[geocentrism] Re: JA's 3D diagram

  • From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 13:36:57 -0800 (PST)

YES, I concure with both of your post...i inserted a comment or two in blue but 
yea, go with that....

Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:      Allen,

In fact, instead of deleting all those blue buttons, JA could simply make one 
of the eight blue buttons on each sphere red, say, in succession around the 
latitude used, and then thread his ellipse through the red buttons. This would 
clearly show both rotations. Make the thread a fine red line. I think that 
would make the connection to the red bottons..?

Neville 

  www.GeocentricUniverse.com


    -----Original Message-----
From: njones@xxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 13:21:45 -0800


      Allen,

If he takes out the geographic axis from each sphere and replaces them with a 
single celestial axis, centred on the Sun, then this is going to generate more 
confusion. (The same type of confusion in reverse, if you like.) yea just make 
them thiner?...and you will need to explain/cover that as it relates to the 
equivilent veiws and parallax of the axis.... i think in your write-up........

I agree with your [amended] comments, that the ecliptic axis should be centred 
on the Sun, but feel that the individual, geographical axes should stay where 
they are. I think that this arrangement will make it easier to describe the 
final diagram.

Therefore - Comment directed to JA: Please replace individual parallels to the 
ecliptic axis, with one single axis, as Allen suggests (rather than moving each 
one, as I previously suggested).

Allen, the drawing of an ellipse through the individual blue buttons would 
still be useful, though, do you agree? YES

Neville 
  www.GeocentricUniverse.com


    -----Original Message-----
From: allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 12:37:06 -0800 (PST)


      Oh yea Nevile, I did not show it on Ja's, but it would be better if he 
takes out the green lines that run thought the earth, I think. The reason i 
suggest that is because of the whole confusion about the difference between 
viewing a axis and where the axis is in reality. The significance determines 
what would and would not constitute a parallax of both the celestial and 
ecliptic axis over the course of a year. You cannot claim parallax the 
celestial over a year as a cause without parallax-ing the ecliptic over the 
course of the same year. That is a key point that many are not getting. The 
reason they are not getting it is because of where the location of the axis is 
for real and not just some equivalent/ parallel view of it...Also I corrected 
the last post too here......

Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: 
    I agree Nevile, 
  I would suggest the following change for simplicity..? ( see 
attached)..although the base line means that we can look at the axis from any 
location on the earth, it does matter where the ecliptic axis really is. I 
think this is important, because moving from one side of the globe to the other 
side does not parallax the ecliptic axis even though we may view it from 
anywhere on the globe and see the same thing. I?m also convinced that is a 
point of misunderstanding for many..(The difference between viewing a axis and 
where the axis is in reality & why that is important)........I?m including mine 
here for you Ja so as to make my garbled words clear as mud,...(It was drawn in 
3d too, notice the earth is not facing the same side in each view as well as 
the shine point hehhehehhe) ..... but It is not as cool as yours!.....:D


Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:       JA,

So confident am I that your upgraded 3D diagram will illustrate both necessary 
(HC) rotations, that I would like to ask for your permission to use it on the 
Celestial Poles web page. Full credit will be given to you, of course, unless 
you do not wish it to be. (For the purpose of such accrediting, perhaps you 
could supply your name, unless you are happy with "Picture by JA" !)

You, Allen, Jack and others have produced fine diagrams, but perhaps the 3D 
nature of yours will make it the most suitable for the paper. (Jack came close, 
too, with his 3D effort. And Allen will use his own diagrams for his own pages, 
no doubt, since they are of very high quality and contain a lot of information.)

If we can get this issue settled in the positive (from an anti-HC point of 
view), then we should all attempt to broadcast it as fast and as widely as 
possible.

Neville

  www.GeocentricUniverse.com
  
---------------------------------
     
Free 3D Earth Screensaver
Watch the Earth right on your desktop! Check it out at www.inbox.com/earth




  
---------------------------------
    Free Online Photosharing - Share your photos online with your friends and 
family!
Visit http://www.inbox.com/photosharing to find out more!


  
---------------------------------
     
Free 3D Earth Screensaver
Watch the Earth right on your desktop! Check it out at www.inbox.com/earth

Other related posts: