Re: Good Article on Orbital Dynamics

On Feb 5, 8:02 pm, Agent Smith <agent-sm...@two-blocks-on-your-
left.com> wrote:
oriel36 <geraldkelle...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote innews:7bafd921-e4c8-4690-b715-0490d08dcfc3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:







On 4 Feb, 22:03, Agent Smith <agent-sm...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
oriel36 <geraldkelle...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote
innews:1230dc2a-5334-4123-9b54-8a
2dabc01...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:

On 4 Feb, 01:12, Agent Smith
<agent-sm...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
It's from last month's issue of American Scientist.

http://tinyurl.com/2w4h5a

Toward the end of the article, that author says that the
configuration of extrasolar planets aroung the star 55 Cancri has
a region of stable orbits

that will allows a planet to exist in the habitable zone around
it's sun, where the temperature is just right for liquid water to
exist. Since the
whole point of the article is that solar systems are "full," ie.
that all stable orbits are typically inhabited, the author is
clearly suggesting that the chances are quite good of actually
finding a planet in that region, eventually.

The first sentence in that article was certainly not written by
anyone who knows Kepler's work or indeed that of the pre-Copernican
or heliocentric astronomers -

"In 1605, Johannes Kepler discovered that the orbits of the planets
are ellipses rather than combinations of circles, as astronomers
had assumed since antiquity."

Care to correct it ?.

The geocentric astronomers  posited the Equant for the Keplerian
refinement whereas epicycles were employed to resolve the main
Copernican argument based on retrogrades -

"Copernicus, by attributing a single annual motion to the earth,
entirely rids the planets of these extremely intricate coils
[spiris], leading the individual planets into their respective
orbits [orbitas],quite bare and very nearly circular. In the period
of time shown in the diagram, Mars traverses one and the same orbit
as many times as the 'garlands' [corollas] you see looped towards
the centre,with one extra, making nine times, while at the same
time the Earth repeats its circle sixteen times "  Kepler  refering
to diagra
m
on page 86 -

http://mitpress.mit.edu/journals/pdf/POSC_13_1_74_0.pdf

It is amazing that there is an overlooked orbital component to the
Earth's motion,which can visibly be extracted from the motions of
the Equatorial rings of Uranus yet nobody wants to touch it -

http://astro.berkeley.edu/~imke/Infrared/UranusAo/ur_time_2001_
2005.jpg

The change in orientation of the rings with respect to the central
Sun is 100 % certain along with the nature of the change in
accordance with Keplerian precepts.Before you ponder other solar
systems perhaps it is much better to adding the major orbital
component to our own planet and specifically replacing the
pseudo-dynamic of variable axial tilt with the explicitly
observationbal orbital change.

The moon librates on a much shorter period than that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3ryt9fBOBE-Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The new orbital component based on referencing orbital motion against
the Sun is too magnificent a motion to ignore.yet  you have no feel
for it -

http://space.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn12529/dn12529-1_
800.
jpg

The  change in the Equatorial rings with respect to the Sun is in
accordance with Keplerian orbital geometry hence it is quite seperate
to axial rotation/orientation.The application of the same principle to
the Earth's orbital motion leads to a simple working principle that a
location will turn through 360 degrees with respect to the Sun over
the course of an annual orbit.

I would have expected an MIT engineer to intepret the images correctly
but judging from the youtube sequence you responded with,obviously you
have not.The addition of a new orbital component  is a major departure
from the pseudo-dynamic of variable axial/Equatorial inclination  and
unfortunately,for whatever reasons,nobody in the entire newsgroups are
up to the challenge even with sequential imaging of another planet
allied with graphics demonstrates its existence explicitly,not even an
inference required,but a clear and unambiguous observation.

The problem is that, with an 84 year period, Uranus moves so slowly
along the course of its orbit that the data comes in at a trickle.
There is a slight change oscillation of the rings' inclination, with a
one year period, due to the motion of the earth, but this is not the 360
degree rotation you're talking about.


What !,do you wish me to treat you like a child and show you graphics
of how the orbital orientation changes through 360 degrees with
respect to the Sun as an orbital component -

http://physics.uoregon.edu/~jimbrau/BrauImNew/Chap13/FG13_06.jpg

Or do you want to be treated like a man and discuss how the change in
the orbital orientation denoted by the orbital longitude beacon of the
Equatorial rings is in accordance with Keplerian orbital geometry -

http://asymptotia.com/wp-images/2007/08/uranus_rings.jpg



To make a movie out of just five frames, gathered at a rate of one per
year, you have to kludge the data pretty bad, which I expect would cause
such a film to lose most of its charm.  However, if you think that the
project can be done, I urge you to do it, if for no other reason than to
see what happens.  There's a virtually infinite amount of available
work, appropriate for amateur astronomers, and having found your very
personal, favorite project, nobody else can ever respect it as
profoundly as you do.


An actual motion a person can see,it is even plainer than axial
rotation and look at that ill-considered and dull mess you just
wrote.I am not trying to convince you of anything,the sequence of
images is enough as far as I know but it may highlight how little you
know about orbital motion and especially that gorgeous motion which is
responsible for variations in daylight/darkness North and South of the
Equator and variations in the noon cycle.

I do not need to tell you how small you look,you manage to do it all
on your own,may be cowardice,may be incapacity,the fact is that you do
not see the motion apart from axial rotation/orientation and that is
that.



Even if you have a day job, so severely restricting the amount of work
you can do, that it will take your entire lifetime to complete the task,
I still encourage you to do it.  Depending on how old you are, at a rate
of one frame per year, you should still get several new frames during
the rest of your time on earth.  You can't finish it, but by the time
you're gone, you may have taken a healthy chunk out of the project, and
it is moving so slowly that you'll still have plenty of time to invent
at least a few more tasks that nobody's ever thought of, for instance,
calculating when to take the snapshot so that the effects of the earth's
orbit are reduced.


How great my astronomical ancestors were to infer the heliocentric
arrangement including the lengthy periods of Jupiter and Saturn
without having to prove heliocentricity using full annual orbital
cycles .-

Now what is said here of Jupiter is to be understood of Saturn and
Mars also. In Saturn these retrogressions are somewhat more frequent
than in Jupiter, because its motion is slower than Jupiter's, so that
the Earth overtakes it in a shorter time. In Mars they are rarer, its
motion being faster than that of Jupiter, so that the Earth spends
more time in catching up with it. Next, as to Venus and Mercury, whose
circles are included within that of the Earth, stoppings and
retrograde motions appear in them also, due not to any motion that
really exists in them, but to the annual motion of the Earth. This is
acutely demonstrated by Copernicus . . . - 1632, Dialogue Concerning
the Two Chief World Systems




Would you please post a link to the parent page, from which those photos
are accessed, as well as its parent, and as far up the chain as you need
to go to get all details of all the Uranian photos at that site,
including especially the camera information.  I'm assuming that it was
taken with the Hubble, but these days, you can't be sure.


You are childish,a simple google image search would give you what you
want


I'm not going to deny that those aren't excellent pictures, but I really
don't understand what you mean by "the addition of a new orbital
component."  It sounds like you're using the language of astrology, but
I can't be sure.  

Any competent high school physics student should be able to infer that
the tilt of the Uranian rings will go through a 360 degree cycle, as
Uranus orbits the sun.

Tilting is an action,a dynamic.The axial orientation of Uranus is due
to axial rotation and nothing further can be said other than it points
in one fixed direction in space just as the Earth does.Axial rotation
cannot change the orientation of the axis/Equator with respect to the
Sun so you can set aside the old reliance on variable axial/equatorial
inclination.

You can actually see how axial rotation does nothing other than keep
Uranus pointing in one direction in space,I will even show you the
childish graphic you require -

http://physics.uoregon.edu/~jimbrau/BrauImNew/Chap13/FG13_06.jpg

The change in the orientation of the rings does not look dramatic in
the graphic but seen using powerful and sequential imaging it
certainly is.If all you can manage is a 'tilting' Uranus then good for
you but the easier answer is to seperate orbital motion and treat the
change in orientation of a location to the Sun as a seperate issue.

I have to treat you like a high school pupil and ask you a simple
question,Over the course of an annual orbit does a location turn
slowly through 360 degrees with respect to the Sun ?.when you come to
the only possible conclusion be sure to teach others that there
beloved celestial sphere arc drawn from the central Sun through the
Earth to constellational geometry does not work -

http://www.pfm.howard.edu/astronomy/Chaisson/AT401/IMAGES/AACHCIT0.JPG







 The libration of the moon, however, was
completely new to me, and it totally blew my mind to see it.  I'm not
completely certain, but I suspect that it is the up and down tilt of the
moon, as seen from earth, as the moon rises and falls along the
inclination of its orbit.  Thus that is also "the addition of a new
orbital element."

Perhaps you're not necessarily infatuated by *any* "new orbital
element," but just by the ones exhibited by the two most remote gas
giants.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

TNewton hung his ballistic agenda on a framework created by Flamsteed
which keeps a location facing noon every 24 hours exactly in order to
justify axial and orbital motion to a star in 23 hours 56 minutes 04
seconds -

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1d/Tiempo_sid%C3%A9reo.en.png

That reasoning belongs to mindless brutes with no feel for
astronomical accomplishments.You do not like the way a location
slowly turns through 360 degrees with respect to the Sun ,seperate to
axial rotation,then good for you.At least you now know how the
geocentrists felt when confronted with the original Copernican
reasoning,in fact I am being harsh on the geocentrists diue to the
strological framework and the reasoning behind you dismal approach.



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Good Article on Orbital Dynamics
    ... configuration of extrasolar planets aroung the star 55 Cancri ... central Sun is 100 % certain along with the nature of the change ... principle to the Earth's orbital motion leads to a simple working ... respect to the Sun over the course of an annual orbit. ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: non relativist / non aetherist reply
    ... > | the Earth axially rotates out of its orbital shadow) and you will ... > | the Sun. ... motion.You view the circumpolar motion of the stars in this light ... assumes axial rotation to be constant and equalises all the variables ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The great Western adaption
    ... appreciate the annual orbital motion of the Earth John,in fact Newton's ... take our meals by the Sun, ... or no attempt to force it into a celestial sphere geometry. ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: The great Western adaption
    ... take our meals by the Sun, ... It certainly won't harmonize with celestial sphere geometry, ... to justify the axial and orbital motions of the Earth. ... their motion in relation to the walls of that room. ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Congratulations guys !
    ... the central Sun hence the useful 'restore point' when dealing with ... spoke of a "variable tilt" for the Earth, but I think he was only ... referring to an apparent geocentric motion there; ... The natural noon cycle represents a geometrical relation between the ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)