Anthony Ayiomamitis

Dear group,

Pete Lawrence and I pooled our work from yesterday surrounding the
near-occultation of Regulus by the moon to produce an interesting view
of how Regulus appeared relatively to the moon for the two of us
separated by 2370 km apart.

For an interesting comparison of this apparent view, please see
http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm .... someone please
provide oriel with his medication before he starts mumbling het again
about astrologers, axial rotation, apparent frames of reference and
whatever else I may have missed.

Clear skies!

Anthony.

Jim

In article <f34cha$ehj$1@mouse.otenet.gr>, Anthony Ayiomamitis wrote:
> Dear group,
>
> Pete Lawrence and I pooled our work from yesterday surrounding the
> near-occultation of Regulus by the moon to produce an interesting view
> of how Regulus appeared relatively to the moon for the two of us
> separated by 2370 km apart.
>
> For an interesting comparison of this apparent view, please see
> http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm .... someone please
> provide oriel with his medication before he starts mumbling het again
> about astrologers, axial rotation, apparent frames of reference and
> whatever else I may have missed.

I'm not sure he actually _understands_ apparent frames of reference. If
he did then he might actually shut up for a while.


Very nice work both of you, by the way :-)

Jim
--
Find me at http://www.ursaMinorBeta.co.uk

My lucky star is probably Eta Carinae.

Jim

In article <f34cha$ehj$1@mouse.otenet.gr>, Anthony Ayiomamitis wrote:
> Dear group,
>
> Pete Lawrence and I pooled our work from yesterday surrounding the
> near-occultation of Regulus by the moon to produce an interesting view
> of how Regulus appeared relatively to the moon for the two of us
> separated by 2370 km apart.
>
> For an interesting comparison of this apparent view, please see
> http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm .... someone please
> provide oriel with his medication before he starts mumbling het again
> about astrologers, axial rotation, apparent frames of reference and
> whatever else I may have missed.

I'm not sure he actually _understands_ apparent frames of reference. If
he did then he might actually shut up for a while.


Very nice work both of you, by the way :-)

Jim
--
Find me at http://www.ursaMinorBeta.co.uk

My lucky star is probably Eta Carinae.

Ben

On May 24, 10:54 am, Anthony Ayiomamitis <anth...@perseus.no2spam.gr>
wrote:
> Dear group,
>
> Pete Lawrence and I pooled our work from yesterday surrounding the
> near-occultation of Regulus by the moon to produce an interesting view
> of how Regulus appeared relatively to the moon for the two of us
> separated by 2370 km apart.
>
> For an interesting comparison of this apparent view, please seehttp://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm.... someone please
> provide oriel with his medication before he starts mumbling het again
> about astrologers, axial rotation, apparent frames of reference and
> whatever else I may have missed.
>
> Clear skies!
>
> Anthony.

Cool, gentlemen. Exponentially cool.
Praises to the both of you.

Thorazine ( iv drip ) for the crazy guy.

Ben

Ben

On May 24, 10:54 am, Anthony Ayiomamitis <anth...@perseus.no2spam.gr>
wrote:
> Dear group,
>
> Pete Lawrence and I pooled our work from yesterday surrounding the
> near-occultation of Regulus by the moon to produce an interesting view
> of how Regulus appeared relatively to the moon for the two of us
> separated by 2370 km apart.
>
> For an interesting comparison of this apparent view, please seehttp://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm.... someone please
> provide oriel with his medication before he starts mumbling het again
> about astrologers, axial rotation, apparent frames of reference and
> whatever else I may have missed.
>
> Clear skies!
>
> Anthony.

Cool, gentlemen. Exponentially cool.
Praises to the both of you.

Thorazine ( iv drip ) for the crazy guy.

Ben

Richard Tobin

In article <f34cha$ehj$1@mouse.otenet.gr>,
Anthony Ayiomamitis <anthony@perseus.no2spam.gr> wrote:

>For an interesting comparison of this apparent view, please see
>http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm

Very nice.

I think the inverse picture would also be interesting, with one image
of Regulus and two of the moon. Would the difference in fullness of
the moon be visible?

-- Richard
--
"Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.

Richard Tobin

In article <f34cha$ehj$1@mouse.otenet.gr>,
Anthony Ayiomamitis <anthony@perseus.no2spam.gr> wrote:

>For an interesting comparison of this apparent view, please see
>http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm

Very nice.

I think the inverse picture would also be interesting, with one image
of Regulus and two of the moon. Would the difference in fullness of
the moon be visible?

-- Richard
--
"Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.

Anthony Ayiomamitis

Richard Tobin wrote:
> In article <f34cha$ehj$1@mouse.otenet.gr>,
> Anthony Ayiomamitis <anthony@perseus.no2spam.gr> wrote:
>
>
>>For an interesting comparison of this apparent view, please see
>>http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm
>
>
> Very nice.

Glad you like it.

>
> I think the inverse picture would also be interesting, with one image
> of Regulus and two of the moon. Would the difference in fullness of
> the moon be visible?

I thought about this as well ... it can be done and it would probably be
best to have the current moon as is and simply add the second (higher)
moon using Pete's Regulus as reference and with a thin artificial
separator between the two moons.

Anthony.

>
> -- Richard

Anthony Ayiomamitis

Richard Tobin wrote:
> In article <f34cha$ehj$1@mouse.otenet.gr>,
> Anthony Ayiomamitis <anthony@perseus.no2spam.gr> wrote:
>
>
>>For an interesting comparison of this apparent view, please see
>>http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm
>
>
> Very nice.

Glad you like it.

>
> I think the inverse picture would also be interesting, with one image
> of Regulus and two of the moon. Would the difference in fullness of
> the moon be visible?

I thought about this as well ... it can be done and it would probably be
best to have the current moon as is and simply add the second (higher)
moon using Pete's Regulus as reference and with a thin artificial
separator between the two moons.

Anthony.

>
> -- Richard

G.T.

Ben wrote:
> On May 24, 10:54 am, Anthony Ayiomamitis <anth...@perseus.no2spam.gr>
> wrote:
>> Dear group,
>>
>> Pete Lawrence and I pooled our work from yesterday surrounding the
>> near-occultation of Regulus by the moon to produce an interesting view
>> of how Regulus appeared relatively to the moon for the two of us
>> separated by 2370 km apart.
>>
>> For an interesting comparison of this apparent view, please seehttp://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm.... someone please
>> provide oriel with his medication before he starts mumbling het again
>> about astrologers, axial rotation, apparent frames of reference and
>> whatever else I may have missed.
>>
>> Clear skies!
>>
>> Anthony.
>
> Cool, gentlemen. Exponentially cool.
> Praises to the both of you.
>

Hear hear! Very cool.

Greg
--
The ticketbastard Tax Tracker:
http://www.ticketmastersucks.org/tracker.html

Dethink to survive - Mclusky

G.T.

Ben wrote:
> On May 24, 10:54 am, Anthony Ayiomamitis <anth...@perseus.no2spam.gr>
> wrote:
>> Dear group,
>>
>> Pete Lawrence and I pooled our work from yesterday surrounding the
>> near-occultation of Regulus by the moon to produce an interesting view
>> of how Regulus appeared relatively to the moon for the two of us
>> separated by 2370 km apart.
>>
>> For an interesting comparison of this apparent view, please seehttp://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm.... someone please
>> provide oriel with his medication before he starts mumbling het again
>> about astrologers, axial rotation, apparent frames of reference and
>> whatever else I may have missed.
>>
>> Clear skies!
>>
>> Anthony.
>
> Cool, gentlemen. Exponentially cool.
> Praises to the both of you.
>

Hear hear! Very cool.

Greg
--
The ticketbastard Tax Tracker:
http://www.ticketmastersucks.org/tracker.html

Dethink to survive - Mclusky

Mark Annand

Anthony Ayiomamitis wrote:

> I thought about this as well ... it can be done and it would probably be
> best to have the current moon as is and simply add the second (higher)
> moon using Pete's Regulus as reference and with a thin artificial
> separator between the two moons.

Please could you produce a stereoscopic pair of images?

Mark

Mark Annand

Anthony Ayiomamitis wrote:

> I thought about this as well ... it can be done and it would probably be
> best to have the current moon as is and simply add the second (higher)
> moon using Pete's Regulus as reference and with a thin artificial
> separator between the two moons.

Please could you produce a stereoscopic pair of images?

Mark

oriel36

On May 24, 4:54 pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis <anth...@perseus.no2spam.gr>
wrote:
> Dear group,
>
> Pete Lawrence and I pooled our work from yesterday surrounding the
> near-occultation of Regulus by the moon to produce an interesting view
> of how Regulus appeared relatively to the moon for the two of us
> separated by 2370 km apart.
>
> For an interesting comparison of this apparent view, please seehttp://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm.... someone please
> provide oriel with his medication before he starts mumbling het again
> about astrologers, axial rotation, apparent frames of reference and
> whatever else I may have missed.
>
> Clear skies!
>
> Anthony.

..

The Roemerian insight on the astronomical adjustment know as the
Equation of Light is based on orbital comparisons just as Kepler's
refinement of orbital geometries is based on orbital comparisons.

http://books.google.com/books?id=N6T...+jupiter+earth

There is nothing remotely difficult in determining that the illusion
of the irregular motion of Io is due to finite light speed and this is
how the great astronomers understood it .Because the Flamsteed/Newton
maneuver of introducing the astrological framework into heliocentric
reasoning,Bradley finished heliocentricity off by invoking the
background stars and paralax to account for the Roiemerian insight.

The irregular motion of Io still can be seen today and the insight of
Roemer can still be appreciated without appealing to stellar
parallax but rather to orbital comparisons between a moving Earth and
slower orbitally moving Jupiter -

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/heather.../JupiterIo.jpg

http://www.msgc.org/images/ioshadow_msgc.gif

A real astronomer would be taking note of the change in the
orientation of Io's shadow due to the change in orbital positions
between Earth and Jupiter as both planets orbit the central star.

