[geocentrism] Re: translational motion of the earth......
- From: j a <ja_777_aj@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 13:49:52 -0800 (PST)
Didn't we determine that 23'56" was the proper time to record the annual star
trail and that at 24hours we would not record a star trail? Maybe I've got it
backwards. But... If you hold that globe in your hand and pretend to make it
revolve around the sun (ignore the nightly rotation) you must still rotate the
globe slightly so that you get one revolution per orbit in order to simulate
the position of the globe at the nightly picture taking moment for recording
portions of the annual. This spot is at a different angle each night. Consider
yourself standing on top of Washington monument at night and then 6 months
later at night, you are at opposite sides of the nightly axis and therefore at
a different angle to the annual axis.
Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
JA..take a look at a globe and read my comments..
j a <ja_777_aj@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dr. Jones & Allen,
What Paul is saying is the same thing I've been trying to get across. When
attempting to record an annual trail; as the camera moves to the next photo op
it also gets tilted by the rotation on the nightly axis. Not if the exposure is
taken every 24 hours...the camera is in the exact same "tilt" it was the night
before.....................Tilting the camera for the next photo alters where
any particular star will fall on the photo plate. Surley you must see how
altering the camera angle while collecting for a single trail (whether nightly
or annual) would alter the trail? There would be if the HC motions existed but
not if there is only the gc motion. However, in any case it is a moot issue
because there is no tilt every 24 hours it is in the exact same "tilted"
postion....... take your globe and spin it to 24 hours latter ( it is in the
exact same positon)..
We all agree that the stars distance from the axis of rotation is what makes
the size of the trail. We all agree that any camera angle is fine for recording
the nightly circles - just as long as the angle stays the same for the entire
recording. Said another way, the orientation of the camera to the ground must
remain fixed for recording a nightly trail. Said another way, the angle of the
camera to the axis of rotation must remain the same. It seems we should hold to
the same criteria for the Annual trail, but we don't, because; when the camera
moves to the next spot to record the annual trail, the angle to the axis of
annual rotation has changed because the camera is rotating with the nightly
axis, therefore we are no longer positioned to record the annual trail.
It is my contention that if we adjusted the angle we would indeed record
annual star trails. My other contention is that we could make up any axis and
record star trails around it with this method. My final contention is that the
lack of an annual trail is not a proof for or against either HC or GC.
I've heard on this forum many times that the dynamics are equal (between HC &
GC), one could be substituted for the other, so why would you be able to record
different things from each scenario?
Last, I repeat my logical challenge (altered a little) because I think it
still stands. If the baseline is 0 and either the camera or the star rotates
and the camera is fixed to the earth, the nightly star circles will never
change position. Since the star circles never change position, a different set
of circles will never be formed from any type of composite. Therefore it is
impossible to record an annual cirlce that is different from the nightly, using
the method of nightly recording.
JA
Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Neville J
In control.
Your description is fine for the camera which records the 'nightly' trails
but not for the camera which records the 'annual' trails -- this is the one
which is fixed directly to the ecliptic disk.
I know that resorting to analogy is a risky process. Its success depends
considerably upon the intended audience's receptivity, yet it has its uses
where goodwill exists.
If I, as the editor of a weekly news magazine, were to offer you a commission
to provide me with two definitive photographs of traffic, one from the point of
a pedestrian, and one from the point of view of a motorist, but instead you
provided me with one view of traffic from the point of view of a pededstrian
and one view of traffic from the point of view of another pedestrian -- you
wouldn't get paid.
I can understand why you won't address this issue but I'm sure you understand
me.
You can have the last crack.
Paul D
----- Original Message ----
From: Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, 14 November, 2007 6:38:50 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: translational motion of the earth......
Paul,
Temper, temper.
If the camera is fixed to a mount, and the mount is fixed to the ground, and
the ground is fixed to the World, and the World is fixed to the ecliptic, and
the ecliptic rotates about the Sun (which is equivalent to the World going
around a path in the plane of the ecliptic), then is the camera not fixed to
the ecliptic disc?
Neville
www.GeocentricUniverse.com
-----Original Message-----
From: paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 18:15:22 +0000 (GMT)
Neville J
No sir! I said FIX it to the ecliptic disk or SIMULATE fixing it to the
ecliptic disk; I did not say SUBSTITUTE something (like the Earth) for it.
You can't evade this issue for ever you know!
Paul D
----- Original Message ----
From: Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, 14 November, 2007 6:01:03 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: translational motion of the earth......
Paul,
Regarding your point number 6, the thing that fixes the camera to the disc of
the ecliptic [plane] is the same thing that fixed the camera in point 5 - i.e.,
the World (or earth), since the World must stay in this plane, just as it must
continue to rotate about its geographical polar axis in the heliocentric model
under discussion.
I may have given you two pictures of the wedding party, but their relation to
the position of the bell tower will be clearly seen in one of them.
Neville
www.GeocentricUniverse.com
-----Original Message-----
From: paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 17:46:16 +0000 (GMT)
Neville J
1. Assume R = 1AU = 2AU.
2. Place your camera in a fixed position anywhere in a sphere of radius 1AU
centered on the Sun.
3. Point it at the NCP. Chock the shutter open. Rotate the camera 360 deg in
almost any period of time. Close the shutter. Result -- star trails centred on
the NCP -- sometimes referred to as 'nightly' star trails.
4. Point your camera at the NEP. Chock the shutter open. Rotate the camera
360 degrees in almost any period of time. Close the shutter. Result -- star
trails centred on the NEP -- sometimes referred to as 'annual' star trails.
5. In #3, the rotation can be obtained by fixing the camera directly to the
Earth.
6. In #4, the rotation can be obtained by fixing the camera to the disk of
the ecliptic (or by simulating it).
I wanted one picture of the wedding party and one of the bell tower. You've
given me two of the wedding party.
Paul D
----- Original Message ----
From: Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
That's the whole point, Jack. There is no difference. Yet one simulation is
achieved with a snapshot every 4 minutes and the other is achieved with a
snapshot every 24 hours.
There is only one rotation axis, not two.
Neville
www.GeocentricUniverse.com
-----Original Message-----
From: jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 21:58:16 -0000
Dear Neville,
I can't see any difference in the two videos. What does this mean? Are you
not able to simulate that which you want to try and do with a camera?
Jack
---------------------------------
Make the switch to the world's best email. Get the new Yahoo!7 Mail now.
---------------------------------
Make the switch to the world's best email. Get the new Yahoo!7 Mail now.
---------------------------------
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:
