[geocentrism] Re: Is geocentrism supported by facts? (Supplementary)
- From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 16:08:42 -0700 (PDT)
Thanks Jack,
I did as you suggested..I think...see attached new diagram
Philip,
The whole bit about being sorry for "being unessisarily outright rude to you
sometimes".......goes for you too..:)
Jack Lewis <jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
A great drawing Allen but could you get rid of the background - it gets
in the way. The less superfluous stuff the better. Also it is difficult to read
the small type. Otherwise brilliant!
Jack
----- Original Message -----
From: Allen Daves
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 10:36 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Is geocentrism supported by facts? (Supplementary)
Paul, Refer to your own chart of what will without question or dispute,
produce a star trail....now look at the attached diagram..I hope this becomes
clearer if not obvious to you exactly what the problem for HC/AC is...you cant
have it both ways..... it produces a star trail and yet it does not for the
same reasons......
Paul...you need t'a......... "join the team and come on in for the big win!"
Allen
P.S. Paul im sorry, not for being harsh, but for being unessisarily outright
rude to you sometimes.......It is easy to lose sight of good manners with the
real people out in cyber sssssspaceeeeeeeeeeeeeee sometimes...
Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Paul, this round ..Me in purple, answering you in this color
Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
DIV { MARGIN: 0px } Allen D
Me in this colour.
Paul D
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
----- Original Message ----
From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, 31 October, 2007 4:20:23 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Is geocentrism supported by facts? (Supplementary)
Paul me in blue...
Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Allen D
Some extracts from your last accusing me of getting it wrong, of being
wilful, of not understanding even HC (obviously inferior) astronomy with my
responses. I've commented them here in teal.
[ PD ] Because the radius of rotation is trivial in comparison to the
distance to the two stars in question and essentially plays no part in the
process.
[ AD ] IF that were true Paul please exaplain to everyone what causes the
star trails we see every night?..Surely you are just kidding.........your
stament contridicts your own position......
No it doesn't. Relative rotation on the axis between the camera and the
object in question with the object in question at centre frame is what causes
star trails. And what part of the "relitive rotaion" of the earth around the
sun as the axis do you not see!? It plays no part ,as I've stated many times
(if I understand your statement and in truth, I'm not sure of that). look at
your own drawing for crying out loud the only difference is the direction of
the axis...ofcourse it matters if it did not then your own drawing would be
meaningless..... The axis must be the axis of rotation -- either Earth
geographical polar axis or Earth orbit axis (Ecliptic) being the two axes under
discussion at this juncture. The diameter of each circle (one per star) is
determined by the radial displacement of the star making the circle from the
axis of rotation. This does not address much less answer the question... There
are so many questions hanging at the moment and from several people.
Why don't you mention the question? Afraid I'll answer it?
The quesion Paul, is why don't we see star trails around this annual axis
that is 23.44 offset/ different from the nightly one that produces startrails.
by the same rotaional motion, there should be some trail ......?
Even assuming that the base line makes no difference then the star trials
will be the same size as the nightly only they will exist around an entirly
different axis (the annual axis that is 23.44o offset from the nightly ones and
it will be different stars in the hierarchy of circles that make up the trails
up and down the axis.) Since Polaris would no longer lie on or near the axis of
rotation, it would now be further away from the axis even Paul according to
your own last drawing (which is a good drawing to demonstrate this) the further
a way a star is from the axis of rotation the larger its trail will be.....so
you will still see circles the only difference is that since stars are no
longer have the same distance from the axis of rotation that they did on the
other axis (nightly, it is 23.44o different) the various stars will have new
and different sizes then they did before......Polaris will have a larger one
now becuse it is further from the axis of
rotation.....but..others will have smaller ones because where in the nightly
star trails they were far from the axis of rotation, now they either lie on or
very close to the axis of rotation ..In fact, if you look at your own diagram
along with Jacks you should be able to see why...?.......NONE EXIST!.........
THUS THERE IS NO ROTATION!
---------------------------------
National Bingo Night. Play along for the chance to win $10,000 every week.
Download your gamecard now at Yahoo!7 TV.
---------------------------------
National Bingo Night. Play along for the chance to win $10,000 every week.
Download your gamecard now at Yahoo!7 TV.
---------------------------------
Other related posts:
