A game for oriel36 et al to play
badastrobuster
the error of his reasoning.
I have claimed that he just simulates stupidity to annoy, frustrate
and generally wind-up people.
http://www.martin-nicholson.info/troll/trollkelleher.htm
So lets see how and for how long he can evade answering a simple
question. A question that is central to where he parts company from
mainstream astronomical thought.
**** Do you accept that the sidereal day is less than 24 hours long
( about 23 h 56 m 4.1 s) Please answer either YES or NO ****
Any answer orial36 gives apart from the one word answer yes or no will
result in a fail grade. The question will then be asked again until he
does answer the question with a simple YES or NO.
oriel36
> There are still a few people here who attempt to convince oriel36 of
> the error of his reasoning.
Here's your answer -
"But that these feast days shall be celebrated in definite seasons for
them to keep for ever, and after the plan of the heaven established on
this day and that the case shall not occur, that all the Egyptian
festivals, now celebrated in winter, shall not be celebrated some time
or other in summer, on account of the precession of the rising of the
Divine Sothis by one day in the course of 4 years, and other festivals
celebrated in the summer, in this country, shall not be celebrated in
winter, as has occasionally occurred in past times, therefore it shall
be, that the year of 360 days and the 5 days added to their end, so
one day as feast of Benevolent Gods [the pharaoh and family] be from
this day after every 4 years added to the 5 epagomenae before the New
Year, whereby all men shall learn, that what was a little defective in
the order as regards the seasons and the year, as also the opinions
which are contained in the rules of the learned on the heavenly
orbits, are now corrected and improved by the Benevolent Gods."
http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/texts/canopus_decree.htm
There was always an authority looking after these things whether it
was the Pharoahs or denominational Christianity until this era which
is the only one,ever to assign 366 1/4 rotations in 365 1/4 days
thereby attempting to destroy the relationship between the average 24
hour day and the day/night cycle and daily rotation.
I can't even begin to imagine what makes people completely ignore an
entire astronomical heritage for nonsense,for nothing yet these people
will promote themselves as making the world a better place.Keep on
repeating the question,if it wasn't that you are so intellectual
impotent you would be looking at just how old the timekeeping system
actually is and how magnificent these people were in putting it
together,the Canopus Decree is not the oldest reference to the system
but it is the first time the refined reasoning which determines the
fractional difference between daily and annual cycles is laid on
making it an incredibly important document.
Who wants to dwell in an atmosphere where you harp on about 'sidereal
time' and its ideology of 366 1/4 rotations in a year when there is a
heritage to recover.
Quadibloc
> **** Do you accept that the sidereal day is less than 24 hours long
> ( about 23 h 56 m 4.1 s) Please answer either YES or NO ****
His answer is YES.
I will quote for you one of his posts which he made on April 12, 2008:
> Stars do return in 23 hours 56 minutes 04 seconds but all that tells you is how good the calendar
> system is or the observational convenience of the Ra/Dec system.
He accepts that the clock drive on a telescope needs to turn the
telescope through 360 degrees in the "sidereal day" of 23 hours, 56
minutes, and 4 seconds to keep the telescope properly pointed at the
same star.
However, he claims, from an earlier post in that thread on the same
date:
> A star returning 3 minutes 56 seconds earlier without fail requires
> the 3 year/365 day 1 year/366 day calendar system to work hence it is
> useless to base axial and orbital motions on that false correlation for
> axial rotation and the return of a star to a meridian.
In still another post:
> Flamsteed determined that a star returning to a meridian 3 minutes 56
> seconds earlier every 24 hour (24 hours minus 3 minute 56 seconds =
> 23 hours 56 minutes 04 seconds) represents the value for axial
> rotation thereby obligating an explanation for orbital motion. to make
> up the difference to 24 hours. Nobody stopped to check that you need
> the calendar system along with zodiacal geometry to work and while
> Newton tried to talk a system of 365 days 5 hours 49 minutes, if axial
> rotation is taken as 23 hours 56 minutes 04 seconds it is 100% certain
> that his framework is 3 years/365 days 1 year/366 days - the old
> Ra/Dec system applied to the motions of the Earth.
This stuff looks to us like just plain bafflegab.
What he seems to me to be saying is:
(begin paraphrase)
When you say that the "sidereal day" is 23 hours, 56 minutes and 4
seconds long, well, you are right that it takes that amount of time
between successive crossings of the local meridian by a star. I've got
no problem with that.
But when you're saying that, look at those *hours* you're using to
measure that period of time by. 24 of those hours make one day - the
average time between mean solar noon.
So this is your foundation - the solar day, and the calendar which has
365 days in a year and one leap year every four years. That is your
starting point - the accomplishments of the ancient astronomers who
kept track of the seasons over many years and were able to average out
the number of days from one spring to the next.
The solar day is, therefore, the basic foundation of all astronomy. If
you try to ignore this foundation, and say that the Earth's rotation
is 23 hours, 56 minutes, and 4 seconds instead, you're jumping
straight from the Earth to the stars. That ignores the fact that we
don't live in Ptolemy's cosmos, where the sphere of the fixed stars
rotates around a motionless Earth. So you're the ones who are
forgetting the great accomplishments of Copernicus and Galileo and
Kepler!
(end paraphrase)
Of course, *we* can see that there is a gaping hole in his logic.
If I want, I can change the length of the pendulum of a pendulum clock
so that its hands return to 12 noon after 11 hours, 58 minutes, and 2
seconds.
And I can acknowledge the fact that the Earth orbits the Sun by saying
that the "real" sidereal day is not determined by when a star crosses
the meridian, but by when the line from the Earth's center to my
observatory points in the same direction (projected to the Earth's
equatorial plane) as the direction from the Sun to that star. In other
words, I can correct for stellar parallax.
So the "sidereal day" can serve as a sound basis for a standard of
time, without having to adopt the Ptolemaic cosmos, if I cared to go
to the trouble.
But, of course, I don't need to do that. The solar day is the one that
tells us when the sun shines, dividing when we should work from when
we should sleep. The length of our unit of time is a convenience for
daily life, and while it came first historically because of that,
there is simply no reason to say it must be the "basis" for astronomy.
We note the fact that the return of a star to the meridian is uniform
and regular when measured by a pendulum clock or a quartz clock -
while the solar day, measured by a sundial, is not. To us, that means
the former must be the Earth's rotation - the Earth is a big heavy
ball of rock, and when one of those is spinning, it doesn't slow down
or speed up unless you push on it awfully hard.
To Oriel, all of _that_ is just a "predictions/modeling agenda" - he
rejects the great discovery of Newton that if you build on Galileo's
observations on mechanics, and turn mechanics into a science, and add
the inverse-square law of gravity... you get Kepler's laws, and thus
the planets are shown to follow the same rules as ordinary objects on
Earth, from gyroscopes to cannonballs.
That sort of stuff means that people would need to learn *calculus* to
understand astronomy, which just ruins it as an enjoyable activity,
and cuts it off from the heritage of the great thinkers of the past,
who used their intuition - and got correct results except when they
didn't have the Catholic Church guiding them with the wisdom of St.
Augustine, and so they went too far in their speculations!
I know what his mistakes are. You are quite correct that he won't
listen and correct his mistakes.
Given that he appears to me to have tied his own peculiar notions
about the heavens to his religious faith, I suppose that he won't
listen to us - and he would need to have this explained to him, very
patiently, by someone he could trust not to be an agent of atheism or
Protestantism. But I suspect that he has not even raised the subject
of his astronomical ideas with his parish priest.
And, of course, people have their own concerns and interests; not
everyone who is not an astronomer is an expert on astronomy. There are
astronomers who are Jesuits, for example, but none of them, perhaps,
has yet found the time to counsel Oriel on his mistakes.
John Savard
badastrobuster
oriel36
> On Nov 26, 11:29 am, oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> FAILED ONCE - I WILL TRY AGAIN
>
You are going to keep this up and that is fine,it all amounts to the
only people who ever existed that believed there are 366 1/4 rotations
in 365 1/4 days in conflict with the most basic astronomical
observation of them all.
Failed indeed !,failed is when there is not another person who can
comprehend that daily and orbital motions are independent of each
other and the way the calendar system reflects the relationship
between daily and orbital motions ,perhaps the greatest astronomical
achievement of all outside the discovery of planetary dynamics by
Copernicus 500 years ago.
As the Feb 29th day/night cycle is also 24 hours of rotation,it is
something else to stand with pride among those ancient astronomers who
first proposed the system that was eventually adopted and improved
on through denominational Christianity as an extra rotation making up
an arithmetical string of average 24 hour days that eventually
substituted for steady rotation.
.."therefore it shall be, that the year of 360 days and the 5 days
added to their end, so one day as feast of Benevolent Gods [the
pharaoh and family] be from this day after every 4 years added to the
5 epagomenae before the New Year, whereby all men shall learn, that
what was a little defective in the order as regards the seasons and
the year, as also the opinions which are contained in the rules of the
learned on the heavenly orbits, are now corrected and improved by the
Benevolent Gods."
http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/texts/canopus_decree.htm
Arguing for 366 1/4 rotations in a year and ,by extension,arguing for
'sidereal time' reasoning is trying to argue against the most basic
cause and effect known to man- that daily rotation is responsible for
the day/night cycle making you lot the dullest and most destructive
bunch of people to gain influence in an area which once was crucial
for a functioning society.What people do is cruel,even sadistic,but I
am mindful that there were once men who thought these things through
and had their work adopted by the civil authorities but not today,not
in this exceptionally intellectually vapid era which tries to ignore
fundamental astronomical facts,people with dead eyes and no heart who
will do everything to make this world a worse place so they can pilfer
a few dollars out of the obfuscation.
Fail indeed !,most of you probably never left college and can't think
for yourselves never mind reach the heights of all astronomers in an
unbroken chain and it is keeping the words of these astronomers front
and center that will change things so even somebody as dull as you
serve a purpose in the scheme of things.
Chris.B
>
> FAILED ONCE - I WILL TRY AGAIN
Why are you encouraging the pig-ignorant, gas bag? Do you not suppose
that his total monopoly of a dying forum is enough without this?
Kelleher is a grey cell vampire. He has fed on his acolytes rapt
attention and bled them to dust. Growing stronger and more confident
with every correction the pedants could muster. They have now turned
into mindless zombies who can no longer be reached by rhyme, reason or
common sense. God knows I tried to chide them and then shame them into
desisting. But they are deeply hypnotised and without any will of
their own. They auto-babble the same drivel at Kelleher's merest whim.
Will you willingly add yourself to the number of his countless
victims? He leaves a slimy bloodbath in his wake. He has the morals
of a locust! The conscience of a Republican. No burning sun can reach
him here! He freeze dries minds into bite-sized, takeaway,
refrigerator fodder. Attending his own soulless wake is all that he
now deserves. Be very afraid! You are now amongst the living dead.
Beware of smoke and mirrors! Nothing is as it seems! Except for the
foul stench of the great, heaving piles of blind, brain-frazzled
undead.... 8-|
Quadibloc
> Fail indeed !,most of you probably never left college and can't think
> for yourselves never mind reach the heights of all astronomers in an
> unbroken chain
Well, you seem to think that the chain did break, what with Newton -
and, more to the point, Newton not being an astronomer, but Flamsteed
having been the Astronomer Royal - Flamsteed being a faulty link
thereof, leaving those who call themselves astronomers today bereft.
In any case, even if it isn't rotation, but merely an "observational
convenience", you have, as I have shown, acknowledged that the so-
called "sidereal day" is indeed 23 hours, 56 minutes, and 4 seconds
long, so I suppose you can "gavarit tolko 'Da'" and send him on his
way...
John Savard
badastrobuster
oriel36
Each and every post you add has relevance and has done so for the past
decade,it shows an intransigence that the world has to deal with in
correcting a living nightmare where the people charged with the
astronomical heritage believe there are 366 1/4 rotations in 365 1/4
days,forget Newton,Einstein,big bang and whatever was built on the
error,the only thing they will see is that the Feb 29th 24 hour
rotation,which in turn represents a single day/night cycle,represents
365 1/4 rotations in a year .
Talk about telescopes,variable star spotting,have a ball with dark
this and dark that, the inability to act responsibly has already
turned those who could have recognized the problem and dealt with it
effectively instead of being traitors to everything that is good and
decent about astronomy and true human achievement. Because of the
nature of the error,it is something that can't be disguised for too
long hence the move towards a different audience seeing the willful
attempt to ignore a fundamental astronomical correspondence between
the day/night cycle,daily rotation and the 24 hour day and why it
provokes hostility among empiricists.
Keep posting,the readers here imagined they are better than you but
that too is unfounded,a group who can't figure out what Feb 29th
rotation does in terms of a 365 1/4 rotations per year is purely
unintelligent,nothing more and nothing less.
badastrobuster
NOW FAILED THREE TIMES - I WILL TRY AGAIN
Anders Eklöf
> There are still a few people here who attempt to convince oriel36 of
> the error of his reasoning.
> I have claimed that he just simulates stupidity to annoy, frustrate
> and generally wind-up people.
>
> http://www.martin-nicholson.info/troll/trollkelleher.htm
To quoute you own words:
"don't bother wasting your time"
Or as I would put it - "Do not feed the t..ll"
--
I recommend Macs to my friends, and Windows machines
to those whom I don't mind billing by the hour
Quadibloc
> The question will then be asked again
> until he does answer the question with a simple YES or NO.
He would fail a thousand times rather than submit to a prosecutorial
inquisition at the hands of the likes of you, foul empiricist!
That might well be what he is too polite to say.
John Savard
oriel36
You are fine and already a success, as readers in this forum love
nothing more than a good spot of variable star observing,make sure you
keep up the good work and demonstrate how lively your type of
astronomy is,you might believe in 366 1/4 rotations in a year thereby
losing the most basic cause and effect of all but at least you have
lots of company.
The Decree of Canopus is probably the most important astronomical
document in antiquity and exceeds the Gregorian refinement as it
refers to the actual and original institution of the equal day and the
calendar system with its leap day correction.
".. this day after every 4 years added to the 5 epagomenae before the
New Year, whereby all men shall learn, that what was a little
defective in the order as regards the seasons and the year, as also
the opinions which are contained in the rules of the learned on the
heavenly orbits,"
http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/texts/canopus_decree.htm
Not enough genuine love of astronomy to realize just how important
that sentence is given the denial and evasion of 21st century people
and their truly awful concepts that simply cannot be dignified as
reasoning.This from NASA -
"The Earth spins on its axis about 366 and 1/4 times each year, but
there are only 365 and 1/4 days per year. This is because we define a
day not based on the Earth's period of rotation, but based on the
average time from noon one day to noon the next. Gradually over the
course of a year the Sun appears to go 'backwards' (West to East)
around the Earth compared to the far away stars (this is because we
are really going around the Sun). Subtracting this 1 time backwards
from the 366 and 1/4 times forward, we get the typical 365 and 1/4
days per year."
http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/970714.html
The NASA description is geocentric which levels the playing field
with the ancient astronomers but the reasoning based on apparent
backward drift of the Sun against the background stars and arriving at
366 1/4 rotations is revolting .The lack of common sense at a point
where empiricists force attempt to force an imbalance between 365 1/4
rotations and 365 1/4 days in an orbital circuit is bewildering yet
nobody objects which makes this far,far worse leaving only nuisances
and their intellectual impotence.
So Martin,you are fine and I have nothing to say against you but there
are those who must certainly have a sense of crisis that looms behind
the facade of big bang,dark this and dark that ideologies after
centuries of betraying astronomy and its geometric language.
badastrobuster
NOW FAILED FOUR TIMES - I WILL TRY AGAIN
Chris.B
strokes when painting with magnolia emulsion. Torture by random,
meaningless words should be prohibited in the Convention. Kelleher
should be listed just after Shrek's donkey and Guano' Bay "surfing"!
oriel36
There is more than enough to attract the right audience - the orbital
daylight/darkness cycle,the twilight variations,the leap day
correction and how it reflects so many things and especially the most
fundamental fact of all that daily rotation is responsible for the day/
night cycle with the Feb 29th 24 hour rotation testifying to the
ability to distinguish daily and orbital motions as independent of
each other.
You are not failing,you have succeeded beyond all expectations and
while I'm sure that goes right over your head, when you end being a
spokesman for the forum it speaks for itself.You are fine,many never
left college here and it is all about passing, failing ,approval and
childish things like that,for a person who stands among the
astronomers from different times of history it is a privilege.
What you are going to talk about from now on is anyone's guess,this is
a crisis that I would have considered that could be dealt with
internally but it is now obvious that people don't know how to act
given that even the strategic 'assimilation' procedure does not apply
here and it would be foolish to imagine it does.There are great things
ahead for humanity and especially that it is not all about careers and
pretense,that there are people with talent and a love of celestial and
terrestrial phenomena to make this world a more interesting place
rather than the empirical attempt at drawing attention to itself and
nothing else.
You are not arguing for 366 1/4 rotations in a year,you are arguing
against daily rotation as the day/night cycle and nothing that can be
said or done can blot out that sadistic ideology.
badastrobuster
NOW FAILED FIVE TIMES - I WILL TRY AGAIN
oriel36
Keep doing this until you reach 1461 times proving that you can count
insofar as the 1461 rotations that are made up of the 24 hour day/
night cycles and stretching from Mar 1st 2008 until Feb 29th 2012
represent a close enough fit to 365 1/4 rotations/day in a year.If
you cannot figure out what the Feb 29th day/night cycle and 24 hour
rotation does in bringing the rotational cycles into sync with the
orbital cycle in omitting the 1/4 day/rotation in non-leap years then
I can't imagine what is left of astronomy,even human intelligence at
this stage.
It is becoming sadistic,the openly hostility to the cause and effect
of the day/night cycle represents an unimaginable low and it is done
with such crudeness that it takes a measure of Christian faith to
withstand this unconscionable irresponsibility in an era of
technological achievements.
The Decree of Canopus is a marvel for someone in my position and
adrift of any people who admire what these great people did and knew
what they were doing when they wrote for the first time to the wider
population -
".. this day after every 4 years added to the 5 epagomenae before the
New Year, whereby all men shall learn, that what was a little
defective in the order as regards the seasons and the year, as also
the opinions which are contained in the rules of the learned on the
heavenly orbits,"
It may be that you do continue this 1461 times and I may choose to
respond to it when it suits as you have already locked yourself in to
a really dumb thing that only the most boring would
do,nevertheless,you will succeed in exposing just how lifeless
everyone else has been and these things are now useful for a
different readership who can appreciate that daily rotation is
responsible for the day/night cycle and the leap day correction.
badastrobuster
NOW FAILED SIX TIMES - I WILL TRY AGAIN
oriel36
> On Nov 27, 10:58 am, oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> NOW FAILED SIX TIMES - I WILL TRY AGAIN
>
You are not failing,you are succeeding and making everyone else
succeed with you so keep trying,you have another 1455 times to go to
show you can count the arithmetical string of rotations and days which
make up the calendar system stretching from Mar 1st 2008 until Feb
29th 2012 or 365 1/4 rotations/days per orbital cycle.
When a 17 billion dollar a year organization like NASA ,nebulous as it
is, argues for 366 1/4 rotations in a year,every year when the 24 hour
rotation of Feb 29th supports 365 1/4 days and rotations a year then
the links between science and intelligence becomes a very expensive
myth,so keep on posting as the more you post the easier it will be for
me to demonstrate the sadistic side of human nature,not just because
you post individually but because you post without objection.
badastrobuster
NOW FAILED SEVEN TIMES - I WILL TRY AGAIN
oriel36
> On Nov 27, 12:15 pm, oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> NOW FAILED SEVEN TIMES - I WILL TRY AGAIN
>
If you failed 7 times there is no need to keep trying.
Maybe somebody should fill you in on duelin' banjos as all you are
doing now is shouting that you failed and need to try again and if you
blink - game over.You got one shot at being clever,made a mess of it
by including 'et al' into the game but checkmate is checkmate,can't
say it means anything accept disposing of a nuisance but I can't
imagine making everyone the same as you can be pleasant.
You won't fail the 8th time,you will succeed once again.
palsing
> Any answer orial36 gives apart from the one word answer yes or no will
> result in a fail grade. The question will then be asked again until he
> does answer the question with a simple YES or NO.
Feckwit (Oriel36) is incapable of answering simple questions,
especially those that only require a YES or a NO answer. To do so
would eventually lead to the unraveling of his wispy and tenuous
theories, which the rest of us already know are 100% inaccurate.
Feckwit is all alone with his theories, he has not found a single
professional who agrees with him. Because of this, he reasons that he
must be superior to literally all of the great scientific minds of
both the past and the present.
Even in the face of STRONG CONTRADICTORY EVIDENCE to his theories,
Feckwit will only regurgitate endless quotes of dead astronomers,
which he doesn't actually understand or interpret correctly, as
evidence for them.
Feckwit is no astronomer, just as he is no climatologist, no
anthropologist, no mathematician, or no geologist, but this does not
stop him from spouting non-stop drivel, day after day.
Many have tried to explain basic celestial mechanics to Feckwit in
simple, easy-to-understand terms, but he either doesn't read these
posts or doesn't have the capacity to understand them. Instead, he
responds to such posts by essentially starting all over again, from
the top, with the same old worn-out arguments that my 14-year-old
granddaughter can blow out of the water with one swat. I have to give
him credit, he carries on undeterred, and unconvinced that there is
ever any possibility that that he is even slightly in error.
Unlike the majority of us, Feckwit has never learned anything here,
and only in rare cases does he agree with anyone at all. It seems to
me that whenever an interesting thread is started, it is soon
disrupted by you-know-who's venomous desultory philippic, and the
whole thing is hijacked for good.
Arguing with Feckwit is like hitting your head against the wall in
that it feels pretty good when you finally stop doing it. Disagreeing
with Feckwit is quite fruitless, he is not at all receptive to
friendly instruction, and often counters by calling you names, and
that is too bad, because there are (and were) a lot of really smart
people here who have a lot to offer the rest of us, and jerks like
Feckwit drive them away. Maybe he requires everyone's attention all of
the time.
Feckwit wouldn't last 2 minutes on any moderated forum, and in that I
find immense satisfaction.
Here is a really simple question for Feckwit; How many forums have
banned you from participating?
I'm pretty sure this was written specifically for Feckwit;
oriel36
> On Nov 26, 12:54 am, badastrobuster <newbinar...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Any answer orial36 gives apart from the one word answer yes or no will
> > result in a fail grade. The question will then be asked again until he
> > does answer the question with a simple YES or NO.
>
> Feckwit (Oriel36) is incapable of answering simple questions,
> especially those that only require a YES or a NO answer.
He keeps writing that he failed and needs to try again,
> NOW FAILED SEVEN TIMES - I WILL TRY AGAIN
Did he write this himself only requires a yes or no answer.
Then he gets his answer.
Androcles
"palsing" <pnal...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:10756241-5bc7-44a3...@a28g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
http://insti.physics.sunysb.edu/~siegel/quack.html
"I have proven that special relativity/quantum mechanics/... is wrong."
You mean you did an experiment whose results disagree with the predictions
of that theory? I didn't think so. You mean you proved it is
self-contradictory? Not possible: Mathematically it's an elementary system,
whose consistency is easy to check. You might as well claim that you can
prove 2+2=5. (If you think you can do that, I'm willing to give you $2+$2
change for a $5 bill.) If you think you have found an inconsistency, you
have probably made an assumption...
Assumptions I do NOT make:
1) But it is not possible without further ASSUMPTION to compare, in respect
of time, an event at A with an event at B.
2) We ASSUME that this definition of synchronism is free from
contradictions, and possible for any number of points;
3) In agreement with experience we further ASSUME the quantity 2AB/(t'A-tA)
= c
4) Current kinematics tacitly ASSUMES that the lengths determined by these
two operations are precisely equal
5) and where for brevity it is ASSUMED that at the origin of k, tau = 0,
when t=0.
6) If no ASSUMPTION whatever be made as to the initial position of the
moving system and as to the zero point of tau
7) We now have to prove that any ray of light, measured in the moving
system, is propagated with the velocity c, if, as we have ASSUMED, this is
the case in the stationary system
8) If we ASSUME that the result proved for a polygonal line is also valid
for a continuously curved line,
9) and our equations ASSUME the form
10) When phi = 0 the equation ASSUMES the perspicuous form
11) the equation for phi' ASSUMES the form
12) for the law of motion of which we ASSUME as follows
13) we may and will ASSUME that the electron, at the moment when we give it
our attention
14) From the above ASSUMPTION, in combination with the principle of
relativity
Special relativity is nothing but assumptions.
GPS would not work if the velocity of light in our theory didn't play the
part, physically, of an infinitely great velocity, no matter how many quacks
think it should.
"the velocity of light in our theory plays the part, physically, of an
infinitely great velocity" --§ 4. Physical Meaning of the Equations
Obtained in Respect to Moving Rigid Bodies and Moving Clocks
-- ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES By A. Einstein
You've found an ignorant bigot page, palsing.
Quadibloc
> Maybe somebody should fill you in on duelin' banjos
I had to view headers on this one; I was worried that someone was
forging a post in your name.
Anyways, here's a link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmMk9tsCjsc
John Savard
palsing
> You've found an ignorant bigot page, palsing.
Perhaps the only people who find this page bigoted are the people who
fit the descriptions offered there... you know like "Their theory
could never be wrong; therefore everyone else's must be."
Sound familiar?
Androcles
Sound familiar?
===========================================
"It seems that Light is propagated in time, spending in its passage from
the sun to us about seven Minutes of time:" -- DEFIN. II of Opticks Or,
A Treatise of the Reflections, Refractions, Inflections and Colours of
Light - Sir Isaac Newton.
"the velocity of light in our theory plays the part, physically, of an
infinitely great velocity" --� 4. Physical Meaning of the Equations
Obtained in Respect to Moving Rigid Bodies and Moving Clocks
-- ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES By A. Einstein
Sound familiar?
No, of course not, you've read neither.
Like millions of medieval Xtians who had never read a bible,
the priest took their money and they went to heaven.
"Their theory could never be wrong; therefore everyone else's must be."
Relativity is a religion.
Sound familiar?
No, of course not, you are a "believer". You have "faith" in Saint Rabbi
Ayatollah Einstein who was god reincarnate, and the main reason for
believing is all the other stupid sheep do too, and you definitely want to
be part of the flock. You can believe the velocity of light in your theory
plays the part, physically, of an infinitely great velocity, but you are
playing the part, physically, of Bozo the clown in Einstein's circus.
"Let there be given a stationary rigid rod; and let its length be L as
measured by a measuring-rod which is also stationary. We now imagine
the axis of the rod lying along the axis of x of the stationary system of
co-ordinates, and that a uniform motion of parallel translation with
velocity v along the axis of x in the direction of increasing x is then
imparted to the rod. We now inquire as to the length of the moving rod" --
Einstein
AND THE ANSWER IS...
"xi = (x-vt)/sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2)" -- Einstein.
Yep, xi differs from L, Greek letters differ from Roman letters.
In agreement with experience we further assume the deranged babbling
incompetent cretin couldn't answer his own inquiry, he was too stupid
to realise xi is greater than L when he wrote 'for v=c all moving
objects--viewed from the "stationary'' system--shrivel up into plane
figures', whereas his own equation shows they stretch to
division-by-zero... sqrt(1-c^2/c^2) = 0.
Perhaps the only people who find this drivel logical are the people who
are bigots like palsing... you know like "Their theory could never be wrong;
therefore everyone else's must be."
Sound familiar, snipping cowardly punk?
Sam Wormley
> ...organization like NASA... argues for 366 1/4 rotations in a year.
That's because there ARE 366.24+ rotation of the earth every
astronomical year!
During its orbit around the Sun, the earth rotates one whole extra
rotation, so of course there are 366.24+ rotation. Try not to be
so stooopid, Gerald.
oriel36
> On 11/27/10 6:15 AM, oriel36 wrote:
>
> > ...organization like NASA... argues for 366 1/4 rotations in a year.
>
> That's because there ARE 366.24+ rotation of the earth every
> astronomical year!
>
I always thought the origins of the calendar system was lost to
history until I came across the stone of Canopus where these people
lay out the structure of the leap day correction which includes the
observation that there are never more than 365 day/night cycles in a
year and the annual cycle was not determined within a stellar
circumpolar framework but the annual reappearance of Sirius or Sothis
as it was known -
"....on account of the procession of the rising of the Divine Sothis
by one day in the course of 4 years, and other festivals celebrated in
the summer, in this country, shall not be celebrated in winter, as has
occasionally occurred 22 in past times, therefore it shall be, that
the year of 360 days and the 5 days added to their end, so one day as
feast of Benevolent Gods [ Pharoah and family] be from this day after
every 4 years added to the 5 epagomenae before the new year, whereby
all men shall learn, that what was a little defective in the order as
regards the seasons and the year, as also the opinions which are
contained in the rules of the learned on the heavenly orbits, are now
corrected and improved by the Benevolent Gods."
http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/texts/canopus_decree.htm
Here is an astronomical document in stone that is nearly on par with
the Commentariolis of Copernicus as there is no part of the system
that we do not use,the equal 24 hour day,the steady progression of
these days,the additional leap day correction to keep the daily cycles
in line with the orbital cycles and here you are with your 366 1/4
rotations in a year in trying to mock this great astronomical history
that you have right in front of you.
The decree is an invitation that " all men shall learn" just how old
and refined the discipline of astronomy is and it relies on the
goodness of men and their ability to adapt and use their observations
to good ends for all men.Somebody is bound to feel the loss,it does
not matter how deeply involved in the career system,here is history
staring them in the face in that men with literally basic tools could
design a system that is so stable and so efficient that it lasted
until the Gregorian correction in an era close to ours.
badastrobuster
ORIEL36 HAS NOW FAILED EIGHT TIMES - I WILL TRY AGAIN
oriel36
> During its orbit around the Sun, the earth rotates one whole extra
> rotation, so of course there are 366.24+ rotation. Try not to be
> so stooopid, Gerald.
I can't imagine why there is no response from people who can reason
through the Feb 29th day/night cycle,the fact that it is a 24 hour
rotation and that it accounts for the 1/4 day/rotation left behind in
the 3 previous non-leap years in identifying the 365 1/4 rotations in
a year when considered in terms of daily rotation,how it is
independent form the orbital motion of the Earth and ,although not an
exact fit,the extra Feb 29th rotation,brings daily and orbital cycles
back in sync in order to main a constant progression of 24 hour days.
Who here can look with pride on what humans were capable of without
any great technological advantage ? and you sense their pride in the
decree that the 'learned ' had solved an issue which kept the
timekeeping framework in sync with both the annual appearance of
Sirius and the flooding of the Nile -
".. that the year of 360 days and the 5 days added to their end, so
one day as feast of Benevolent Gods [ Pharoah and family] be from this
day after every 4 years added to the 5 epagomenae before the new year,
whereby all men shall learn, that what was a little defective in the
order as regards the seasons and the year, as also the opinions which
are contained in the rules of the learned on the heavenly orbits," The
Stone of Canopus
Are none of you ashamed that you do not measure up to these
astronomers even as you use their system ?,no you are not and as
there is no decisiveness common to men of courage and intelligence,you
cannot act in the best interests of the wider population and the civil
authorities,something which happened at the time of the Pharoahs
and,although it has now jettisoned its scientific
heritage,denominational Christianity.
You can openly state 366 1/4 rotations in 365 1/4 days and that should
have told readers it is time to act in a meaningful way and because
you can't comprehend the correct system you have no idea of the
wasteland this has created in areas far removed from astronomy.When
astronomers can act in such a way as to undermine the very system they
pretend to love,it undermines many other human endeavors where being
cunning substitutes for acts of intelligence and once where
astronomers influenced authorities in a beneficial way now it is done
as an instrument of the civil authorities.You are not stupid,you are
traitors of the worst kind as the currency of astronomy is the ability
to reason and interpret correctly using its geometric language and its
physical effects so if you are getting 366 1/4 rotations in a
year,something is badly astray.
Chris.B
>something is badly astray.
Your bullshit is overpowering the smell of paint drying.
badastrobuster
ORIEL36 HAS NOW FAILED NINE TIMES - I WILL TRY AGAIN
Sam Wormley
> You can openly state 366 1/4 rotations in 365 1/4 days and that should
> have told readers it is time to act in a meaningful way and because
> you can't comprehend the correct system you have no idea of the
> wasteland this has created in areas far removed from astronomy.
The earth has rotates 366.24+ times every astronomical year... long
before humans came along and before the invention on calendars.
Calendars are crude compared to the simplicity of 366.24+ rotations
per orbit of the sun.
Gerald, you appear to be incapable of understanding the simplest
concepts of celestial mechanics. Do you even KNOW what a sidereal day
is?
oriel36
> On Nov 28, 9:46 am, oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ORIEL36 HAS NOW FAILED NINE TIMES - I WILL TRY AGAIN
>
You set a snare for this Christian,got caught in the snare yourself
and the other guy joined you even though I forewarned readers that you
were finished without fully knowing it,some may have got a chuckle out
of the seemingly impossible way to leave you howling in your own trap
but they have no reason to,there is no game here and they are caught
in their own particular trap.
Now howl for the rest of your life for all I care,the unmoderated
Usenet forums are the toughest to deal with and I do not need half-
wits who are all too cunning until they find themselves a victim of
their own crudeness,you being no better or worse than the next.The way
out of your snare is there for you and anyone else but don't dare to
imagine that you have that access anymore and join the other
nuisances.
Note; As for Palsing,I can't believe he couldn't see where this was
going as there must be a hatred there I cannot account for unless he
is trying to protect a family member in the empirical business,in any
case,he can remain stuck with you for as long as he looked to you for
consensus.
badastrobuster
ORIEL36 HAS NOW FAILED TEN TIMES - I WILL TRY AGAIN
oriel36
> On 11/28/10 3:46 AM, oriel36 wrote:
>
> > You can openly state 366 1/4 rotations in 365 1/4 days and that should
> > have told readers it is time to act in a meaningful way and because
> > you can't comprehend the correct system you have no idea of the
> > wasteland this has created in areas far removed from astronomy.
>
> The earth has rotates 366.24+ times every astronomical year...
The Feb 29th day/night cycle is both 24 hours and a daily rotation
hence daily rotation is responsible for the day/night cycle,even
seeing it challenged at the beginning of the 21st century is such a
dismal proposition and especially now when anyone can see the pride in
the Egyptian priests in announcing the beginning of the equal day
calendar system with its correction which allows the annual cycle to
drift until corrected by an extra day/rotation -
".. that the year of 360 days and the 5 days added to their end, so
one day as feast of Benevolent Gods [ Pharoah and family] be from this
day after every 4 years added to the 5 epagomenae before the new year,
whereby all men shall learn, that what was a little defective in the
order as regards the seasons and the year, as also the opinions which
are contained in the rules of the learned on the heavenly orbits,.."
The Stone of Canopus
What person here,as an astronomer or as an educator could possibly
argue against one of the jewels of human reasoning and for what !,a
nonsensical 366 1/4 rotations per year lie that serves no purpose
whatsoever.You are no traitor,a person so intent on something which
exists only in the imagination could not manage to enjoy the
experience of Feb 29th as a daily rotation and a 24 hour day in
context of the 365 1/4 days/rotations in an orbital circuit and the
main reason why it is now possible to look at the orbital daylight/
darkness cycle,something best appreciated at the polar coordinates as
6 months of darkness followed by 6 months of daylight arising from the
orbital motion of the Earth.
None of this is for those who are afflicted,it is for those who can
appreciate what our ancestors achieved and add or modify their
accomplishments rather than vandalize them.If you are pleased that
nobody objected to 366 1/4 rotations in a year then it becomes a
measure of the lack of responsibility and authority and especially in
light of the great astronomers who created the equal day/ calendar
system and modified it through the Gregorian correction whereas in
this era it is not even possible to affirm the components which link
365 1/4 days/rotations with the leap day correction.
