[geocentrism] Re: Celestial Poles
- From: j a <ja_777_aj@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 12:45:46 -0800 (PST)
The camera, when fixed to the earth follows the nightly axis and thus changes
orientation with regard to any other axis, including the 24 hour path you are
trying to use to record an annual... it still moves around the nightly axis and
thereby changes angles with the annual.
Think of the difference between the camera locations and angle to the annual
axis when the camera is 6 months apart.... From winter to summer is the easiest
to see.... don't use fall to spring.
Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The cameras orientation to any and all axis or latitudes in the sky never
changes ....
Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Blue......
Allen, Your conception and logic are all correct, except for camera position
during recording. The camera postion never changes ..?The camera must maintain
the same angle to the axis in question during recording. It does!.I have
demonstrated this as a fact not jsut the circular reasoning that keeps getting
passed around...( you can only see it if there is a rotation.. There is no
rotation, that?s why you can?t see it)..Never mind that the cameras orientation
to the common point in question is in a radial orientation to that point every
24 hours and the angle of the camera never changes to the axis we are trying to
observe and that simply looking away does not make it or the effect go away
...!?
The camera in all cases under consideration (and in my drawing) still rotate
about the nightly axis, therefore it will only record a nightly star trail.
That is a assertion that is the point of discussion here. However, It also
rotates around the ecliptic axis. the orbit also translates to the ecliptic
plane not the celestial axis. the two are not one and the same thing. In order
to record an annual star trail, the camera must rotate about the annual
axis..and to do that you must change the angle of the camera with each
photo.absolutly not.. but this would work for a fictitious axis too. yes any
path that can produce a radial oreintaion to a common point.
JA...
---------------------------------
Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with Yahoo Mobile. Try it
now.
---------------------------------
Be a better pen pal. Text or chat with friends inside Yahoo! Mail. See how.
Other related posts:
