[geocentrism] Re: Celestial Poles
- From: j a <ja_777_aj@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 14:00:05 -0700 (PDT)
I appreciate the answers to my question, but maybe I'm dense on this one 'cause
I don't get it. If a star gives a certain angle, then moving that star further
away only decreases the angle we would measure. The base of our traingle, the
width of the planet for GC or the width of orbit around the sun for HC would
remain the same. Both distances incredibly small compared to the distance of
that star giving the "looks more like a line than a triangle" arguement it's
validity.
For GC the universe can be large or small and the star trails would look like
they do but for HC the universe must be large for the star trails to look like
they do.
So, I still don't see how this statement could be true: :"Incidentally, these
star trails can only be explained by a rotating universe, rather than by a
rotating World." I would like this statement to be true, but I don't see how it
can be.
Thanks,
James...
Philip <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
thats is what I am saying angles are angles and the further the distance the
greater the displacement., Phul
----- Original Message -----
From: Allen Daves
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2005 8:33 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Celestial Poles
Correction: This is what I meant.
The further away the earth is from a given star the smaller the angle will be
but the displacement of whatever that angle is will also be proportionally
larger.
Allen Daves wrote:Both GS and HC are essentially just a mathematical coordinate
systems for what we observe here on Earth. A method for calculating how far
away and where something is going to be at any given time in the heavens when
we look up. The appearance of motion is identical, It is the theoretical motion
that gets the stars and planets to the right place at the right time that
differs. However, at externally large distances any discrepancies in the two
methods for achieving those positions will show up. This is due to the fact
that a ~.0000005 of a angel at the point of origin is imperceptible to the
observer at the point of origin, however at 430ly away it will displace ~7926
miles. The average male is 5'6". Relatively specking the displacement of that
angle at that distance is overwhelmingly enormous compared to the observer. The
further away the earth is from a given star the smaller the angle will be but
so to will the displacement of
w
hatever
that angle is. Basically, we as the ob
servers
will always be microscopic compared to the displacement of the angles at those
distances, thus we can observe this phenomena quite readily.
It is interesting to note that the HC have estimated Polaris' distance from
Earth to be everywhere from 360 to 820 light years . The 430ly figure is from
the Hipparchus satellite estimates.
j a wrote:"Incidentally, these star trails can only be explained by a rotating
universe, rather than by a rotating World."
Why is this true? I thought that the appearance of motion in either HC or GC
were the same?
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Other related posts: