Re: An astronomer's view of mechanics

On 11 Oct, 02:29, Quadibloc <jsav...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
oriel36 quoted:

SAGR." I know; such men do not deduce their conclusion from its
premises or establish it by reason, but they accommodate (I should
have said discommode and distort) the premises and reasons to a
conclusion which for them is already established and nailed down. No
good can come of dealing with such people, especially to the extent
that their company may be not only unpleasant but dangerous."

This is a crime of which neither I nor Newton and Flamsteed may be
justly accused.

Copernicus spoke of the loops of the planets being untangled by virtue
of an annual motion of the Earth. As you have noted, and praised.

This is a part of the theory of the heavens which Copernicus called by
the name "heliocentric".

So the Earth moves around the Sun once a year.

And the other planets also move around the Sun, without loops.
Retrogades are simply an appearance, caused by the Earth overtaking
the slower-moving outer planets (for example; in the case of an inner
planet, it is because that planet is on the opposite side of its
orbit, so moving in the opposite direction from Earth without
reversing its orbit).

You agree with those things, as you have stated them often enough.

And then, when Flamsteed comes along, and says the very same thing in
slightly different words, you say he has made a terrible mistake that
has put astronomy on the wrong footing ever since.


" For to the earth planetary motions appear sometimes direct,
sometimes stationary, nay, and sometimes retrograde. But from the sun
they are always seen direct," Newton

You merely now affirm the words of Galileo for how many will applaud
the attribution to Flamsteed that originatewd with Newton.How many
here will admire -


SALV. "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. Beside
themselves with passion, some of them would not be backward even about
scheming to suppress and silence their adversaries. I have had some
experience of this myself." Galileo


http://webexhibits.org/calendars



Yes, he chose a different phrasing; he speaks of planets being direct
in the Sun's night sky, as though they could ever be seen in such
glare!

I cannot begin to grasp what offense he has commited against the truth
by the sentence you quote. It is just another way to say the planets
go around the Sun, and in doing so, they never reverse their course to
make loops; those loops, those retrogades, are an appearance we see on
Earth because the Earth, too, is in motion.

John Savard

You cannot begin to grasp indeed,you have not the slightest idea just
how unpleasent and dangeous the Flamsteed/Newton combination has been
to structural and timekeeping astronomy.

I have given participants here the words of a man who used his
telescope as a real tool to promote astronomy whereas 500 years later
there arer nothing but astrologers who believe they are of the
heritage of Copernicus,Kepler and Galileo.I do not condemn you but the
words of these great astronomers do.


When I said I was tired it only was due to poor sentence structure and
spelling errors,there is nothing whatsoever beyond that .

Until people come to grips wqith Galileo,as one of your own from the
magnification side,you will remain astrologers ,a level below the
Simplicio character in the Dialogue.You want to condone a worthless
view of Newton then good for you,it has no precedence in either pre-
Copernican or heliocentric astronomy -

" For to the earth planetary motions appear sometimes direct,
sometimes stationary, nay, and sometimes retrograde. But from the sun
they are always seen direct," Newton




.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Refuting the Big Bang Theory
    ... the big bang of some 17.6 billion years ago started it ... cooled, and became planets. ... than "impossible" is too benign a term for the fact that our Earth exists as ... It's a good thing our sun is in a single-star configuration. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Refuting the Big Bang Theory
    ... the big bang of some 17.6 billion years ago started it ... cooled, and became planets. ... than "impossible" is too benign a term for the fact that our Earth exists as ... It's a good thing our sun is in a single-star configuration. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Avoiding the Leap Second
    ... A location on Earth does not rotate to face the Sun in 24 hours ... The creation of the 24 hour cycle from the unequal natural noon cycle ... that the Sun or the Earth passeth the 12. ... core of astronomy is a creationist-type affair all wrapeed up in ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Two Questions...
    ... Astronomy stopped at Roemer,after that Newton bundled the Keplerian ... "For to the earth planetary motions appear sometimes direct, ... But from the sun they are ... you can't remove more greenhouse gases from ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Empirical cult
    ... | are astronomy, ... entirely rids the planets of these extremely intricate coils, ... Earth repeats its circle sixteen times " KEPLER ... Earth which accounts for the observed motions of the planets seeming to ...
    (uk.religion.christian)