Re: precession of mercury
- From: hw@..(Dr. Henri Wilson)
- Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 20:26:15 GMT
On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 09:34:25 -0800 (PST), "Strich.9" <strich.9992@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Dec 22, 5:01 am, Jerry <Cephalobus_alie...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Dec 22, 3:35 am, Jerry <Cephalobus_alie...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Now why would you want to rotate it once every 90 minutes?
If it is NOT rotated the field of view retains its orientation whilst moving in
a very small circle.
Because if you rotate it once per year, you will done NOTHING
to, ahem, "compensate for" the diurnal aberration...
CORRECTION:
Because if you rotate it once per year, you will done NOTHING
to, ahem, "compensate for" the 90-minute period aberration
due to its orbit around the Earth.
Your "very small circle" has a 5 arcsec radius, which is huge.
Jerry
You miss the whole point. Aberration results from the ballistic
nature of light. end of story
It does....but the claims of Andersen and Jerry are wrong. The methods used in
Hipparcos eliminate aerration and are not sensitive to light speed .
Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm.
......
.
- References:
- Re: precession of mercury
- From: Dr. Henri Wilson
- Re: precession of mercury
- From: Jerry
- Re: precession of mercury
- From: Dr. Henri Wilson
- Re: precession of mercury
- From: Jerry
- Re: precession of mercury
- From: Dr. Henri Wilson
- Re: precession of mercury
- From: Jerry
- Re: precession of mercury
- From: Jerry
- Re: precession of mercury
- From: Strich.9
- Re: precession of mercury
- Prev by Date: Re: precession of mercury
- Next by Date: Re: Test SPF3
- Previous by thread: Re: precession of mercury
- Next by thread: Re: precession of mercury
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|