[geocentrism] Re: 2 Axes of rotation - drawing brand new for you

May I point out that if the basline is zero - then both drawings are exactly 
the same. 
  
Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
     
  The point of the non HC drawing is simply that although that is not how the 
HC folk would describe the mechanics of HC, that is the only mechanics that 
would allow and are capable of replicating the nightly motion in the annual 
orbital motion with no other motions perceivable and no distinction between the 
two! Therefore, although no one would draw the solar system that way (bottom 
drawing) that is the only way that you can archive hiding the annual motion 
behind the nightly and making them indistinguishable from each other. The point 
of the top drawing is that it cannot and will not replicated the nightly 
without demonstrating a secondary annual motion. As I said the two drawings are 
not equivalent. The reason the top drawing is not capable of hiding the annual 
motion in the nightly (as the bottom can and would) is that rotation is s 
function of x& y vectors around the z axis. If the two vectors and z axis do 
not say constant then they cannot produce the same thing as
 the nighty rotation where all three variables do stay constant. You see the 
slight of hand that HC uses is the failure to point out that not only is the 
orbital motion of the celestial axis transnational but they imply that the 
annual orbit itself rides the 23 degree plane    (That is why there examples 
try to emphasize and get you to look at and only focus on the change in 
latitude of the camera around the earth annually and how that "rides" the 23.44 
degree celestial plane) The top drawing depicts a camera that rotates in one 
direction while looking at another. The problem is it is backwards from what it 
would have to be it were to hid the annual motion. It rotates in a different 
direction then the nightly while looking at the nightly. While the bottom 
drawing is a camera the is looking at the nightly rotation while in a orbit 
that also mimics the nightly rotation. The two drawings are not equivalent and 
only the bottom one is and would hide and make the annual and
 nightly indistinguishable from each other.

   
  I attach it here again for any late comers.......

  Jack Lewis <jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
          Dear Allen,
  Just a point of clarification. In the 'non HC' drawing the camera is in one 
position whilst the earth rotates below it. Is this deliberate or should the 
camera positions be the same as the 'HC' drawing? This would mean that the ONLY 
difference between the two drawings is the angle of the ecliptic with respect 
to the stars.
   
  Jack
    ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Allen Daves 
  To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:44 AM
  Subject: [geocentrism] Re: 2 Axes of rotation - drawing brand new for you
  

  One last thing, for the evening.....They say a picture speaks a thousand 
words......  Hopefully you will all be able to see this....brand new attached 
diagram. it illustrates the fundamental error in your argument...........

   


       
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing.   Make Yahoo your homepage.

Other related posts: