| |
Main
Date: 01 Oct 2006 08:26:53
From: oriel36
Subject: Concerning the use of watches at sea
|
There is a wonderful article from 1669 explaining the correlation
between clocks and axial rotation about 7 years before Flamsteed made
that catastrophic error of tying axial rotation directly to celestial
sphere geometry and justifying it by using the Earth's axial and
orbital motions -
Philosophical Transactions (1665-1678)
ISSN: 0370-2316
Volume: Volume 4 - 1669
Pages: 937 - 976
'Concerning the use of pendulum watches for finding the Longitude at
sea'
http://www.journals.royalsoc.ac.uk/media/mgat4ef0al0rnke03h2m/contributions/w/0/m/3/w0m31406967t5702.pdf
It cannot be imagined why people would choose an alternative system
based on the return of a star but that no authority exists to swiftly
correct this intellectual and intuitive holocaust may be the worse part
of it all.
|
|
| |
Date: 01 Oct 2006 13:45:32
From: oriel36
Subject: Re: Concerning the use of watches at sea
|
OG wrote:
> "oriel36" <geraldkelleher@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1159732683.965350.226350@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > jsavard@ecn.ab.ca wrote:
> >> oriel36 wrote:
> >> > about 7 years before Flamsteed made
> >> > that catastrophic error of tying axial rotation directly to celestial
> >> > sphere geometry and justifying it by using the Earth's axial and
> >> > orbital motions -
> >>
> >> Isn't it true that the Earth's axis continues to point in the same
> >> direction all year, and that the distances to the stars are very much
> >> greater than the distance from the Earth to the Sun?
> >>
> >> Precisely what error did Flamsteed make?
> >>
> >> John Savard
> >
> > You cannot use celestial sphere geometry and the return of a star to a
> > meridian in 23 hours 56 minutes 04 sec
>
> If not, why not?
It now is a matter of whether capable people can make the effort to
grasp how the Equation of Time governs the creation of the 24 hour day
and from there into the heliocentric adaption to axial rotation as a
two step process.With familiarity,the calendar system emerges as a
seperate complimentary extension of the creation of the 24 hour day
based on the calculation of an annual orbit using equable 24 hour days.
The Ra/Dec system remains as a convenience with no attempt made to
justify the Earth's axial and orbital motions with it insofar as the
system is calendrically conditioned by 3 years of 365 days and 1 year
of 366 days.
Astronomy is a gift that has to be developed in such a way that it
involves equal measures of intuitive and intellectual intelligence,the
intuitive intelligence being that faculty which affirms or rejects
conceptions based on physical considerations .This faculty is used to
exposed the celestial sphere geometry at the core of your thinking
which is catastrophic for heliocentric modelling.
All this will be easy to come back to if neccessary but I much prefer
that another person try their hand at untangling the false astronomical
principles of celestial sphere geometers from the genuine working
principles of Copernicus and Kepler.It is well worth the effort.
|
| |
Date: 01 Oct 2006 13:25:11
From: oriel36
Subject: Re: Concerning the use of watches at sea
|
Alan French wrote:
> <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in message
> news:1159727275.213136.174360@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> > oriel36 wrote:
> > > about 7 years before Flamsteed made
> > > that catastrophic error of tying axial rotation directly to celestial
> > > sphere geometry and justifying it by using the Earth's axial and
> > > orbital motions -
> >
> > Isn't it true that the Earth's axis continues to point in the same
> > direction all year, and that the distances to the stars are very much
> > greater than the distance from the Earth to the Sun?
> >
> > Precisely what error did Flamsteed make?
>
> John,
>
> As I expected, the reponse was essentially the same old recycled junk he's
> been posting here all along.
>
> Clear skies, Alan
Astrophotographers have a glimpse of their real astronomical heritage
in being able to see what the Earth's orbital motion looks like and how
Copernicus worked out the Earth has a seperate axial rotation -
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0112/jupsatloop_tezel.jpg
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0112/JuSa2000_tezel.gif
The flip side of orbital motion in isolation is axial rotation in
isolation and that is where the greatest Western astronomical
achievement of linking the 24 hour clock system with that motion
emerges from those who can appreciate it.
You call that achievement of so many careful people 'junk 'as is your
right and I am sure many here would agree with you.There is nothing I
can do but present how the two step process generates the 24 hour/360
degree correlation without the need of celestial sphere geometry or
that the Ra/Dec system is just an observational convenience but like
all great works of humanity these things dictate themselves to those
who have the intuitive intelligence to admire and love what was done by
our ancestors.
Mr Tezel who created the images above deserves a lot of credit,the
ability to isolate orbital motion or what amounts to the same thing the
absence of axial rotation generates the spectacular insight of the
Earth overtaking the slower moving outer planets.It also helps people
grasp that axial rotation can also be justified as an independent
motion.How long it takes people to catch on is anyone guess but it will
be there for any genuine person who has a love of astronomy and can
forgive those 17th century guys for getting it so wrong.
Clear skies indeed !,try clear thinking.
|
| |
Date: 01 Oct 2006 12:58:04
From: oriel36
Subject: Re: Concerning the use of watches at sea
|
jsavard@ecn.ab.ca wrote:
> oriel36 wrote:
> > about 7 years before Flamsteed made
> > that catastrophic error of tying axial rotation directly to celestial
> > sphere geometry and justifying it by using the Earth's axial and
> > orbital motions -
>
> Isn't it true that the Earth's axis continues to point in the same
> direction all year, and that the distances to the stars are very much
> greater than the distance from the Earth to the Sun?
>
> Precisely what error did Flamsteed make?
>
> John Savard
You cannot use celestial sphere geometry and the return of a star to a
meridian in 23 hours 56 minutes 04 sec using the axial and orbital
motions of the Earth hence Flamsteed false proof for constant axial
rotation -
"Flamsteed used the star Sirius as a timekeeper correcting the sidereal
time obtained from successive transits of the star into solar time, the
difference of course being due to the rotation of the Earth round the
Sun. Flamsteed wrote in a letter in 1677:-
... our clocks kept so good a correspondence with the Heavens that I
doubt it not but they would prove the revolutions of the Earth to be
isochronical... "
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/HistTopics/Longitude2.html
The actual principles which keep axial rotation constant and
independent at precisely 24 hours through 360 degrees do not involve
celestial sphere geometry or any other star than our own Sun.It
requires only an acknowledgement that the Equation of Time equalises
the total length of the natural day to a 24 hour day and that each 24
hour elapses seamlessly into the next 24 hour day.The real genius of
Western astronomy was to superimpose the principle of axial rotation at
4 minutes for each degree of rotation and 24 hours/360 degrees in
total on the pre-Copernican Equation of Time framework.
There are no external references required which correlate axial
rotation at 15 degrees per hour precisely,there is just that brilliant
intuitive intelligence to see how the human devised principle for the
24 hour day through observation of noon was transfered to the principle
that the Earth has an independent axial rotation causing the daily
cycle.
I do not intend to continue arguing the correlation between clocks and
axial rotation among people who simply cannot grasp the
consequences.It is no exaggeration that Flamsteed's error is the
astronomical equivalent of a Chernobyl ,if you are off by 3 minutes 56
second for the value assigned to axial rotation there cannot be
anything but severe damage done to the working principles of
astronomy.As the correct principles are from a shared astronomical
heritage there is no pressure on me to promote the material as my own
and I can approach it with the dignity and appreciation that our
ancestors deserve.
The entire empirical framework passing itself off as astronomy is
built on Flamsteed's error,how you deal with it is your own
business.The actual and correct working principles will go towards
modifying and replacing variable axial tilt of the Earth to the Sun
with the change in orbital orientation against fixed axial
orientation,a more productive astronomical view for climatological
purposes.
|
| | |
Date: 01 Oct 2006 21:09:13
From: OG
Subject: Re: Concerning the use of watches at sea
|
"oriel36" <geraldkelleher@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1159732683.965350.226350@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> jsavard@ecn.ab.ca wrote:
>> oriel36 wrote:
>> > about 7 years before Flamsteed made
>> > that catastrophic error of tying axial rotation directly to celestial
>> > sphere geometry and justifying it by using the Earth's axial and
>> > orbital motions -
>>
>> Isn't it true that the Earth's axis continues to point in the same
>> direction all year, and that the distances to the stars are very much
>> greater than the distance from the Earth to the Sun?
>>
>> Precisely what error did Flamsteed make?
>>
>> John Savard
>
> You cannot use celestial sphere geometry and the return of a star to a
> meridian in 23 hours 56 minutes 04 sec
If not, why not?
|
| |
Date: 01 Oct 2006 11:27:55
From:
Subject: Re: Concerning the use of watches at sea
|
oriel36 wrote:
> about 7 years before Flamsteed made
> that catastrophic error of tying axial rotation directly to celestial
> sphere geometry and justifying it by using the Earth's axial and
> orbital motions -
Isn't it true that the Earth's axis continues to point in the same
direction all year, and that the distances to the stars are very much
greater than the distance from the Earth to the Sun?
Precisely what error did Flamsteed make?
John Savard
|
| | |
Date: 01 Oct 2006 20:00:16
From: Alan French
Subject: Re: Concerning the use of watches at sea
|
<jsavard@ecn.ab.ca > wrote in message
news:1159727275.213136.174360@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> oriel36 wrote:
> > about 7 years before Flamsteed made
> > that catastrophic error of tying axial rotation directly to celestial
> > sphere geometry and justifying it by using the Earth's axial and
> > orbital motions -
>
> Isn't it true that the Earth's axis continues to point in the same
> direction all year, and that the distances to the stars are very much
> greater than the distance from the Earth to the Sun?
>
> Precisely what error did Flamsteed make?
John,
As I expected, the reponse was essentially the same old recycled junk he's
been posting here all along.
Clear skies, Alan
|
|
