Vatican observatory


#1

It is really disappointing to see that Catholics cannot figure out that to construct an accurate calendar of 365.25 equable days you must first determine an equable 24 hour day.The principles behind this equable day are determined by exquisite reasoning based on the motion of the Earth on its axis.

Newton made himself God’s authority on natural things and reduced Jesus to God’s spokeman on moral issues hence his denial of the trinity and subsequently the truly awful situation where religion is supposed to deal with Spiritual things and science deals with fact.

There is no fact in Newton’s work on applying terrestial ballistics to the motion of the planets,his work is not some much an intellectual fountain as a tomb which sucks the virtue out of the astronomical insights he so badly misused.

Granted that the technical aspects are intricate and terrestial ballistics in itself is fine for launching rockets but applying it to planetary motion may have been a good guess but is technically and conceptually wrong .

There is nothing productive in determining that a mathematically endeared concept such as Newton’s is incorrect and a fudge, for considering the life of Jesus he spoke of what Life was availible through belief than what was wrong with Judaism and likewise with the astronomical material here as an imitation,albeit a minor imitation of Spiritual intricacies.

Nobody appear to enjoy the insight on how the equable 24 hour day emerged as a combination of clocks,geometry and astronomy but without that appreceation which extends into the creation of the calendar system much of Western ideas borrowed from the astronomical giants such as Copernicus,Kepler and Roemer are reduced to exotic trash.

Let the Vatican observatory speak on the matter of the fundamental rotation of the Earth on its axis as an independent motion.The empirical guys who did so much to counter Christian faith have managed to conceal an awful lapse of reasoning based on a 24 hour/360 degree rotation.

Without a thorough review ,intellectual accomplishment within the Western/Christian world will be all but impossble and tend toward utter absurdity (It most certainly has arrived at that point).While Catholics speak of calendars and the Easter determination it can hardly escape their attension that the equable day and the principle which keep it equable have first to be in place.

It may be difficult for Catholics to imagine that scientists uphold a really poor type of reasoning on this matter but with prejudice and as a straightforward fact they simply get the value for the rotation of the Earth on its axis wrong for self-serving and self-congratualtory reasons.


#2

well, you must be a genius then, un real how the Catholics couldn’t figure it out…lol


#3

Okay, I have a bachelors of science in biochemistry, magna cum laude, from a Jesuit university and earned 4.0’s in my physics and physical chemistry (quantum mechanics, relativity, etc.) courses. I still can’t figure out the point this guy is trying to make, other than that he thinks 1) the Vatican has control over secular calendar determinations, and 2) we’ Catholics are idiots.

Who is this guy, and why is he so bent on insulting us over a calendar, and doing it in such a way that it is unintelligible?


#4

SeekerJen,

This has been consistent with other posts on other threads. I think it’s fair to say that the person has, um, “issues”, to put it diplomatically.


#5

It may be difficult for Catholics to imagine that scientists uphold a really poor type of reasoning on this matter but with prejudice and as a straightforward fact they simply get the value for the rotation of the Earth on its axis wrong for self-serving and self-congratualtory reasons.

Assuming this is your summary remarks, I’d like to ask what the heck are you’re on about and why should any Catholic care?

Considering all the really big problems facing the world, any problems you might have with the calendar (of all things to get worked up about) strikes me as downright silly.


#6

Yeah apparently this guy has something against sidereal time
I’ve never quite understood his point

As if it makes a hill of beans from a theological point of view

The measurement of time and the reckoning of days is just a convenient tool to keep track of things

We could just as easily all agree to say that a “day” is 42.3 hours or that a “year” is 100 days (call it a deci-year :wink: )

It wouldn’t be too convenient or in keeping with apparent solar motion and the seasons but we really could do anything we wanted. It is just numbers after all.

But for now 360 degrees & 24 hours seem to work out well mathematically


#7

He sounds like someone who read part of an article and is trying to base an argument on it.


#8

He may be talking about the fact that the solar day, what we call a “day” (the time from, say, exact local noon one day to exact local noon the next day) is 3 minutes 55.909 seconds longer than the sidereal day (the time it takes for any given star to reach exactly the same point in the sky that we saw it at yesterday.

The reason for that is that in the intervening time the earth has moved 0.9856 of a degree along its orbit, and it has to spin an extra 3:55.909 to make up for that, to put the sun back into the same place in the sky.

Our clock is based on solar time, because the sun is the major reference point in our sky, and we want our clock to read 1200 (or something close to it) every time it is highest in the sky. Astronomers use a clock that reads sidereal time. Each clock has a 24-hour day; it’s just that the astronomer’s clock ticks a little faster.

Having said all that, I still don’t know what Oriel’s diatribe against the Vatican observatory was all about.

DaveBj


#9

Thank you Steve and Dave. Those posts made sense. :thumbsup:


#10

What kind of degree in science do you have? And where did it come from? A cereal box?


#11

[quote=Della]Assuming this is your summary remarks, I’d like to ask what the heck are you’re on about and why should any Catholic care?

Considering all the really big problems facing the world, any problems you might have with the calendar (of all things to get worked up about) strikes me as downright silly.
[/quote]

Would you object if your children were taught that creationism is correct and a valid point of departure for models of geological,cosmological and the development of life on Earth ?.

There is just ONE correct value for axial rotation through 360 degrees - 24 hours exactly but scientists base there theories on the wrong value,namely 23 hours 56 min 04 sec.

I assure you that there is a major anti-Christian error in principle behind this seemigly small difference in what constitutes the value for the rotation of the Earth on its axis as an independent motion.


#12

[quote=Steve Andersen]Yeah apparently this guy has something against sidereal time
I’ve never quite understood his point

As if it makes a hill of beans from a theological point of view

[/quote]

The Newtonian perspective based on the sidereal value amounts to a destruction of Copernican heliocentrism,in other words Newton justifies the position that the Earth and Sun can swap position without suffering any loss to the heliocentric view.

nordita.dk/~steen/fysik51/ast/astt8_files/AT40103_files/AACHCIR0.JPG

The illegal maneuver is based on Flamsteed’s false proof for axial rotation where a coordinate based on axial rotation is shoved into an orbital displacement or what you see as the 3 min 56 sec difference.

Nowhere in all the intervening centuries has it been explained where Newton is deriving his absolute and relative time definitions and distinctions except for the early 20th century fictionalised accounts which omit the technical point that Newton is describing the Equation of Time which keeps the Earth’s axial rotation fixed to 15 degrees of rotation per hour and 24 hours in total for 360 degrees.

Why do Catholics want to play dumb for the sake of Newton ?, his empirical agenda knocks the careful balances between the self-correcting mechanism of intuition against a mathematical treatment hence 100 years of exotic relativistic and qm trash which emerged as an extreme example of the snowballing effect of that 1687 error.


#13

[quote=oriel36]The Newtonian perspective based on the sidereal value amounts to a destruction of Copernican heliocentrism,in other words Newton justifies the position that the Earth and Sun can swap position without suffering any loss to the heliocentric view.

nordita.dk/~steen/fysik51/ast/astt8_files/AT40103_files/AACHCIR0.JPG

The illegal maneuver is based on Flamsteed’s false proof for axial rotation where a coordinate based on axial rotation is shoved into an orbital displacement or what you see as the 3 min 56 sec difference.

Nowhere in all the intervening centuries has it been explained where Newton is deriving his absolute and relative time definitions and distinctions except for the early 20th century fictionalised accounts which omit the technical point that Newton is describing the Equation of Time which keeps the Earth’s axial rotation fixed to 15 degrees of rotation per hour and 24 hours in total for 360 degrees.

Why do Catholics want to play dumb for the sake of Newton ?, his empirical agenda knocks the careful balances between the self-correcting mechanism of intuition against a mathematical treatment hence 100 years of exotic relativistic and qm trash which emerged as an extreme example of the snowballing effect of that 1687 error.
[/quote]

I am not obsessive
I am not obsessive
I am not obsessive
I am not obsessive
I am not obsessive


#14

[quote=tcay584]I am not obsessive
I am not obsessive
I am not obsessive
I am not obsessive
I am not obsessive
[/quote]

Call me what you will but that you allow children to be influenced by the Newtonian outlook which is fundamentally wrong on a very basic point and shades off into wildly absurd relativistic/qm concepts that can only harm appreceation of our planet and life on it.If a person can say that the Earth around the Sun is the same as the Sun around the Earth as Newton did,even for his own specific purposes,the Copernican insight is immediately lost.

