[geocentrism] Re: translational orbit
- From: "Bernie Brauer" <bbrauer777@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 16:42:55 -0600
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/301/lectures/node106.html *Translational
motion versus rotational motion** **It should be clear, by now, that there
is a strong analogy between rotational motion and standard translational
motion. Indeed, each physical concept used to analyze rotational motion has
its translational concomitant. Likewise, every law of physics governing
rotational motion has a translational equivalent. The analogies between
rotational and translational motion are summarized in Table
**3*<http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/301/lectures/node106.html#tt1>
*.*
*Table 3:* *The analogies between translational and rotational motion.*
*Translational motion* *Rotational motion* Displacement [image: $d{\bf
r}$] Angular displacement [image: $d\mbox{\boldmath$\phi$}$] Velocity [image:
${\bf v} = d{\bf r}/dt$] Angular velocity [image: $\mbox{\boldmath$\omega$}=
d\mbox{\boldmath$\phi$}/dt$] Acceleration [image: ${\bf a} = d{\bf
v}/dt$] Angular
acceleration [image: $\mbox{\boldmath$\alpha$}=
d\mbox{\boldmath$\omega$}/dt$] Mass [image: $M$] Moment of inertia [image:
$I = {\scriptstyle\int \rho \vert\hat{\mbox{\boldmath$\omega$}}\times {\bf
r}\vert^2 dV}$] Force [image: ${\bf f} = M {\bf a}$] Torque [image:
$\mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}\equiv{\bf r}\times {\bf f}= I
\mbox{\boldmath$\alpha$}$] Work [image: $W = \int {\bf f}\!\cdot\!d{\bf r}$]
Work [image: $W = \int
\mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}\!\cdot\!d\mbox{\boldmath$\phi$}$] Power [image: $P =
{\bf f}\!\cdot\!{\bf v}$] Power [image: $P =
\mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}\!\cdot\!\mbox{\boldmath$\omega$}$] Kinetic
energy [image:
$K = M v^2/2$] Kinetic energy [image: $K = I \omega^2/2$]
On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 3:41 PM, philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
> I thought you wer out to prove that movement of the world around the sun
> would be detected as a rotation..
> Maybe I am jumping ahead.. so bring on your first simple step and we will
> go from there. though I feel somehow this was al ready resolved by Regner.
> Philip
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> *To:* geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Sent:* Sunday, September 21, 2008 1:01 PM
> *Subject:* [geocentrism] Re: translational orbit
>
>
>
> Just how does scale have anything to do with rotaional
> effects?..Demonstrate somthing dont just imagin..... if you take any camera
> and rotate it against any object *at any distance* , *at any
> scale*..including real stars you get rotational effects!..That being absolutly
> true...please clarify & explain your objections with somthing real not just
> imagined.......
>
> --- On *Sat, 9/20/08, Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx>* wrote:
>
> From: Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [geocentrism] Re: translational orbit
> To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Saturday, September 20, 2008, 5:11 PM
>
> Yes, I concur with that. The (alleged/accepted) distances are the
> problem.
>
> Neville
> www.realityreviewed.com
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Sent:* Sun, 21 Sep 2008 09:16:59 +1000
> *To:* geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Subject:* [geocentrism] Re: translational orbit
>
> No go Allen.. You are not including scale.. *HC propose two myths.*
> *One *that the earth moves around the sun...
>
> Now if this were the only myth, then your camera would indeed show the
> rotation. and you are correct.
>
> However the other myth makes your camera worthless..
>
> Oh the other myth.. That is the alleged distance of your star... You see
> with optics, everything past a certain focal length is infinity.. It cannot
> be resolved.. And they have conveniently placed all the stars at a distance
> well beyond your power of resolution..
>
> Hope you got all that.. I didn't .. but it sounds good..
>
> Philip.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> *To:* geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Sent:* Friday, September 19, 2008 1:59 AM
> *Subject:* [geocentrism] translational orbit
>
> EUREKA!!......A translational orbit still produces a rotational
> effect!...The punch line is ....
> 1. the axis of the rotation shifts from the body that is being orbited to
> the center of the body in the translational orbit....
> 2. It reverses the effects of the rotational effects. That is to say that a
> clockwise orbit will produce counter clockwise rotational impression on
> film where if the translational orbit is clockwise then the rotational
> effects on film will be clockwise!..
>
> The fact that the earth's has a translational orbit around the sun cannot
> and will not hide a rotation around the NCP which is offset from the nightly
> NEP by 23 degrees.. YES, Im already fully aware of ALL the previous as well
> as possible objections.....i was able to isolate each and every single
> one.........I have now found the way to prove it as well as demonstrate how
> it can be accomplished in the real world ......The solution is remarkably
> "simple" but extremely hard to visualize due to the complexities of the
> kinematics........If you imagine a set of crosshairs they have a up/ down
> equal distant mark as well as a left and right equal distant mark....The
> trick is understanding that the back and fourth motion of the sun by 23
> degrees annually is nothing more then up/down deviations from that up/down
> center mark.....The key is as long as the right/ left center mark does not
> deviate we can still get our rotation around a axis that lay parallel to
> a axis that is perpendicular and runs through the suns (ecliptic
> deviation/ path) since it lay perpendicular to the up/down centerline on our
> cross hairs, because it lays 23 degrees offset ..this is true because any
> rotation around the sun or ecliptic is not dependent on the north south
> deviation of the sun/ecliptic ..the rotation & it's effects are around a
> axis that lay perpendicular to that deviation. Yes we have to have a camera
> that does not move with respect to that ecliptic deviation….I will show but
> we should already know exactly how to accomplish that… .......the proof is
> quite detailed i will lay out the fundamentals bit by bit so we don't get
> confused by all the motions........I plan to submit some diagrams and photos
> eventually...using real stars and demonstrating exactly how it was
> done...but the key is *a translational motion will still produce a
> rotation on the NCP* .....The rub is, I kept trying to tell you guys that
> the clue was "hidden" in that "most powerful definition of rotation known to
> man" ....In fact, It would have to produce a rotational effect in order for
> all of the motions to be "equivalent"!.............. Oh, what fun I am going
> to have now....."Destruction" and "chaos" the likes of which have not been
> seen since the Renaissance itself..& ..It won't take me any 400 years
> either!
>
> ------------------------------
> [image: 3D Earth Screensaver Preview] <http://www.inbox.com/earth>
> *Free 3D Earth Screensaver*
> Watch the Earth right on your desktop! Check it out at www.inbox.com/earth
>
>
Other related posts:
