DELTA 4 ROCKET READY TO LAUNCH NEW ERA FOR GPS

oriel36 wrote:

That must be a bit subjective (unless you have an objective measure of
crudity!). How about the "four elements"?

Mike.
--
If reply address is invalid, remove spurious "@" and substitute "plus"
where needed.

Even more basic,try the Pi proportion.The Earth has one diameter that
is specifically organised around it rotational characteristics,one
circumference of 24,901 miles or 40,075 km,one rotation period of 24
hours with all the values for this round and rotating Earth contained
in the following tables -

http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/education/curricula/giscc/units/u014/tables/table=
02.html

All those values represent the dimensions and rotational
characteristics of the Earth and are only valid for an Earth that
displays a minor spherical deviation of 26 miles between equatorial
and polar diameters.I personally think it is disgraceful that I have
to argue for the Pi proportion,the geographical separation of 1037.5
miles representing 15 degrees and 1 hour at the equator and things
that normally reasonable people would accept without hesitation but
arguing against the values in that table,and this is what 'sidereal
time' reasoning does, exposes a side of human nature that even I
shudder to imagine.So take out a world globe and look at the
geographical dimensions that represent real places on the globe and
effects such as the rapid transition from day to night at the equator
due to independent rotation as opposed to longer twilights at
latitudes towards the geographical poles and the slower rotational
speeds.

What possible good can come from a disjointed relationship between
rotational cause and terrestrial effects by appealing to that dumb
conclusion of Flamsteed,I do not mind that people continue on with
novelties built on 'sidereal time' reasoning but there has to be a
counterpoint of people working with the correct dimensions and
rotational characteristics of the Earth.

Let's say that I was standing on a turntable on a toy railroad train
that was moving through my living room.

If I see the ceiling turn around once every five minutes, then I'll
conclude that the turntable on the train is turning once every five
minutes.

Well, that's true if the train is going around in a straight line.

But what if the train is going around in a circle, and it takes thirty
minutes for the train to go around the whole circle? Then, couldn't it
be that the turntable is really turning around once every five
minutes?

Yes, we would normally call it that. If the turntable is mounted
rigidly to the train, and turned by a little motor on the train, then
that motor is causing one rotation of the turntable every six minutes,
and the reason I see the ceiling turn around faster is because of the
contribution of the train's circular path.

So why don't we do the same thing for the Earth in its orbit -
recognize that the Earth turns at a speed which causes it to rotate
through 360 degrees in 24 hours, and note that the Earth's orbital
motion adds one rotation a year, making the apparent motion of the
stars faster, giving the shorter 23 hour, 56 minute, and 4 second
period?

Unlike a turntable mounted to a train, there isn't anything solid the
Earth is sitting on that follows the Earth's orbit.

And the 24 hour rotation relative to the orbital path is only an
average, while the 23 hour, 56 minute, and 4 second rotation is
uniform. That's why it makes better sense to think of that as the
"real" rotation.

John Savard

On 5/22/10 12:32 AM, oriel36 wrote:

That's nothing, Gerald, as anybody that understands the
rotation of the earth under the Keplerian orbits of
satellites understands that a successive launch opportunity
comes one sidereal day later.

360° later is one sidereal day later. Simple geometry.