Jack I wish you would post the photos to your Facebook page so I can share
them! Its very good and a stimulating debate I am sitting on the fence.
Best
Terry
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 3:16 PM, Jack Lewis <
ukpatriot@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi All,
You may remember seeing my three photos about the odd positions of the
Moon relative to the Sun a few days ago, well I think I have got Cambridge
University Astronomy Department on the run over this.
Check out these email exchanges I have had with them. This is big stuff
and needs to be followed-up. I think these guys are being caught-out in a
lie!
Jack
-------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Re: More on Sun / Moon
pictures Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 15:11:48 +0000 From: Jack Lewis
<home@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <home@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: Mark Hurn
<hurnm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <hurnm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Mark,
Do you not think it is possible that because they are ignoring the
simplicity of this unexplained phenomena, that the Sun-Moon-earth model may
be wrong and that they have simply missed the turning and that they are
going down a wrong route?
This problem is a lot closer to home and to ignore it very bad science. I
feel a bit like the little boy who said, 'The king has no clothes on'.
Could it be that the idea of their model being wrong is unthinkable? But
if they are good scientists then the unthinkable must be considered
whenever it occurs because at the end of the day this has got to be
explained.
Jack
On 10/12/2015 15:00, Mark Hurn wrote:
Hi Jack,
It is quite astonishing I agree. I was surprised I had not heard of it
myself, before your enquiry. I also said 'most astronomers', - some here
certainly knew of this phenomenon. Also, in defence of my colleagues, I
should say that the majority are studying phenomena far outside of the
solar system, such as distant stars and galaxies. They cannot be expected
to know about all the many varied visible phenomena of the solar system.
It is also true that not everything is known in Astronomy as in all fields
of study.
Best wishes
Mark
On 10/12/2015 14:31, Jack Lewis wrote:
Hi Mark,
I am astonished by this revelation that astronomers are, by-and-large,
ignorant of this phenomena!
I would have thought that they knew everything there was to know about the
relationship between the Moon, Sun and Earth.
Why is this? Surely this is a simple cause and effect scenario.
The cause is the light from a light source and the effect is the
perpendicular illumination of a surface. Clearly my photo shows that Moon
cannot be illuminated in this way. Therefore the Sun - Moon - Earth model
must be brought into question regardless of any cognitive dissonance that
may be experienced by the astronomers in finding a solution.
Jack
-------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Re: Fwd: More on Sun / Moon
pictures Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 12:49:44 +0000 From: Mark Hurn
<hurnm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <hurnm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: Jack Lewis
<ukpatriot@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<ukpatriot@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Jack,
Short answer is no. Most astronomers I mention it to have never heard of
it. I have found this though, In M.G.J. Minnaert "Light and Color in the
Outdoors" (1974) he says this (p.171):
"Immediately related to this is the observation that the line conecting
the horns of the moon, between its first quarter and full moon, for
instance, does not appear to be at all perpendicular to the direction from
sun to moon; we apparently think of this direction as being a curved line.
Fix this direction by stretching a piece of string taut in front of your
eyes: however unlikely it may have seemed at first, you will now perceive
that the condition of perpendicularity is satisfied."
I think I will try this 'taut string' experiment myself at the next
possible opportunity.
Best wishes
Mark
On 10/12/2015 10:56, Jack Lewis wrote:
Hi Mark,
Have you been able to get me a more definitive answer to Moon and Sun
anomaly?
regards
Jack
-------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: More on Sun / Moon pictures Date:
Sun, 6 Dec 2015 08:56:26 +0000 From: Jack Lewis <home@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<home@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: Mark Hurn <hurnm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<hurnm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Mark,
Thank you for your explanation for the phenomena of the Moon's
illumination by the Sun in my photos.
I have some comments to make on this issue.
1 I find the first link to be not a very scientific answer however it
would play into the hands of those who think the Earth may be flat and
covered by a transparent dome. This could account for Quote: 'projection of
a straight line onto a sphere or great circle'.
2 I checked Einstein's light bending equation and substituted the
following values.
Theta = 4 x G (gravitational constant) x M (Earth's mass) / c^2 (speed of
light) x r (radius of the Earth)
θ=4GMc2r
When one substitutes real figures into this equation we basically finish
up with a very, very tiny figure divided by a very, very large figure. The
result being virtually ZERO for the angle of deflection caused by the
Earth. This does not square up with observation.
Therefore we must discount Einstein's idea of gravitational light bending.
The second link is to the paper written by Myers-Beaghton and Myers. I
find that this is an extraordinary paper full of unproven assumptions. The
first being Quote:
*The moon tilt illusion is not described in astronomy textbooks because
astronomers*
*know that straight lines in object space become great circles on the
celestial sphere.*
*Minnaert [5] gives only a passing reference: \...the line connecting the
horns of the*
*moon, between its rst quarter and full moon, for instance, does not
appear to be*
*at all perpendicular to the direction from sun to moon; we apparently
think of this*
*direction as being a curved line. *
It is interesting that it is never quoted in text books! I get the
distinct impression from trying to understand this paper is that it is an
attempt to reconcile an obvious truth about how three bodies show the
correct illumination properties with the standard accepted theory of the
behaviour of the three bodies. I use the word theory because there are too
many ways that falsify the accepted model.
What figure is given for the diameter of this 'celestial sphere' and how
is it supposed to affect the bending of the light from the Sun to the Moon?
Isn't the celestial sphere just a convenient way to describe what is seen
when looking at the sky?
What possible effect can a 'notion' have on actual observations of a
physical event?
We have seen that Einstein's angle of light curvature is too small to get
a result which by default suggesting a curve is too large to measure.
Ignoring that the celestial sphere is not a 'thing' we are left with the
inescapable fact that the light on the moon is not perpendicular to the
Sun. The most obvious conclusion is that the current heliocentric model is
flawed in some way.
I now feel a sense of 'cognitive dissonance' coming on but I must fight it!
I am not worried about what kind of model is used to describe the universe
etc so long as it is truthful. It matters not to me if the cosmos is
heliocentric, geocentric or any other kind 'centric, also it doesn't matter
to me if the world is convex, concave or flat. What does matter to me is
that those who disseminate information are being truthful and not
dis-information full of unproven assumptions and personal world views.
Surely there must be scientists that are truly objective and open minded to
consider any experimental result regardless of an philosophical
implications? I think not as it would be stretching human nature a step too
far.
Regarding my comment that the obvious is never quoted reminds me of the
Michaelson-Morley and the Sangac interferometer experiments plus the
Astronomer Royal, George Airey's experiments. The obvious conclusion to
their experiments was that the Earth was not moving but it was never
stated. The reason given was "Everyone knows that the Earth moves'. Not a
very scientific reason. In fact the Michaelson-Morley and the Sagnac
experiment were deemed to be giving a 'null' result and Airey's experiment
was dubbed 'Airey's failure"! These experiments are never taught to
students even as an example of 'bad' experiments.
That leaves us with a problem about the phenomena shown in my photos that
astronomers like to bury. Personally I'm inclined to accept that the
current Earth - Sun - Moon model is flawed.
Regards
Jack
Dear Jack,
Sorry if I didn't pick up on the point you were making. This is new to
me, but what I think you have witnessed is called 'The Moon Tilt Illusion'.
I haven't found a really good explanation for it, but here are a couple:
http://www.upenn.edu/emeritus/essays/MyersMoon.html
http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~amyers/MoonPaperOnline.pdf
Thank you for introducing me to something, I had never come across before
in astronomy!
Best wishes
Mark
On 03/12/2015 19:41, Jack Lewis wrote:
Hi Mark,
Thank you for this technical explanation, if not a tad patronising, but
neither it nor the link you sent me was any help. All I want to know was
how come the sun's rays appear to be coming from above the Moon when the
Sun was slightly below the Moon?
If I looked a football in a dark room illuminated in the same way as the
Moon was then I would expect to see the source of the illumination slightly
above the football and not slightly below it.
Perhaps you could provide a simple diagram or link to a simply diagram
explaining this phenomena?
Regards
Jack Lewis
On 03/12/2015 10:09, Mark Hurn wrote:
Dear Jack,
I have shown your photographs to experts here, and they were very
impressed by your observation. A significant point is the inclination of
the Earths Axis (of 23.4 degrees) with respect to the Sun, this gives us
our seasons and explains why the Sun is lower in the winter than in the
summer. In addition the orbit of the Moon is also inclined (by 5 degrees),
there is a diagram and explanation on this webpage:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbit_of_the_Moon
You will also see from that page, that there are some other factors
involved, and that this is a very complicated celestial mechanics!
The date is also significant, you observed on the 2 December, very close
to Last Quarter (3 December) - the half way phase between Full Moon (26
November) and New Moon (11 December).
So I think, it should be clear that, the position of the Moon relative to
the Earth can sometimes be in the arrangement you observed the other
morning. With some simple angle measuring instruments, and some
trigonometry you could probably work out all sorts of useful information,
from observations such as this. And before the era of GPS satellite
navigation mariners would use just such methods to find their position at
sea.
I hope this helps.
Best wishes
Mark
On 02/12/2015 12:21, Jack Lewis wrote:
Hi Mark,
Thank you for your quick response. Below are the photos. Can you explain
this maybe with diagrams if necessary?
These photos were taken between 9.50 and 10.30 this morning outside my
front door in Isleham.
Regards
Jack Lewis
On 02/12/2015 11:42, Mark Hurn wrote:
Dear Mr Lewis,
You are welcome to send me your photographs as an email attachment. I can
show them to some of our experts, and let you know what they think.
Best wishes
Mark
--
*****************************
Mark Hurn
Departmental Librarian
Institute of Astronomy
University of Cambridge
Madingley Road
Cambridge
CB3 0HA
Tel. 01223 337537
*****************************
--
*****************************
Mark Hurn
Departmental Librarian
Institute of Astronomy
University of Cambridge
Madingley Road
Cambridge
CB3 0HA
Tel. 01223 337537
*****************************
--
*****************************
Mark Hurn
Departmental Librarian
Institute of Astronomy
University of Cambridge
Madingley Road
Cambridge
CB3 0HA
Tel. 01223 337537
*****************************
--
*****************************
Mark Hurn
Departmental Librarian
Institute of Astronomy
University of Cambridge
Madingley Road
Cambridge
CB3 0HA
Tel. 01223 337537
*****************************
