|
Posted by oriel36 on December 8, 2006, 8:02 am
Please log in for more thread options
Our timekeeping ancestors devised a system whereby they created an
equable day and then applied it to the annual cycle,from there they
devised the calendar system which enables one year to follow the next
year with the effect that the convenience breaks clear of the
astronomical cycles and allows humanity to gauge a linear progression
of years.The convenience is based on a 1461 day cycle with 3 years of
365 days and 1 year of 366 days with minor differences.The antiquity of
the system can be gauged by the Gregorian correction which returns the
calendrical convenience to its celestial sphere marker -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calendar_reform
Apart from the calendar,the seperate system which correlates clocks
with axial rotation at a rate of precisely 4 minutes for each degree
of terrestrial rotation needs a thorough and accurate explanation,if
only for the appreciation of the exquisite and intricate two step
process which makes it possible.
The Total length of the day as observed for each complete cycle
determined by noon is known to be different since antiquity .By
whatever means they collected the data ,they equalised the variations
in these cycles to an equable 24 hour cycle by applying a correction
each noon using addition or subtraction of minutes and seconds to
generate the 24 hour average.It also allows one 24 hour day to elapse
seamlessly into the next 24 hour day and it was this vital piece of
information which was exploited by the heliocentric astronomers who
existed after 1543.
As Copernicus split the Earth's motions into axial and orbital
motions,the explanation of axial rotation to account for the daily
cycle became the basis for geometrically overlaying the longitude
system by dividing the geographical surface into 1 degree seperations
making 360 degrees in total.
The pre-existing Equation of Time system which generates the equable 24
hour day was then overlayed on the longitude divisions where 4 minutes
clock time correlate to 1 degree of rotation making 24 hours/360
degrees in total.
After,or probably equal to,the Copernican resolution for
retrogrades,the heliocentric adaption of the equable day to axial
rotation is the most exquisite and enjoyable achievements of
humanity.Claiming nothing other than the sheer joy in seeing how the
correlation between clocks and axial rotation emerged as a two step
process,a more capable person can explain how it was done even in the
hostile enviroment which proposes an alternative value based on the
return of a star to a location.
|
|
Posted by on December 8, 2006, 9:01 am
Please log in for more thread options
oriel36 wrote:
show/hide quoted text
> a more capable person can explain how it was done even in the
> hostile enviroment which proposes an alternative value based on the
> return of a star to a location.
We based our year on the *tropical* year instead of the *sidereal*
year, as soon as we could tell the difference, because calendars are
for planting crops with.
OK, so maybe the Muslims don't agree. But nearly every other culture
does - even those that use lunar calendars, and thus have a little
tolerance for things bouncing around, use the Metonic cycle. (And think
of the "joints and breaths" in the Chinese system.)
John Savard
|
|
Posted by Paul Schlyter on December 8, 2006, 10:13 am
Please log in for more thread options show/hide quoted text
>oriel36 wrote:
>> a more capable person can explain how it was done even in the
>> hostile enviroment which proposes an alternative value based on the
>> return of a star to a location.
>We based our year on the *tropical* year instead of the *sidereal*
>year, as soon as we could tell the difference, because calendars are
>for planting crops with.
>OK, so maybe the Muslims don't agree. But nearly every other culture
>does - even those that use lunar calendars, and thus have a little
>tolerance for things bouncing around, use the Metonic cycle. (And think
>of the "joints and breaths" in the Chinese system.)
>John Savard
The Muslims don't base their calendar on the sidereal year..... :-)
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter, Grev Turegatan 40, SE-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN
e-mail: pausch at stockholm dot bostream dot se
WWW: http://stjarnhimlen.se/
|
|
Posted by oriel36 on December 8, 2006, 4:13 pm
Please log in for more thread options Your kind gloats that you can put these astrophotographers in their
place even take a planet off them at will without the slightest
objection.
You feed them mass,acceleration,force and tell them that looking out on
the magnificense of the Universe that space is 'curved'.
You see Paul,it was a mistake made by a cataloguer ( Flamsteed) in
thinking that you could justify axial rotation using the return of a
star to a location,in other words,the joke is most definitely on the
theorists following Newton who built concepts on celestial sphere
geometry.
Errors in astronomy are fine and especially Flamsteed's error because
they are ultimately resolved by taking into account physical
considerations involved in drawing conclusions.The way the early
astronomers overlaid the Equation of Time principle on axial rotation
is probably the greatest adaption ever to take place to the timekeeping
system insofar as it never requires an external justification for axial
rotation.It was just a leftover consequence of isolating orbitl motion
to explain these motions -
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0112/JuSa2000_tezel.gif
Having nothing to offer humanity by way of promoting the exquisite
thinking of astronomers and having spent humanity on the exotic and
counter-productive novelties of celestial sphere concepts ,you really
have nothing to say.
Paul Schlyter wrote:
show/hide quoted text
> >oriel36 wrote:
> >> a more capable person can explain how it was done even in the
> >> hostile enviroment which proposes an alternative value based on the
> >> return of a star to a location.
> >We based our year on the *tropical* year instead of the *sidereal*
> >year, as soon as we could tell the difference, because calendars are
> >for planting crops with.
> >OK, so maybe the Muslims don't agree. But nearly every other culture
> >does - even those that use lunar calendars, and thus have a little
> >tolerance for things bouncing around, use the Metonic cycle. (And think
> >of the "joints and breaths" in the Chinese system.)
> >John Savard
> The Muslims don't base their calendar on the sidereal year..... :-)
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Paul Schlyter, Grev Turegatan 40, SE-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN
> e-mail: pausch at stockholm dot bostream dot se
> WWW: http://stjarnhimlen.se/
|
|
Posted by on December 8, 2006, 9:37 pm
Please log in for more thread options Paul Schlyter wrote:
show/hide quoted text
> quoting me:
show/hide quoted text
> >We based our year on the *tropical* year instead of the *sidereal*
> >year, as soon as we could tell the difference, because calendars are
> >for planting crops with.
show/hide quoted text
> The Muslims don't base their calendar on the sidereal year..... :-)
No, they don't. But they don't (seem to) agree that calendars are for
planting crops with - they base theirs on something other than the
tropical year.
John Savard
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Western Crises at sunset | September 21, 2005, 2:14 pm |
| Re: Western Feminists Silent | January 14, 2008, 1:29 am |
| Western prominence, Jan 14th | January 14, 2008, 6:34 pm |
| Solar Prominences, Western Limb | February 11, 2008, 4:47 pm |
| ?new impact Crater found in Western Australia | March 24, 2008, 10:50 pm |
| Well, aids provoke on the part of cheerful cracks, unless they're western. | December 8, 2007, 9:54 pm |
| He may all right trade surrounding and fears our nervous, western exams in view of a expedition. | August 13, 2007, 7:14 am |
| GREAT RED SPOT NOT AS GREAT | February 26, 2009, 6:07 pm |
| Re: The great Pay-Day | December 25, 2007, 1:09 pm |
| Great News | August 5, 2005, 4:05 pm |
|
XML Sitemap
> hostile enviroment which proposes an alternative value based on the
> return of a star to a location.