Re: Know your analemma from a hole in the ground

On Nov 10, 9:43 pm, Dave Typinski <nos...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Nov 10, 7:56 pm, Dave Typinski <nos...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Nov 10, 8:31 am, Dave Typinski <nos...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Nov 10, 12:06 am, Dave Typinski <nos...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Nov 9, 5:45 pm, Dave Typinski <nos...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Nov 9, 7:37 am, Dave Typinski <nos...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Quadibloc <jsav...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Nov 7, 6:46 pm, Dave Typinski <nos...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Here's a nice clear, concise article from the November issue of
Physics Today on the reason for the existence of astronomical
analemmas.

I found it difficult to follow the URL, but I eventually did find the
article - and the thesis it referenced, which was quite nice.

Sorry about that.  I used the "preview" feature of TinyURL.

Since I'm new here, I'll throw it out to y'all... is there a better
way to post links such that they're easier for folks to follow?

Thanks!
--
Dave

You are new to discovering that you are an astrologer after all,barely
capable of thinking for yourself but quite capable of explaining the
figure 8 feature using the motions of the Earth.

The empiricists learn pretty quickly to keep their mouths shut here as
you will  but that is no excuse for others to remain quiet on very
important matters that need to be handled with the dignity and respect
it deserves.The days where empiricists could run amok with astronomy
are over and if nobody appointed me authority in astronomical matters
I certainly am now.

I am not interested in poking anyone,but if you want to promote the
'analemma', a late 17th century hoax then that suits me fine,I will
show you it is nothing other than stupidity designed by people who
believe that there is an external reference for constant  daily
rotation through 360 degrees,something so unforgivable that it sinks
to a level not seen before -maybe flat-Earthers or astrologers exist
at the only comparable intellectual level as the 'sidereal time'
proponents.

I have to believe that people are not doing their jobs or unfamiliar
with the technical details because the other option is almost
unthinkable.

If there's no external reference, then how do you know it's rotating?
--
Dave

There are two dual motions going on simultaneously with respect to the
central Sun,

<snip>

Doesn't a Focault pendulum say you're wrong about that?
--
Dave

Oh,so now you are timid and reduce yourself to asking questions about
things that are so basic that I wonder what age you are ?.

You will find that I am wholly unashamed, nay, proud to ask questions
about things that I know I don't know.

First and foremost - terrestrial longitudes which represent
geographical separation based on 4 minutes for each degree of
longitude making 24 hours to circle the 360 degree planet requires no
further explanation and basically the following guys doing the
experiment had enough sense to follow this inviolate correlation -

http://www.phys-astro.sonoma.edu/people/students/baker/SouthPoleFouca...

In one place they claim 24h 50m for the period, then 24h, then say
they also had a pendulum that evinced a 12h period.

Maybe somebody can take you buy the hand and explain to you why
Foucault's pendulum will tend to register a full return in 24 hours
exactly at the geographical poles while taking longer the further
towards the Equator,you can even affirm the basic  24 hours/360 degree
correlation between clocks and terrestrial geography using a different
site -

http://www.music.sc.edu/fs/bain/atmi02/foucault/pendulum.htm

So,have you got that clear now.

<snip>

They're approximating.  That is, they're using the phrase "24 hours"
to represent the sidereal day, which is appropriate given that the
difference is so small that it's most often not worth worrying about.
In our case, it is worth worrying about.

An idealized Focault pendulum at the poles will evince an Earth
rotation period of one sidereal day, not one solar day.  Rotation in a
Newtonian universe (we've no need for Einstein at this level of
analysis) obeys Mach's principle.  Rotation is relative to the fixed
stars, not the Sun.  
--
Dave

Our bodies are designed around the daily cycle and that means rotation
to the central Sun and the sad part in all this is that in all the
years I have explained the ins and outs of how clocks are kept fixed
to the natural noon cycle via the Equation of Time correction,not a
single individual has thought it a magnificent testament to existence
and human achievement which it is.

Do you want to know where Isaac gets his absolute/relative time and
space ?,many here now are educated in the difference between his silly
views and that of the great astronomers such as Copernicus,Kepler and
Galileo in real terms rather than the exotic relativity thingie of the
last century and should be capable of guiding you through the
arguments that distinguish the reasoning of Copernicus and the dumb
mutations Isaac dumped on heliocentricity.They may even surprise
themselves with what they know now  and especially in respect to how
daily rotation through 360 degrees combines with a slow orbital
turning of the planet to generate the natural noon cycles thereby
affirming that there is no isolated external reference for daily
rotation through 360 degrees.Daily rotation being constant the value
for daily rotation through 360 degrees is almost identical to 24 hours
exactly so I am afraid you are  around 3 minutes 56 seconds off to the
actual value.

No small error let me tell you.

It's a simple question: does your specific arrangement of reasoning
predict that an idealized Foucault pendulum situated at either pole
will evince an Earth rotation of 360° per sidereal day or 360° per
solar day?

The answer demonstrates the difference between an astrologer and an
astronomer for the astrologer will answer 23 hours 56 minutes with
daily rotation through 360 degrees fixed to an external reference
while the astronomer acknowledges that there is no external reference
for daily rotation through 360 degrees and the 24 hour/360 degree for
the Earth rotating beneath Foucault's pendulum at the geographical
poles is the only possible value.


 No high order corrections are needed here: it's either one
sidereal day or one solar day at this level of analysis.

So, which is it?
--
Dave

If you cannot give the correct answer to the most basic motion of
all- ,the length of time it takes the Earth to rotate through 360
degrees and the answer is 24 hours then I can well understand why you
may have problems with orbital specifics.The reasoning employed to
believe that a star returning to a location in 3 minutes 56 seconds
earlier each night can act as a reference for daily rotation is so
shockingly bad that I once thought that participants would be
embarrassed enough to take action given the astrological implication
it introduces but have found over the years that they love the
framework and have no intention of altering their position as
indicative of the institutions they represent.


It is far better now to promote new discoveries than go chasing after
people who are incapable of altering their views so if you believe
that there is something to the fiction of a 3 minute 56 second
difference between a sidereal and solar day and using the motions of
the Earth to justify it then good for you,it helps me know what your
position is and that you can be left to your own devices.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Know your analemma from a hole in the ground
    ... rotation period of one sidereal day, ... affirming that there is no isolated external reference for daily ... does your specific arrangement of reasoning ... astronomers down. ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Know your analemma from a hole in the ground
    ... it deserves.The days where empiricists could run amok with astronomy ... rotation period of one sidereal day, ... affirming that there is no isolated external reference for daily ... does your specific arrangement of reasoning ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: about newtons gravitation theory
    ... already there via stellar dynamics and the correlation between maximum ... Equatorial speed,differential rotation and spherical deviation.To put ... planetary shape or motion). ... its own.Again,I am a Christian astronomer who is deeply involved in ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: whats your bet?
    ... quickly to modern imaging and start behaving like real me for a ... with the empirical idea that the rotation of the constellations around ... conclusion and Newton act on it,the former an error no astronomer ... "empiricists. ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: whats your bet?
    ... use to it,contemporary dynamicists are going to have to adapt very ... quickly to modern imaging and start behaving like real me for a ... with the empirical idea that the rotation of the constellations around ... conclusion and Newton act on it,the former an error no astronomer ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)