Re: An astronomer's view of mechanics

oriel36 wrote:
The bottleneck which was created in the late 17th century by Flamsteed
first and Newton later spun itself off into a vocabulary all of its
own and still used today -

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

The created bottleneck where no new data can pass productively exists
as a consequence of the work of two individuals yet it can be
presented in terms of absolute space and absolute time of Newton.

Absolute/relative time is simply the false perception that the 'fixed
stars ' provide a means to determine axial and orbital motion and is
the basis for Newton's treatment of Keplerian geometries.

Absolute/relative space is the false approach and resolution of
retrogrades and opposed to Coipernican reasoning,an idiosyncratic
version by Newton which is counter-productive on all counts and has no
precedence in pre-Copernican and heliocentric astronomies.

Many attempts were made to deal with time and space conceptions and
especially by the Germans such as Mach -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach's_principle

For an astronomer with the neccessary intutive intelligence it is
possible to identify the double errors which eluded many people for
centuries and for the most part show how it is possible to re-align
most of the astronomical principles back to 'safe mode'.

I thank you for attempting here to explain in more detail what it is
you find troubling about the current understanding of Solar System
motions.

If indeed, though, no one has yet come up with "true" principles of
time and space - Mach's principle being an unsuccessful attempt - and
what we have to do is discard Newton and limit ourselves only to what
Copernicus and Kepler knew, thus being in a more limited world - like
going into "safe mode" in the Microsoft Windows operating system -
people will be understandably reluctant to do that without a good
reason.

And given the impressive success of computations based on Newton in
guiding space probes to the distant planets, or predicting the
complicated motions of the Moon to a high accuracy, it would seem that
this would be avoiding things that are *known* to work and *proven* by
experience - simply because they are somehow inaesthetic. At least
from your point of view.

As an example of one point that baffles me is that even if one doesn't
want to use the fixed stars as a reference, if one admits Venus moves
faster, the Earth more slowly, and Mars more slowly yet, in the same
direction around the Sun, then isn't one also admitting that a year is
approximately the period of the Earth's revolution around the Sun?

And, of course, _that_ admission leads directly to 1/day + 1/year = 1/
(23 hours, 56 minutes, 4 seconds) which you find particularly
problematic, as well as indicating that the fixed stars really are
approximately fixed. This is why you seem to us to be contradicting
yourself.

Of course, I know you may feel that we are so indoctrinated with
empiricism that the intuition has just been beaten out of us - and if
that weren't true, you wouldn't need to explain further, we would see
what is obvious to you.

John Savard

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The BB
    ... Newton. ... expression of it remains the distinction between natural noon and 24 ... "Absolute time, in astronomy, is distinguished from relative, by the ... references for daily and orbital motions in order to complete ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Simple question about relativity and space time
    ... "Absolute time, in astronomy, is distinguished from relative, by the ... I know every maneuver Newton took to re-arrange astronomical ... clockwork solar system inherited from Flamsteed/Newton like so many ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Sachs/Hunger: VAT4956 misrep exposed to British Museum
    ... The one thing that distinguishes Newton from numbskulls that follow ... "Absolute time, in astronomy, is distinguished from relative, by the ... Earth rotates through 360 degrees in 24 hours exactly for the ... axial rotation with the Equation of Time as a common denominator cannot ...
    (uk.sci.astronomy)
  • Re: relative motion and aging
    ... > made a simple mistake or rather Flamsteed made the mistake and Newton ... star and note ... As for "absolute time", Lorent'z equations make it very clear: ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The princile of the relativity.
    ... Newton needed to fit planetary motion into the Ra/Dec system by ... Try the actual periodic times argumenty of Kepler known as the 10th ... apparent movement of the Sun has 365 days which is the mean measure ... "Relativity made the odler concepts of absolute space and absolute time ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Loading