 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Natural Science Forum / Physics / Relativity / June 2006The periodic times argument of Kepler
The creation of the AU by Newton through the so-called 'periodic times' argument of Kepler is unjustified,undignified and outright fraud. If a participant is not capable of matching Newton or not capable of comprehending the clear reasoning of Kepler in support of heliocentricity in his 'periodic times' argument then nothing will be gained.Otoh,should recognition of the perversion of Keplerian reasoning occur,it may be possible to approach the Keplerian refinement in a new and more productive way with 21st century observational data. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Epitome Of Copernican Astronomy by Johannes Kepler Finally by what arguments do you prove that the centre of the Sun which is at the midpoint of the planetary spheres and bears their whole system - does not revolve in some annual movement,as Brahe wishes,but in accordance with Copernicus sticks immobile in one place,while the centre of the Earth revolves in an annual movement. Argument 10 " The 10th argument,taken from the periodic times, is as follows; the apparent movement of the Sun has 365 days which is the mean measure between Venus' period of 225 days and Mars' period of 687 days.Therefore does not the nature of things shout out loud that the circuits in which those 365 days are taken up has a mean position between the circuits of Mars and Venus around the Sun and thus this is not the circuit of the Sun around the Earth -for none of the primary planets has its orbit arranged around the Earth,as Brahe admits,but the circuit of the Earth around the resting Sun,just as the other planets,namely Mars and Venus,complete their own periods by running around the Sun." Johannes Kepler _______________________________________________ PHENOMENON IV. "That the fixed stars being at rest, the periodic times of the five primary planets, and (whether of the sun about the earth, or) of the earth about the sun, are in the sesquiplicate proportion of their mean distances from the sun. This proportion, first observed by Kepler, is now received by all astronomers; for the periodic times are the same, and the dimensions of the orbits are the same, whether the sun revolves about the earth, or the earth about the sun. And as to the measures of the periodic times, all astronomers are agreed about them. But for the dimensions of the orbits, Kepler and Bullialdus, above all others, have determined them from observations with the greatest accuracy; and the mean distances corresponding to the periodic times differ but insensibly from those which they have assigned, and for the most part fall in between them; as we may see from the following table." newton --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > The creation of the AU by Newton through the so-called 'periodic > times' argument of Kepler is unjustified,undignified and outright [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] > as we may see from the following table." newton > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- xxein: What's your point??? | > The creation of the AU by Newton through the so-called 'periodic | > times' argument of Kepler is unjustified,undignified and outright [quoted text clipped - 54 lines] | | xxein: What's your point??? He likes to rant. He doesn't understand the difference between solar day and sidereal day, even though I've told him to place two sticks in the ground aligned to a star and check it 23 hours and 56 minutes later. Only Kellerher is right, every astronomer in the world should throw away his telescope motor, they are all set wrong and only Kellerher knows the truth. He won't do the experiment, piss on him. He should join the Flat Earth Conspirator's Executive Society (FECES). Androcles. > | > The creation of the AU by Newton through the so-called 'periodic > | > times' argument of Kepler is unjustified,undignified and outright [quoted text clipped - 64 lines] > He should join the Flat Earth Conspirator's Executive Society (FECES). > Androcles. Your experiment is wonderful,it works whether there are 365 days in a year or 366 days in a year,in fact it requires the additional day to justify the 1461 day calendrical cycle and keep a star returning in 23 hours 56 min 04 sec. Newton's 'achievement' was to talk a 365.25 day year while using an Ra/Dec scheme of 3 years of 365 days and 1 year of 366 days,Charming !,wonderful !,a truly marvelous way to force a mechanical solar system and get the AU to boot. > | > The creation of the AU by Newton through the so-called 'periodic > | > times' argument of Kepler is unjustified,undignified and outright [quoted text clipped - 62 lines] > the truth. > He won't do the experiment, piss on him. The principles which keep a correlation between the axial rotation of the Earth at 15 degrees per hour (24 hours/360 degrees) rely only on the Sun and the motion of the Earth,it has nothing to do with the background stars and the 1461 day calendrical cycle,that cycle is just a complimentary extension of the principles which generate the equable 24 hour day. The pre-Copernican astronomers extracted the equable 24 hour day from the return of the Sun to noon each day,they applied individual corrections to smooth out the natural variations of the total length of the day thereby achieving the exquisite system where one 24 hour day elapses seamlessly into the next 24 hour day.These equalising principles were know as the Equation of Time. When Copernicus discovered that the Earth had seperate axial and orbital motions,the first heliocentric astronomers were gifted with the EoT principles of the 24 hour day and simply adapted those principles to the notion of independent axial rotation at 15 degrees per hour.Again,no recourse to the stellar background and by keeping things local between the motion of the Earth around the Sun,one of the greatest achievements of humanity became possible. I suppose you wish to know about the return of a star in 23 hours 56 min 04 sec.There is no way to justify the system as it applies to planetary motion for it is based on 3 years of 365 days and 1 year of 366 days yet this is exactly what Newton on one side and for his own purposes did and optical astronomers and their Ra/Dec system on the other side did. If a genuine person ever wishes to know what Newton was actually up to with absolute/relative space rather than the 20th century fables with their enormous feedback loop to Newton,they begin with the fundamental principles which keep the pace of a clock in sync with axial rotation without the neccessity of refering the correlation to the stellar background,fixed stars,absolute space or whatever inane conception that grew out of the 17th century error. I do not particularly want to play teacher but circumstances seem to conspire against anything other than this dismal situation . > He should join the Flat Earth Conspirator's Executive Society (FECES). > Androcles. > > The creation of the AU by Newton through the so-called 'periodic > > times' argument of Kepler is unjustified,undignified and outright [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] > > xxein: What's your point??? Fraud and stupidity go hand in hand. With great pleasure let me show you exactly how all this plays out graphically - http://www.pfm.howard.edu/astronomy/Chaisson/AT401/IMAGES/AACHCIR0.JPG Put a .986 degree orbital displacement in an elliptical framework and tell if you achieve Keplerian motion and geometry. Truth be told,anyone can enjoy the Keplerian reasoning so much that you have to be extremely dull or dimwitted to make it fit with the vacuousness of what Newton said.It is an astronomical thing,you understand. > > xxein: What's your point??? > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > vacuousness of what Newton said.It is an astronomical thing,you > understand. xxein: There are universal geometric relations that are not attuned to what we call a 'second', a 'meter' or the resultant acceleration. For instance, if any "different" value is used for a second or a meter (as long as it remains constant), the orbit of a test mass about a body is a direct relation to the escape velocity of the test mass at a given r (meters) by: Esc vel / Orb vel = sqrt(2) for a circular orbit. But most important for you to understand is that we adopted the 24-hr. day by observing ONLY our close sun as we rotate AND revolve around it. It is only our incidental face to our sun that determines what we use as a daily time measure. That is WHY we DON'T have a year that is consistent to 60*60*24*365 seconds. Otoh, it is difficult to maintain a daily Sun-centered schedule by using any other clock face measure. Iow, it is a utilitarian rather than an astronomical type of time and needs the annual corrections to maintain the seasons which are a direct result of astronomical time. You have it awkward and backward in your thinking. Simply put, you cannot use the independent measure of the Earth's rotation to decide a measure of revolution around the Sun. Think about it! Our seasons need correction and we do that every year in varying utilitarian degrees to achieve that. We can't fool nature with man's time. > > > xxein: What's your point??? > > [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > need correction and we do that every year in varying utilitarian > degrees to achieve that. We can't fool nature with man's time. Seasons are hemispherical weather patterns,they do not even make it to the global scale. Your Ra/Dec system requires a leap adjustment every 4 years years and if you can work with the Earth's heliocentric annual orbit based on 3 years of 365 days and 1 year of 366 days then you will manage to fool yourselves quite nicely. When you set aside your indoctrination derived from the 17th century imagination of Flamsteed and Newton let me know otherwise stick with you mechanial clockwork solar system.The geometric/geographic principles of the 24 hour day are so easy to understand that it would be embarraasing to be seen speaking to a person who bases his conceptions on 23 hours 56 min 04 sec.I expected to speak to men about how to correct the stupid Newtonian error,manipulation,mutation ort whatever way you put it but I have yet to see anyone who is other than a silly windbag,polisher reputations or not. > > > xxein: What's your point??? > > [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > need correction and we do that every year in varying utilitarian > degrees to achieve that. We can't fool nature with man's time. Suit yourself,all the polished prose and you still stuck with a useless,I repeat useless,astronomical justification for what you believe to be the value for the Earths' axial rotation through 360 degrees in 23 hours 56 min 04 sec.It not a bright shining lie,it is just a silly notion of people who never appreceated the original astronomical principles behind the 24 hour day and its heliocentric adaption to axial rotation at 15 degrees per hour. It is impossible to appreceate Copernican heliocentricity or what amounts to the same thing - the Earth's axial and orbital motions in isolation from each other with the dumb sidereal time notions,if you can't figure out basic astronomical principles such as the heliocentric adaption of the Equation of Time principles I suggest you stick to what you know - the exotic 20th century garbage designed for mathematicians for mathematicians. Good to see astronomy finally detach itself from empiricism after a 300 year assault. > > > xxein: What's your point??? > > [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > need correction and we do that every year in varying utilitarian > degrees to achieve that. We can't fool nature with man's time. Suit yourself,all the polished prose and you are still stuck with a useless,I repeat useless,astronomical justification for what you believe to be the value for the Earths' axial rotation through 360 degrees in 23 hours 56 min 04 sec.It not a bright shining lie,it is just a silly notion of people who never appreceated the original astronomical principles behind the 24 hour day and its heliocentric adaption to axial rotation at 15 degrees per hour. It is impossible to appreceate Copernican heliocentricity or what amounts to the same thing - the Earth's axial and orbital motions in isolation from each other with the dumb sidereal time notions,if you can't figure out basic astronomical principles such as the heliocentric adaption of the Equation of Time principles I suggest you stick to what you know - the exotic 20th century garbage designed fby mathematicians for mathematicians. Good to see astronomy finally detach itself from empiricism after a 300 year assault.Nobody suggests that causation be removed from astronomical investigations but what you have presently is junk conceptions amounting to little more than cartoons.In terms of cosmological processes things are not altogether bad but too much stupid people looking for conclusions rather than working towards better astronomical working principles. Good luck to you and your cartoon Ra/Dec system,the basis for the clockwork Newtonian mutation and its exotic extensions. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.