Something special is happening this weekend. Venus and the Moon are...
Sam Wormley
Something special is happening this weekend. Venus and the Moon are
gathering for a sunset conjunction on Saturday and Sunday, May 15th and
16th. On the same nights, the ISS is going to be flying over many US
towns and cities. And if space shuttle Atlantis launches on
schedule--wow! People could witness a rare meeting of the shuttle,
station, Venus and the Moon. Details and observing tips may be found in
today's story from Science@NASA.
FULL STORY at
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2010/13may_planetsandspaceships/
oriel36
We should be working with planetary comparisons such as why Venus has
no spherical deviation,no plate tectonics but it has volcanism whereas
the Earth has a 40 km spherical deviation,crustal evolution and motion
along with volcanism indicating rotational dynamics are involved in
the Earth's geological evolution.
Observations indicate that all rotating celestial bodies with viscous
compositions display spherical deviation of some sort along with
differential rotation,the general rule that a rotating viscous body
will display differential rotation shear bands around its rotational
characteristics and the Earth,with a viscous interior,cannot be exempt
from fluid dynamics of a rotating body.
Instead you have NASA with a happy geocentric description of Venus at
sunset and people with not a care in the world that they refuse to
accept our own planet turns at a rate of 1037.5 miles per hour at the
equator.This Sam,is holocaust conditions where there is not the
slightest sign of human goodness in all this.
palsing
> Observations indicate that all rotating celestial bodies with viscous
> compositions display spherical deviation of some sort along with
> differential rotation,the general rule that a rotating viscous body
> will display differential rotation shear bands around its rotational
> characteristics and the Earth,with a viscous interior,cannot be exempt
> from fluid dynamics of a rotating body.
I don't suppose you can point to a source for that general rule, can
you? Or, is this just something that intuitive intelligence tells
you... Of course, even if this mythical general rule concerning
viscous bodies does exist, the Earth is NOT a viscous body, it only
has a viscous interior, and there is no evidence that there is
differential rotation at the surface, your famous coloring-book URL
notwithstanding.
By the way, nice job of hijacking another interesting and innocent
thread...
\Paul A
\Paul A
Brad Guth
Our K12 parrots seem to like being snookered and dumbfounded past the
point of no return. Human goodness is far from their mainstream
status quo mindset, especially of those saturating this Usenet and its
newsgroups.
~ BG
oriel36
> On May 14, 6:32 am, oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Observations indicate that all rotating celestial bodies with viscous
> > compositions display spherical deviation of some sort along with
> > differential rotation,the general rule that a rotating viscous body
> > will display differential rotation shear bands around its rotational
> > characteristics and the Earth,with a viscous interior,cannot be exempt
> > from fluid dynamics of a rotating body.
>
> I don't suppose you can point to a source for that general rule, can
> you? Or, is this just something that intuitive intelligence tells
> you... Of course, even if this mythical general rule concerning
> viscous bodies does exist, the Earth is NOT a viscous body,
Guess you never seen this stuff then ! -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XM-EFhX6MOs&feature=related
The symmetrical generation of crust of the Mid Atlantic Ridge,the
fracture zone orientation and especially that spectacular division at
the equatorial Earth indicate the rotational mechanism which generates
both the Earth's spherical deviation and crustal evolution and
motion.Of course it requires the recognition that the surface
fractured crust has an even rotational gradient from equator to poles
whereas the viscous composition,in line with all other rotating
viscous compositions,has an uneven rotational gradient or differential
rotation as it is known with a maximum equatorial speed of 1037 miles
per hour,without that value it is impossible to discuss the links
between surface crust and the difference with the rotating viscous
interior.
it only
> has a viscous interior, and there is no evidence that there is
> differential rotation at the surface, your famous coloring-book URL
> notwithstanding.
>
Ah,this would normally be a discussion for people who can handle cause
and effect and like everything else that is new,there is a great
satisfaction in exploring the frontier here and figuring things out.I
cringe when you try to speak for me on these things like the other
nuisance who mixes science fiction with fact but such are the
newsgroups.When you take that route I allow you to say anything you
want about me and that is as far as it goes,evolutionary geology is
highly dependent on planetary rotation despite the dominance of the
'convection cell' mechansim which has no links to planetary shape or
planetary rotation and cannot explain things like the Mid Atlantic
Ridge whereas differential rotation can explain the evolution of crust
from the interior mechanism.
Now good luck to you and restrict this quoting business unless you
quote a technical or historical point and then I will address
you,otherwise just go back to being an empirical drone.
oriel36
One final thing,it is that graceful sweep of the fracture zones which
run almost parallel with latitude and that distinctive 'S' shape which
divides the global hemispheres which are really intriguing along with
symmetrical generation of crust off the ridge -
http://www.zim24travel.com/images/maps/atlantic.jpg
http://www.huttoncommentaries.com/subs/Other/EquatorialAtlantis/Romanche750.jpg
The lag/advance mechanism of rotational shear bands as they generate
crust is better suited as an explanation for the second largest
geological feature of the planet - the Mid Atlantic Ridge.
The nice thing about this is not just that it is in its infancy or
that it is almost a blank sheet but the thrill of a new frontier
opening up and this is why I am content to leave you with your own
ideologies which do not accept cause and effect of daily rotation.
Sam Wormley
>
> Our K12 parrots seem to like being snookered and dumbfounded past the
> point of no return. Human goodness is far from their mainstream
> status quo mindset, especially of those saturating this Usenet and its
> newsgroups.
>
> ~ BG
Brad, I don't think you really understand the term "parrot".
Ref: http://dichionary.reference.com/search?q=parrot
par�rot
1. One who teaches or instructs; one whose business or occupation
is to instruct others; an instructor; a tutor.
2. A person having expert knowledge of one or more sciences,
especially a natural or physical science.
Source: The American Heritige� Dichionary of the English Language,
Fourth Edition
Copyright � 2000 by Houghtin Mifflen Company.
Published by Houghtin Mifflen Company. All rights reserved.
Brad Guth
A parrot is foremost a bird that's trainable.
http://www.google.com/search?q=parrots&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
Our next generation of K12 parrots are fed only those faith-based
certified crackers, seeds and nuts that are mainstream status quo
approved.
You're at least part K12 parrot of your generation, because you don't
even believe in deductive interpreting of images or much less allow
the use of those pesky regular laws of physics, such as for the planet
Venus.
Brad Guth / Blog and my Google document pages:
http://bradguth.blogspot.com/
http://docs.google.com/View?id=ddsdxhv_0hrm5bdfj
palsing
> Guess you never seen this stuff then ! -
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XM-EFhX6MOs&feature=related
Errr... that's just a volcano... what does that have to do with
differential rotation?
