[geocentrism] Re: translational motion of the earth......

• From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
• Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 15:58:32 -0800 (PST)
```One last thing here...you said "it WILL point to another point on the 23.5'
great circle around
the CELESTIAL pole!"... It cannot it is angled at more the 22 degrees in a
differnt direction! and even if what you said were physicaly posible....That
would defeat You guys  own argument against a fixed camera from observing the
rotational condition around the ecliptic year around since it would not change
lattitudes... Since if what you suppose here if it were posible then you cant
argue that a camera would not be in rotation around the ecliptical axis always
looking at the ecliptic pole...you are confusing the two.....

Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:    The great circle is only a
circle due to a rotational motion. a rotaional motion exist on the ecliptic
axis as well for the reasons you gave in your last post......However, the
camera can point to any direction you want to point it to on the celestial
sphere...!?  By definition of 24 hours, the camera is in a radial position to
the axis in question (ecliptic) particularly if you point your camera to 23.44
degrees offset from Polaris now the camera is parallels to the ecliptic axis (
all parallel views of the ecliptic are equivalent) ...........The other key
issue you are overlooking is you do not even have to point a camera in the
direction of a rotation to see it. The nightly proves that fact!

Regner Trampedach <art@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:   Allen,
The camera will NOT point to another point along a great circle around
the ECLIPTIC pole,
it WILL point to another point on the 23.5' great circle around
the CELESTIAL pole!
This means rotation around the celestial pole!
Look at the figure again - the two instances are symmetric around the
daily rotational axis of Earth - the axis pointing to the celestial poles.

- Regner

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Quoting Allen Daves :

> Congratulations Paul !.
>
> Your diagram shows and just proved that if the earth did in fact go around
> the sun according to HC then the fixed camera focused ~parallel to the
> ecliptic (north or south) axis, over the course of six moths will be pointing
> in a entirely different direction and thus looking a different stars in a
> different ecliptic latitude of the celestial sphere in the sky ( not just
> different stars on the same ecliptic latitude) A wopping 24 degrees in a
> different direction altogether with entirly different stars ....NOW GO DO
> THAT AN SEE IF THAT EVER HAPPENS IN REALITY........hint....IT DOES NOT!!!
> .........Paul, I knew you were a closet geocentrist all the time.....:-)
>
>
>
> Paul Deema
wrote:
>
> Greetings interested parties!
> Comments in this colour
> From j a Wed Nov 14 20:45:30 2007
> What Paul is saying is the same thing I've been trying to get across. An
> ally! When attempting to record an annual trail; as the camera moves to the
> next photo op it also gets tilted by the rotation on the nightly axis.
> Tilting the camera for the next photo alters where any particular star will
> fall on the photo plate. Surley you must see how altering the camera angle
> while collecting for a single trail (whether nightly or annual) would alter
> the trail?
> From j a Wed Nov 14 21:49:52 2007
> Didn't we determine that 23'56" was the proper time to record the annual
> star trail and that at 24hours we would not record a star trail? NO 24 hours
> exposures.. Sorry -- this time Allen got it right!
> From Allen Daves Wed Nov 14 23:43:00 2007
> I think I understand what you are getting at now..?...........Allen! Can
> I truly stop trying now?
>
> Well I've got a picture for you all anyway. Please tell me if you don't
> understand this.
> Paul D
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Make the switch to the world's best email. Get the new Yahoo!7 Mail now.
>

```