Do we actually exist between ultimate boundaries?

Popoutman

^ reported for being just plain wrong. Quite delusional, and please set your reader to ignore gkell11 - your sanity will be better off.

I had a long thread a few years ago trying to educate this misguided individual in the past, and it's like trying to teach a wall to sing.

ps200306

gkell11 wrote: »

Kids wake up in a world where adults believe that the Earth is into the next full rotation after 23 hours 56 minutes hence the silly conclusion that there is one more rotation than there are 24 hour days in a year and that is pure cult behavior... There is a step by step approach of course that anyone can take and it is not difficult with visual imaging to demonstrate the fact.

I see from other threads you've trolled that you flit between your own prescribed "visual imaging" and admonishing people to get out and see for themselves, depending on which of your crazy views has just been trashed. I see also that you're a Newgrange fan. You might be interested in my Newgrange-style observations of Spica in April-May 2012 where I timed its arrival at a fixed sky location over a number of weeks. I dug the picture below out from my notes. I measured the length of one earth rotation to be the accepted value that you have rubbished, to within a margin of error of 6 seconds. So who's the cult now? :pac:

Rubecula

has this anything to do with the original question?

ps200306

Rubecula wrote: »

has this anything to do with the original question?

Nothing whatsoever -- gkell11 is a master of thread hijacking and obfuscation.

mickmackey1

ps200306 wrote: »

You might be interested in my Newgrange-style observations of Spica in April-May 2012 where I timed its arrival at a fixed sky location over a number of weeks. I dug the picture below out from my notes. I measured the length of one earth rotation to be the accepted value

Excellent project. I keep meaning to do something like this, it creates a kind of ethereal link with the ancients

ps200306

mickmackey1 wrote: »

Excellent project. I keep meaning to do something like this, it creates a kind of ethereal link with the ancients

Yeah it was great fun. I wanted to do it with no equipment other than a clock. I ended up investigating everything from light pollution to how much your head moves by random postural swaying. (So I suppose I used a couple of billion transistors and a globally connected network as well as the clock )

Popoutman

Slightly off topic, but an interesting exercise that could have been done with the technology available to the ancients.

It would have been possible for the ancients to determine that the planets were apparently bigger than the stars in our sky.
If you take e.g. a film canister with a hole in the end, mounted on a tripod, and you watch a star as it moves behind something hard and vertical like the side of a building or a cliff face, you can see that it'll take maybe a second or less to wink out. The film canister is used to ensure that the eye position doesn't move. If you were to reposition the film canister such that one of the planets was to move behind something similar, you'd see that the planet takes a longer time to disappear.

There was an article in Astronomy Now a long time ago going into detail on this.

ps200306

Popoutman wrote: »

Slightly off topic, but an interesting exercise that could have been done with the technology available to the ancients.

It would have been possible for the ancients to determine that the planets were apparently bigger than the stars in our sky.
If you take e.g. a film canister with a hole in the end, mounted on a tripod, and you watch a star as it moves behind something hard and vertical like the side of a building or a cliff face, you can see that it'll take maybe a second or less to wink out. The film canister is used to ensure that the eye position doesn't move. If you were to reposition the film canister such that one of the planets was to move behind something similar, you'd see that the planet takes a longer time to disappear.

There was an article in Astronomy Now a long time ago going into detail on this.

That's interesting, and one I'd like to try. I see from Wikipedia that the maximum angular diameters of the classical planets range from 13 to 66 seconds of arc. Jupiter at opposition would probably be the best choice at 50 seconds. The sky rotates 15 seconds of arc per second so Jupiter takes 3 seconds to disappear if the planet was moving perpendicular to the edge of the occluding object. How much of that would the eye be able to perceive, though? I'd expect the dimming to follow some kind of sinusoidal pattern (and that's just from the shape of the disc, ignoring complications like limb darkening and diffraction). Could we arrange a grazing occultation to stretch out the event in time? I'd imagine the biggest experimental challenge would be trying to line your planet and obstacle up in a very tiny field of view.

I presume the occultation of a star is almost instantaneous but I don't know what allowance has to be made for atmospheric distortion. Judging by the video below, the second slowed-down occultation seems to take less than half a second (15 frames of video), and that's by the moon which is moving only 1/30 times the speed relative to the star than a terrestrial object would be. But in that case the occluding object is above our atmosphere -- a twinkling star must be prone to dancing in and out of view momentarily where the object is earth-based.

ps200306

ps200306 wrote: »

Nothing whatsoever -- gkell11 is a master of thread hijacking and obfuscation.

Where are our mod overlords then? I imagine that more than one of his comments have been reported?

mickmackey1

ps200306 wrote: »

I see also that you're a Newgrange fan. You might be interested in my Newgrange-style observations

Looking at yet another clouded-out Newgrange yesterday, there must have been a lot of effing and blinding when the ancients were trying to construct the bloody thing :pac: