|
|
On Apr 22, 2:28 am, "Greg Neill" <gneill...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> "David Weinshenker" <daz...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>
> news:480CD359.67F003E5@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> > How would you measure the rotation: suppose you landed on this planet
> > from outer space, with your own time-measuring devices (that were
> > marked in some totally alien units, independent of Earthlings'
> > "hours"), and were wondering what the rotation period of the planet
> > was. By what observation would you take that measurement? (Observing
> > the apparent position of distant stars? Observing the position of
> > sun? Using a Foucault pendulum at the pole?
>
> Kelleher, aka Oriel36, is a well known crank who
> seems to be fixated upon a geocentric universe.
>
> Definitely not worth the effort.
The man asked about Foucault's pendulum at the poles and I give him
the answer through the experiment and the 24 hour/360 Degree
principles ,if you does not like the answer that is not my business.
A foundational error is the worst type of error,you cannot do
anything with it no more than you can build on flat Earth notios and
be taken seriously.This is the exact same situation with an
astrological twist and it stands against every single astronomical
achievement up to the time that Flamsteed created his false 'proof'
for axial rotation.
The means by which clocks are kept in sync with the axial cycle and
longitudes at 24 hours/360 degrees is a heliocentric development and
one of the most greatest known human achievements that everybody here
will use today and for the rest of their lives,even the ungrateful
ones like yourself.To go from that achievement to a sub-geocentric
astrological framework amounts to the worst sort of vandalism and
that is final.
|
|