[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Aether or whatever

Subject: Re: Aether or whatever
From: "oriel36"
Date: 25 Oct 2006 10:52:52 -0700
Newsgroups: alt.sci.physics, sci.astro, sci.physics, sci.physics.relativity
The incredible satisfaction of watching theorists dither around with
Flamsteed erroneous proof that axial rotation was equivalent to
celestial sphere geometry by way of the return of a star in 23 hours 56
minutes 04 seconds.How was poor Isaac to know that within a few
centuries they would have not only adopted celestial sphere geometry
but morphed axial rotation to the celestial sphere to orbital motion to
aether/absolute space.

Wasting your lives sure while the magnificent celestial arena is before
you,when even dynamicists can work with avenues such as updated
terrestrial dynamics of the molten/flexible interior as a safe way to
approach the motions of the Earth and from there into solar system
structure and motion.

Look at you George,the authority of the newsgroup when a few years back
you were learning basic astronomical material.

George Dishman wrote:
> GSS wrote:
> > Hence it should be clear that "using the terms barycentric,
> > galactocentric or geocentric" by itself is not sufficient (because it
> > refers only to the origin of the reference system), we must also
> > specify (or fix) the directions of the coordinate axes which is done
> > through ICRF.
> Indeed, I was taking the use of the ICRF for rotation
> as agreed and merely clarifying the location of the
> origin. The page I read on the ICRF dodn't mention
> the use of the solar system barycentre though the
> ICRS page does.
> > Finally therefore let us agree that the celestial reference frames
> > ICRS, ICRF and SSBF refer to the one and the same reference frame and
> > we need not waste any more time on this issue.  Further, whenever we
> > refer to the galactocentric or geocentric celestial reference frames it
> > will imply the reference frames with their origins at galactic center
> > or geocenter respectively and their coordinate axis directions
> > 'parallel' to those of ICRS.
> That's exactly what I intended to clear up and I am
> happy to agree that. My original one-line comment
> was just that we must be careful not to confuse the
> geocentric frame with the barycentric frame even
> though both fix rotation by setting the axes parallel
> to the ICRF since you show point A (which must
> correspond the the DSN station when discussing
> Pioneer) as moving at V1.
> Can we return to the main discussion now? My point
> remains that your suggested experiment is an
> implementation of the Michelson Moreley experiment.
> George

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>