I have seen the results of 100 years of relativistic obsession with a clock and some imagined dimension bottled up in it and I assure you that this undisciplined snowballing effect is telling on Western civilisation.Men make terrible mistakes,if I suffer the humiliation of isolation on this matter it is small compared to the humiliation of continuing to adhere to an awful lapse of reasoning upon which modern theories are founded.

How Newton undid the Copernican heliocentric system and backslid into quasi-geocentricity is indeed a remarkable story but what is more remarkable is that as a man who denied the Trinity can find acceptance among Catholics.His works cannot be from God if he denies the divinity of Christ from whom all intellectual gifts come.


#15

[quote=oriel36]His works cannot be from God if he denies the divinity of Christ from whom all intellectual gifts come.
[/quote]

Even a blind squirrel can find a nut once in a while.

Even an atheist can observe the universe and make accurate analyses of his observations.

I still haven’t figured out what you’re so upset about.

DaveBj


#16

[quote=DaveBj]Even a blind squirrel can find a nut once in a while.

Even an atheist can observe the universe and make accurate analyses of his observations.

I still haven’t figured out what you’re so upset about.

DaveBj
[/quote]

The creationists and Newton have one thing in common,they both have terrible problems with the basic and equable 24 hour day.Most people already know that the Earth rotates through 360 degrees in 24 hour exactly through familiarity with Dava Sobel’s book on Longitude but they may not be familiar with the Equation of Time correction which facilitated the seamless transition from one 24 hour day to the next 24 hour day. Without the Equation of Time there would be no such thing as accurate clocks for it was the means by which John Harrison determined the accuracy of his clock which registers the pace of the rotation of the Earth on its axis as 15 degrees per hour and 24 hours/360 degrees in total.

Now turn to the scientists who manage to make a mess of things on Newton’s account by being pretensious and nonsensical numbskulls and use the sidereal value of 23 hours 56 min 04 sec for a full rotation through 360 degrees.

To the best of my abilities I have shown why Newton,while accurately defining the Equation of Time as the difference between the equable 24 hour day and the natural unequal day adopts Flamsteed’s sidereal value for axial rotation.In other words,while Newton tells his reader than people are vulgar and need ‘time’ defined for them,he himself makes an error that supersedes anything the creationists might come up with.

This is what happens when everyone,Catholic or not, glorifies a guy like Newton who denied the trinity,if he misses the point on the fundamental tenets of Christian faith it does’nt take a genius to figure out what other basic tenets he misses out on.It may be hard to grasp but he built his concepts on the wrong value for axial rotation of the Earth .

If you are not livid that your kids are influenced by an artificial astronomical construct based on terrestial ballistics applied to planetary motion (Newtonian mechanics) by a peevish tyrant like Newton then perhaps you should follow Newtown’s god but I assure you it won’t be anything to do with Christ or Christianity.


#17

[quote=oriel36]The creationists and Newton have one thing in common,they both have terrible problems with the basic and equable 24 hour day.Most people already know that the Earth rotates through 360 degrees in 24 hour exactly through familiarity with Dava Sobel’s book on Longitude but they may not be familiar with the Equation of Time correction which facilitated the seamless transition from one 24 hour day to the next 24 hour day. Without the Equation of Time there would be no such thing as accurate clocks for it was the means by which John Harrison determined the accuracy of his clock which registers the pace of the rotation of the Earth on its axis as 15 degrees per hour and 24 hours/360 degrees in total.
[/quote]

Umm, not quite. The rotation for a 24-hour day (sun “returns” to exactly the same spot in the sky) is 360.9856… degrees. A 360-degree rotation (any given star returns to exactly the same spot in the sky) gives a sidereal day of 23:56:whatever. The idea of the 24-hour day with each hour being exactly 15 degrees was settled on before people realized that the earth moves around the sun and has to rotate a little more than 360 degrees for the sun to be exactly where it was yesterday at this time.

Now turn to the scientists who manage to make a mess of things on Newton’s account by being pretensious and nonsensical numbskulls and use the sidereal value of 23 hours 56 min 04 sec for a full rotation through 360 degrees.

Well, that’s what it is. Sorry astronomical reality doesn’t agree with the reality you’ve made up for yourself. You’ve never looked at an astronomy textbook, have you? The illustration here en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidereal_day isn’t as good as the one in my astronomy book, but it will do.

