Re: Those of us trying to help Kelleher

On Apr 17, 12:50 am, "dkel...@xxxxxxxxxxx" <dkel...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:


Now,Dwight,all this dithering around variable tilt to the Sun or
orbital plane is not going to help future generations deal with the
enormous problem which they will inherit just as we have.

 I never said it had a variable tilt relative to the plane of the
orbit.
In fact it has a constant angle relative to the orbital plane. It does
not
dither around. It is quite fixed to an inertial frame, as would be
expected for an object of the size of the Earth.

---snip some more ---

The original explanation for the seasons is based on a clear premise
of variable axial/equatorial inclination as a consequence of the
observations which are seen in the graphics -

http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/nof/sun/images/high_low_sun.gif

"To this circle, which goes through the middle of the signs, and to
its plane, the equator and the earth's axis must be understood to have
a variable inclination. For if they stayed at a constant angle, and
were affected exclusively by the motion of the centre, no inequality
of days and nights would be observed. On the contrary,it day or the
day of equal daylight and darkness, or summer or winter, or whatever
the character of the season, it would remain identical and
unchanged." Copernicus

This filters into global climate as the astronomical input which
considers the seasons as relying on variable inclination to solar
radiation by referencing 'tilt' to the central Sun but as most people
now already know,such a premise and conclusion does not work.The
orbital requirement is needed where ,as an independent motion,the
Earth orbits the Sun in a specific way thereby generating the seasons
and putting more emphasis on the length of time a location spends in
the orbital shadow and solar radiation as the major reason for
temperature fluctuations between January and July.I am not about to go
into more detail on a usenet forum considering that explaining the
seasons properly is a major modification and deserves the respect it
should get,in regard to the original explanation or the modification.

If you wish to remain with 'tilt' to the orbital plane as the reason
for seasonal temperature fluctuations then so be it,however,the
clarity of the original explanation by Copernicus expressed as
variable inclination can be modified using planetary comparisons but
nothing can be done with the tilt/orbital plane expression which
originates nowhere.While some participants,including you, have
realised some of the difficulties expressing the seasons solely off
'tilt' and especially in the last post where the limitations of the
old 'tilt' explanation become more obvious ,you remain entrenched in
the old way and I am satisfied that nothing more can be done here.













Your best bet is go back and look at the summer/winter high and low
trajectory and then think about the Equinox just as I have told
you.Only then can you start to consider that it is the specific way
the Earth orbits the Sun that accounts for the seasons and the
variations in the natural noon cycle when allied with daily rotation.

 As I stated, I fully understand the causes of the high and low
trajectory
during summer and winter. I also know what causes the solar noon
to move before and after local noon as measured with a clock
that keeps constant time.
 The explanation of the tilt of the Earth requires no astrological
reference.
It only requires an inertial reference to explain all. No stars are
required!
It is handy to use stars as reference points because their angular
motion
is so small relative to an inertial reference but it does not require
that
we use them.
 Can you explain exactly what the term equinox means for different
locations
North and South of the equator? It would seem that we may have
different
definitions. The only one I know of is that the Sun would rise and set
directly East and West and that it would pass directly ( 90 degrees )
over
head, at local noon, if one were at the equator.



I will pretty much leave this forum to its own astrological devices
from here on in as you all  are descendents of the same people who
tried so hard to block Harrison in his endeavor to create accurate
watches which maintain the correlation between clocks,terrestrial
longitudes and daily rotation as 24 hours/360 degrees,the most
fundamental correlation in all astronomy for daily rotation through
360 degrees without an external reference.

 Our genetic heritage has nothing to do with the our understand of the
seasons.
I doubt I have any genetic connection to the few that were involved
with
the troubles Harrison had. In fact I have in the past depended on the
methods he founded in order to do navigation. I doubt we have but
one or two people,( if that ) that are genetically related to anyone
that
even knew about Harrison when he was alive, that post to SAA.
Dwight


People here have an ideological connection with the astrologers who
tried to resolve longitude determination via celestial sphere geometry
and who were happy to see Harrison and his clock fail by whatever
methods they thought necessary,even the horological masterpieces were
left to languish for 200 years so peevish was the reaction to his
resolution based on the correlation between clocks,terrestrial
longitudes and daily rotation via the 24 hours/360 degree
value.Harrison was like a one man version of NASA with no need to
stress the inventive importance of the bimetallic strip and the
roller bearing (page 94),but the world has been less than generous in
according the man these achievements as components of the true
original mechanism of a clock that keeps a constant pace over a long
period -

http://books.google.com/books?id=b5Wsw3rYVbEC&printsec=frontcover&dq=time+restored&ei=9pfoSb2GMKTYMNW4wccF#PPA94,M1

The point here is that people can continue on without the slightest
difficulty and no regard whatsoever for anything other than their
chosen exercise which amounts to magnification and the calendar based
Ra/Dec conventions.All situations evolve for good or for bad,in this
case,there is no room left to argue for or against the orbital dynamic
which generates the seasons and I leave you with the unoriginal and
idiosyncratic 'axial tilt to the orbital plane',something Copernicus
never said or infered.







.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Climate change
    ... If the earth had no rotational inclination (tilt), it's orbital motion around the sun would *not* produce variable seasons. ... That's why a tilt (to the orbital plane) is a necessary condition for seasons to occur. ... determining what role rotational inclination actually serves?. ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Fair orbital question
    ... with respect to its orbital plane. ... talking about the Earth's axis, which is tilted 23.4 degrees, ... has a significant tilt, which you can observe in the ... orientation with respect to the sun, and us, changes. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Fair orbital question
    ... with respect to its orbital plane. ... Mars' axis has a tilt ... rings during one long Saturn orbit of the sun, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Fair orbital question
    ... with respect to its orbital plane. ... Mars' axis has a tilt ... rings during one long Saturn orbit of the sun, ...
    (sci.physics)
Quantcast