The main obstacle faced by Copernicus at the time was how to mesh a moving Earth in a Sun-centred system with the antecedent predictive framework of Ptolemy, which existed for many hundreds of years previously and predicted events such as eclipses andplanetary positions to each other.
He originally got the annual motions of the North/South poles right in his first descriptions of a Sun centred system, but because of the dominance of predictive astronomy, he had to sacrifice that correct perspective to satisfy the demands of the 25,920 year Precession of the Equinoxes cycle built into the Ptolemaic framework-
" The third is the motion in declination. For, the axis of the daily rotation is not parallel to the Grand Orb's axis, but is inclined [to it at an angle that intercepts] a portion of a circumference, in our time about 23 1/2°. Therefore, while theearth's centre always remains in the plane of the ecliptic, that is, in the circumference of a circle of the Grand Orb, the earth's poles rotate, both of them describing small circles about centres [lying on a line that moves] parallel to the Grand Orb's
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CommentariolusEarth orthogonal to the orbital plane.
The new perspective would be to relate inclination to the orbital plane of 66 1/2° so as to gauge the motion of the North/South poles (where daily rotation is absent) relative to the central/stationary Sun and to the light and dark hemispheres of the
On Sunday, 7 November 2021 at 10:13:00 UTC, kellehe...@gmail.com wrote:and planetary positions to each other.
The main obstacle faced by Copernicus at the time was how to mesh a moving Earth in a Sun-centred system with the antecedent predictive framework of Ptolemy, which existed for many hundreds of years previously and predicted events such as eclipses
920 year Precession of the Equinoxes cycle built into the Ptolemaic framework-He originally got the annual motions of the North/South poles right in his first descriptions of a Sun centred system, but because of the dominance of predictive astronomy, he had to sacrifice that correct perspective to satisfy the demands of the 25,
earth's centre always remains in the plane of the ecliptic, that is, in the circumference of a circle of the Grand Orb, the earth's poles rotate, both of them describing small circles about centres [lying on a line that moves] parallel to the Grand Orb's" The third is the motion in declination. For, the axis of the daily rotation is not parallel to the Grand Orb's axis, but is inclined [to it at an angle that intercepts] a portion of a circumference, in our time about 23 1/2°. Therefore, while the
the Earth orthogonal to the orbital plane.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commentariolus
The new perspective would be to relate inclination to the orbital plane of 66 1/2° so as to gauge the motion of the North/South poles (where daily rotation is absent) relative to the central/stationary Sun and to the light and dark hemispheres of
Copernicus had already read and acknowledged his debt to Aristarchus who first proposed the heliocentric theory. However he removed Aristarchus from the draft before he published.
On Sunday, November 7, 2021 at 2:23:32 PM UTC, Mike Collins wrote:and planetary positions to each other.
On Sunday, 7 November 2021 at 10:13:00 UTC, kellehe...@gmail.com wrote:
The main obstacle faced by Copernicus at the time was how to mesh a moving Earth in a Sun-centred system with the antecedent predictive framework of Ptolemy, which existed for many hundreds of years previously and predicted events such as eclipses
25,920 year Precession of the Equinoxes cycle built into the Ptolemaic framework-He originally got the annual motions of the North/South poles right in his first descriptions of a Sun centred system, but because of the dominance of predictive astronomy, he had to sacrifice that correct perspective to satisfy the demands of the
the earth's centre always remains in the plane of the ecliptic, that is, in the circumference of a circle of the Grand Orb, the earth's poles rotate, both of them describing small circles about centres [lying on a line that moves] parallel to the Grand" The third is the motion in declination. For, the axis of the daily rotation is not parallel to the Grand Orb's axis, but is inclined [to it at an angle that intercepts] a portion of a circumference, in our time about 23 1/2°. Therefore, while
the Earth orthogonal to the orbital plane.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commentariolus
The new perspective would be to relate inclination to the orbital plane of 66 1/2° so as to gauge the motion of the North/South poles (where daily rotation is absent) relative to the central/stationary Sun and to the light and dark hemispheres of
modifications as it requires the Sun as a stationary/central reference in order to judge the faster motions of the inner solar system planets as they run tighter circuits closer to the Sun-Copernicus had already read and acknowledged his debt to Aristarchus who first proposed the heliocentric theory. However he removed Aristarchus from the draft before he published.This isn't really for you or the Royal Society guys Mike, this is a series of adaptations to free up research into a number of areas which satellite imaging allows. The separate direct/retrograde resolution for Mercury and Venus is among the major
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2uCtot1aDg
Easy enough for any observer to judge which planet is travelling behind the Sun and which one is passing between the slower moving Earth and central Sun. The change in position of the background field of stars substitutes for the Earth's orbital motion.
The other major modification is using the circumpolar framework as an orbital reference rather than projecting the rotational characteristics of the Earth into the Universe as RA/Dec. The point in space occupied by Polaris allows the observer toconsider the single surface rotation parallel to the orbital plane which allows the circumference increase/decrease with the poles at the centre of that development where the Sun remains in view or out of sight. Presently the surface area with the North
It is all verifiable by extrapolating the dual rotations from satellite imaging of Uranus-
https://hubblesite.org/contents/media/videos/1999/11/175-Video.html?news=true
Solar system research is first and foremost an observational exercise and not a theoretical one.
On Sunday, November 7, 2021 at 10:56:25 AM UTC-8, kellehe...@gmail.com wrote:eclipses and planetary positions to each other.
On Sunday, November 7, 2021 at 2:23:32 PM UTC, Mike Collins wrote:
On Sunday, 7 November 2021 at 10:13:00 UTC, kellehe...@gmail.com wrote:
The main obstacle faced by Copernicus at the time was how to mesh a moving Earth in a Sun-centred system with the antecedent predictive framework of Ptolemy, which existed for many hundreds of years previously and predicted events such as
the 25,920 year Precession of the Equinoxes cycle built into the Ptolemaic framework-He originally got the annual motions of the North/South poles right in his first descriptions of a Sun centred system, but because of the dominance of predictive astronomy, he had to sacrifice that correct perspective to satisfy the demands of
the earth's centre always remains in the plane of the ecliptic, that is, in the circumference of a circle of the Grand Orb, the earth's poles rotate, both of them describing small circles about centres [lying on a line that moves] parallel to the Grand" The third is the motion in declination. For, the axis of the daily rotation is not parallel to the Grand Orb's axis, but is inclined [to it at an angle that intercepts] a portion of a circumference, in our time about 23 1/2°. Therefore, while
of the Earth orthogonal to the orbital plane.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commentariolus
The new perspective would be to relate inclination to the orbital plane of 66 1/2° so as to gauge the motion of the North/South poles (where daily rotation is absent) relative to the central/stationary Sun and to the light and dark hemispheres
modifications as it requires the Sun as a stationary/central reference in order to judge the faster motions of the inner solar system planets as they run tighter circuits closer to the Sun-Copernicus had already read and acknowledged his debt to Aristarchus who first proposed the heliocentric theory. However he removed Aristarchus from the draft before he published.This isn't really for you or the Royal Society guys Mike, this is a series of adaptations to free up research into a number of areas which satellite imaging allows. The separate direct/retrograde resolution for Mercury and Venus is among the major
motion.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2uCtot1aDg
Easy enough for any observer to judge which planet is travelling behind the Sun and which one is passing between the slower moving Earth and central Sun. The change in position of the background field of stars substitutes for the Earth's orbital
consider the single surface rotation parallel to the orbital plane which allows the circumference increase/decrease with the poles at the centre of that development where the Sun remains in view or out of sight. Presently the surface area with the NorthThe other major modification is using the circumpolar framework as an orbital reference rather than projecting the rotational characteristics of the Earth into the Universe as RA/Dec. The point in space occupied by Polaris allows the observer to
It is all verifiable by extrapolating the dual rotations from satellite imaging of Uranus-
https://hubblesite.org/contents/media/videos/1999/11/175-Video.html?news=true
Solar system research is first and foremost an observational exercise and not a theoretical one.Gerald, what you are labeling as "modifications" have been thoroughly understood for centuries. They may be new for you, but for most of us, they are not...
On Sunday, November 7, 2021 at 7:23:32 AM UTC-7, Mike Collins wrote:
Copernicus had already read and acknowledged his debt to AristarchusGiven that he waited until he was on his deathbed _to_ publish... not wanting to get in the kind of trouble Galileo did, I think we can safely conclude that his
who first proposed the heliocentric theory. However he removed
Aristarchus from the draft before he published.
motive in that was not to hog all the fame and glory for himself.
Given that, what was his motive?
- to save space, because people in those days were familiar with the classics;
- to avoid burdening this theory with an associatiion with paganism;
or something else that is quite beyond my ability to guess?
Copernicus had already read and acknowledged his debt to Aristarchus
who first proposed the heliocentric theory. However he removed
Aristarchus from the draft before he published.
On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 4:14:40 AM UTC, palsing wrote:therefore an altogether different perspective to the slower moving planets further out from a faster moving Earth.
Gerald, what you are labeling as "modifications" have been thoroughly understood for centuries. They may be new for you, but for most of us, they are not...
Well Paul, not to be petty, a satellite tracking with the Earth around the Sun and peering into the inner solar system where the central/stationary Sun exists is crucial in accounting for the direct/retrogrades of the faster moving Mercury and Venus
On Sunday, November 7, 2021 at 11:02:16 PM UTC-8, kellehe...@gmail.com wrote:therefore an altogether different perspective to the slower moving planets further out from a faster moving Earth.
On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 4:14:40 AM UTC, palsing wrote:
Gerald, what you are labeling as "modifications" have been thoroughly understood for centuries. They may be new for you, but for most of us, they are not...
Well Paul, not to be petty, a satellite tracking with the Earth around the Sun and peering into the inner solar system where the central/stationary Sun exists is crucial in accounting for the direct/retrogrades of the faster moving Mercury and Venus
No, Gerald, a satellite is not crucial to understanding retrograde motion. Again, this has been thoroughly understood for a very long time before satellites existed. Newton knew all about direct/retrograde motions, as you have reminded us so many timesbefore. Sure, satellites have greatly advanced our knowledge of the universe in general and specifically the Solar System, but not so much when speaking of retrograde motions...
On Sunday, November 7, 2021 at 11:51:19 PM UTC-7, Quadibloc wrote:
On Sunday, November 7, 2021 at 7:23:32 AM UTC-7, Mike Collins wrote:
Copernicus had already read and acknowledged his debt to AristarchusGiven that he waited until he was on his deathbed _to_ publish... not wanting
who first proposed the heliocentric theory. However he removed Aristarchus from the draft before he published.
to get in the kind of trouble Galileo did, I think we can safely conclude that his
motive in that was not to hog all the fame and glory for himself.
Given that, what was his motive?
- to save space, because people in those days were familiar with the classics;
- to avoid burdening this theory with an associatiion with paganism;
or something else that is quite beyond my ability to guess?I've found a paper by Owen Gingerich online which explains it. The ancient work which was the main source for our knowledge that Aristarchus held
that the Earth goes around the Sun was not published again in Europe until the year after Copernicus died.
The passage Copernicus removed mentioned in passing that Philolaus,
and _perhaps_ Aristarchus believed that the Earth was not fixed in space, and was of such a character that Gingerich concluded it was likely trimmed as being an irrelevant digression.
John Savard
On Sunday, November 7, 2021 at 11:51:19 PM UTC-7, Quadibloc wrote:
On Sunday, November 7, 2021 at 7:23:32 AM UTC-7, Mike Collins wrote:
Copernicus had already read and acknowledged his debt to AristarchusGiven that he waited until he was on his deathbed _to_ publish... not wanting
who first proposed the heliocentric theory. However he removed Aristarchus from the draft before he published.
to get in the kind of trouble Galileo did, I think we can safely conclude that his
motive in that was not to hog all the fame and glory for himself.
Given that, what was his motive?
- to save space, because people in those days were familiar with the classics;
- to avoid burdening this theory with an associatiion with paganism;
or something else that is quite beyond my ability to guess?I've found a paper by Owen Gingerich online which explains it. The ancient work which was the main source for our knowledge that Aristarchus held
that the Earth goes around the Sun was not published again in Europe until the year after Copernicus died.
The passage Copernicus removed mentioned in passing that Philolaus,
and _perhaps_ Aristarchus believed that the Earth was not fixed in space, and was of such a character that Gingerich concluded it was likely trimmed as being an irrelevant digression.
John Savard
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 296 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 74:57:28 |
| Calls: | 6,657 |
| Calls today: | 3 |
| Files: | 12,203 |
| Messages: | 5,332,636 |
| Posted today: | 1 |