So now you are claiming to be smarter than Galileo, but you are simply wrong. There is only one definition of the word retrograde, and it does not differentiate
between inner or outer planets. There are not separate causes, but there are different perspectives. What do you know about perspectives, anyhow?
On Thursday, February 27, 2014 at 9:22:16 PM UTC-7, palsing wrote:
So now you are claiming to be smarter than Galileo, but you are simply wrong.It is true that "retrograde" means only one thing: moving backwards.
There is only one definition of the word retrograde, and it does not differentiate
between inner or outer planets. There are not separate causes, but there are
different perspectives. What do you know about perspectives, anyhow?
And the cause of apparent retrograde motion, whether of an inner or outer planet, is the orbital motion of the Earth, so there is only one cause.
But that doesn't mean there is no difference between the sequence of causes that leads to the apparent motion of the other planets in our sky between inner
and outer planets.
The apparent paths of planets around the Earth are circular in shape, but with
multiple loops along the way. In the case of an outer planet, the overall circle
corresponds to the planet's real motion, and the loops correspond to the change
made by the Earth's motion.
In the case of an inner planet, the overall circle corresponds to the Sun's apparent
motion around the Earth - the effect of the Earth's motion, and the loops correspond
to the planet's real motion.
That's definitely a difference of some sort.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 301 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 222:39:16 |
Calls: | 6,745 |
Files: | 12,272 |
Messages: | 5,370,077 |