Re: Precession of the equinoxes ?


"OG" <owen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4ra0abForqm7U1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
| "Sorcerer" <Headmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| news:_8x3h.136769$lT5.47357@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| >
| > "OG" <owen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > news:4r7ihoFq5i5kU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > |
| > | "Tom Linden" <tom@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > | news:op.tikg1lb1zgicya@xxxxxxxxxx
| > | >I was looking at some data,
| > | >
| > | > http://aa.usno.navy.mil/data/docs/EarthSeasons.html
| > | >
| > | > I could not figure out why the duration between Winter solstice and
| > the
| > | > immediately
| > | > following perhelion jumps around. We know that the perhelion should
| > | > advance one
| > | > day on our calendars about every 71 years. So you would think there
| > | > should be about
| > | > a 20 minute increase from one year to the next. Anybody have an
| > | > explanation?
| > | >
| > | > Tom
| > |
| > | The most plausible explanation I've seen is that the 'smoothly
| > advancing'
| > | perihelion you expect is based on the barycentre of the Earth/Moon
| > system,
| > | but the tabulated perihelion is the actual geocentric one which
depends
| > on
| > | the lunar phase about that time.
| > |
| > | An interesting exercise to plot the earth-moon position around this
time
| > | each year.
| >
| > What does perihelion (closest approach to the sun) have
| > to do with the Earth-Moon system? Perihelion is not perigee.
| > Nor is Winter solstice connected with perihelion.
| >
| > The ONLY reason the calendar is "jumping around" is because there
| > are not exactly 365 days in a year. When you've grown up you'll
| > learn about leap years.
|
| > Be honest, OG, you fabricated the implausible explanation you've seen
| > all by yourself, you lying ***, and now you are trying to impress
| > "We" with your total lack of knowledge, you fuckwit.
| > If "We" knows that the "perhelion" should advance one day on "our"
| > calendars about every 71 years then "We" is another blustering bigot
| > like you.
|
| Of course, yes the simple 4 year step cycle due to leap years is obvious
| when you think about it. Simple, easily explained and wrong.
|
| Have a quick look at this and see what I mean
| http://www.gwynnefamily.org.uk/astro/Perihelion/index.htm
|
| By the way, this page dates back to early 2004.

Why not make the plot in rotations of Earth rather than time
to eliminate the inaccurate calendar?
Simple to do with a spread***, but remember to use a sidereal day:
1 sidereal day = 23.9344696 hours
1 solar day = 24.0 hours.
1 year = 365.2422 SOLAR days
Calculation:
365.2422 *24.0/23.9344696 = 366.2422 rotations
per revolution.
That's one more turn.
To see why, imagine the Earth keeping one face toward the sun just
as the moon keeps one face toward the Earth. There would be zero
days per year, the sun always overhead, but the Earth would turn once.
The ellipse of the moon's orbit produces this effect:
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap051113.html
Notice we can see more than a hemisphere and the moon's apparent
size changes with distance. Thus we KNOW the moon's orbit is
elliptical.

| I'm still wondering why there is so much anomosity in your posts?
|
Years of dealing with arrogant idiots, I'm sorry to have to say.
You'll find me reasonable if you do not make assertions that are simply
untrue.
Ask me a question. If I don't know the answer then I'll find out,
work it out or I'll say I don't know. Not all knowledge is in yet, there
is much that is unknown to all. There is no shame in not knowing,
but there is in bluster. Science is finding out the unknown, not creating
it or misleading others.
Tom Linden's statement "We know" is false. He's blustering,
providing a misleading statement. Which hat he invented 71 years
from only he knows. The same applies to you, there was no
"plausible explanation".
Beware of anyone starting a sentence with "In fact", "Actually"
or "We know" because 9 out of 10 times what follows is their
conviction and not a fact at all.
I can say "1+1 = 3"
You'll say no, it's 2. I'd say 'Oops, sorry, my blunder. No harm
done, let's carry on."
Or I can say "We know in fact that 1+1 = 3, actually".
Who am I fooling? Only me, I'd be trying to reassure myself
and I'd be the fool. It's even worse if I argue the point.

This really happens. I've got Paul Cardinale arguing that a SPDT
(single pole, double throw) switch is a three way switch, and
he's not letting up calling me an idiot. The deeper he digs
the more dirt I'll drop on his head.

Be reasonable and I'll be reasonable. Bluster and I'll come down
on you hard. You can always ignore me, I don't mind. Quite a few
morons have me killfiled, it's no skin off my nose and their loss.
I hope that answers your question.

BTW, if you make that spread*** as I suggest you can then
create your own calendar and give your own "predictions".
Fortune telling is based on convincing people that you know
the future written in the stars, the rest is bluster and it's been that
way for millennia. Three wise men found their way to Bethlehem
2000 years ago, guided by stars. It is of course a children's
bedtime story, written before the Cartoon Channel existed, but
nevertheless there were competent navigators. Cross my palm with silver.
Androcles


.

Quantcast