
laughing at you.
tj Frazir
Sep 28, 2012, 8:37:41 PM9/28/12
to
richest square mile on earth .
central city colorado .
keystone gold mine.
15000 ton of white rock.
great white mountain. suni indian
170,000 ton of gold was ever found exsist in mans hands in mans history
so far.
80,000 tons came from cala and colo .
50,000 ton of gold came from one square mile in called celtral city
keystone gold mine colorado.
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
central city colorado .
keystone gold mine.
15000 ton of white rock.
great white mountain. suni indian
170,000 ton of gold was ever found exsist in mans hands in mans history
so far.
80,000 tons came from cala and colo .
50,000 ton of gold came from one square mile in called celtral city
keystone gold mine colorado.
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
tj Frazir
Sep 28, 2012, 8:44:10 PM9/28/12
to
keystone gold mine shut down in 1890 .
left behind 150,000 ton of crshed white rock.
now,,, calaverite is Au-Te2.
sooo you nead 7000 deg to get it to boil point of granet.
hydrogen oxygen torch dint exsist in 1890.
they crshed and used coal to melt nugets out.
I melt the rock down the heat it to its boiling point then hotter then
that.
18000 deg.
3 ton white calaverite is 1 ton gold.
20 ton gold is a billion bucks.
200 ton gold is rich..
80 ton sold and 120 ton sitting there .
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
left behind 150,000 ton of crshed white rock.
now,,, calaverite is Au-Te2.
sooo you nead 7000 deg to get it to boil point of granet.
hydrogen oxygen torch dint exsist in 1890.
they crshed and used coal to melt nugets out.
I melt the rock down the heat it to its boiling point then hotter then
that.
18000 deg.
3 ton white calaverite is 1 ton gold.
20 ton gold is a billion bucks.
200 ton gold is rich..
80 ton sold and 120 ton sitting there .
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
tj Frazir
Sep 28, 2012, 8:57:25 PM9/28/12
to
wheres your gill cylinders and steam programable relay ?
whale eng has gills...ya know.
The flaps up the sides of the cylinder only open into the cylinder so
the water gets in.
The jet end flap whre the water is forced out of the cylinder only
opens out . the cylinder beside it cant push water up the next
cyclinder.
unless all 4 or more cyclinders are in a boat and can each jet out the
back. 4 nosels threw transom.
a cylinder refills in 2 seconds.
steam will just push it out..
10 ci steam per second is 1/100th the steam your steam engine boat will
use.
My steam engine has no piston no rod no converting thrust to rotation
then back to thrust.
the less o the energy thats converted the less is waisted.
each time the energy is converted 25 % is waisted then the prop that
converts it back to thrust allways sucks.
a steam power water rocket is perfect in oat and ship.
its simple...cheep..never brakes down..dont nead a mechanic.. all the
trust i want in any direction at any time.
ive got 20 cylinders in the bow.
They are pumps too..
makes a fire truck pump look stupid.
fire truck cant put 650 psi out a 2 inch all day it cant do 200 psi 2
inch.
fire truck does 140 psi 4 inch but wount do 200 psi.
I can run a 12 inch at 650 psi with the fuel the fire truck uses.
i can add oxygen ..get 1200 deg hot and run 2000 psi.
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
whale eng has gills...ya know.
The flaps up the sides of the cylinder only open into the cylinder so
the water gets in.
The jet end flap whre the water is forced out of the cylinder only
opens out . the cylinder beside it cant push water up the next
cyclinder.
unless all 4 or more cyclinders are in a boat and can each jet out the
back. 4 nosels threw transom.
a cylinder refills in 2 seconds.
steam will just push it out..
10 ci steam per second is 1/100th the steam your steam engine boat will
use.
My steam engine has no piston no rod no converting thrust to rotation
then back to thrust.
the less o the energy thats converted the less is waisted.
each time the energy is converted 25 % is waisted then the prop that
converts it back to thrust allways sucks.
a steam power water rocket is perfect in oat and ship.
its simple...cheep..never brakes down..dont nead a mechanic.. all the
trust i want in any direction at any time.
ive got 20 cylinders in the bow.
They are pumps too..
makes a fire truck pump look stupid.
fire truck cant put 650 psi out a 2 inch all day it cant do 200 psi 2
inch.
fire truck does 140 psi 4 inch but wount do 200 psi.
