[geocentrism] Re: 2 Axes of rotation - drawing

The point i was making was the point you raised..."Again, not detectable by the 
casual observer."......but mechanicaly that is not even posible requries 
contridictions in terms and defintions to accomplish such feets, as I have 
pointed out......

Regner Trampedach <art@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:  
Quoting Allen Daves :

> NO you can not, and that is the rub. HC claims there is no difference between
> what the annual motion and the nightly motion produce.
>
That is not quite correct. I think I have found one of the misunderstandings
in this discussion. Please read carefully.
a) The daily rotation is around the celestial axis.
It produces the nightly star-trails.
We agree on that.
b) The annual orbital translation around the Sun occurs in the ecliptic.
This produces the paralactic ellipses, as I described in pt.5 of this post:
http://www.freelists.org/archives/geocentrism/11-2007/msg00917.html
"5) Parallax displays itself as an ellipse with the eccentricity (oblateness)
determined by the ecliptic (not the celestial) latitude of the star. At
the [celestial poles] the paralactic motion over a year, will describe a
circle - at the ecliptic equator a star will go back and forth along
a straight line."
As Paul Deema pointed out in this post:
http://www.freelists.org/archives/geocentrism/11-2007/msg00921.html
The [celestial poles] should be changed to 'ecliptic poles'.
This is the annual motion - it is very small scale and will not be
observed by the casual observer.
I believe we agree on that.
c) The crucial part.
What has been interpreted as a separate annual rotation around the
celestial axis is nothing of the sort.
To recapitulate:
i) 1 tropical (Solar) day (24h00m) of the daily rotation puts the
observer in the same orientation with respect to the Sun.
ii) 1 sidereal (stellar) day (23h56m) of the daily rotation puts the
observer in the same orientation with respect to the stars.
Several people have referred to observations in the same direction
w.r.t Earth (e.g., straight up) at local midnight, as showing the
annual motion - see various figures by Allen and Neville.
That is not correct.
It is merely showing different phases of the daily motion.
The true period of the daily rotation, is the sidereal day.
Taking pictures every Solar day merely means that you let the Earth
rotate a bit further (in its daily rotation) before you take a picture.
It's not a separate movement.
Taking pictures every sidereal day will result in the annual paralactic
motion. Again, not detectable by the casual observer.

I hope this helps,

Regner


> So how are you going
> to show the motion, when HC itself calims there is no differnece between the
> two..? However, HC can not do that the way HC is modeled. That is our point!
> 
> 
> 
> Paul Deema 
wrote:
> 
> Jack L
> This heliocentrist is NOT saying that the second (annual revolution) motion
> cannot be detected. I have been describing how it CAN be detected for a year
> and a half but unfortunately this seems to be in most everyone's dark
> cupboard into which none of you seem to have the courage look.
> I've tried to remove the subject from this emotional exclusion zone by
> shifting the phenomenon to Mars but that didn't work either. See several
> short posts "Translational motion of Mars". 
> Egocentrism? Spelling error or is there a point here that I am missing?
> Paul D
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Jack Lewis 
> To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Monday, 19 November, 2007 9:08:38 PM
> Subject: [geocentrism] Re: 2 Axes of rotation - drawing
> 
> Dear All,
> In the heliocentric model it would appear that there are two movements
> taking place, which is not disputed, but the observations support only one
> movement- egocentrism. The heliocentrists seem to be saying that the second
> movement cannot be detected for reasons I do not understand. Will it help if
> I ask the question, why can't it be detected if it exists? We can't see the
> moon turning actually but we know it does simply by the observations and
> dynamics involved. Therefore I would expect the helios to be able to do the
> same. 
> 
> Jack 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: Allen Daves 
> To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 8:52 PM
> Subject: [geocentrism] Re: 2 Axes of rotation - drawing
> 
> 
> Ja,
> 
> I agree with your drawings... Again no one is debating the fact that the
> annual motion will record the nightly motion....that is a FACT!...however it
> is also a fact that a secondary motion would and must be present that is not
> a assumption that is a physical fact, just as in the case of a orbital
> sander........Your conclusion which states just the opposite is an assumption
> by definition.....What do you not understand?
> 
> more in blue....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Make the switch to the world's best email. Get the new Yahoo!7 Mail now. 
>

Other related posts: