The perpetual calendar
in [Math]
|
Prev: THE MIND OF MATHEMATICIANS PART 7 " SPATIAL MATHEMATICS , VALUE OF 1 and 3
Next: Exactly why the theories of relativity are complete nonsense- the basic mistake exposed!
From: Peter T. Daniels on 26 Feb 2010 15:54 On Feb 26, 11:13 am, R H Draney <dadoc...(a)spamcop.net> wrote: > Peter T. Daniels filted: > > > > >On Feb 25, 1:29=A0pm, Adam Funk <a24...(a)ducksburg.com> wrote: > > >> "archaeoastronomy" > > >No, that's speculation about the alignments of Stonehenge or the Nasca > >figures or whatever. > > >Which is different from the sort of _recorded_ observations made from > >at least the early first millennium BCE in Mesopotamia (and from some > >point in China) down to the time of Tycho Brahe, on the basis of > >nothing but whose naked-eye observations, Kepler worked out the theory > >of elliptical planetary orbits. > > Impressive, true, but I once got my hands on a book on celestial mechanics that > derived the fact of elliptical orbits (and the "equal areas in equal times" > principle) starting with nothing but the fact that gravity is in inverse-square > proportion to distance....r Kepler would have had it so much easier if he had lived after Newtion!
From: Yusuf B Gursey on 26 Feb 2010 17:24 On Feb 26, 3:10 pm, Adam Funk <a24...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On 2010-02-24, Michael Press wrote: > > > In article <hlvvbr$50...(a)news.eternal-september.org>, > > "PaulJK" <paul.kr...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >> I would prefer if every 24 hour day was made longer by one > >> hour, i.e. 25 hours long. I know it would cause some strife > >> for many people but I for one and people like me wouldn't have > >> to suffer the pain of advancing my slow circadian rhythm clock > >> by an hour every morning. > > > There is a reason our circadian period is ~25 hour. > > It is easier to reset a physical oscillator before > > its natural end of cycle, than just after; much, > > much easier. A free running 25 hour period allows > > for enough stochastic variation to keep the period > > longer than 24 hour. > > The earth's rotation has been slowing down faster than we've been > evolving. AFAIK the previous explanation is more accepted. also it is said to be an adaption to have activity at all times, at some point. but htta is just something I( had read a long time ago. > > ("Are we not men?") > > -- > War is God's way of teaching Americans geography. > [Ambrose Bierce]
From: Robert Bannister on 26 Feb 2010 18:29 Michael Stemper wrote: > In article <7uomssFvk0U1(a)mid.individual.net>, Robert Bannister <robban1(a)bigpond.com> writes: >> tony cooper wrote: >>> On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 09:14:04 +0800, Robert Bannister <robban1(a)bigpond.com> wrote: >>>> Ant�nio Marques wrote: >>>> >>>>> It's not what you think. Either the Church's message is universal and >>>>> Christ did found one Church, or it isn't. >>>> Now there's a new one: the first I've heard that Jesus founded or even >>>> wanted a church. >>> I thought he delegated the job to Peter. >> I don't think so. I believe he did ask Peter and the others to keep on >> spreading the word, but I have seen no mention of churches, priests, >> buildings, vestments or choir boys in the New Testament. > > Try Mt 16:17-18. > I wonder which word was used for "church", and did it mean "temple" or "house" or "society" or exactly what? -- Rob Bannister
From: Robert Bannister on 26 Feb 2010 18:31 Evan Kirshenbaum wrote: > Robert Bannister <robban1(a)bigpond.com> writes: > >> Ant�nio Marques wrote: >> >>> It's not what you think. Either the Church's message is universal >>> and Christ did found one Church, or it isn't. >> Now there's a new one: the first I've heard that Jesus founded or even >> wanted a church. > > And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock > I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail > against it. [Matt. 16:18, KJV] > As I said in another post, what word is used for "church" and what did it mean at the time? I somehow doubt it meant bricks and mortar and costly raiment. -- Rob Bannister
From: Jerry Friedman on 26 Feb 2010 18:38
On Feb 26, 5:31 pm, Robert Bannister <robb...(a)bigpond.com> wrote: > Evan Kirshenbaum wrote: > > Robert Bannister <robb...(a)bigpond.com> writes: > > >> António Marques wrote: > > >>> It's not what you think. Either the Church's message is universal > >>> and Christ did found one Church, or it isn't. > >> Now there's a new one: the first I've heard that Jesus founded or even > >> wanted a church. > > > And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock > > I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail > > against it. [Matt. 16:18, KJV] > > As I said in another post, what word is used for "church" and what did > it mean at the time? I somehow doubt it meant bricks and mortar and > costly raiment. I don't understand statements such as "Christ founded one Church," but I'm pretty sure it's not about bricks or mortar or ever gargoyles. -- Jerry Friedman |