I can run a 12 inch at 650 psi with the fuel the fire truck uses.
i can add oxygen ..get 1200 deg hot and run 2000 psi.
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
tj Frazir
Sep 28, 2012, 9:00:51 PM9/28/12
to
steam car 400 ci at 2000 rpm is 1200 cubic inch steam per second at 650
psi.
In a water rocket its 1000 cubic inch at 650 psi injected into a13 foot
tall cylinder 22 inch with a 12 inch jet nosel for a 2 second stroke at
30 ton thrust.
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
psi.
In a water rocket its 1000 cubic inch at 650 psi injected into a13 foot
tall cylinder 22 inch with a 12 inch jet nosel for a 2 second stroke at
30 ton thrust.
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
tj Frazir
Sep 28, 2012, 9:09:25 PM9/28/12
to
None if the stroke is waisted.
Im not using enouph steam to empty the cylinder and the cylinder in
ship whale 3 is bent from under the ship water flows in and past a flap
inside the pipe thenits in the 30 feet of pipe . the other end just
bends down threw the transom to a jet that can rotate. 12 inch fire
nosel.
its like bending a straw so water is ramed into one end and out the
back.
Steam is injjected just behind the flap that shuts the fill end of the
pipe and as long as more psi is inside the pipe the flap is forced shut
and the water in the tubeforced out threw the jet.
no shit
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
Im not using enouph steam to empty the cylinder and the cylinder in
ship whale 3 is bent from under the ship water flows in and past a flap
inside the pipe thenits in the 30 feet of pipe . the other end just
bends down threw the transom to a jet that can rotate. 12 inch fire
nosel.
its like bending a straw so water is ramed into one end and out the
back.
Steam is injjected just behind the flap that shuts the fill end of the
pipe and as long as more psi is inside the pipe the flap is forced shut
and the water in the tubeforced out threw the jet.
no shit
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
tj Frazir
Sep 28, 2012, 9:14:04 PM9/28/12
to
i dint take the cruise ship engines out..
i added a steam water rocket eng room.
and never run the diesels.
30000 HP deisels dont do what 1/100 the fuel do ..can fire 4 cylinders
per second having 16 of them. 100,000 HP on 1/50 the fuel.
and run hours dont add up because there are no pistons turbines ..no
parts .
no coolers pumps filters...no engines.
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
i added a steam water rocket eng room.
and never run the diesels.
30000 HP deisels dont do what 1/100 the fuel do ..can fire 4 cylinders
per second having 16 of them. 100,000 HP on 1/50 the fuel.
and run hours dont add up because there are no pistons turbines ..no
parts .
no coolers pumps filters...no engines.
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
Bill Snyder
Sep 29, 2012, 4:25:25 AM9/29/12
to
Bill Snyder
Sep 29, 2012, 4:26:43 AM9/29/12
to
Bill Snyder
Sep 29, 2012, 4:27:13 AM9/29/12
to
tj Frazir
Sep 30, 2012, 2:38:18 AM9/30/12
to
Bill Snyder
Sep 30, 2012, 9:48:19 AM9/30/12
to
On Sun, 30 Sep 2012 02:38:18 -0400, Gravity...@webtv.net (tj
Frazir) wrote:
>[the usual drived]
FOAD, moron. You aren't fooling anybody. And shove your
imaginary engine up your spamming, psychotic ass.
Everybody knows you have no engine, you have no yacht, you have no
money. Every post you make shows us all that you're a dumb,
illiterate bullshit artist.
And you can't even fool the Relfdroid any more. That must suck,
to be a crap-slinger who can't even fool the world's biggest born
sucker. Or maybe you get some kind of kick out of having everyone
laughing at you.
I wonder just how big a loser you are. Do you manage to hold some
kind of ultra-low-end job, of the WalMart greeter or "fries with
that" variety, or are you too crazy to be employable at all?
Frazir) wrote:
>[the usual drived]
FOAD, moron. You aren't fooling anybody. And shove your
imaginary engine up your spamming, psychotic ass.
Everybody knows you have no engine, you have no yacht, you have no
money. Every post you make shows us all that you're a dumb,
illiterate bullshit artist.