> The symmetrical generation of crust of the Mid Atlantic Ridge,the
> fracture zone orientation and especially that spectacular division at
> the equatorial Earth indicate the rotational mechanism which generates
> both the Earth's spherical deviation and crustal evolution and
> motion...
There are no fracture zones, those are just figments of your
overactive imagination. Those horizontal east-west lines on the bottom
of the Atlantic ocean are just artifacts of the spreading sea floor,
ridges due to the fact that at some places there is more or less magma
being produced than at others along its length. That is why they go in
the direction they go, perpendicularly AWAY from the MAR, coincidently
in the same direction as our rotation. If you look at those same lines
on other ocean floors around the world, you will see that they go
every which-way, are rarely aligned east-west, and are always
perpendicular to the ridge creating the local sea floor. See, I can
interpret pretty pictures, too.
> ... there is a great
> satisfaction in exploring the frontier here and figuring things out...
Well, it is clear that you need a lot more practice in your figuring-
things-out exercises... don't you ever wonder why no one, but no one,
(well, except for maybe Guth and the coal guy, who are certifiable
idiots) ever agrees with 98% of everything you say? Sam and others may
have their faults (and don't we all), but they have forgotten more
about science than you will likely ever know. As far as I can see, you
have never even made the effort to see someone else's point-of-view,
even when their suggestions are completely down-to-earth and 100%
proven facts, you simply choose to ignore anything that doesn't jive
with your own personal "insight". That's too bad, you could really
learn a lot here.
> Now good luck to you and restrict this quoting business unless you
> quote a technical or historical point and then I will address
> you,otherwise just go back to being an empirical drone.
Honestly, I am not a pilotless aircraft operated by remote control,
but I'm sure I remember others calling you something quite similar...
a Bot... right?
Regarding my quotes, most of the authors are definitely historical
people, and you should take those quotes to heart, they are mostly
intended to inspire you to change your ways, evil or otherwise.
"Oh, I could spend my life having this conversation - look - please
try to understand, before one of us dies"
- John Cleese
\Paul A
oriel36
> On May 14, 11:38 pm, oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Guess you never seen this stuff then ! -
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XM-EFhX6MOs&feature=related
>
> Errr... that's just a volcano... what does that have to do with
> differential rotation?
>
You are such strange people - the Earth's interior is governed by
fluid dynamics of a rotating viscous composition that sometimes makes
an appearance through the surface crust and somehow you just can't
make the connection,not just here with rotational dynamics and
evolutionary geology but everywhere planetary dynamics and terrestrial
effects mesh.
Although your kind is dominant through the alternative value for
rotation through 360 degrees as opposed to the correct value which
translates into an equatorial speed of 1037.5 miles per hour and
turning a full 24,901 mile equatorial circumference in 24 hours,even
that basic fact eludes both you and the unresponsive and why
rotational dynamics is never considered as the mechanism driving
planetary spherical deviation and crustal evolution/motion.
There is nothing dignified in the rest of your response,no better or
worse than any other so you can safely leave me to enjoy the dignity
of a once great scientific heritage and the new frontier where
planetary dynamics and geological evolution mesh through differential
rotation.You wouldn't like it and that is fine.
> > The symmetrical generation of crust of the Mid Atlantic Ridge,the
> > fracture zone orientation and especially that spectacular division at
> > the equatorial Earth indicate the rotational mechanism which generates
> > both the Earth's spherical deviation and crustal evolution and
> > motion...
>
> There are no fracture zones, those are just figments of your
> overactive imagination. Those horizontal east-west lines on the bottom
> of the Atlantic ocean are just artifacts of the spreading sea floor,
> ridges due to the fact that at some places there is more or less magma
> being produced than at others along its length. That is why they go in
> the direction they go, perpendicularly AWAY from the MAR, coincidently
> in the same direction as our rotation.
You are best suited to 'black hole','time travel' and all the other
undignified junk that occupies
If you look at those same lines
> on other ocean floors around the world, you will see that they go
> every which-way, are rarely aligned east-west, and are always
> perpendicular to the ridge creating the local sea floor. See, I can
> interpret pretty pictures, too.
>
> > ... there is a great
> > satisfaction in exploring the frontier here and figuring things out...
>
> Well, it is clear that you need a lot more practice in your figuring-
> things-out exercises... don't you ever wonder why no one, but no one,
> (well, except for maybe Guth and the coal guy, who are certifiable
> idiots) ever agrees with 98% of everything you say? Sam and others may
> have their faults (and don't we all), but they have forgotten more
> about science than you will likely ever know. As far as I can see, you
> have never even made the effort to see someone else's point-of-view,
> even when their suggestions are completely down-to-earth and 100%
> proven facts, you simply choose to ignore anything that doesn't jive
> with your own personal "insight". That's too bad, you could really
> learn a lot here.
>
Here's what you do,consider me insane for promoting the idea that the
Earth turns at a rate of 15 degrees per hour
palsing
> Here's what you do,consider me insane for promoting the idea that the
> Earth turns at a rate of 15 degrees per hour..
OK, can do.
Your statement is exactly like sticking your fingers in your ears and
your head in the sand... you really need to study frames, all these
problems would vanish.
\Paul A
Sam Wormley
> Our next generation of K12 parrots are fed only those faith-based
> certified crackers, seeds and nuts that are mainstream status quo
> approved.
>
> You're at least part K12 parrot of your generation, because you don't
> even believe in deductive interpreting of images or much less allow
> the use of those pesky regular laws of physics, such as for the planet
> Venus.
>
Yup--Those pesky regular laws of physics have always been a problem
for you Brad. Reality is a b____!
Sam Wormley
> You are such strange people - the Earth's interior is governed by
> fluid dynamics of a rotating viscous composition that sometimes makes
> an appearance through the surface crust and somehow you just can't
> make the connection,not just here with rotational dynamics and
> evolutionary geology but everywhere planetary dynamics and terrestrial
> effects mesh.
Now, now, Gerald--The Earth's interior is a bit more complicated than
that with two iron cores, one of which is solid and the other liquid.
Sam Wormley
> Earth turns at a rate of 15 degrees per hour
I don't know about insane, but certainly wrong, you are.
oriel36
You can't even handle the Earth's visible exterior let alone speculate
on its fluid interior and this is why it becomes all too dismal.When
the most respected institutions on the planet traffic in an
astronomical version of 'man as old as coal' conclusion,specifically
the 'sidereal time' one drawn by Flamsteed, things become
pointless.Who wants to discuss anything with people who hold an
opinion that is completely out of context with the Earth's dimensions
and rotational characteristics,not some minor thing that you can take
or leave but the most basic planetary facts of all and so well
documented in terms of the longitude problem that the hostility
towards rotation once in 24 hours exposes something which borders on
frightening.
If the 'human skull in coal strata' is crude then at least you have
something to gauge your own 'sidereal time' belief by, for even if I
concede that the error Flamsteed made is not initially easy to spot
and nobody here is responsible for it,to completely ignore it in the
face of all the technical and historical details working against that
single bad mistake is unconscionable,even for a brief while.To think
nobody here wants to affirm the equatorial speed of 1037.5 miles per
hour and turning a full 24,901 mile circumference in 24 hours so they
can stick with a 'man as old as coal/sidereal time' level of reasoning
should shame people out of their unresponsive ways.Every time you make
the statement about sidereal time and daily rotation,I see only the
opinions at the level for the 'coal guy' and to think it is not just
you but it is maintained by all the major educational organisations
who influence students.
People's opinions,regardless how much they regard themselves and their
status,become worthless if their authority rests on the single mistake
of a single individual and if you doubt me then take a good look at
the 'coal' guy for that is the level where 'sidereal time' reasoning
brings you and your colleagues and I refuse to believe that people
would knowingly accept that even if has been known to exist in science
-
"The same thing has struck me even more forcibly than you. I have
heard such things put forth as I should blush to repeat--not so much
to avoid discrediting their authors (whose names could always be
withheld) as to refrain from detracting so greatly from the honor of
the human race. In the long run my observations have convinced me that
some men, reasoning preposterously, first establish some conclusion In
their minds which, either because of its being their own or because
of
their having received it from some person who has their entire
confidence, impresses them so deeply that one finds it impossible ever
to get it out of their heads. Such arguments in support of their fixed
idea as they hit upon themselves or hear set forth by others, no
matter how simple and stupid these may be, gain their instant
acceptance and applause. On the other hand whatever is brought forward
against it, however ingenious and conclusive, they receive with
disdain or with hot rage--if indeed it does not make them ill "
Galileo
This is my generation Sam and I will speak for it in the face of
people who wish to stick with reasoning which is a dishonor,and it
truly is a dishonor,,to the human race .Equating stellar circumpolar
motion through 360 degrees with daily rotation through 360 degrees
would normally make people blush,that you are not and the major
institutions refuse to deal with it openly casts this generation in
the worst possible light.
Sam Wormley
> This is my generation Sam and I will speak for it in the face of
> people who wish to stick with reasoning which is a dishonor,and it
> truly is a dishonor,,to the human race .Equating stellar circumpolar
> motion through 360 degrees with daily rotation through 360 degrees
> would normally make people blush,that you are not and the major
> institutions refuse to deal with it openly casts this generation in
> the worst possible light.
It is hard for me to understand how you can hang onto your
misunderstanding, Gerald, when direct observation, which you
yourself can do, proves you wrong. You remind me of the church
officials looking through Galileo's telescope darkly, refusing
to see.
oriel36
> On 5/16/10 7:07 AM, oriel36 wrote:
>
> > This is my generation Sam and I will speak for it in the face of
> > people who wish to stick with reasoning which is a dishonor,and it
> > truly is a dishonor,,to the human race .Equating stellar circumpolar
> > motion through 360 degrees with daily rotation through 360 degrees
> > would normally make people blush,that you are not and the major
> > institutions refuse to deal with it openly casts this generation in
> > the worst possible light.
>
> It is hard for me to understand how you can hang onto your
> misunderstanding, Gerald, when direct observation, which you
> yourself can do, proves you wrong.
The Earth has a spherical deviation owing to its rotational
characteristics and that set of values corresponding to the rotational
speeds at different latitudes are only applicable when organized
around daily rotation as an independent motion -
http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/education/curricula/giscc/units/u014/tables/table02.html
As the fractured surface crust moves across the less than spherical
deviation it sometimes exposes what the viscous interior looks like or
places like Hawaii in the middle of large tectonic plates -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdCoGOumKe4
I have no problem considering differential rotation of the interior
and the common mechanism for generating the 40 km spherical deviation
and crustal evolution/motion for since Alfred Wegener introduced
geology as a global discipline through plate tectonics,there should be
no difficulty in using global characteristics such as rotational
dynamics to explain crustal geodynamics even in rough outlines.It was
never really a matter of you being wrong but the cruelty imposed on
all terrestrial disciplines for the sake of what !, a silly mistake
made by somebody 3 centuries ago that should take all of a few weeks
to completely resolve.I have noticed that geologists disappeared
rather than even consider the link between rotation and evolutionary
geology but ultimately it all hinges on the maximum equatorial speed
at the equator which is needed for a comparison with the uneven
rotational gradient between equator and poles as per differential
rotation.
You remind me of the church
> officials looking through Galileo's telescope darkly, refusing
> to see.
1st Corinthians 13 -
"For now we see through a glass, darkly (enigmate in the Latin of the
Vulgate); but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I
know even as also I am known."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUgoBb8m1eE
We Christians do indeed see through a glass darkly,not as an end in
itself but as in a journey at our own expense for the end is not ours
to decide,on the way we can pick up those things there for us to enjoy
and improve on them when we can,always varying and never staying idle
for such is our planet,our solar system , our universe and our
participation in all these things.
You use Galileo yet refuse to accept his affirmation of retrograde
resolution by inserting the bogus resolution using a hypothetical
observer on the Sun so don't talk to me about Galileo's relationship
with the Church,at least not before correcting the vandalism of the
main argument for the Earth's orbital motion.Then again Sam,with your
astronomical equivalent of 'man as old as coal ' sidereal time
conclusion maybe these things mean nothing to you and never will.
Sam Wormley
More often than not, you post unrelated material as though you
can never focus on the simple fact that the earth is rotating
about its polar axis and that rotation can be measured by gyro,
pendulum, or by direct observation to a "fixed" reference such
as a night-time star.
You can make the measurement, Gerald, and it come out one sidereal
day every time one makes the observation. I don't understand how
this can escape you. It has nothing to do with the solar day or
retrogrades, or coal or Paul's letters to the Corinthians.
It is just a simple matter of the earth spinning and measuring the
spin rate.
MIB
news:uamdndlCO-hUKG3W...@mchsi.com...
[snip]
> It is just a simple matter of the earth spinning and measuring the
> spin rate.
I'll say one thing, this idiot will not give up. Time for him to get back to
the *very* basics.
https://www.e-education.psu.edu/files/astro801/image/Sidereal_day_prograde.png
https://www.e-education.psu.edu/astro801/book/export/html/1572
http://www.lcsd.gov.hk/CE/Museum/Space/EducationResource/Universe/framed_e/lecture/ch02/ch02.html
JFC, this tool has been on this trip for how long? One would think that after
this many
bad trips one would put the bong down.
oriel36
> On 5/16/10 1:06 PM, oriel36 wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 16, 4:22 pm, Sam Wormley<sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On 5/16/10 7:07 AM, oriel36 wrote:
>
> >>> This is my generation Sam and I will speak for it in the face of
> >>> people who wish to stick with reasoning which is a dishonor,and it
> >>> truly is a dishonor,,to the human race .Equating stellar circumpolar
> >>> motion through 360 degrees with daily rotation through 360 degrees
> >>> would normally make people blush,that you are not and the major
> >>> institutions refuse to deal with it openly casts this generation in
> >>> the worst possible light.
>
> >> It is hard for me to understand how you can hang onto your
> >> misunderstanding, Gerald, when direct observation, which you
> >> yourself can do, proves you wrong.
>
> > The Earth has a spherical deviation owing to its rotational
> > characteristics and that set of values corresponding to the rotational
> > speeds at different latitudes are only applicable when organized
> > around daily rotation as an independent motion -
>
http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/education/curricula/giscc/units/u014/tables/table02.html
In that simple table of values there is just about everything you need
to know about the Earth's dimensions , its rotational characteristics
and the effects such as why we experience longer twilights directly
correlated to slower latitudinal speeds away from the equator.It even
tells you that the Earth is not a perfect sphere but deviates around
its rotational geometry where at the equator,69.17 miles represents 1
degree of geographical separation and also represents 4 minutes of
rotation so that in 1 hour ,the equator rotates through 1037.5 miles
and 15 degrees and a full 24,901 mile circumference in 24 hours.
For whatever reasons,many participants here who are attached to
institutions ,universities and even observatories,do not want to know
and above all things in science, there should not be the slightest
doubt about a round and rotating Earth but unfortunately we occupy a
period in history where not even the basic facts surrounding
dimensions and rotational characteristics survive,if that is not
heartbreaking then you will never know why I come here and do what I
can to shake people out of this horrible unresponsive behavior.
At the level of universities and institutions,the false assumption of
Flamsteed which he tacked on to circumpolar motion using timekeeping
averages act as a warning for our generation as it now runs amok with
these computer generated predictions/modelling agendas for the
antecedent of computers were clocks.The crude conclusion of Flamsteed
in equating stellar circumpolar motion through 360 degrees with daily
rotation through 360 degrees using the then emerging mechanical clocks
sounds out a warning for those who believe they can displace sublime
human reasoning power with artificial means,I would have much more to
say about this were there responsible people present but unfortunately
people are not conducting themselves as adults much less doctorates or
astronomers.
So Sam,no need to continue with a line of reasoning that sets up more
conflict,if you and the world's leading institutions want stellar
circumpolar motion to equate to daily rotation there is nothing that
can alter your views even if it means disregarding the table above
which contains all the physical facts of our round and rotating Earth.
palsing
> The crude conclusion of Flamsteed
> in equating stellar circumpolar motion through 360 degrees with daily
> rotation through 360 degrees using the then emerging mechanical clocks
> sounds out a warning for those who believe they can displace sublime
> human reasoning power with artificial means,I would have much more to
> say about this were there responsible people present but unfortunately
> people are not conducting themselves as adults much less doctorates or
> astronomers.
You own and operate a monstrous ego if you really think that your
"insight" trumps all scientists of the past and present. Actually,
your egotism is your only talent here, other than that you have no
game at all.
“Egotism is the anesthetic given by a kindly nature to relieve the
pain of being a damned fool”
- Bellamy Brooks
“Never ascribe to malice that which can adequately be explained by
incompetence”
- Napoleon Bonaparte
"YOU!! Out of the gene pool."
- Bumper Sticker
\Paul
oriel36
> On May 17, 7:17 am, oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@gmail.com> wrote
>
> > The crude conclusion of Flamsteed
> > in equating stellar circumpolar motion through 360 degrees with daily
> > rotation through 360 degrees using the then emerging mechanical clocks
> > sounds out a warning for those who believe they can displace sublime
> > human reasoning power with artificial means,I would have much more to
> > say about this were there responsible people present but unfortunately
> > people are not conducting themselves as adults much less doctorates or
> > astronomers.
>
> You own and operate a monstrous ego if you really think that your
> "insight" trumps all scientists of the past and present. Actually,
> your egotism is your only talent here, other than that you have no
> game at all.
>
http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/education/curricula/giscc/units/u014/tables/table02.html
No,this is a plain and straightforward statement of purpose,we are the
first generation in over 300 years to spot the error created John
Flamsteed in equating circumpolar motion directly with daily rotation
while those values in that table contain the correct correspondence
between clocks,planetary geometry,planetary dimensions ,daily rotation
and even the spherical deviation.If you can't take out your calculator
and multiply the equatorial value of 69.17 miles corresponding to 1
degree of geographical separation and 4 minutes of clock time to give
rotation of 1037.5 miles in 1 hour and ultimately the Earth's 24,901
mile equatorial circumference in 24 hours then everything else becomes
pointless.
If people do not consider the loss of planetary facts a self-inflicted
tragedy or worse, decide it is better to remain unresponsive then
there will be little point to science or much else.It is one thing to
not know something because it is new or hasn't been looked at before
but the history and technical details behind the longitude problem are
so familiar by way of the correspondence between time and longitude
degrees on a world globe that I can't help but feel wounded to my
bones for what was temporarily destroyed and the possibilities that
are now lost.
Continue with the belief in 'sidereal time' reasoning,after all the
world's institutions are behind you but behind it all is a simple
error made by one person and even I do not hold him to his false
assumption,it was silly and should be resolved without any great
effort -
"... our clocks kept so good a correspondence with the Heavens that I
doubt it not but they would prove the revolutions of the Earth to be
isochronical" Flamsteed
palsing
> http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/education/curricula/giscc/units/u014/tables...
>
> No,this is a plain and straightforward statement of purpose,we are the
> first generation in over 300 years to spot the error created John
> Flamsteed...
What do you mean "we"... do you have a mouse in your pocket?
> ... in equating circumpolar motion directly with daily rotation
> while those values in that table contain the correct correspondence
> between clocks,planetary geometry,planetary dimensions ,daily rotation
> and even the spherical deviation.If you can't take out your calculator
> and multiply the equatorial value of 69.17 miles corresponding to 1
> degree of geographical separation and 4 minutes of clock time to give
> rotation of 1037.5 miles in 1 hour and ultimately the Earth's 24,901
> mile equatorial circumference in 24 hours then everything else becomes
> pointless.
Well, sure, I can whip out my calculator and do all of that, and come
up with those same numbers, as can the rest of us here. BUT, those
numbers are only correct WITH RESPECT TO THE SUN, and it is here that
you are making your own grievous error. There is more than one frame
of reference, and why you continue to completely reject the "other"
frame is totally beyond my comprehension. No one here is even remotely
suggesting that one frame can be substituted for the other, but you
continue, ad naseum, to insist that we are doing exactly that.
Frames of reference are not all that hard to understand. If you go to
a football game and sit on the 50-yard, in the first couple of rows,
you will hear the action as well as see it. You will see the great
burst of speed by the running back as he outruns his pursuers, you
will hear all the grunts and groans of the players crashing into each
other, and hear their cursing. If you watch from high in the end zone,
you will easily see the large holes torn along the line through which
the runners go, and see the quick lateral movements of the players,
which are much harder to perceive from the sidelines, but you will
hear very little, in general, from the playing field itself. These 2
fans are seeing very different aspects of the very same game. OK, some
people like to sit on the 50, others in the end zone, each because
they like the view from there, but the football game is still the same
game, the same winner and same loser, and all of the game statistics
are identical. Of course, someone watching at home on TV sees LOTS of
different perspectives, and has no trouble at all following the game
when the presentation switches from one perspective to the next, we
are able to seamlessly combine the different views and enjoy the game
in a richer capacity than a guy stuck in a single seat. Even if the TV
producer were to show every other play from opposite sides of the
field, we could still follow the game, even though it would become a
distraction before too long.
And so it is with our spinning Earth, we can observe the action by
comparing its motion with respect to the sun and planets, or we can
enjoy the exact same motion with respect to the fixed stars. The Earth
is just doing what it does, rotating on its axis and revolving around
the sun, it does it exactly the same WRT the stars every day and not
quite exactly the same every day WRT the sun and planets. The 2
viewpoints may be unique to each other, but the motion of the Earth
just is what it is, just like the football game.
The problem with you is that you really enjoy the game from the
sidelines, and that is fine, but you have no concept about how the
game looks from the end zone, you can't even imagine anyone watching
from there, or even wanting to watch from there, and when "they" talk
about how the star running back can sure zig-zag up the field, you
have no idea what they are talking about because you can only see him
plow forward at a great rate of speed, his lateral movements are
foreshortened too much for you to see much of them from your seat.
From where you sit, lateral movement may as well not even exist, but
exist it does.
You need to actually see a game from the end zone before you can
appreciate the game from the other guy's perspective. You may find
that you actually might enjoy it from there now and again.
“Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a
perspective, not the truth.”
- Marcus Aurelius
“Never write about a place until you're away from it, because that
gives you perspective”
- Ernest Hemingway
“Never solve a problem from its original perspective.”
- Charles Thompson
\Paul A, (trying to bring enlightenment where there is now darkness)
oriel36
> On May 17, 9:03 am, oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/education/curricula/giscc/units/u014/tables...
>
> > No,this is a plain and straightforward statement of purpose,we are the
> > first generation in over 300 years to spot the error created John
> > Flamsteed...
>
> What do you mean "we"... do you have a mouse in your pocket?
>
> > ... in equating circumpolar motion directly with daily rotation
>
> > while those values in that table contain the correct correspondence
> > between clocks,planetary geometry,planetary dimensions ,daily rotation
> > and even the spherical deviation.If you can't take out your calculator
> > and multiply the equatorial value of 69.17 miles corresponding to 1
> > degree of geographical separation and 4 minutes of clock time to give
> > rotation of 1037.5 miles in 1 hour and ultimately the Earth's 24,901
> > mile equatorial circumference in 24 hours then everything else becomes
> > pointless.
>
> Well, sure, I can whip out my calculator and do all of that, and come
> up with those same numbers, as can the rest of us here. BUT, those
> numbers are only correct WITH RESPECT TO THE SUN, and it is here that
> you are making your own grievous error.
http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/education/curricula/giscc/units/u014/tables/table02.html
Those values represent the independent rotation of the Earth along
with the terrestrial effects which correlate longer twilight lengths
away from the equator with slower rotational speeds,the maximum
equatorial speed being 1037.5 miles per hour corresponding to 15
degrees of geographical separation, in other words,the planet turns
through its full 24,901 mile equatorial circumference in 24 hours
without an external reference,that determination was made by
substituting ' average' 24 hours with 'constant' rotation by using
rotation to natural noon and equalizing out the natural variations in
that cycle.The great astronomers ,when they originally created the
correlation in the mid 16th century, did not know why the natural noon
cycles varied nor even considered if daily rotation was constant,what
they did was treat rotation as constant through the average 24 hour
day and that is why 4 minutes of rotation corresponds to 1 degree of
rotation and a full 360 degree rotation in 24 hours.
You want the planet to turn through 360 degrees in something less than
24 hours or what amounts to the same thing,equate stellar circumpolar
motion through 360 degrees directly with constant daily rotation
through 360 degrees and you will have to find new values corresponding
to 1 degree of geographical separation to make it fit your 'sidereal
time' conclusion but even before that,the utter crudeness of the
conclusion itself is about the same as the guy who sees a skull in
coal strata and immediately jumps to a conclusion .The last thing I
wish to do is go down that direction,if you wish to continue with your
'sidereal time' reasoning then go for it,as far as I am concerned
there is nothing going to get it out of your heads no matter what is
brought in front of you.
You want to accept that table of values, but all they express is the
Earth's independent rotation at 4 minutes for each degree of rotation
and a full 360 degree rotation in 24 hours.It is one of the loveliest
and most basic correlations in all science and it is back to stay.
Sam Wormley
> So Sam,no need to continue with a line of reasoning that sets up more
> conflict,if you and the world's leading institutions want stellar
> circumpolar motion to equate to daily rotation there is nothing that
> can alter your views even if it means disregarding the table above
> which contains all the physical facts of our round and rotating Earth.
The reasoning is confirmed by observation, Gerald.
See:
http://www.astro.washington.edu/courses/labs/clearinghouse/labs/Skywatch/LengthOfSiderealDay.htm
SKYWATCH PROJECT: LENGTH OF SIDEREAL DAY
EQUIPMENT REQUIRED: One good eye, a tall building, and a watch (must
have a "seconds" hand or digital display).
TIME REQUIRED: A few minutes on each of several nights over at least a
week or two.
BACKGROUND: One might think that the sun and the stars move across the
sky at the same speed since their motions result primarily from the same
cause - the rotation of the earth. The sun's apparent motion, however,
is also affected by the orbit of the earth. Because we travel around
the sun, we must complete a little more than one rotation for the sun to
appear in the same place on two successive days, an interval called a
solar day. On the other hand, the earth is so far from the stars that
our orbital motion compared to the stars is negligible and a given star
will appear in the same place for every rotation of the earth. The time
required for this rotation is called a sidereal (star) day. With your
naked eye and some care it turns out you can make an amazingly accurate
measurement of the length of the sidereal day.
WHAT TO DO: To find the difference between a solar day and a sidereal
day you will measure the intervals between the times when a star returns
to a given spot over successive evenings. This requires knowing both
the position of the star and the solar time when it is at that position.
The latter is easy -- you can read it off your watch, although you
should carefully check your watch before each observation. Accurate time
is available as follows: (1) at 361-8643, (2) from KIRO’s hourly “bong”
just as the CBS news begins, or (4) for the cost of a one-minute long
distance call to the US Naval Observatory at 202-653-1800.To find the
position of the star, note that you don't really need to know the
coordinates of the position, you need only to pick a "spot" which can be
reliably repeated each night as the star returns. A good way to do this
is to time when a star passes behind (is occulted by) a tall building or
other object. The edge of the building defines the spot. This would be
fine if you could remain at the same location for several nights. But if
you must leave during the 24 hours (!), and if you then happened to
return to a slightly different location, the edge would be in front of a
different place in the sky, resulting in a poor measurement. To
minimize this problem move as far away from the building as possible.
For example, if you think you can from night to night reproduce your
observing location (position of your eye) to within 1 meter the building
should be at least 100 meters distant; for 1/2 meter, at least 50 meters
distant, etc. A good way to mark your position and sight-line would be
with a stick, but this is not necessary if you are careful.
Pick a bright star low enough in the sky that it will soon be occulted
by your chosen building from your vantage point. It's simplest if your
star is roughly in the southerly direction; if it is not, you will have
to think carefully about the star's path across the sky. The best thing
to do is to monitor the motions of a few candidate stars over an hour or
so, and thus better pick a suitable star, building, and observing
location. Having chosen these, record the instant at which the star is
occulted by the building. (If you want to improve accuracy, you can
repeat this for a second star, which wouldn't have to be using the same
building or even the same observing location.) On the next clear
evening, return to exactly the same observing location, find your star,
and again record the time of occultation. Repeat this on at least 3
nights over a week or two, but 4 to 6 nights over a longer interval
yields even better accuracy.
ANALYSIS: Calculate your values for the length of the sidereal day for
each of the night-to-night intervals for which you observed. Compare
your average measured value and an estimate of its error with the
accepted value. How well do they agree? Why do your longest intervals
seem to yield the best results? If possible, use a star chart to
identify exactly which star(s) you used. Also make a sketch showing
your "set-up".
Sam Wormley
> No,this is a plain and straightforward statement of purpose,we are the
> first generation in over 300 years to spot the error created John
> Flamsteed in equating circumpolar motion directly with daily rotation
> while those values in that table contain the correct correspondence
> between clocks,planetary geometry,planetary dimensions ,daily rotation
> and even the spherical deviation.
But, Flamsteed was correct, as anyone with a working eye can verify.
http://www.astro.washington.edu/courses/labs/clearinghouse/labs/Skywatch/LengthOfSiderealDay.htm
Greg Neill
> On 5/17/10 11:03 AM, oriel36 wrote:
>> No,this is a plain and straightforward statement of purpose,we are the
>> first generation in over 300 years to spot the error created John
>> Flamsteed in equating circumpolar motion directly with daily rotation
>> while those values in that table contain the correct correspondence
>> between clocks,planetary geometry,planetary dimensions ,daily rotation
>> and even the spherical deviation.
>
> But, Flamsteed was correct, as anyone with a working eye can verify.
But it would help, Sam, if that eye was also connected
to an open and functioning intellect. One has certain
reservations about assuming this to be the case with
Gerald.
oriel36
http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/education/curricula/giscc/units/u014/tables/table02.html
The open hostility to the tables which reflect the latitudinal speeds
for 4 minutes of rotation is quite impressive,that cause and effect is
introduced through twilight length variations as slower speeds
correlate with longer twilights more than satisfies any objection for
a simple calculation that the 69.17 mile distance for 1 degree at the
equator ( as a rotational coordinate) translates into rotation of
1037.5 miles per hour and a full 360 degree circumference in 24
hours,the other values represent a round Earth,slower speeds smaller
circumference through 360 degrees of rotation but you all know that by
now.
Why would an entire race of people, including the world's most
respected educational institutions, abandon all reason because of one
man,in this case John Flamsteed,who attached significance to
circumpolar motion by equating circumpolar motion through 360 degrees
directly with daily rotation through 360 degrees ?. The resolution
isn't even that difficult,as the creation of timekeeping averages
themselves prohibit an external reference for constant daily
rotation,the return of a star can only represent a useful extension of
the equal day/calendar system so if trying to squeeze the orbital
motion of the Earth into the 365/366 day calendar system sounds like
it is perverse then welcome to 'sidereal time' reasoning.
Strip relativity down to its basics and there is the ridiculous '
absolute/relative time' of Isaac and his attempt to describe the
original reference system which distinguishes natural noon from 24
hour noon and so what if the guy ultimately followed Flamsteed's
false conclusion based on circumpolar motion or 'inertial space' as
empiricists like to call it,all it means is Flamsteed gets his belated
revenge on Newton's followers and that is no concern of mine,I only
deal now with the proper system which uses terrestrial effects and
values where time differences correspond to geographical differences
such as in that table.
If you want to know the truth,the 'no center/no circumference'
ideologies are a logical conclusion of 'sidereal time' reasoning
meaning that there is nowhere conceptually left to go,the thing was
always worse than limited even if initially seemed to give you loads
of choices but you can't know that as I do.So, not knowing how long it
takes the Earth to turn once carries a terrible price and even if you
try to ignore the false 'sidereal time' reasoning from now onwards,it
will haunt everything you touch.
Sam Wormley
> Why would an entire race of people, including the world's most
> respected educational institutions, abandon all reason because of one
> man,in this case John Flamsteed,who attached significance to
> circumpolar motion by equating circumpolar motion through 360 degrees
> directly with daily rotation through 360 degrees ?.
This should be a wake up clue for you Gerald. An "entire race
of people, including the world's most respected educational
institutions" vs Gerald kelleher. What is the probability that
you are the one that's wrong? Really, you should question
yourself.
Sam Wormley
> With the loss of the space shuttle program and all the excuses for
> setting it aside,people already know something has gone badly wrong as
> theorists couldn't care less for human adventure and have convinced
> everyone that science is done on paper in university cubicles with a
> bit of magnification thrown in as an ornament.This is what a world
> without astronomers looks like , a people who no longer know the facts
> of the astronomical cycles and the motions which cause them.
>
Current Missions
http://www.nasa.gov/missions/current/index.html
palsing
> http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/education/curricula/giscc/units/u014/tables...
>
> The open hostility to the tables which reflect the latitudinal speeds
> for 4 minutes of rotation is quite impressive
But Gerald, no one disputes those tables, with respect to the sun. No
one. No worries there. Whatever gave you the idea that we don't
understand solar time? The problem is, of course, that you do not
understand sidereal time, or frames of reference.
If you weren't so stubborn, you would already know this.
> Why would an entire race of people, including the world's most
> respected educational institutions, abandon all reason because of one
> man,in this case John Flamsteed,who attached significance to
> circumpolar motion by equating circumpolar motion through 360 degrees
> directly with daily rotation through 360 degrees ?
Maybe because they have it right and you alone have it wrong... or
maybe it is because you don't understand frames and refuse to change
your opinion of "how-things-really-are."
> So, not knowing how long it
> takes the Earth to turn once carries a terrible price and even if you
> try to ignore the false 'sidereal time' reasoning from now onwards,it
> will haunt everything you touch.
HA! Not likely.
Not knowing the difference between solar time and sidereal time, which
are just (2) perspectives of exactly the same thing, and being nothing
but constantly stubborn and obstinate will haunt everything the YOU
touch, as it already has.
By the way, on Saturday night Venus and the moon were just spectacular
from the California desert. I was there to practice my "magnification
exercise", which was, well, out-of-this-world. I also had the chance
to entertain a number of Newbies who had been invited by a friend.
Teaching folks about stellar matters is one of my greatest joys, and
these guys took to it like a duck to water. The whole sidereal time
issue only took about 5 minutes to explain, and I think they caught on
right away, even without the advantage of a nice graphic. They
understood that solar time and sidereal time are just (2) different
perspectives of the very same motions, and not at all that hard to
conceptualize. If only everyone was so easy to teach...
I know you don't like my quotes, but you really deserve these;
"Obstinacy and vehemency in opinion are the surest proofs of
stupidity."
- Bernard Barton
"Obstinacy is ever most positive when it is most in the wrong."
- Madame Necker
Fools are stubborn in their way,
As coins are harden'd by th' allay;
And obstinacy's ne'er so stiff
As when 'tis in a wrong belief.
- Samuel Butler
His still refuted quirks he still repeats.
New-raised objections with new quibbles meets;
Till sinking in the quicksand he defends,
He dies disputing, and the contest ends.
- William Cowper
"Obstinacy in opinions holds the dogmatist in the chains of error,
without hope of emancipation."
- Joseph Glanvill
\Paul A, who might be obsessive about teaching this guy at least one
thing...
oriel36
> On May 17, 2:11 pm, oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/education/curricula/giscc/units/u014/tables...
>
> > The open hostility to the tables which reflect the latitudinal speeds
> > for 4 minutes of rotation is quite impressive
>
> But Gerald, no one disputes those tables, with respect to the sun.
Those tables of latitudinal speeds are applied to the effects of
daily rotation specifically why twilight lengths vary at different
latitudes and why longer twilights correlate to slower rotational
speeds.There is no ambiguity,just a direct correlation between
rotational cause and terrestrial effect and it is nice to think that
something so gorgeous as twilight and dawn helps resolves the issue as
to what speeds to attach to different latitudes as the Earth turns
through 360 degrees in its daily cycle.
It is painful to see the most respected institutions in the world
reach for that 'solar vs sidereal' fiction and then conclude that the
Earth turns once in 'sidereal time' but all they are doing is equating
stellar circumpolar motion through 360 degrees with daily rotation
through 360 degrees ,a spinning Earth at the center of a celestial
sphere in point of fact.
Those tables are not so much at the center of the dispute but rather
affirm that there is no external reference for rotation through 360
degrees insofar as the rotation rate of 1 degree for each 4 minutes of
rotation or 15 degrees per hour is borrowed from the average 24 hour
noon cycle with the implicit understanding that natural noon cycles
vary.By accepting the tables as correct,the other participants will
probably get to dislike you more than they do me but what of it,at
least you will be back in that area of astronomy which has been
dormant for a few centuries.
Sam Wormley
> Those tables are not so much at the center of the dispute but rather
> affirm that there is no external reference for rotation through 360
> degrees insofar as the rotation rate of 1 degree for each 4 minutes of
> rotation or 15 degrees per hour is borrowed from the average 24 hour
> noon cycle with the implicit understanding that natural noon cycles
> vary.By accepting the tables as correct,the other participants will
> probably get to dislike you more than they do me but what of it,at
> least you will be back in that area of astronomy which has been
> dormant for a few centuries.
>
Gerald, tables are a crutch--do the calculation directly.
v = cos(L) r ω
where v is the instantaneous tangential velocity on the surface
of the earth, L is longitude, r is the earth radius and ω is
the earth's angular velocity in rad/s.
r and ω are both given in the PHYSICAL CONSTANTS section of
this document:
http://earth-info.nga.mil/GandG/sathtml/gpsdoc2009_10a.html
> NATIONAL GEOSPATIAL-INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
> GPS PRECISE EPHEMERIDES, SATELLITE CLOCK PARAMETERS
> AND SMOOTHED OBSERVATIONS
>
> PRECISE EPHEMERIS
>
> Earth-centered Earth-fixed trajectory
> Coordinate system: WGS84 (G1150)
> Position -- x,y,z (km)
> Velocity -- dx/dt,dy/dt,dz/dt (dm/s)
> GPS time -- year, day, hour, minute
> Trajectory interval: 15 min.
> Standard Trajectory referenced to satellite center of mass
> Optional Trajectory referenced to satellite antenna phase center
>
>
> SATELLITE CLOCK PARAMETERS
>
> Clock parameters for each satellite:
> Time offset (microseconds)
> Frequency offset (10E-4 microsec/s = parts in 10E10)
> Time interval for parameters: 15 min.
> Satellite clock events: All events processed as reinitializations
>
>
> SMOOTHED OBSERVATIONS
>
> Smoothed range and range difference observations (km) with corrections
> applied (see below)
> GPS time of observation (year, day, seconds from beginning of day)
> Standard deviation of observation (km)
> Coordinate system: WGS84 (G1150)
> Station coordinates: Position -- x,y,z (m), Epoch 2001.0
> Velocity -- dx/dt,dy/dt,dz/dt (m/year)
> Temperature (degrees Celsius)
> Pressure (millibars)
> Humidity (percent)
> Data interval: 15 min.
> Smoothing uses carrier phase to smooth range and range difference
> measurements collected at a 1.5 second rate for NGA and Air Force
> monitor stations and at a 30 second rate for IGS monitor stations
> Minimum elevation angle for observation: 10 degrees
> National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency and Air Force monitor station data
> collected and smoothed using similar procedures
> References: Computer Program Development Spec., Master Control
> Station, Ephemeris/Clock Computer Program, NAVSTAR GPS Operational
> Control System Segment, CP-MCSEC-302C, Part 1, Appendix A, 7 May 1993.
> Description of the Smoothing Algorithm in the NGA Monitor Station
> Network, (MSN29), Applied Research Laboratories, The University of
> Texas at Austin, GR-SGG-97-1, 3 April 1997.
>
>
> PHYSICAL CONSTANTS
>
> GM(Earth) = 398600.4418 km**3/s**2
> GM(Sun) = 132712400000 km**3/s**2
> GM(Moon) = 4902.799186 km**3/s**2
> Moon radius = 1738 km
> Sun radius = 696000 km
> Earth semi-major axis (a) = 6378.137 km
> Inverse flattening (1/f) = 298.257223563
> Earth angular velocity = 0.72921158553 X 10**-4 Rad/s
> Speed of light = 299792.458 km/s
> Love's constant = 0.290
> Solar constant = 4.560 X 10**-6 N/m**2
> Astronomical Unit = 149597870.691 km
>
>
oriel36
> On 5/18/10 12:59 AM, oriel36 wrote:
>
> > Those tables are not so much at the center of the dispute but rather
> > affirm that there is no external reference for rotation through 360
> > degrees insofar as the rotation rate of 1 degree for each 4 minutes of
> > rotation or 15 degrees per hour is borrowed from the average 24 hour
> > noon cycle with the implicit understanding that natural noon cycles
> > vary.By accepting the tables as correct,the other participants will
> > probably get to dislike you more than they do me but what of it,at
> > least you will be back in that area of astronomy which has been
> > dormant for a few centuries.
>
> Gerald, tables are a crutch--do the calculation directly.
>
The tables contain the solution as to why people experience a rapid
transition from day to night at the equator compared to the longer
twilights towards the geographical poles as latitudinal speeds
decrease.It also sets up the distinction between the daylight/darkness
cycle due to rotation and the single daylight/darkness cycle at the
geographical poles due solely to the orbital motion of the Earth as
the polar coordinate pass through the circle of illumination at the
orbital points of the equinoxes dividing 6 months of darkness from 6
months of daylight.These things are at the actual astronomical
frontiers at the moment but considering that you equate stellar
circumpolar motion through 360 degrees with daily rotation through 360
degrees,these frontiers for you don't even exist.People who give the
polar cycle some thought as the polar coordinate passes through the
circle of illumination will come to understand clearly that the
seasonal changes are better explained by the orbital cycle than the
usual 'tilt' one you are used to giving.
The table of values as they apply to the evolutionary geological
effects of rotation can be just as interesting,specifically the idea
of an uneven rotational gradient from equator to poles generates the
uneven spherical shape of the Earth ,of course,this refers to
differential rotation of the viscous interior.It is possible to shift
gears and compare the Earth to Venus where spherical shape,rotation
and plate tectonics of the lack of it is present but this again is a
new frontier on account of beginning with accurate dimensions and
rotational characteristics seen in that table -
http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/education/curricula/giscc/units/u014/tables/table02.html
It is amazing what you can do with just a simple table of values which
reflect a round and rotating Earth,not a crutch but an inspirational
fountain for even in a few paragraphs you get to see new frontiers in
climate,geology,the astronomy of planetary comparisons and all the
other things you can't discuss because of that dumb circumpolar motion/
daily rotation conclusion.
palsing
> By accepting the tables as correct,the other participants will
> probably get to dislike you more than they do me but what of it,at
> least you will be back in that area of astronomy which has been
> dormant for a few centuries.
But Gerald, the other participants also accept the table as being
correct, WITH RESPECT TO THE SUN.
You are one stubborn SOB -or- you are among the dumbest people on the
planet -or- you are the biggest phony in the solar system... but which
is it?
"Sometimes my plot lines are so convoluted, I get calls from friends
at 3 am saying; you SOB, you'll never pull this one off."
- Clive Cussler
"I'm just happy I`m not a phony."
- Mike Tyson
"We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid."
- Benjamin Franklin
"In the face of an obstacle which is impossible to overcome,
stubbornness is stupid."
- Simone de Beauvoir
\Paul A
palsing
> ... considering that you equate stellar
> circumpolar motion through 360 degrees with daily rotation through 360
> degrees
There you go again, telling us what we think. NO ONE here equates the
solar day with the sidereal day, we know the difference, we know how
they coexist without difficulty... by the way, 360 degrees of sidereal
rotation equates with about 361 degrees of daily (solar) rotation...
but you would have no way of knowing this, being unable to learn
anything new.
Gerald, you should have been the author of the following;
"Avoid context and specifics; generalize and keep repeating the
generalization."
- Jack Schwartz
\Paul A
oriel36
Right in the middle of all terrestrial sciences is this big dumb error
that anyone should be ashamed of let alone the world's most respected
institutions and organizations,it has no purpose whatsoever except to
block any meaningful connection between planetary dynamics and
terrestrial effects on one side or interpretation of the celestial
arena on the other.
Because the error is so big and so obvious to all but the most
indifferent or the most indoctrinated,the resolution of it through the
USENET system is a once-off,it has to be considering that unlike the
deliberate 'Piltdown man' hoax,the error is traceable,unintentional
and requires only the most basic knowledge of the reference systems
for timekeeping averages.Taking from John Harrison's account of his
treatment and the ' Piltdown man' hoax as a gauge for the predictable
conduct of the majority makes gruesome reading,even though there is
not the slightest possibility of doing anything productive with that
'solar vs sidereal' fiction and genuine praise for those who
eventually sort things out,there is always this unspoken courtesy
given to the status quo ,at least for those who base their ideologies
on the most crude conclusions whether it is 'Piltdown man' or
'sidereal time'.
Equating circumpolar motion through 360 degrees with daily rotation
through 360 degrees is crude whatever way you want to put it and the
window of opportunity has just opened up to deal with it thereby
allowing the connection between planetary dynamics and terrestrial
effects to commence .It has its own unique challenges but one of them
is not that those currently respected institutions are not aware of
the 'sidereal time' error or the correct reasoning and valued
attached to rotation once in 24 hours.
palsing
"Anyone who thinks they're important is usually just a pompous moron
who can't deal with his or her own pathetic insignificance and the
fact that what they do is meaningless and inconsequential."
- William Thomas
Brad Guth
> On 5/15/10 11:53 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
>
> > Our next generation of K12 parrots are fed only those faith-based
> > certified crackers, seeds and nuts that are mainstream status quo
> > approved.
>
> > You're at least part K12 parrot of your generation, because you don't
> > even believe in deductive interpreting of images or much less allow
> > the use of those pesky regular laws of physics, such as for the planet
> > Venus.
>
> Yup--Those pesky regular laws of physics have always been a problem
> for you Brad. Reality is a b____!
Now you're acting exactly like a pro ZNR.
I have no physics problems whatsoever, perhaps because unlike
yourself, I always use the same physics that works here on Earth, and
as such can be peer replicated. Such as the easily replicated physics
of SAR imaging.
Brad Guth / Blog and my Google Document info on Venus:
http://bradguth.blogspot.com/
http://docs.google.com/View?id=ddsdxhv_0hrm5bdfj