Re: relative motion and aging

In sci.physics.relativity, geraldkelleher@xxxxxxxxxxx
<geraldkelleher@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote
on 22 May 2005 12:44:19 -0700
<1116791059.257546.259380@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> To ghost
>
> Go back to that bit with Newtonian 'absolute time', now ghost,Newton
> made a simple mistake or rather Flamsteed made the mistake and Newton
> never picked up on it,he even built his entire ballistic agenda applied
> to planetary motion on the wrong relationship between axial and orbital
> motion.
>
> Dirk,shine up the award for the golden fumble of the last
> millenium,are you ready Dirk,it is astonishing for its simplicity.
>
> The pre-Copernican 24 hour day translates into independent and constant
> axial rotation at 24 hours /360 degrees in a Copernican/Keplerian
> heliocentric system using the Equation of Time correction.
>
> Poor Newton failed/did'nt know/never figured out the 24 hour/constant
> axial rotation translation and went along with Flamsteed's erroneous
> proof for constant axial rotation value of 23 hours 56 min 04 sec.
>
> So,relativists and Newtonians are similiar by the degree of
> stupidity,to be fair to Newton he was an out and out peevish banana
> head and could'nt help himself but Albert is just plain funny.
>

Sidereal vs. Synodic. Easy to measure; take an arbitrary
star (preferably near the celestial equator) and note
its position at a certain time of ... well, night, since
most stars don't show up during the day, the very rare
supernova notwithstanding. (Make sure it's a star; planets
have their own agenda. :-) )

Now, when does it get to the exact same (or nearly exact same)
position the next night?

As for "absolute time", Lorent'z equations make it very clear: there
can't be such. The difference isn't much -- about 4.46 * 10^-10 --
for GPS (the delta is a combination of SR and GR), but it's there and
has to be dealt with.

As for Flamsteed's error -- perhaps you can clarify as to why (or,
for that matter, *what*)? It would be rather inconvenient for
sunrise to occur at 11 in the evening clocktime... :-)

--
#191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
It's still legal to go .sigless.
.

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: Simple question about relativity and space time
    ... "Absolute time, in astronomy, is distinguished from relative, by the ... I know every maneuver Newton took to re-arrange astronomical ... clockwork solar system inherited from Flamsteed/Newton like so many ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Sachs/Hunger: VAT4956 misrep exposed to British Museum
    ... The one thing that distinguishes Newton from numbskulls that follow ... "Absolute time, in astronomy, is distinguished from relative, by the ... Earth rotates through 360 degrees in 24 hours exactly for the ... axial rotation with the Equation of Time as a common denominator cannot ...
    (uk.sci.astronomy)
  • Re: relative motion and aging
    ... > Go back to that bit with Newtonian 'absolute time', now ghost,Newton ... > made a simple mistake or rather Flamsteed made the mistake and Newton ... I don't know about Ghost, but putting me in the company of ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: An astronomers view of mechanics
    ... presented in terms of absolute space and absolute time of Newton. ... want to use the fixed stars as a reference, ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)