Re: Climate change
- From: oriel36 <kelleher.gerald@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 16:49:06 -0700 (PDT)
On Jun 25, 11:05 pm, skyguy <sky...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
How hard is it (apart from the usual nuisances who reply) to determine
what role rotational inclination (tilt) actually plays and that it
does not cause the seasons ? .
The idea of 'no tilt/no seasons' is derived by a hypothesis from
Copernicus himself but the modified view replaces that view with
practical observations based on planetary comparisons where the cause
of the seasons is actually the orbital motion of the Earth and the
isolation of that motion and its characteristics.
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.
Copernicus was right, no tilt-no seasons.
Oh brother,I could spend years answering every objection which seems
prepared to ignore the simple additional specific attached to orbital
motion which explains seasonal variations in daylight/darkness,why the
natural noon cycles vary,the seasonal disappearance of certain
constellations and all the other effects arising from the
modification.If you insist on the hypothesis of Copernicus of no tilt/
no seasons then you must be prepared to accept the full description
based on variable axial/Equatorial orientation to the central Sun -
"... 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 center, no inequality of
days and nights would be observed. On the contrary, it would always be
either the longest or shortest 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
The modified explanation alters the conception of 'no seasons' to
Equatorial conditions hence the degree of rotational inclination above
45 degrees indicate a planetary characteristic of Equatorial
conditions such as the Earth or below 45 degrees you have Uranus with
Polar characteristics.
So,the rotation of the Earth generates the day and night cycle and the
variations in the length of daylight/darkness is due to the orbital
motion which represents the seasonal cycle hence the seasons are not
caused by a daily rotational component such as 'tilt'.It is not the
difficult in this era when it is easy to make planetary comparisons.
A planet can have either Equatorial conditions such as the Earth or
polar conditions like Uranus based on what degree of 'tilt' exists but
of itself 'tilt' cannot cause the seasons,that dynamic is strictly the
specific way a planet orbits the Sun.The role of 'tilt' is therefore
restricted to seasonal characteristics and completely at variance with
the view of 'axial tilt to the orbital plane' or some such variation
of that theme -
Guess what, practically everyone here knows that it requires a
combination of a fixed (in space) axial tilt (to the orbital plane)
*combined* with the orbital motion of the earth during the course of a
year, to produce the seasons. You must be the last one here to discover
this.
The seasons will occur regardless of what the rotational inclination
is,if they look out from Mars they will see the same seasonal
disappearance of constellations as Earth but this is just one
additional detail among many when people decide to escape the Ra/Dec
conventions and grow up.Operating on a level where the proper
references for daily and orbital motions are restored back to where
they were before Flamsteed is crucial to understanding planetary
dynamics and that hasn't happened yet.
http://www.crh.noaa.gov/fsd/astro/season.php
I am not throwing good information after the 'climate change' mob whio
live and operate of a hyper fuss basis while not having any sense of
what causes basic temperature fluctuations of the day/night cycle due
to daily rotation or the seasonal cycle via orbital dynamics.
Is there any sane person,who can simply work out the reasons which
distinguish Earth from Uranus in terms of 'tilt' comparisons thereby
determining what role rotational inclination actually serves?.
I guess everyone here must be sane, because we all know how to make an
accurate comparison between the earth's rotational axis and that of
Uranus. If Uranus were a terrestrial planet, it would have very extreme
seasons during an orbit of the sun because of the extreme tilt to it's
orbital plane. There really is a connection between tilt (rotational
inclination) and a planet's orbital plane. After all, the tilt angle has
to be measured in reference to something. The orbital plane is that
reference.
http://astro.berkeley.edu/~imke/Infrared/UranusAo/ur_time_2001_2005.jpg
For all the fuss over 'global warming' and whether temperature spikes
are due to human or natural influences,until scientists explain the
basic seasonal temperature fluctuations correctly via astronomy and
planetary dynamics,they are being absolutely ridiculous in attempting
to correlate carbon dioxide with minor variations in temperature.
How intelligent do you need to be to understand what 'tilt' actually
does ?.
Apparently at least as intelligent as you, but there are many here who
are much more so. That's why they understand much more than you do about
orbital mechanics.
Here's that nagging question again. Why does the earth's rotational axis
remain fixed in space towards the star Polaris? Why not some other
direction or star? Have you made any attempt to look it up?
I have actually very little interest in 'climate change' other than
the idea of carbon dioxide as a temperature dial is quite a reckless
conclusion by excluding everything else and especially astronomical
inputs.Because 'astronomy' as most here know it is a middle class
magnification indulgence attached to late 17th century astrology,few
would understand the powerful arguments that put the brakes on this
bandwagon which excludes any other possibilities for temperature
spikes other than carbon dioxide or human pollution.
I can't answer every objection and explaining this multiple times in
order to get people familiar with the modified explanation for the
seasons and the natural noon has gone on long enough.Instead of 'axial
tilt' as a dynamic,'tilt' takes on a much more effective role in
shaping equatorial or polar characteristics while the dynamic is
strictly an orbital component. I am not in competition with NOAA or
any other climate organisation but they are obligated to explain the
known seasonal temperature fluctuations properly,including the day/
night fluctuations before deciding that they can account for global
temperature fluctuations from other causes.
Of course,after 1905 when anyone can make up whatever story they
like ,for instance,Copernicus had specific reasons for using variable
axial/Equatorial tilt as the reason for the seasons while you just
simply ignore it ,the valuable addition of a component to orbital
motion is lost in the hubris to retain 'axial tilt'.For my part,I am
relaxed at the level I enjoy these things and that is it.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Climate change
- From: skyguy
- Re: Climate change
- From: Dave Typinski
- Re: Climate change
- References:
- Climate change
- From: oriel36
- Re: Climate change
- From: skyguy
- Climate change
- Prev by Date: Re: To all those sad people who still doubt the moon landings!
- Next by Date: Mars Rover Yielding New Clues While Lodged in Martian Soil
- Previous by thread: Re: Climate change
- Next by thread: Re: Climate change
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