And you can't even fool the Relfdroid any more. That must suck,
to be a crap-slinger who can't even fool the world's biggest born
sucker. Or maybe you get some kind of kick out of having everyone
laughing at you.
kind of ultra-low-end job, of the WalMart greeter or "fries with
that" variety, or are you too crazy to be employable at all?
bja...@iwaynet.net
Sep 30, 2012, 10:55:57 AM9/30/12
to
:-)
Bill Snyder
Sep 30, 2012, 1:37:12 PM9/30/12
to
good to be true.
tj Frazir
Oct 1, 2012, 5:23:10 PM10/1/12
to
your nothng but stupid.
stupid wount get it the very day the gov cant coddle dumbasses.
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
stupid wount get it the very day the gov cant coddle dumbasses.
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
tj Frazir
Oct 1, 2012, 5:21:21 PM10/1/12
to
tj Frazir
Oct 1, 2012, 5:45:52 PM10/1/12
to
bottom of earth passes the top of earth at its rotation speed.
tie two masses to string put tinto orbit the longer string will get
passed by the slighty faster shorter string .
The earth turns equal the difrance in orbit radius.
it tilts equal its ballance .
what turns the earth is its orbit around the sun at two radius at the
same time one radius 600000 miles shorter.
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
tie two masses to string put tinto orbit the longer string will get
passed by the slighty faster shorter string .
The earth turns equal the difrance in orbit radius.
it tilts equal its ballance .
what turns the earth is its orbit around the sun at two radius at the
same time one radius 600000 miles shorter.
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
tj Frazir
Oct 1, 2012, 5:52:06 PM10/1/12
to
earth turns because the radius 6000 miles closest to the sun is 600000
miles shorter.
The earth point farthest from the sun is lower then a point nearest the
sun.
if the points were two objects spaced an in solar orbit the lower one
will pass the top one at te same rate the earth turns.
the earth slows down in highr orbit and a day last 28 hours and in a
low orbit a day is 21hours.
at slowing 3 seconds per year 100 years is 5 minuts 1000 years ago the
day was 50 minuts shorter.
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
miles shorter.
The earth point farthest from the sun is lower then a point nearest the
sun.
if the points were two objects spaced an in solar orbit the lower one
will pass the top one at te same rate the earth turns.
the earth slows down in highr orbit and a day last 28 hours and in a
low orbit a day is 21hours.
at slowing 3 seconds per year 100 years is 5 minuts 1000 years ago the
day was 50 minuts shorter.
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA
Bill Snyder
Oct 1, 2012, 7:29:04 PM10/1/12
to
On Mon, 1 Oct 2012 17:52:06 -0400, Gravity...@webtv.net (tj
yacht and the mansion and all, posts from an ancient webtv
account. You'd think he could afford something a tiny bit
classier. I wonder if he lugs the TV around with him, or just the
set-top box? (Actually, I wonder if he's dialing in from his
trailer, or from his mommy's basement.)
Frazir) wrote:
>[the usual drived]
FOAD, moron. You aren't fooling anybody. And shove your
imaginary engine up your spamming, psychotic ass.
Everybody knows you have no engine, you have no yacht, you have no
money. Every post you make shows us all that you're a dumb,
illiterate bullshit artist.
And you can't even fool the Relfdroid any more. That must suck,
to be a crap-slinger who can't even fool the world's biggest born
sucker. Or maybe you get some kind of kick out of having everyone
laughing at you.
I wonder just how big a loser you are. Do you manage to hold some
kind of ultra-low-end job, of the WalMart greeter or "fries with
that" variety, or are you too crazy to be employable at all?
Interesting that the globe-trotting gazillionare with the huge
>[the usual drived]
FOAD, moron. You aren't fooling anybody. And shove your
imaginary engine up your spamming, psychotic ass.
Everybody knows you have no engine, you have no yacht, you have no
money. Every post you make shows us all that you're a dumb,
illiterate bullshit artist.
And you can't even fool the Relfdroid any more. That must suck,
to be a crap-slinger who can't even fool the world's biggest born
sucker. Or maybe you get some kind of kick out of having everyone
laughing at you.
I wonder just how big a loser you are. Do you manage to hold some
kind of ultra-low-end job, of the WalMart greeter or "fries with
that" variety, or are you too crazy to be employable at all?
yacht and the mansion and all, posts from an ancient webtv
account. You'd think he could afford something a tiny bit
classier. I wonder if he lugs the TV around with him, or just the
set-top box? (Actually, I wonder if he's dialing in from his
trailer, or from his mommy's basement.)
0 new messages