Bookmark this page:
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
On 3/12/10 4:13 AM, Quadibloc wrote:
> Evidently the battle with Gerard has fatigued you more than you know.
> Not only is civil time kept in synchrony with the synodic day - as the
> sidereal day would lead night and day to switch places once a year...
> but the calendar is kept in sync with the tropical year.
> The tropical year is about 365.2422 days, which is why we omit three
> leap years in 400 years to get 365.2425 days instead of 365.25 days.
> The sidereal year, on the other hand, is slightly _longer_ than 365.25
> days, so we would have to add *extra* leap years to keep in sync with
> that. But we would rather have the year tell us when to plant our
> crops than tell us when to expect the heliacal rising of Sirius.
> John Savard
> Not only is civil time kept in synchrony with the synodic day - as the
> sidereal day would lead night and day to switch places once a year...
> but the calendar is kept in sync with the tropical year.
> The tropical year is about 365.2422 days, which is why we omit three
> leap years in 400 years to get 365.2425 days instead of 365.25 days.
> The sidereal year, on the other hand, is slightly _longer_ than 365.25
> days, so we would have to add *extra* leap years to keep in sync with
> that. But we would rather have the year tell us when to plant our
> crops than tell us when to expect the heliacal rising of Sirius.
> John Savard
When responding, we have to make judgment call as to the level
and language, sometime trade offs between articulating general
concept and correct and precise science and mathematics.
Historically precise timing involved sidereal timing of bright
stars on the Greenwich meridian. That activity did NOT imply the
use of sidereal day over solar day in civil timing.
My apologies for lack of articulation for the other readers in
my response to Gerald.
> On 3/12/10 4:13 AM, Quadibloc wrote:
> >> =A0 =A0 Now Gerald, you should realize that sometimes leap seconds
> >> =A0 =A0 are added (or subtracted) to keep so the civil time and sidere=
al
> >> =A0 =A0 are added (or subtracted) to keep so the civil time and sidere=
> >> =A0 =A0 day will stay synced, just like we add (or don't add) leap day=
s
> >> =A0 =A0 to keep the seasons synced with the sidereal year.
> > Evidently the battle with Gerard has fatigued you more than you know.
> > Not only is civil time kept in synchrony with the synodic day - as the
> > sidereal day would lead night and day to switch places once a year...
> > but the calendar is kept in sync with the tropical year.
> > The tropical year is about 365.2422 days, which is why we omit three
> > leap years in 400 years to get 365.2425 days instead of 365.25 days.
> > The sidereal year, on the other hand, is slightly _longer_ than 365.25
> > days, so we would have to add *extra* leap years to keep in sync with
> > that. But we would rather have the year tell us when to plant our
> > crops than tell us when to expect the heliacal rising of Sirius.
> > John Savard
> > Not only is civil time kept in synchrony with the synodic day - as the
> > sidereal day would lead night and day to switch places once a year...
> > but the calendar is kept in sync with the tropical year.
> > The tropical year is about 365.2422 days, which is why we omit three
> > leap years in 400 years to get 365.2425 days instead of 365.25 days.
> > The sidereal year, on the other hand, is slightly _longer_ than 365.25
> > days, so we would have to add *extra* leap years to keep in sync with
> > that. But we would rather have the year tell us when to plant our
> > crops than tell us when to expect the heliacal rising of Sirius.
> > John Savard
> =A0 =A0When responding, we have to make judgment call as to the level
> =A0 =A0and language, sometime trade offs between articulating general
> =A0 =A0concept and correct and precise science and mathematics.
> =A0 =A0Historically precise timing involved sidereal timing of bright
> =A0 =A0stars on the Greenwich meridian. That activity did NOT imply the
> =A0 =A0use of sidereal day over solar day in civil timing.
> =A0 =A0My apologies for lack of articulation for the other readers in
> =A0 =A0my response to Gerald.
> =A0 =A0and language, sometime trade offs between articulating general
> =A0 =A0concept and correct and precise science and mathematics.
> =A0 =A0Historically precise timing involved sidereal timing of bright
> =A0 =A0stars on the Greenwich meridian. That activity did NOT imply the
> =A0 =A0use of sidereal day over solar day in civil timing.
> =A0 =A0My apologies for lack of articulation for the other readers in
> =A0 =A0my response to Gerald.
No astronomer since antiquity and especially those involved in the
timekeeping system ever referenced the daily cycle to the circumpolar
motion of the constellations and no sane person could ever assign
daily rotation,as a planetary dynamic,directly to the return of a
star.What you are looking at when a star returns in 23 hours 56
minutes is the average taken within the calendar system of equable
days which requires a leap day added to correct the equable day
calendar system back to the raw orbital cycle.
The crisis our race faces in directly related to that silly error made
by Flamsteed in believing that the apparent return of a star proves
daily rotation is constant insofar as the convenience of the Ra/Dec
framework for determining events like eclipses within the calendar
system cannot be used for planetary dynamics and structural astronomy
such as the structure of the solar system or larger celestial
structures.
Newton attempted to use the Ra/Dec convenience to bridge planetary
dynamics to tabletop experiments,you are simply not good enough or too
indoctrinated into the empirical myth to realize what damage was done
and how it was allowed to snowball into the living nightmare where
nobody affirms the basic geometrical fact that the Earth turns at a
rate of 15 degrees/ 1037.5 miles per hour at the equator and an entire
equatorial circumference in 24 hours.If the disgrace is too much to
handle then just say so but until this gets sorted out,and
quickly,none of you deserve to be called intelligent,that is not an
insult,that is a geometric certainty.
On 3/12/2010 8:52 AM, Sam Wormley wrote:
> [...]
> My apologies for lack of articulation for the other readers in
> my response to Gerald.
> My apologies for lack of articulation for the other readers in
> my response to Gerald.
Not accepted; it's your lack of good, not common, sense with your
responses that's at issue and is why you're in so many killfiles.
On 3/12/10 1:26 PM, Thad Floryan wrote:
> On 3/12/2010 8:52 AM, Sam Wormley wrote:
>> [...]
>> My apologies for lack of articulation for the other readers in
>> my response to Gerald.
>> My apologies for lack of articulation for the other readers in
>> my response to Gerald.
> Not accepted; it's your lack of good, not common, sense with your
> responses that's at issue and is why you're in so many killfiles.
> responses that's at issue and is why you're in so many killfiles.
You are just sore, because I challenge your global climate change
nay-sayer gibberish. You should stick me in your killfile, Thad!
>> are added (or subtracted) to keep so the civil time and sidereal
>> day will stay synced, just like we add (or don't add) leap days
>> to keep the seasons synced with the sidereal year.