Re: Goto Nixed for Club by AAVSO Oldtimer

On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 09:44:39 -0700, oriel36 <geraldkelleher@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote, in part:

There is no such thing as conventional astronomy,not as long as the
dominant view originating from Newton prevails -

That may be. I use the phrase "conventional astronomy" to mean that
which follows the prevailing view, and is generally acknowledged as
astronomy. Perhaps it is as wrong-headed as you say, and does not
deserve to be called astronomy; I do not believe that, but in any event,
I need to refer to the prevailing view in a simple way that everyone can
understand.

I never had a monopoly in explaining these l things and to think that
teenagers are within touching distance of the Copernican insights now
with modern imaging but are blocked by dull and dreary people like
yourself promoting the absolute/relative space of Newton or his false
view and resolution of retrogrades.

The use of the fixed stars as a reference, and of a viewpoint from the
perspective of someone standing at a fixed position relative to the Sun
and Stars is for the purpose of making learning the basics of astronomy
less dull and dreary - because it is simpler and more rapid.

As I will note below, I don't think that the difference between the
prevailing view and the "Copernican insights" which you believe differ
from it is going to be obvious to anyone; if there is such a difference,
you will have to make it plainer.

I
have tried everything except the one thing which pains me the most -
leaving.

There are, I am sad to say, many who will say, "Oh, yes! *Please* try
that!".

But I think there is one other thing you haven't tried. And it's because
you have failed to try it that some find your posts annoying. You have
presented the plain words of Copernicus and others, you have guided us
to photographs of the planets moving.

But the facts have failed to speak for themselves; yes, people agree
that Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler had beautiful insights, and yes,
they agree that the animation you pointed out is a beautiful
illustration of retrogades - and that the pole Uranus bears a different
relationship to us as it moves in its orbit.

But all those things don't budge people an inch towards agreeing with
you that Newton and Flamsteed were wrong. I think, and I believe pretty
well everyone else does too, that while Newton and Flamsteed may have
added some useful and important things to what their predecessors did,
they were perfectly consistent with those beautiful previous insights. I
see, and they see, no departure or contradiction.

And what you haven't tried, what you haven't felt the need to do,
because you felt it should be obvious (from the images, from the words
of Copernicus, and so on) is explain exactly where the difference is.
Why "from the Sun, always seen direct" departs from the truth, and so
on.

I'll admit that I don't believe that, even after you make this effort,
that people will be convinced. Instead, it will probably just make it
easier for them to say, no, you're wrong here and here. But it's the
only way you'll have any chance at all.

Of course, Jesus, who made the blind see, also said that "there are none
so blind as those who will not see", and you may feel that I am asking
you to out-do Jesus - since you have noted that with the facts you have
already presented, you do not know what else could possibly be needed.

John Savard

John Savard
http://www.quadibloc.com/index.html
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: An astronomers view of mechanics
    ... explanation that Copernicus,Kepler and Galileo knew,that we see ... Copernicus; as I have often noted, ... viewpoint that Newton only affirmed Copernicus and Kepler - adding ... book about astronomy that I read, which led me to an interest in these ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Goto Nixed for Club by AAVSO Oldtimer
    ... I use the phrase "conventional astronomy" to mean that ... I need to refer to the prevailing view in a simple way that everyone can ... yourself promoting the absolute/relative space of Newton or his false ... both axial and orbital motions / orientations Not,I repeat Not to try ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Goto Nixed for Club by AAVSO Oldtimer
    ... I use the phrase "conventional astronomy" to mean that ... I need to refer to the prevailing view in a simple way that everyone can ... yourself promoting the absolute/relative space of Newton or his false ... both axial and orbital motions / orientations Not,I repeat Not to try ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Goto Nixed for Club by AAVSO Oldtimer
    ... I use the phrase "conventional astronomy" to mean that ... which follows the prevailing view, ... that Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler had beautiful insights, and yes, ... you that Newton and Flamsteed were wrong. ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Re-aligning astronomical principles
    ... >>The whole point of Copernican/Keplerian heliocentricity is dropping the ... >>stellar background reference in which the plotted motions of the ... > not because of anything Newton said or did, but because it is the only ... >>contemplative astronomy; while to say by what circleand lines correct ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)