Regner, Yes, I agree also. But my point is.... How can you tell were the annual axis is, based on star trails... you can't. With a baseline of essentially zero, any annual axis we propose collapses into the nightly axis... That is why a translation is not detectable using star trail. JA Regner Trampedach <art@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: J A, the point is that in the bottom figure, the two axes are coincident, in the top figure they are not. You can't change that by any tilting of the figures. I fully support Allen here. Regards, Regner - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Quoting Allen Daves : > No they are not the same..there is a differnce in rotaion aound the celestial > axis (bottom) and just looking at the celestial axis while in rotation > (TOP)..one is translational the other is not........rotation is a fuction of > xy around z thoes variable are not identical in both diagrams........look > again they are not the same....I think i hjust found where the difficulty for > you is.. > > > > j a wrote: > May I point out that if the basline is zero - then both drawings are > exactly the same. > > Allen Daves wrote: > > The point of the non HC drawing is simply that although that is not how the > HC folk would describe the mechanics of HC, that is the only mechanics that > would allow and are capable of replicating the nightly motion in the annual > orbital motion with no other motions perceivable and no distinction between > the two! Therefore, although no one would draw the solar system that way > (bottom drawing) that is the only way that you can archive hiding the annual > motion behind the nightly and making them indistinguishable from each other. > The point of the top drawing is that it cannot and will not replicated the > nightly without demonstrating a secondary annual motion. As I said the two > drawings are not equivalent. The reason the top drawing is not capable of > hiding the annual motion in the nightly (as the bottom can and would) is that > rotation is s function of x& y vectors around the z axis. If the two vectors > and z axis do not say constant then they cannot produce the same thing as > the nighty rotation where all three variables do stay constant. You see the > slight of hand that HC uses is the failure to point out that not only is the > orbital motion of the celestial axis transnational but they imply that the > annual orbit itself rides the 23 degree plane (That is why there examples > try to emphasize and get you to look at and only focus on the change in > latitude of the camera around the earth annually and how that "rides" the > 23.44 degree celestial plane) The top drawing depicts a camera that rotates > in one direction while looking at another. The problem is it is backwards > from what it would have to be it were to hid the annual motion. It rotates in > a different direction then the nightly while looking at the nightly. While > the bottom drawing is a camera the is looking at the nightly rotation while > in a orbit that also mimics the nightly rotation. The two drawings are not > equivalent and only the bottom one is and would hide and make the annual and > nightly indistinguishable from each other. > > > I attach it here again for any late comers....... > > Jack Lewis wrote: > Dear Allen, > Just a point of clarification. In the 'non HC' drawing the camera is in one > position whilst the earth rotates below it. Is this deliberate or should the > camera positions be the same as the 'HC' drawing? This would mean that the > ONLY difference between the two drawings is the angle of the ecliptic with > respect to the stars. > > Jack > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Allen Daves > To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:44 AM > Subject: [geocentrism] Re: 2 Axes of rotation - drawing brand new for you > > > One last thing, for the evening.....They say a picture speaks a thousand > words...... Hopefully you will all be able to see this....brand new attached > diagram. it illustrates the fundamental error in your argument........... > > > > > --------------------------------- > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. > --------------------------------- Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.