Allen D
I'm sorry to keep on about this but this is the situation -
I'm asking these questions because I can't read half the text in the
illustrations plus what I can is not clear.
You keep referring to an experiment. I don't know what that experiment is.
Most of what you have written here assumes that I am ignorant of many things of
which I am not.
I can't understand what you are saying in most of this post.
I know what actions produce star trails.
I have shown you how to produce an annual star trail which you either didn't
grasp or simply rejected.
You keep referring to a distance from the axis of rotation. This is a
meaningless expression. Angular separation (of a star from the axis of
rotation) is an accurate expression.
Other problems.
You don't like my continued use of illustrations for some reason but I use them
because you don't seem to understand my questions. I'll try again -- there is a
picture attached -- ThePlank.png. I don't want a long rambling explanation --
sentences like those above would be nice. Why won't both daily and annual star
trails be be produced from this setup?
I still don't perceive an answer to the question "How have annual star trails
been searched for and found to be not present?
I've inserted some comments below in this colour. You need not respond to
everything below -- I've put them there to indicate the level of my confusion
about what you are saying.
Paul D
PS I hope this illustration is clear but I'll make a couple of points. I know
it is impractical in reality -- it is only for explanatory purposes. The Earth
is doing its thing rotating once per sidereal day and the camera nailed to the
planet remains firmly fixed on Earth's axis of rotation. It will record one
complete circular trail in one sidereal day. The Earth is pulling a plank
around the Earth's orbit to which is nailed a camera firmly oriented along the
Ecliptic Disk Axis. It will record one complete circular trail in 365.25 mean
solar days.
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
----- Original Message ----
From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, 8 November, 2007 5:20:56 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: magnitude of scale.
I answerer both your questions..... :-)
Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Allen D
Since JA is away for a bit, may I attempt to entertain you in the interim?
I looked back over that collection of drawings you sent me ... From Allen Daves
Tue Nov 6 19:36:53 2007. I couldn't help concluding after a quick scan that
you seem to be describing things the way I have been describing them for some
time and the way JA has been describing them recently. Realy ..i got the
impressin that you were bouncing between arguments never mind they are mutualy
exclusive.....so i address them all ...... This is that, if heliocentricity is
the reality, then star trails around the NCP (as observed -- no argument here)
will be evident, Yes no matter what time of year or how long the exposures are
taken as it will be a photo graph of the same thing, all year long....... GOOD
- WE AGREE as will similar trails (different stars but still -- big argument)
around the NEP,
no not similar trails but entirely different sizes for each star due to the
different distance to the axis..stars cannot have the same distance from two
axis offset by 23.44o simultaneously ..They would have to in order to explain
why you cannot see them both..or you would have to explian how the nightly
(smaller) rotation about the NCP has dominance over the NEP such that it is
even possible to obscure that rotation if it existed, when you cannot reproduce
such a obserdity with a replica model of the earth, sun &axis..... I DON'T
UNDERSTAND ANY OF THIS. THE DAILY SET OF TRAILS IS CENTRED ON THE NCP WITH THE
RADIUS OF EACH CIRCULAR ARC DEPENDANT UPON THE ANGULAR SEPARATION OF THAT STAR
FROM THE GEOGRAPHICAL POLAR AXIS. THE ANNUAL SET OF TRAILS IS CENTRED ON THE
NEP WITH THE RADIUS OF EACH ARC DEPENDANT UPON THE ANGULAR SEPARATION OF THAT
STAR FROM THE ECLIPTIC POLAR AXIS. DEPENDING UPON THE WIDTH FIELD OF VIEW, MANY
STARS MAY MAKE TRAILS IN EACH PHOTO
RECORD.
but that because the latter is not observed, then heliocentricity is shown to
be false. Is this the nub of the argument?
You see, some little time in the past, when I pointed out to you that the
distance to these stars was such that no observer baseline possible could have
any non trivial effect on the size and shape of these trails but you stated
that even the latitude from which they were observed would have a noticeable
effect. You haven't rescinded this statement but as I said, the impression I
gained was that you are now basically wearing the clothes I laid out for you.
You do see my predicament?
I see your predicament, the problem is that you do not see your own
predicament.... I stated that other MS scientist have made that statement as
well...I also said that regardless of that issue...lets assume that is
correct.... " the stars are too far away to affect the baseline."........for
the sake of argument.... ..who cares!.....it is the distance ANGULAR SEPARATION
of the star from the rotational axis not the distance to the star!!!!..I WHICH
DETERMINES THE DIAMETER OF THE STAR TRAILS? WHERE WOULD YOU GET THE IDEA THAT I
MIGHT THINK OTHERWISE? If the stars are too far away then scale is irrelevant
for the diagrams.......If the stars are not too far away then the baseline
would have an effect. Then there would be a whole another component of
observable motion. In either case either one of those is a problem of HC that
make it untenable...Those issues, which ever one you subscribe to, are not
problems for me. I’m simply showing you where the fault
WHAT FAULT? lies no matter which side of that fence you want to sit on in this
annual star trail issue.....
Now if the nub of the argument in fact is as stated above -- that these trails
have not been detected -- I have no knowledge of how you have attempted to
detect them.
Do the experiment..REFERRED TO ABOVE you can produce star trails even rotating
a camera around a 12' disk..but your position is yes that is true..yes you can
see rotation on a 6000 mile disk DON'T KNOW WHAT THIS MEANS ... but we cannot
observe rotation on a 150million km disk...!?? OR THIS! What is so hard to
understand the diagrams label it for you and show you how to construct a model
of the earth sun axis of rotation with a camera..?
It may be buried in the verbiage, but I can't see it. My impression is that
you believe that the NEP centred star trails will be visible in photos of the
NCP centred star trails taken on a single occasion but it is not clear. Is this
so?
This post contains two questions.
I have no idea what you mean by a "single occasion" LIKE "AT MIDNIGHT" OR
"TOMORROW AT NOON" -- A ONE OFF DEAL ....... the diagrams are pretty self
explanatory.....try asking me a question about the diagrams ......This just is
there is two axis of rotation those axis diverge not converge. WHERE WOULD YOU
GET THE IDEA THAT I MIGHT THINK OTHERWISE? what produces a star trail is the
distance ANGULAR SEPARATION of the star from the axis not the distance to the
star WHERE WOULD YOU GET THE IDEA THAT I MIGHT THINK THIS?...all stars cannot
be the same distance from both axis simultaneously.. WHERE WOULD YOU GET THE
IDEA THAT I MIGHT THINK THIS?.If the rotation exist there must be two different
sets for each star which in fact would just create a big blur.. SOMEHOW I DOUBT
THAT but do the experiment even a casual attempt will demonstrate that a camera
in rotation about 2 axis NOT POSSIBLE -- YOU'D NEED TWO CAMERAS offset from
each other will be most
discernable! AGAIN -- I KNOW THAT. I HAVE NO IDEA WHERE YOU GET THE IDEA THAT
I DO NOT.
National Bingo Night. Play along for the chance to win $10,000 every week.
Download your gamecard now at Yahoo!7 TV.
National Bingo Night. Play along for the chance to win $10,000 every week.
Download your gamecard now at Yahoo!7 TV.
http://au.blogs.yahoo.com/national-bingo-night/
Attachment:
ThePlank.PNG
Description: PNG image