What is happening is not just wrong,it is sadistic in the extreme.
badastrobuster
ORIEL36 HAS NOW FAILED ELEVEN TIMES - I WILL TRY AGAIN
palsing
> Note; As for Palsing,I can't believe he couldn't see where this was
> going as there must be a hatred there I cannot account for unless he
> is trying to protect a family member in the empirical business,in any
> case,he can remain stuck with you for as long as he looked to you for
> consensus.
Hatred? Naw, just the opposite. You are a main source of daily laughs
(daily, as in wrt the sun) around here. The results of your "intuitive
intelligence" are hilarious. You obviously have a very fertile mind to
be able to generate such fantasy.
By definition, anyone who makes observations or performs experiments
is in the empirical business. I'm pretty sure that ALL of your Ancient
Heroes were also empiricists, what do you think of that?
Ever since coming across the Quack page...
http://insti.physics.sunysb.edu/~siegel/quack.html
... it is clear that you can't help what you are doing any more than
you could choose to quit breathing for a day, so from me, you get a
pass. Still, you are funny, and always good for a laugh. The only
concern I might have is the thought that you could influence a newbie
to some degree, but then, we all have to take our chances, don't we?
"Take a chance and try my fare!
It will grow on you, I swear;
Soon it will taste good to you!"
- Friedrich Nietzsche
Androcles
http://insti.physics.sunysb.edu/~siegel/quack.html
==========================================
What's really funny is siegel is the quack and palsing is the goose
trying to imitate the duck.
Test of GR.
Synchronize two vacuum enclosed identical horizontal light clocks
side-by-side and leave to run for 6 months in two identical chest
freezers (for environmental control). Note any relative drift.
<http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/lightclock.gif>
Place one horizontal light clock at the top of the Burj Khalifa
<http://www.burjkhalifa.ae/>
and leave the other at the base. Leave to run for 6 months.
Bring the clocks together again, note any relative drift.
If the clocks DO read the same count (with drift allowed) then NIST
got it wrong, there was no time dilation due to altitude difference.
<http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/aluminum-atomic-clock_092310.cfm>
If the clocks do NOT read the same count (with drift allowed) due to
time dilation then NIST got it wrong, the speed of light cannot be a
universal constant.
<http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?c>
Either way, NIST are useless yankee wankers and WRONG.
palsing
wrote:
> "palsing" <pnals...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> If the clocks do NOT read the same count (with drift allowed) due to
> time dilation then NIST got it wrong, the speed of light cannot be a
> universal constant.
> <http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?c>
>
> Either way, NIST are useless yankee wankers and WRONG.
You know, of course you do, that not a single creditable scientist
agrees with you. Not a single creditable experiment has shown
relativity to be wrong. In this regard you are exactly like Oriel, a
man alone with his beliefs against the greatest minds in history, who
you think are wrong.
Does "intuitive intelligence" rule your world, too?
oriel36
Are you telling me that you didn't see it coming ?,a simple yes or no
answer will do.
Wait for the other guy's howling as you are both caught together in
the same snare,if he doesn't howl he has lost his 'game' and if he
does he tortures you,either way it is the end of the matter for
me,the discovery of that remarkable ancient decree is too exciting to
waste on those who do not have the intelligence to understand how the
Feb 29th day/night cycle and 24 hour rotation maintains the balance
between 365 1/4 days and rotations on one side and an orbital circuit
on the other.
Sam Wormley
Gerald, I don't think anybody hates you. But your behavior of
inserting your feeble cause to rid the world of its science
instead of correcting your own stooopidity, wears thin.
palsing
> ... too exciting to
> waste on those who do not have the intelligence to understand how the
> Feb 29th day/night cycle and 24 hour rotation maintains the balance
> between 365 1/4 days and rotations on one side and an orbital circuit
> on the other.
But everyone here DOES understand this... and also understands that
"24 hour rotation" refers to the solar day alone.
Quadibloc
> What person here,as an astronomer or as an educator could possibly
> argue against one of the jewels of human reasoning and for what !,a
> nonsensical 366 1/4 rotations per year lie that serves no purpose
> whatsoever.
So you say, but that is because you are incapable of understanding the
purpose taking stellar circumpolar motion as the basis of the Earth's
rotation serves.
Stellar circumpolar motion is _uniform_ when timed by our mechanical
clocks.
Natural noon, on the other hand, exhibits the variations recorded in
the Equation of Time,.
So, if we take the simple, uniform motion - which has a period of 23
hours, 56 minutes, and 4 seconds, as the rotation of the Earth, and
then combine it with the specifics of the Earth's orbit to obtain the
natural noon cycle as a _consequence_, then we can account for the
Equation of Time in an understandable manner.
Your complaints that natural noon is obvious, and people saw it first,
therefore it MUST be the basis, and giving precedence to stellar
circumpolar motion because it makes the Earth into a big ball of rock
that behaves like mechanisms on Earth is empirical and atheistic or
something... they have no basis that is even intelligible to us.
We can't really understand why someone would keep thinking such
nonsense. I suppose it's some sort of thing like "natural noon was
good enough for Moses and Abraham, and so it's good enough for me",
but don't expect the rest of the world to follow you in thinking this
way - ever.
John Savard
oriel36
Who cares if you hate me or not,you can't manage to put the Feb 29th
day/night cycle in context of a 24 hour rotation hence day/night is
due to daily rotation with 365 1/4 days and rotations corresponding to
an orbital circuit.
Without the fundamental astronomical facts there is no way to
restructure astronomy back to its former heights from where it is now
and goodness knows that lamp burns low in this dark empirical era,you
couldn't even accept the return of a star observation as the calendar
convenience that it is but believe in some silly lie that the Earth
turns 366 1/4 times a year every year.
You do have a hatred of anything that is magnificent in actual human
achievement for who has commented on the first known announcement of
the leap day correction -
".. that the year of 360 days and the 5 days added to their end, so
one day as feast of Benevolent Gods [ Pharoah and family] be from this
day after every 4 years added to the 5 epagomenae before the new year,
whereby all men shall learn, that what was a little defective in the
order as regards the seasons and the year, as also the opinions which
are contained in the rules of the learned on the heavenly orbits,.."
The Stone of Canopus
Genuine astronomers can look on those words and seeing how it unfolded
down through the many centuries until it was corrected by
denominational Christianity and now in terms of today how it can be
used to express the orbital daylight/darkness cycle as separate to
daily rotation and its day/night cycle.
You will make your few dollars for betraying astronomy,the tenets of
Christianity also include a mention of what people will do for a few
pieces of silver,hence you have something to go by to know your fate
yet the choice will always remain for that too is a part of Christian
faith.Closing out this is no small thing,a lot harder than I thought
but it is done.
Quadibloc
> A question that is central to where he parts company from
> mainstream astronomical thought.
No, it isn't. If he weren't so temperamental that he would take the
trouble to read your question, understand it, and answer it, his
answer would be "Yes", as I have shown earlier with quotes from some
of his posts.
He knows perfectly well the length of the so-called "sidereal day", he
just considers it illegitimate to treat that as the rotational period
of the Earth.
John Savard
Androcles
=================================================
That's why you are hilarious, palsing. You imagine Galileo, Kepler, Newton,
Doppler and Michelson were not creditable scientists.
"It seems that Light is propagated in time, spending in its passage from
the sun to us about seven Minutes of time:" -- DEFIN. II of Opticks Or,
A Treatise of the Reflections, Refractions, Inflections and Colours of
Light - Sir Isaac Newton.
"the velocity of light in our theory plays the part, physically, of an
infinitely great velocity" --§ 4. Physical Meaning of the Equations
Obtained in Respect to Moving Rigid Bodies and Moving Clocks
-- ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES By A. Einstein
Palsing plays the part, physically, of Bozo the clown in Einstein's circus.
You refuse to address logic and mathematics, your sole reason for believing
Einstein is that every other cretin like you does. You don't know, of
course,
that you are more insane than Kelleher and too cowardly to discuss what I
wrote above, so you babble about some vague "scientists" that don't agree.
You are a nasty little cowardly bully with no data, palsing, a fuckin' joke.
You want take me on with math and physics, palsing, put up your dukes
and I'll beat you to pulp, you miserable ignorant bastard.
palsing
#26 from the Quack page;
"You %$#@@%# $% #%#* *#%!!"
You definitely qualify as a Quack.
You don't need to be crazy to play here, but it helps...
Sam Wormley
It is REALLY a good thing you are not a king, dictator or person
with the power to harm other people because of your stooopidity.
Thank goodness for that!
Androcles
===============================================
You belong in alt. flame, you cowardly name-calling arsehole, not in a "sci"
newsgroup.
Even at that I can whip you, you stupid motherfucking cunt.
badastrobuster
ORIEL36 HAS NOW FAILED TWELVE TIMES - I WILL TRY AGAIN
Sam Wormley
It is REALLY a good thing you are not a king, dictator or person
oriel36
How many thousands are you making a year when you tell students that
the Earth turns 366 1/4 times in a year thereby creating an imbalance
between the correct 365 1/4 rotations and 365 1/4 days as a balance
with one orbital circuit and accounted for by a Feb 29th day/night
cycle and 24 hour rotation ?,that's right,you know enough to protect
your own interests while betraying the vast treasure of astronomical
knowledge which you cannot enjoy yourself.
The testimony of the Canopus Stone is enough to bury that lifeless
corpse you call 'sidereal time' and its 366 1/4 rotations but being
dishonorable people you won't accept this astronomical treasure,that
is one thing,but that you prevent others from seeing how it works as a
rough fit between daily and orbital motions is unconscionable and you
deserve your fate,such as it is.
I have seen what went wrong,fair enough it was a mistake and nobody
can be faulted for that,but that it got out of hand and nearly
extinguished astronomy I do mind and no matter what hostility you
direct towards me,it will not change the return of astronomy as
something that is enjoyed among people who have been denied it for far
too long -
"Although all the good arts serve to draw man's mind away from vices
and lead it toward better things, this function can be more fully
performed by this art [Astronomy] , which also provides extraordinary
intellectual pleasure." Nicolaus Copernicus
palsing
> > Obtained in Respect to Moving Rigid Bodies and Moving Clocks
> > -- ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES By A. Einstein
>
> > Palsing plays the part, physically, of Bozo the clown in Einstein's
> > circus.
>
> > You refuse to address logic and mathematics, your sole reason for
> > believing
> > Einstein is that every other cretin like you does. You don't know, of
> > course,
> > that you are more insane than Kelleher and too cowardly to discuss what I
> > wrote above, so you babble about some vague "scientists" that don't agree.
> > You are a nasty little cowardly bully with no data, palsing, a fuckin'
> > joke.
>
> > You want take me on with math and physics, palsing, put up your dukes
> > and I'll beat you to pulp, you miserable ignorant bastard.
>
> #26 from the Quack page;
>
> "You %$#@@%# $% #%#* *#%!!"
>
> You definitely qualify as a Quack.
>
> You don't need to be crazy to play here, but it helps...
>
> ===============================================
> You belong in alt. flame, you cowardly name-calling arsehole, not in a "sci"
> newsgroup.
> Even at that I can whip you, you stupid motherfucking cunt.
Q.E.D.
Keep talking, continue to prove my point...
badastrobuster
ORIEL36 HAS NOW FAILED THIRTEEN TIMES - I WILL TRY AGAIN
palsing
> see how long he can evade answering a simple
> question...
A lot longer than you can... he is nothing if not persistent.
Androcles
Q.E.D.
==================================
Your only points were you are a bigot, a coward and a bully. I'll leave it
to Kelleher to take the piss out of you and wind you up since you are
incapable of discussing logic, so continue to prove your point, ignorant
motherfucker.
Quod erat demonstrandum.
palsing
Do you kiss your Mother with that mouth?
Androcles
================================
Do you call your mother a quack, a cunt or an arsehole?
I won't ask about your father, he might be me.
Keep ranting, continue to prove my point, anencephalous cretin, you've
obviously got nothing to say about physics, mathematics or astronomy.
palsing
I don't seem to be the guy ranting here...
Androcles
What's really funny is siegel is the quack and palsing SEEMS TO BE the goose
trying to imitate the duck. He certainly doesn't SEEM TO BE rational, he
SEEMS to prefer name-calling.
You ARE the anencephalous childish moron ranting here, palsing. Go get
quacking siegel and I'll take you both on with 10,000 neurons tied behind my
back, you spineless cretin with no balls.
Quadibloc
wrote:
> That's why you are hilarious, palsing. You imagine Galileo, Kepler, Newton,
> Doppler and Michelson were not creditable scientists.
He does not. Of course, though, he was really talking about credible
scientists who came _after_ Einstein, and who, therefore, have the
modern understanding and verification of special relativity available
to them. I can't claim that Galileo, Kepler, and Newton, for example,
agreed with Einstein about time dilation and the Lorenz contraction;
in fact, I'm rather sure they weren't aware that such things could
happen.
John Savard
Androcles
"Quadibloc" <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in message
news:867ff793-9801-427a...@f20g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 28, 1:39 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics_ac>
wrote:
> That's why you are hilarious, palsing. You imagine Galileo, Kepler,
> Newton,
> Doppler and Michelson were not creditable scientists.
He does not.
=====================
Yes he does, you lying bastard.
What credible scientist believes
<http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img11.gif>
but r_AB/(c-v) = r_AB/(c+v)
or, to be fair,
tau( 1/(c-v)) = tau( 1/c+v)) and tau is a linear function?
You don't know one, do you?
You are just as much a liar and bigot as palsing, savard, another snipping
shithead with your head up Einstein's arse.
This is great game for palsing, savard et al to play.
Quadibloc
> The testimony of the Canopus Stone is enough to bury that lifeless
> corpse you call 'sidereal time' and its 366 1/4 rotations
It is? How?
The Canopus Stone attests to 365 1/4 solar days in a year. No one
denies that. To deny that would be silly; we have the testimony of the
calendar that this is how long a year is.
But there is no conflict between that and stellar circumpolar rotation
taking 23 hours, 56 minutes and 4 seconds - as you admit yourself,
that is how long it takes.
The reasons that we choose to see the stellar circumpolar rotation as
the true rotational period of the Earth... are a bit complicated, but
they don't in any way involve denying that the solar day averages to
24 hours.
John Savard
Androcles
===========================================
How long can a quack like you evade
"It seems that Light is propagated in time, spending in its passage from
the sun to us about seven Minutes of time:" -- DEFIN. II of Opticks Or,
A Treatise of the Reflections, Refractions, Inflections and Colours of
Light - Sir Isaac Newton.
"the velocity of light in our theory plays the part, physically, of an
infinitely great velocity" --§ 4. Physical Meaning of the Equations
Obtained in Respect to Moving Rigid Bodies and Moving Clocks
-- ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES By A. Einstein
Indefinitely, you have your head up Einstein's arse persistently.
palsing
wrote:
> "Quadibloc" <jsav...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in message
When all is said and done, it might eventually become a fact that
relativity needs to be modified or even discarded, but it is going to
take more than a braggadocio's internet bluster to bring it down. If
relativity is to be shown a failure, you can be sure that its downfall
will come from a mainstream scientist, and be caused by the same
careful thinking that generated the theory in the first place.
palsing
wrote:
> "palsing" <pnals...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Your are starting to sound desperate...
Androcles
On Nov 28, 8:50 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics_ac>
wrote:
> "Quadibloc" <jsav...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in message
>
> news:867ff793-9801-427a...@f20g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 28, 1:39 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics_ac>
> wrote:
>
> > That's why you are hilarious, palsing. You imagine Galileo, Kepler,
> > Newton,
> > Doppler and Michelson were not creditable scientists.
>
> He does not.
>
> =====================
> Yes he does, you lying bastard.
>
> What credible scientist believes
> <http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img11.gif>
> but r_AB/(c-v) = r_AB/(c+v)
> or, to be fair,
> tau( 1/(c-v)) = tau( 1/c+v)) and tau is a linear function?
>
> You don't know one, do you?
>
> You are just as much a liar and bigot as palsing, savard, another snipping
> shithead with your head up Einstein's arse.
>
> This is great game for palsing, savard et al to play.
When all is said and done, it might eventually become a fact that
relativity needs to be modified or even discarded, but it is going to
take more than a braggadocio's internet bluster to bring it down.
Ah, proof number 16:
Wackypedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_proof
lists:
1 Direct proof
2 Proof by induction
3 Proof by transposition
4 Proof by contradiction
5 Proof by construction
6 Proof by exhaustion
7 Probabilistic proof
8 Combinatorial proof
9 Nonconstructive proof
10 Elementary proof
Not included:
11 Proof by "everybody knows" (proof by popular opinion).
12 Proof by "because I say so" (proof by assertion).
13 Proof by "it is written" (proof by appeal to authority).
14 Proof by "you prove it isn't!" (proof by simple denial).
15 Proof by "what about the tooth fairy?"(proof by irrelevance).
16 Proof by "I'm smarter than you, so there!" (proof by bluster).
17 Proof by "read a text book" (proof by bluster revision 2).
and the ultimate counter proof:
18 Proof by "You're'n'asshole!" (proof by ad hominem attack).
Proof 18 is my favorite, I use it often. It is very effective when used
against proofs 11-17. Fight fire with fire, I say. Proofs 1-10 have me
defeated, they prevent me from using proofs 11-17 and I have to bite
the bullet and embarrass myself to win the argument (which I must do
at all costs upon pain of death by diarrhea of the verbal kind).
If relativity is to be shown a failure, you can be sure that its downfall
will come from a mainstream scientist, and be caused by the same
careful thinking that generated the theory in the first place.
=========================================
Ah, proof 13: (proof by appeal to authority).
Shame, stupid bragging quack, but only proofs 1-10 have any weight.
Androcles
=======================================
Ah, proof #15. I'll just have to counter that with proof #16.
This is great game for palsing, savard et al to play.
Wackypedia
palsing
Really, really desperate
Androcles
Really, really desperate
===================
Yes, I know, but there it is, you have no credibility or integrity so you
have to
be as desperate as Kelleher. You are certainly his equal in the stupidity
dept.
(Really, really, really.)
badastrobuster
an alternative title!
Dr J R Stockton
000yqe.googlegroups.com>, Sun, 28 Nov 2010 00:55:59, badastrobuster
<newbi...@yahoo.co.uk> posted:
>On Nov 28, 7:56 am, oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>So lets see how and for how long he can evade answering a simple
>question. A question that is central to where he parts company from
>mainstream astronomical thought.
>
>
>**** Do you accept that the sidereal day is less than 24 hours long
>( about 23 h 56 m 4.1 s) Please answer either YES or NO ****
The sidereal day is 24 sidereal hours long. Perhaps your question has
been found inadequate.
--
(c) John Stockton, nr London UK. ???@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
Check boilerplate spelling -- error is a public sign of incompetence.
Never fully trust an article from a poster who gives no full real name.
Quadibloc
wrote:
> The sidereal day is 24 sidereal hours long. Perhaps your question has
> been found inadequate.
Somehow, I doubt very much that this is Oriel's reason for disdaining
to lower himself to answering a direct yes or no question from a mere
empiricist.
And, in fact, one of the things central to his world view is that the
debased coin of sidereal hours shouldn't be used to measure anything.
He has admitted in previous posts - some of which he quoted - that the
successive transits of a star occur at intervals of 23 hours, 56
minutes, and 4 seconds. But he views the sidereal day as solely and
exclusively an "observational convenience".
Why it makes more sense to say that this is also the period of the
Earth's rotation, rather than 24 hours, has to do with stuff like the
Equation of Time - of which he's _aware_ - and the importance of
uniform motions when explaining things physically. As far as Oriel is
concerned, though, trying to explain the movements of the planets in
terms of stuff like gravity and angular momentum is "empiricism" and
therefore EEVIL.
Copernicus, Galileo, and Kepler are to be praised for shoving the
crystal spheres around and putting them in their right places, but
lowering the heavens to our level by trying to apply prosaic Earthly
physical laws to them? A betrayal of our priceless heritage of
"structural astronomy"!
I'm not sure what kind of "yes or no" questions I could get him to
answer that would lead to him seeing the problems with _that_ world
view. He seems to feel that Aquinas got the reconciliation of faith
and science right for all time - and believes Copernicus should be
praised for adding a correction *within the Aristotelian system*. The
idea that Newton was right, and the whole Aristotelian system ought to
go out into the trash to be replaced by something better... *that's*
what he's at war with.
Deal with that by yes-or-no questions? Nice trick if you can pull it.
John Savard
Chris.B
>
> Deal with that by yes-or-no questions? Nice trick if you can pull it.
>
> John Savard
It is a nice irony that Dr Stockton deigns to respond to a troll who
is so twisted by hypocrisy that he wouldn't recognise his own god's
word on this matter.
Sympathy or charity, John? ;-)
badastrobuster
annoy,
frustrate and generally wind-up people.
Nothing that has happened in the last few days has changed my view.
http://www.martin-nicholson.info/troll/trollkelleher.htm
Talking at Kelleher (you cannot talk to him) is a waste of time.
Assuming
he doesn't have some mental illness I do wonder what motivates him.
Thad Floryan
He's an Irish pub entertainer and he suckers in his lackeys,
minions and sycophants such as Worm Spamley for the amusement
of his fellow Irish-tea drinkers who think his followers are
stupid American fools (and that would be very correct).
In case you hadn't noticed, every one of the multiple IPs from
which he posts is a pub in Ireland, presumably with WiFi.
oriel36
You are poor people believe there is an imbalance between 365 1/4
days and 365 1/4 rotations and that is it,the Feb 29th day/night cycle
and 24 hour rotation reflects 365 1/4 rotations in a year whereas you
believe in an extra 366 1/4 rotations through something which is a
outright lie,the 3 minute 56 second difference to 24 hours is
something that only exists as a calendar observation and that is it.
I found this thread useful if dismaying and especially the denial that
the day/night cycle is separate to daily rotation without the
slightest sign of objection or horror.I no longer think you are
foolish,fraudulent or incompetent for any person who can't express the
cause for day and night has bigger problems than any one individual
can deal with.It will be useful to demonstrate how intransigent the
affliction is but that is about it in the most pragmatic way possible.
I sacrificed a great deal to maintain the material front and center
and move things forward,a lot more than you or anyone else could
imagine or indeed bear that responsibility in the most hostile
environment possible and I assure you that my ties to both countries
mentioned are those of love and admiration,these things like matters
of faith are in the background and important for what I do whereas you
have no souls,traitors to your countries,to science,to astronomy and
even those close to you.Anything that has goodness to it you strangle
up to the point of the most basic cause and effect of all
demonstrating the state of your minds rather than the actual
experience which can be interpreted visually now from space -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXCnxoixb-s
A group who can attempt to separate daily rotation from the day/night
cycle,even a whisper of it,is finished .
Androcles
"Thad Floryan" <th...@thadlabs.com> wrote in message
news:4CF4D37A...@thadlabs.com...
Are you talking about Einstein again? He was a Jewish pub entertainer.
This is one of his best jokes:
r_AB/(c+v) = r_AB/(c-v). References given:
<http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img6.gif>
<http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img11.gif>
r_AB = 8, c = 5, v = 3
8/(5-3) = 8/(5+2)
4 = 1
oriel36
> On Nov 27, 12:15 pm, oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> NOW FAILED SEVEN TIMES - I WILL TRY AGAIN
>
I have always said that you succeeded even though you got caught in a
snare of your own devising,a simple yes or no answer to the fact that
you kept writing that you were failing would represent just how tough
an unmoderated Usenet forum is and especially how you lost a 'game'
that is just about impossible to lose (you didn't even have to
participate) so your success is elsewhere.How many readers who can't
stand you had hoped that you succeed but should have told you when the
game was over leaving me to inform you instead, and all these after-
the-fact comments now are merely how you managed to rope the rest of
the readership into your ring,they should have objected straight
away,I stepped out and now they are stuck in there with you hence your
ultimate success among the 'et al'.
It is a Christian thing,you need to be an astronomer to understand how
to turn a crude attempt into something different and even worthwhile
as no person is ever going to force another into a strategy of yes or
no replies,there might even be a dissertation in it for somebody.As
for you,well,the guy who loses a game that is nearly impossible to
lose can be left alone,at least for me anyway,it is not that you are
dishonorable in the howling that will follow this post but that is
your fate and if the others are not intelligent enough to inform you
then they can remain with you.
Sam Wormley
> It is a Christian thing,you need to be an astronomer to understand how
> to turn a crude attempt into something different and even worthwhile
> as no person is ever going to force another into a strategy of yes or
> no replies,there might even be a dissertation in it for somebody.As
> for you,well,the guy who loses a game that is nearly impossible to
> lose can be left alone,at least for me anyway,it is not that you are
> dishonorable in the howling that will follow this post but that is
> your fate and if the others are not intelligent enough to inform you
> then they can remain with you.
Hark how the bells
Sweet silver bells
All seem to say
Throw cares away
Christmas is here
Bringing good cheer
To young and old
Meek and the bold
Ding dong ding
That is their song
With joyful ring
All caroling
One seems to hear
Words of good cheer
From everywhere
Filling the air
Oh how they pound
Raising the sound
O'er hill and dale
Telling their tale
Gaily they ring
While people sing
Songs of good cheer
Christmas is here
Merry, merry, merry, merry Christmas
Merry, merry, merry, merry Christmas
On on they send
On without end
Their joyful tone to every home
Dong ding dong ding
oriel36
Try the life of a real Christian -
"Above all the graces and gifts of the Holy Spirit which Christ gives
to His friends is that of conquering oneself and willingly enduring
sufferings, insults, humiliations, and hardships for the love of
Christ. For we cannot glory in all those other marvelous gifts of God,
as they are not ours but God's, as the Apostle says: 'What have you
that you have not received?' But we can glory in the cross of
tribulations and afflictions, because that is ours, and so the Apostle
says: 'I will not glory save in the Cross of Our Lord Jesus Christ.'"
http://feastofsaints.com/perfectjoy.htm
It is in these times when the lamp of astronomy burns low that men do
sing their hearts out by the pride of the many great astronomers who
left us an inheritance to pass on to the next generation and improve
on their insights when possible.you have seen the Canopus Stone and
this is another gift this year among the others that you cannot accept
so you have something to judge yourself by and not this taunt.
It is taking sadistic satisfaction from the lack of objection that
makes you what you are and many readers like you but life goes on and
there is a lot to do for those who have a genuine love of astronomy
and a heart to comprehend its riches.
badastrobuster
Gerald will do anything to avoid answering the question!
Chris.B
sentences now. I suppose it hardly matters when there is no content
worth a ha'penny per kilometre of text.
Sam Wormley
> "Above all the graces and gifts of the Holy Spirit which Christ gives
> to His friends is that of conquering oneself and willingly enduring
> sufferings, insults, humiliations, and hardships for the love of
> Christ. For we cannot glory in all those other marvelous gifts of God,
> as they are not ours but God's, as the Apostle says: 'What have you
> that you have not received?' But we can glory in the cross of
> tribulations and afflictions, because that is ours, and so the Apostle
> says: 'I will not glory save in the Cross of Our Lord Jesus Christ.'"
>
It's hard for me to believe that Jesus would embrace your denial
of the rotation of the heavenly bodies such as the sun and moon,
Gerald!
oriel36
> Gerald, you are taking about day night cycles.
>
> I am writing about earth rotations. Do you not have the foggiest
> notion that they are technically (thus astronomically) different?
The Feb 29th day/night cycle is also a 24 hour rotation and never
shall they part regardless of how subhuman your thinking may descend
to,the cause and effect of the day/night being daily rotation is added
to the fact that there are never more than 365 full 24 hour cycles in
a year with the calendar convenience showing that the daily and
orbital cycles are independent and drift temporarily apart in the non-
leap years.
You hate astronomy and mock faith but that is not freedom,that is
slavery of the worse kind.I do not pass judgment on you or the
rest ,these things happen in their own way and own time but it is
betrayal,make no mistake about this as it attempts to influence the
next generation with the same rubbish you cling to.Thanks for
finishing off with a statement like the one above,even I couldn't deal
with people who write like that or don't object to the idea that day/
night does not correspond to daily rotation,not even a whisper of it.
Quadibloc
> Assuming he doesn't have some mental illness I do wonder what motivates him.
Assuming he is sincere in what he posts - I had long tried to engage
him, but he now thinks of me as a "nuisance" and does not deign to
reply to my posts - his motivations are clear enough, if one were,
like me, to waste time closely studying his every post here for years.
As I've noted, he's all right with Copernicus finding out that the
Earth goes around the Sun. And he's even happy that Kepler worked out
his elegant three laws, giving planetary orbits an elegant geometrical
form.
But Newton is where he objects. Newton took the laws of mechanics, as
he further developed them, and applied them to the planets, treating
them as ordinary massive bodies - bodies that have inertia, momentum,
angular momentum, and which are pulled by gravity. And he found that
the inverse-square law of gravity coincided with Kepler's laws.
To him, this is "empiricism" and a "predictions/modeling agenda". How
dare you take God's glorious handiwork in the heavens and reduce it to
raw materialism!
The "sidereal day" objection is simply a consequence of this basic
approach. Astronomers today treat the sidereal day as the true
rotational period of the Earth because that can be referenced to the
fixed stars - and, therefore, to an _inertial reference frame_.
If you don't think that physics even applies to the motions of the
planets, then there's no reason to do that. So the Earth speeds up and
slows down in its rotation because of the Equation of Time? That's
just the way God's clockwork happens to be set up. The whole idea of
the Earth being a massive ball of rock, that requires energy to speed
up its rotation or slow down its rotation, is in direct opposition to
his world view.
So today's conventional astronomers just have these complicated
mechanistic ideas that just detract from our enjoyable contemplation
of God's miraculous handiwork in the heavens.
John Savard
Sam Wormley
>
> You hate astronomy and mock faith but that is not freedom,that is
> slavery of the worse kind.I do not pass judgment on you or the
> rest ,these things happen in their own way and own time but it is
> betrayal,make no mistake about this as it attempts to influence the
> next generation with the same rubbish you cling to.
It's hard for me to believe that Jesus would embrace your denial
of the rotation of the heavenly bodies such as the sun and moon,
Gerald! I don't see that as hating astronomy, nor mocking faith.
oriel36
That's right son,let it out,I too would lose my humanity if I thought
that I could not determine that the day/night cycle is due to the
daily rotation of the Earth and especially knowing what the Feb 29th
24 hour rotation does,and as for matters of faith,astronomy and
science is a facet of faith as it contains that one word which
encompasses the existence of the universe with our individual
existence - Behold !.
Are you ashamed that you went so far as to casually determine that day/
night is different to daily rotation in an open forum knowing there
would be nobody else objecting ?,the stupid idea of 366 1/4 rotations
in a year cannot come from an astronomer and I assure you,when you
make your few dollars,that you and your colleagues have devalued
astronomy to the point where it does not exist except in these
unmoderated forums.
What are you going to do next now that you believe 366 1/4 rotations
in a year without cause and effect ?.
Sam Wormley
Astronomy is particularly interesting in that there is new
discovery all the time! I find that I thrive on teaching and
am not afraid to show the excitement, the emotion and
appreciation for the men and women who have contributed to
our understanding of nature around us.
There is also beauty the mathematics and the insight, simplicity
and elegance that it contributes to our understanding.
So what's next? I'm going to keep teaching! Gerald you are
invited to take one of my classes, but you are going to have
to positively participate in class, read the textbook, do and
turn in the homework and take the exams. Your life will be
enriched. You become a better life-long learner.
oriel36
You do not teach,a person,any person, who cannot put the Feb 29th 24
hour rotation in context of 365 1/4 days and 365 1/4 rotations in an
orbital circuit does not belong anywhere near a classroom or a
scientific institution.
So be it,that unrepentant nature is a result of being exceptionally
crude,no more or no less but that you can openly state that the day/
night cycle and daily rotation are not intrinsic to each other without
fear of objection is your last word,not this one.
oriel36
> So what's next? I'm going to keep teaching! Gerald you are
> invited to take one of my classes, but you are going to have
> to positively participate in class, read the textbook, do and
> turn in the homework and take the exams. Your life will be
> enriched. You become a better life-long learner.
Tell me,what is the name of the institution you work for so I can
demonstrate gross incompetence and fraud seeing you are so confident
of your abilities,after all if I ask you what causes the day/night
cycle,you openly stated it is not daily rotation,to be precise seeing
this is a criminal incompetence issue -
On Nov 29, 9:41 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Gerald, you are taking about day night cycles.
> I am writing about earth rotations. Do you not have the foggiest
> notion that they are technically (thus astronomically) different?
Even a whisper of dissent from cause and effect amounts to criminal
liability as this is influencing students in a manner that endangers
their ability to reason properly.There was a reason others had tried
to talk you out of pursuing me but sooner or later you would compile
enough evidence for a larger conviction platform and having obliged ,I
thank you for helping to open up an incredibly productive chapter in
human history.It does not matter if you operate out of a community
college or JPL,assent by silence in this case is culpability and the
court is much tougher than any legal court as your kind will find out.
Btw the way,daily rotation causes the day night cycle.
Sam Wormley
I don't remember "Feb 29" or "day/night cycles" ever having come up
in ANY astronomy course that I have taught. Certainly the students are
expected to know and articulate the differences between sidereal and
solar days.
It is interesting that you, Gerald CANNOT articulate the difference
between sidereal and solar days, and the importance of both in
astronomy. Had you ever used a telescope that tracks the sky, or sun
you be a bit more "up" on the differences and importance.
Sam Wormley
> Tell me,what is the name of the institution you work for so I can
> demonstrate gross incompetence and fraud seeing you are so confident
> of your abilities,after all if I ask you what causes the day/night
> cycle,you openly stated it is not daily rotation,to be precise seeing
> this is a criminal incompetence issue -
>
Iowa State University
Marshalltown Community College
oriel36
Thank you.
Are you still confident that the day/night cycle and daily rotation
are not intrinsically linked through cause and effect ?.This is not a
trap,it s a simple question that you can answer any way you want with
considerations given to no more than a full 365 rotations and day/
night cycles in one orbital circuit and corresponding to 36 1/4 days
and 365 1/4 rotations within context of a Feb 29th day/night cycle
and 24 hour rotation.
You are giving an answer for everyone who has posted in
sci.astro.amateur within the last decade,not just representative of
your college but many other institutions so take your time and be
confident in your 366 1/4 rotations in a year.It is not a Usenet
game,it is something decisive and long overdue and if you can't
handle the responsibility then just say so.
Sam Wormley
I teach science, not bullshit, Gerald! I find it interesting that
you rally against the measurements of the rotation of the sun, of the
moon and and even the earth. You have trouble understanding what the
observations say, scientifically.
oriel36
I will take your original response that daily rotation and the day/
night cycle are not intrinsic to each other based on no more than a
full 365 1/4 days and rotations in an orbital circuit as opposed to
the empirical conception of 366 1/4 rotations in a year and its
inability to express cause and effect.That was not a Usenet game and
you did respond for the bigger institutions ,given that students are
under your influence and these students eventually turn into adults,it
is important to break that cycle which you treat so trivially.
Daily rotation causes the day/night cycle with the Feb 29th day/night
cycle corresponding to 24 hours of rotation and corresponding to 365
1/4 rotations and days in an orbital year.That is the basis of the
correct astronomical cause to the terrestrial effect and it is with
this precious fact that this goes elsewhere.
Sam Wormley
The rotation of the earth is responsible for solar day.... The earth
rotates 360° in one sidereal day and an additional ~1° in just under
4 minutes to line up with the noon day sun.
The equatorial region of the sun rotates with a period of ~25 days
and the rotation of the moon take 27+ days.
I would hope that you would cease to deny these observables, Gerald,
lest we think you a bit off your rocker.