To the best of my abilities I have shown why Newton,while accurately defining the Equation of Time as the difference between the equable 24 hour day and the natural unequal day adopts Flamsteed’s sidereal value for axial rotation.In other words,while Newton tells his reader than people are vulgar and need ‘time’ defined for them,he himself makes an error that supersedes anything the creationists might come up with.

This is what happens when everyone,Catholic or not, glorifies a guy like Newton who denied the trinity,if he misses the point on the fundamental tenets of Christian faith it does’nt take a genius to figure out what other basic tenets he misses out on.It may be hard to grasp but he built his concepts on the wrong value for axial rotation of the Earth .

There’s a name for this logical fallacy–the ad hominem attack. So-and-so (in this case, Newton) is wrong about Subject A (in this case, theology); therefore, he must also be wrong about Subject B (astronomical mechanics). By the same token, because I would be wrong if I tried to expound on the grammar of the Turkish language (a language I do not speak), I should not be listened to if I tried to expound on the grammar of the Russian language (the language I have my degrees in). Again, I would not consult Einstein or Hawkings on matters of theology, but they sure as heck have made the universe a lot more understandable.

If you are not livid that your kids are influenced by an artificial astronomical construct based on terrestial ballistics applied to planetary motion (Newtonian mechanics) by a peevish tyrant like Newton then perhaps you should follow Newtown’s god but I assure you it won’t be anything to do with Christ or Christianity.

My kids are long out of school. Neither of them works in a field that is influenced by terrestrial ballistics. Newton was, in fact, a peevish tyrant, but I can follow him where he was right (planetary motion), while ignoring him where he is wrong (theology).

One thing I am glad about–that you don’t teach in any classes I take.

DaveBj


#18

[quote=oriel36]…
Why do Catholics want to play dumb for the sake of Newton ?, his empirical agenda knocks the careful balances between the self-correcting mechanism of intuition against a mathematical treatment hence 100 years of exotic relativistic and qm trash which emerged as an extreme example of the snowballing effect of that 1687 error.
[/quote]

So you don’t like Newton or Einstein?

Time, velocity, length, mass are all relative

We’ve known this and proven it experimentally decades ago.

But what does it have to do with Catholicism?

Are you sad that the heliocentric model was debunked?

I’m just not following your point
:confused:

[quote=oriel36] …
Now turn to the scientists who manage to make a mess of things on Newton’s account by being pretensious and nonsensical numbskulls and use the sidereal value of 23 hours 56 min 04 sec for a full rotation through 360 degrees.


[/quote]

the sidereal day and the solar day are different

any textbook will tell you that

it is not news


#19

oriel36, If this is big news, as you are purporting it to be, WHY don’t you go public with this? I mean, take it to the media, influence others because you don’t want our children to grow up ignorant & all. Maybe you’ll be able to get them to change time and such for the sake of accuracy. Why tell us? We’re not going to change it.


#20

[quote=DaveBj]Umm, not quite. The rotation for a 24-hour day (sun “returns” to exactly the same spot in the sky) is 360.9856… degrees. A 360-degree rotation (any given star returns to exactly the same spot in the sky) gives a sidereal day of 23:56:whatever. The idea of the 24-hour day with each hour being exactly 15 degrees was settled on before people realized that the earth moves around the sun and has to rotate a little more than 360 degrees for the sun to be exactly where it was yesterday at this time.

DaveBj
[/quote]

You are typical of your empirical masters,you say anything you wish and hope that there is nobody around with enough interest in the matter to know the difference.The tenets of my Christian faith forbid me from ever bending to the vacuous nature of empirical reasoning and technically everything you said above is false in respect to the motion of the Earth,the values for that motion and the references which gauge the pace of an equable day and subsequently the pace of equable hours,minutes and seconds of a clock

No Catholic,I repeat,no Catholic with any intellectual esteem would believe that there is a constant rotation of their position back to the Sun every 24 hours even though the sidereal justification relies on it .The whole point of the Equation of Time correction is that before Copernicus it designated the difference between the average or equable day against variations in the lenght of the natural day whereas after Copernicus/Kepler it would have made sense that axial rotation is constant while the natural inequality is due to Kepler’s second law.

Western European Catholicism or the lack of it has been due to the rise of this horrible empirical tradition known as the ‘scientific method’ when the very foundation of that method applied to astronomy supersedes creationism or geocentrism for conceptual values and believe me,I do say this as a generalisation,the technical basis is basically a Newtonian cartoon.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.