• Re: Greatest astronomical innovation

    From Gerald Kelleher@21:1/5 to All on Thu Jun 29 03:19:56 2023
    At the time, over a decade ago, nobody suggested that the satellite tracking along with the Earth around the Sun would account for the written and graphic descriptions that I supplied back then when the partitioning of direct/retrograde motions depending
    on whether the planets move faster or slower than the moving Earth is accepted without a clear explanation other than what is found in this newsgroup and perhaps other forums.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2uCtot1aDg

    The framework itself is important as it changes the role the cyclical return of the stars plays for the calendar system but also how climate research is dependent on the issue Copernicus and Galileo couldn't resolve without that framework.

    I never hold people to their deficient views and even the animosity I see today while celebrity theorists improperly explain what was not known to the first Sun-centred astronomers in terms of solar system structure or a better explanation for the
    seasons and planetary climate.

    Instead of directing facile insults at me, people should be proud that they are among the first to see a breakthrough, and goodness knows, that term 'breakthrough' hasn't been used in any meaningful way for so long within the astronomical heritage.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Quadibloc@21:1/5 to palsing on Thu Jun 29 16:52:45 2023
    On Monday, June 10, 2013 at 4:12:34 PM UTC-6, palsing wrote:

    WHAT!!!! Are you changing horses in mid-stream again? What do you
    mean, "the orbital motion of the Earth has little to do with retrogrades
    in this case"? Of course it does! Why oh why wouldn't it?

    In the case of retrogrades of planets that are closer to the Sun than the Earth, of course the retrogrades remain caused by...

    - the fact that these planets orbit the Sun rather than the Earth.

    That, however, is not the same thing as the motion of the Earth
    itself. Even if the Earth didn't move, these planets would exhibit
    apparent retrograde motion when their orbits took them in front
    of the Sun.

    Of course he is badly confused and gets things wrong in many
    ways, but sometimes he is at least partly right - and this is one
    of those cases.

    John Savard

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Gerald Kelleher@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jun 30 00:56:52 2023
    The Earth's orbital motion creates the change in position of the stars from left to right of the Sun or, as seen from the surface of a rotating Earth, from an evening to morning appearance-

    https://sol24.net/data/html/SOHO/C3/96H/VIDEO/

    In comparison to the first Sun-centred astronomer who had to make do with a fixed star background by which to determine the direct/retrograde motions of the slower-moving planets, the new framework provides an easier means to account for the orbital
    motion of the Earth while resolving the direct/retrogrades of the faster-moving Venus and Mercury.

    The relative speeds between the faster-moving Earth and the slower-moving Mars, Jupiter and Saturn infer a stationary Sun at the centre of all planetary motions-

    https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0112/JuSa2000_tezel.gif

    The annual change in the position of the stars relative to the foreground central Sun infer the orbital motion of the Earth-

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2uCtot1aDg

    This is how it will be explained and why the partitioning of direct/retrograde motions is necessary even though it is already out in the open without the careful considerations so many here sought to diminish. I do not hold these people to their previous
    convictions but silence must be terrible knowing it was right in front of them for the last decade.

    The science fantasy people, I have nothing today about or to as is proper when dealing with issues at the level of Copernicus and Galileo.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)