Regner Trampedach <art@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Allen, 1) What is an angular view?!?!? 2) Positions of objects in the sky, are all angles. I think you agree on this, but just a clarification for the rest of the forum - Regner Good question..look at the following attached diagrams.. There is a difference between a angular view of some part of the night sky and being in rotation at a given angle, in this case perpendicular to the celestial axis. ( angular displacement/path). The solar pizza should give everyone a clear understanding of scale such that the earth's celestial axis from winter to summer is only looking in the same direction all year.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Quoting Allen Daves : > 1. There is a fundamental difference between angular displacement as show in > the top drawing verse a angular view..All you are describing Ja is a angular > view. There is no problem observing a rotational effect even with a angular > view. A angular view does not and will not ever make the motion or its > effects disappear. Even Regner agreed. > 2. Stars on the same celestial latitude are not the issue here. No one is > arguing that the stars will be in motion on their various latitudes. The > cameras change on the latitude itself ( around any circle of latitude) is not > the issue. That motion is irrelevant. If the rotation of HC exist the > latitude itself (stars on a latitude that sits 23.44 degrees to the celestial > axis) wrt the cameras orientation would and must change, otherwise you cannot > claim the motions as per HC period. You are confusing the cameras circular > rotation around a given latitude with the orbital rotational motion. That > motion would and must show stars out of their given nightly celestial > latitudes particularly the ones that sit near the ecliptic axis of rotation. > > > > j a wrote: Refer to your 3d drawing. The camera you > have maintains a parrallel position to the nightly axis, but to the annual > axis the angle changes. If the left most earth is the start point and the > camera is pointing 23.44 degrees to the left of the annual axis and 6 months > later earth is on the far right.... the camera, while turned 180 degrees, is > still pointing 23.44 degrees to the left, when if you had wished to record > the annual axis, the camera should now be angled 23.44 degrees to the right > of the annual axis. > > Place a star (think Polaris and place near the nightly axis) on your > drawing and think about where it will fall on the photo plate for the two > positions, far left earth and far right earth.... the camera as you have it > positioned will only record positions which correspond to the nightly..... > > j a wrote: > The camera, when fixed to the earth follows the nightly axis and thus > changes orientation with regard to any other axis, including the 24 hour path > you are trying to use to record an annual... it still moves around the > nightly axis and thereby changes angles with the annual. > > Think of the difference between the camera locations and angle to the > annual axis when the camera is 6 months apart.... From winter to summer is > the easiest to see.... don't use fall to spring. > > Allen Daves wrote: > The cameras orientation to any and all axis or latitudes in the sky never > changes .... > > > Allen Daves wrote: Blue...... > Allen, Your conception and logic are all correct, except for camera > position during recording. The camera postion never changes ..?The camera > must maintain the same angle to the axis in question during recording. It > does!.I have demonstrated this as a fact not jsut the circular reasoning that > keeps getting passed around...( you can only see it if there is a rotation.. > There is no rotation, that?s why you can?t see it)..Never mind that the > cameras orientation to the common point in question is in a radial > orientation to that point every 24 hours and the angle of the camera never > changes to the axis we are trying to observe and that simply looking away > does not make it or the effect go away ...!? > The camera in all cases under consideration (and in my drawing) still rotate > about the nightly axis, therefore it will only record a nightly star trail. > That is a assertion that is the point of discussion here. However, It also > rotates around the ecliptic axis. the orbit also translates to the ecliptic > plane not the celestial axis. the two are not one and the same thing. In > order to record an annual star trail, the camera must rotate about the annual > axis..and to do that you must change the angle of the camera with each > photo.absolutly not.. but this would work for a fictitious axis too. yes any > path that can produce a radial oreintaion to a common point. > > JA... > > --------------------------------- > Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with Yahoo Mobile. Try it > now. > > > > > --------------------------------- > Be a better pen pal. Text or chat with friends inside Yahoo! Mail. See > how. > > > --------------------------------- > Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. Make Yahoo! your homepage. >