The fate of the Earth?
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Partially crystalline materials
Next: Speciation Process: Excrement Color Skin Proven Harmful (Poverty, Crime and Disease)
From: Sam Wormley on 14 Sep 2009 16:48 oriel36 wrote: > On Sep 13, 9:53 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)mchsi.com> wrote: >> oriel36 wrote: >>> On Sep 13, 7:45 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)mchsi.com> wrote: >>>> oriel36 wrote: >>>>> Tell me how long it takes the Earth to turn once and remind me just >>>>> how desperate the situation is. >>>> The earth rotates exactly 360° in 86,164.09+ seconds. It's a direct >>>> observation anybody can make and is referred to a sidereal day. >>> Your open response, that will exist without objection, is the sound of >>> Western civiliisation rotting itself from within for even though all >>> planetary facts such as dimensions and rotational characteristics are >>> organised around rotation through 15 degrees every hour and once in >>> 24 hours,the empiricists have organised around the 23 hours 56 minute >>> 04 second value.I know of no nightmare worse than this one,not so much >>> the reasoning which goes into the 'sidereal time' value but the >>> absolute absence of any authority to deal with this urgent matter >>> effectively even with the enormous sprawling history of clocks and >>> longitudes,the equable day/calendar system and all the history that >>> supports the 24 hour value. >>> The 'predictive' nature of Ra/Dec observing which determines >>> astronomical events like an eclipse within the equable 365/366 day >>> calendar system cannot be used in tandem with the Earth's planetary >>> dynamics for it loses all references to daily and orbital >>> characteristics for all types of geological,climatological and many >>> other purposes but that is not the worst part,it is the wanton glee of >>> continuing with something which is intellectually perverse and amounts >>> to pure treason against Western achievements and traditions. >>> I personally do not know how any of you live with yourselves for even >>> though I consider the darkness period of Western involvement in >>> celestial/terrestrial phenomena is now over,at least the mantra spout >>> 'scientific method' cult,there has to be an authority to pick up the >>> pieces and halt the ridiculous spread of this new social tyranny >>> which uses climate to introduce stealth taxes under the guise of >>> scientific inquiry. >>> I watch as you draw your 'sidereal time' conclusion without the >>> slightest sense of what is lost or excluded and know all too well the >>> same cult outlook has now descended on the climate conclusion ,not so >>> much the conclusion itself but the liberties which it allows the >>> opportunistic to thrive.Again,the ideology which cannot affirm the >>> most basic of all planetary facts such as daily rotation in 24 hours >>> conceals something which conceals a type of treason that reduces >>> Western achievements to dust and erode its goodness and the ability to >>> be genuinely productive. >> Nevertheless, the earth rotates exactly 360° in 86,164.09+ seconds. > > Western achievements and traditions have pretty much the same status > as a country and to defy the basic 24 hour value for rotation through > 360 degrees and the information it contains on planetary > dynamics,dimensions and rotational characteristics is out and out > treason and even if I am justified in assigning you and many like you > a fool's pardon,it still leaves no authority to determine the scale > of corruption which is rotting all the goodness people are capable of > for the sake of destructive late 17th century agendas that exist only > in the imagination of mathematicians. > > How,for goodness sake,can people bypass the sprawling history of the > equable day/calendar system or clocks and the longitude problem to > arrive at a value which attempts to force right ascension into an > isolated motion ?.What have astronomers since antiquity or present day > kids done to deserve a distortion that is so intrinsically damaging > that there is no known precedence in living memory other than being on > par with the holocaust of sixty years ago.None of you get it for > whatever reason,it is not the simple fact itself but the entire chain > of reasoning which sets investigators on one course whereas the > 'sidereal time value has the 'big bang' as a logical conclusion or > rather the lowest possible astronomical level to which reasoning can > descend. > > > >> It's a direct observation anybody can make and is referred to a >> sidereal day. For a solar day (86,400 seconds) the earth rotates >> about 361° and everybody knows this from the ancients to the present. >> >> You, Gerald are "out of sync" with the rest of the world. > > I really like to know what people think they are doing by considering > me a madman for demonstrating that the Earth turns 15 degrees every > hour and turns once in 24 hours with all the information of different > rotational speeds corresponding to 1 deg/4 minutes of rotation - > > http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/education/curricula/giscc/units/u014/tables/table02.html > > It is not the fate of the Earth that matters presently,it is the > descent through indoctrination of intellectual standards to either > outright fraud or pure unbridled speculation with all novelty and no > substance and our kids will suffer from lack of leaders with the > intelligence and courage needed to tackle the mantra spouting cult > and subsequently back from this self-inflicted intellectual oblivion. > I don't wish to comment about you being a madman, Gerald, but you get the physics wrong and you don't even have algebra in your education so it's got to be pretty hard for you. Use a laser gyro--the earth rotates exactly 360° in 86,164.09+ seconds.
From: Sam Wormley on 14 Sep 2009 16:49 dow wrote: > On Sep 14, 8:41 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)mchsi.com> wrote: >> Yousuf Khan wrote: >>> dow wrote: >>>> On Sep 12, 5:08 pm, oriel36 <kelleher.ger...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> Repeat this as many times as you like,what looks good at close >>>>> range,and in Kepler's era,things only went as far as Saturn,but his >>>>> correlation between orbital periods and orbital radii does not work. >>>> Give me one example in which this equation does not work: >>>> T^2 = (2Ï)^2 a^3 / (G M) >>>> where G is the gravitational constant, T is the orbital period, a is >>>> the semi-major axis of an elliptical orbit (which equals the radius if >>>> the orbit is circular), and M is the mass of the primary, i.e. the >>>> star or whatever that the object is going around. >>>> It works for all the planets, asteroids, etc., in our solar system, >>>> using the mass of the sun for M, for all the satellites of Jupiter, >>>> using Jupiter's mass for M, ditto for the satellites of the other >>>> planets, and, yes, for Formalhaut b, using the mass of Formalhaut a as >>>> the value of M. >>> Actually, one thing that has always puzzled me is how one could use >>> Kepler's laws to determine the mass of two objects whose mass is >>> unknown? You see it all of the time, where scientists talk about >>> determining the mass of one object by measuring it against another >>> object, such as binary stars. >>> Yousuf Khan >> T^2 = (2Ï)^2 a^3 / (G M+m) >> >> If one know the period and orbital distance and one of the masses... >> >> Background >> http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/pappasm/AST101/Class7.pdf >> >> Some Detail >> http://www.physics.oregonstate.edu/~ketterj/COURSES/ph104spr/material...- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > You don't need to know one of the masses. All you need is the ratio of > the masses, which can can be determined by observing the relative > radii of their orbits. m1/m2 = r2/r1. > > dow Agreed.
From: oriel36 on 14 Sep 2009 16:53 On Sep 14, 9:05 pm, alien8er <alien8...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Sep 13, 4:53 am, oriel36 <kelleher.ger...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Tell me how long it takes the Earth to turn once > > To "turn once" relative to what? > > Measured against the Sun, it varies through the year for several > reasons(1); the mean value is currently 86,400 seconds and is defined > as the "solar day". > > Measured against the Vernal equinox(2), it currently takes about > 86164.09053083288 sidereal seconds. That's a so-called "sidereal day". > > Measured against the "fixed stars"(3), it currently takes > 86164.098903691 sidereal seconds. Some call that period an "apparent > sidereal day"; it's also called a "stellar day" by the International > Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Service (IERS). > > (1) Mostly since the Earth's around the Sun isn't circular; the time > it takes for the sun to return to its highest observed point changes > as the Earth's orbital velocity changes. > > (2) The equinoxes don't hold still because the Earth orbits the sun. > > (3) The stars aren't really fixed either; that idea assumes there's > something out there that they're attached to (the "crystal spheres"). > > The bottom line is that there's no fixed reference anywhere against > which to measure the Earth's rotation period; it isn't even measurable > against itself, though its absolute rotation _rate_ is measurable. > > Mark L. Fergerson Very briefly,the equable day/calendar system is ancient and exists as a seamless unit where the daily cycle is referenced to the central Sun and the orbital cycle is gauged against the stellar background where the only acceptable observation for a return of a star to a meridian is determined as 365 days 5 hours 49 minutes,if you do not wish to hear it from me then Huygens shall be good enough to demonstrate this most basic astronomical principle - " Here take notice, that the Sun or the Earth passeth the 12. Signes, or makes an entire revolution in the Ecliptick in 365 days, 5 hours 49 min. or there about, and that those days, reckon'd from noon to noon, are of different lenghts; as is known to all that are vers'd in Astronomy. Now between the longest and the shortest of those days, a day may be taken of such a length, as 365 such days, 5. hours &c. (the same numbers as before) make up, or are equall to that revolution" Huygens http://www.xs4all.nl/~adcs/Huygens/06/kort-E.html You are supposed to be big boys and I should not have to explain that Flamsteed inverted the references for daily and orbital motions thereby creating the core error which tries to explain planetary daily rotational and orbital dynamics using the daily return of a star to a meridian.If you cannot comprehend this much then none of the rest of the explanation will make sense. I have not explained how the great genius in antiquity put the whole equable day/calendar structure together in order to arrive at the timekeeping system we still use today nor explain how the averaging of the natural noon cycle by way of the Equation of Time acted to create the equable 24 hour day via natural noon ,keep these days constantly elapsing as cycles (Monday,Tuesday,Wednesday..) and eventually became the basis for constant daily rotation as a convenience.There is no external reference for constant daily rotation through 360 degrees but again,you are supposed to be big boys and figure out the neat transfer of the average 24 hour day to 'constant' rotation at a rate of 4 minutes per degree,15 degrees per our and making a full rotation in 24 hours.It does entail knowing what the orbital characteristics of the Earth are but this assumes people are interested enough to know what modifications are necessary to explain variations in the natural noon cycle and the seasons. All that business of Isaac and absolute/relative time is merely obfuscation,he knows just enough about astronomical timekeeping to get himself and everyone else into trouble and knows nothing of Flamsteed's inversion of daily and orbital references for their respective cycles so here I am at the beginning of the 21st century trying to explain how the trajectory of reasoning which leads to the 24 hour value contains all the relevant details of planetary shape,dimensions and rotational characteristics to people who are absolutely oblivious to why the 24 hour value contains an incredible amount of information or the Ra/Dec convenience represents a catastrophic derailment of all known astronomical principles. It is possible to take a wider view and look at Western achievements as more encompassing than an achievement by people of individual countries for most Western societies share common traits and here things take a dark turn.The acceptance of an error at all costs and make no mistake about it,the simpleminded conclusion which references daily rotation to the return of a star is exactly that ,is basically ground zero for the conclusion which now turns carbon dioxide into a global temperature dial to the exclusion of all else and no evidence,no matter how solid and historically affirmed will alter a person who is fully committed to an ideology,this has always been a problem which many see in an opposite light,again,Galileo more or less affirms the problem - "The same thing has struck me even more forcibly than you. I have heard such things put forth as I should blush to repeat--not so much to avoid discrediting their authors (whose names could always be withheld) as to refrain from detracting so greatly from the honor of the human race. In the long run my observations have convinced me that some men, reasoning preposterously, first establish some conclusion In their minds which, either because of its being their own or because of their having received it from some person who has their entire confidence, impresses them so deeply that one finds it impossible ever to get it out of their heads. Such arguments in support of their fixed idea as they hit upon themselves or hear set forth by others, no matter how simple and stupid these may be, gain their instant acceptance and applause. On the other hand whatever is brought forward against it, however ingenious and conclusive, they receive with disdain or with hot rage--if indeed it does not make them ill " Galileo So,men want a short answer as to why the Earth turns once in 24 hours and can't have such a response,the chain of reasoning for that fact goes all the way back to antiquity and the original creation of the equable day/calendar system as a single structure for one cannot be created without the other and I cannot,in good conscience,even attempt to explain how it came from the mind of one great genius where the various raw astronomical cycles were adapted to a linear progression of equable days and years,besides,I have already seen what has happened to the recent great astronomers in this empirically driven holocaust where men got too greedy.
From: oriel36 on 14 Sep 2009 17:18 On Sep 14, 9:48 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)mchsi.com> wrote: > I don't wish to comment about you being a madman, Gerald, but you > get the physics wrong and you don't even have algebra in your education > so it's got to be pretty hard for you. > No,you consider me a madman for determining that the Earth rotates once in 24 hours and more specifically,the different latitudinal speeds for each deg/4 minutes of rotation - http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/education/curricula/giscc/units/u014/tables/table02.html > Use a laser gyro--the earth rotates exactly 360° in 86,164.09+ seconds. I have something much better in mind - the GOCE satellite now collecting data on the Earth and that information is quickly bearing down now on geologists.I know that the stationary Earth mechanism of thermally driven 'convection cells' cannot explain the Mid Atlantic ridge and symmetrical generation of crust off the ridge but the lag/ advance mechanism of fluid dynamics and specifically differential rotation can in addition to being tied in with the rotational dynamics behind the 40km planetary spherical deviation.The key is having a genuine grasps of latitudinal speeds organised around the rotation of the planet and you are going nowhere with the 'sidereal time' reasoning which I suspect is why rotational dynamics is effectively absent in all geological discussions on crustal evolution and motion. The generalised rule for a rotating celestial body with a viscous composition is that it does not rotate as a single unit but unevenly from its maximum speed at the Equator and diminishing in rotational shear bands towards the poles and it only takes a quick glance at the fracture zones beneath the oceans to spot the signature of the rotational cause and especially that beauty at the Equator - http://www.serg.unicam.it/images/Fig09.gif It does depend on how much geologists want to move of jettisoning the ridiculous 'convection cells' mechanism and adopting a visually affirmed mechanism which will amount to geodynamics and the specifics of differential rotation of the planet's molten composition beneath the thin fractured crust.
From: alien8er on 14 Sep 2009 18:06
On Sep 14, 1:36 pm, dow <williamsdavi...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > The bottom line is that there's no fixed reference anywhere against > > which to measure the Earth's rotation period; it isn't even measurable > > against itself, though its absolute rotation _rate_ is measurable. > > Ummm.. There is (or at least there is thought to be) an absolutely non- > rotating frame of reference, independent of observations of stars, > etc.. It's the frame in which there are no centrifugal or Coriolis > forces. Theoretically, the absolute speed of rotation of he earth is > its speed relative to this frame. No, there's no such external reference. Besides, I said its _period_ (length of a day) is not independently measurable. Its _rate_ (or speed, if you prefer) _is_ independently measurable (say in a hermetically sealed room) with a Foucalt pendulum. Why a Foucalt pendulum doesn't exactly measure the length of a day is complicated and I won't try to explain; I'll refer you here instead: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foucault_pendulum To say we've measured its period, its rotation must be timed against an _external_ measurement point, but they all _move_. That's why I put quotes around "fixed" stars. > However, there is no existing way in which this speed can be measured > to more than a few digits of precision, so for practical purposes we > have to use the "fixed" stars, even though we know they are not really > fixed. Horsefeathers. Mark L. Fergerson |