Without objection

On Jun 17, 8:03 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Jun 17, 5:40 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
On Jun 17, 4:37 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
You didn't write anything,you just produced a thumbsucking excerpt
which doesn't deal with the problems which existed around 1904 or
rather,rigs it to suit a conclusion based on homocentricity within an
astrological framework which relativity represents as an extension of
that original framehopping absolute/relative space catastrophe of
Newton.
Frame hoppers make the mistake of thinking that frame dependent
observations affect the observation from another frame.

"This absolute time can be measured by comparison with no motion; it
has therefore neither a practical nor a scientific value; and no one
is justified in saying that he knows aught about it. It is an idle
metaphysical conception." Mach, Analyse der Empfindungen, 6th ed.
Now you know why there is no "Mach's Law", as there is no absolute
time.

Ah,you wish simple answers to question such as long does it takes the
Earth to turn once and it encompasses the Equation of Time and the
natural noon references which then filter into daily rotation as a
constant.You declare 'no absolute time' whereas Newton's idiosyncratic
expression of it remains the distinction between natural noon and 24
hour noon -

"Absolute time, in astronomy, is distinguished from relative, by the
equation or correlation of the vulgar time. For the natural days are
truly unequal, though they are commonly considered as equal and used
for a measure of time; astronomers correct this inequality..." Newton

That is why most of this is dependent on restoring the correct
references for daily and orbital motions in order to complete
obliterate the astrological infections created by Flamsteed and built
on by Newton.

Physics, astronomers, and the majority of posters to sci.astro.amateur
use these terms differently than you do, Gerald. There is no absolute
time in astronomy and hasn't been for more than a hundred years.

Rotation of bodies, including the Earth has nothing to do with the
equation of time. The Equation of time deals with the "solar day" and
elliptical orbit of the earth about the sun.... totally independent
of the measure of rotation of the earth.


I allowed Newton his idiosyncratic take on the Equation of Time as
absolute/relative time,the reference system which uses the daily
cycle to natural noon in order to create the equable and average 24
hour day,even his use of the switching of references for daily and
orbital motions by Flamsteed.

You can openly state something like that in this forum without fear
of objection and then I know I am not among men let alone
astronomers.You cannot do any worse because there is nothing worse
than what you believe.






.

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: Panis Quadragesimalis of Kepler
    ... Galileo, or Kepler. ... Copernicus proposed that the Earth went around the Sun, ... hold on to the string or rope that restrains it; Newton showed that ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: This is for Kepler
    ... the heliocentric faster Earth taking an inner orbital circuit.The toys ... >>stationary Earth but an orbitally motion Earth. ... Newton was a peevish freak who cared little for the exquisite reasoning ... If you feel the need to travel to the Sun to account for retrogrades ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Is the universe coming or going?
    ... Would you give up your cherished belief that Newton knew how to ... "For to the earth planetary motions appear sometimes direct, ... Copernican reasoning and verifying that to account for axial rotation ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Panis Quadragesimalis of Kepler
    ... Copernicus proposed that the Earth went around the Sun, ... Kepler then gave an exact description to the motions of the planets. ... But it was then Newton who _completed_ the achievements they began. ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)