Go back to occultations,personally I think birdwatching photography is
far more difficult than what you do.At least the birdwatchers put
thing in correct context.

oriel36

On May 24, 4:54 pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis <anth...@perseus.no2spam.gr>
wrote:
> Dear group,
>
> Pete Lawrence and I pooled our work from yesterday surrounding the
> near-occultation of Regulus by the moon to produce an interesting view
> of how Regulus appeared relatively to the moon for the two of us
> separated by 2370 km apart.
>
> For an interesting comparison of this apparent view, please seehttp://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm.... someone please
> provide oriel with his medication before he starts mumbling het again
> about astrologers, axial rotation, apparent frames of reference and
> whatever else I may have missed.
>
> Clear skies!
>
> Anthony.

..

The Roemerian insight on the astronomical adjustment know as the
Equation of Light is based on orbital comparisons just as Kepler's
refinement of orbital geometries is based on orbital comparisons.

http://books.google.com/books?id=N6T...+jupiter+earth

There is nothing remotely difficult in determining that the illusion
of the irregular motion of Io is due to finite light speed and this is
how the great astronomers understood it .Because the Flamsteed/Newton
maneuver of introducing the astrological framework into heliocentric
reasoning,Bradley finished heliocentricity off by invoking the
background stars and paralax to account for the Roiemerian insight.

The irregular motion of Io still can be seen today and the insight of
Roemer can still be appreciated without appealing to stellar
parallax but rather to orbital comparisons between a moving Earth and
slower orbitally moving Jupiter -

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/heather.../JupiterIo.jpg

http://www.msgc.org/images/ioshadow_msgc.gif

A real astronomer would be taking note of the change in the
orientation of Io's shadow due to the change in orbital positions
between Earth and Jupiter as both planets orbit the central star.

Go back to occultations,personally I think birdwatching photography is
far more difficult than what you do.At least the birdwatchers put
thing in correct context.

Anthony Ayiomamitis

oriel36 wrote:
> On May 24, 4:54 pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis <anth...@perseus.no2spam.gr>
> wrote:
>
>>Dear group,
>>
>>Pete Lawrence and I pooled our work from yesterday surrounding the
>>near-occultation of Regulus by the moon to produce an interesting view
>>of how Regulus appeared relatively to the moon for the two of us
>>separated by 2370 km apart.
>>
>>For an interesting comparison of this apparent view, please seehttp://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm.... someone please
>>provide oriel with his medication before he starts mumbling het again
>>about astrologers, axial rotation, apparent frames of reference and
>>whatever else I may have missed.
>>
>>Clear skies!
>>
>>Anthony.
>
>
> .
>
> The Roemerian insight on the astronomical adjustment know as the
> Equation of Light is based on orbital comparisons just as Kepler's
> refinement of orbital geometries is based on orbital comparisons.

<snip>

>
> Go back to occultations,personally I think birdwatching photography is
> far more difficult than what you do.At least the birdwatchers put
> thing in correct context.
>

Does this mean you will not be computing an estimated distance of the
moon from earth using this collaborative work so that we can compare
estimates?

The image scale of the resampled image is around 2.51"/pixel. ;-)

Anthony.

Anthony Ayiomamitis

oriel36 wrote:
> On May 24, 4:54 pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis <anth...@perseus.no2spam.gr>
> wrote:
>
>>Dear group,
>>
>>Pete Lawrence and I pooled our work from yesterday surrounding the
>>near-occultation of Regulus by the moon to produce an interesting view
>>of how Regulus appeared relatively to the moon for the two of us
>>separated by 2370 km apart.
>>
>>For an interesting comparison of this apparent view, please seehttp://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm.... someone please
>>provide oriel with his medication before he starts mumbling het again
>>about astrologers, axial rotation, apparent frames of reference and
>>whatever else I may have missed.
>>
>>Clear skies!
>>
>>Anthony.
>
>
> .
>
> The Roemerian insight on the astronomical adjustment know as the
> Equation of Light is based on orbital comparisons just as Kepler's
> refinement of orbital geometries is based on orbital comparisons.

<snip>

>
> Go back to occultations,personally I think birdwatching photography is
> far more difficult than what you do.At least the birdwatchers put
> thing in correct context.
>

Does this mean you will not be computing an estimated distance of the
moon from earth using this collaborative work so that we can compare
estimates?

The image scale of the resampled image is around 2.51"/pixel. ;-)

Anthony.

Shawn

Anthony Ayiomamitis wrote:
> Dear group,
>
> Pete Lawrence and I pooled our work from yesterday surrounding the
> near-occultation of Regulus by the moon to produce an interesting view
> of how Regulus appeared relatively to the moon for the two of us
> separated by 2370 km apart.
>
> For an interesting comparison of this apparent view, please see
> http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm .... someone please
> provide oriel with his medication before he starts mumbling het again
> about astrologers, axial rotation, apparent frames of reference and
> whatever else I may have missed.
>
> Clear skies!


Cool! Thanks to both of you for sharing.


Shawn

Shawn

Anthony Ayiomamitis wrote:
> Dear group,
>
> Pete Lawrence and I pooled our work from yesterday surrounding the
> near-occultation of Regulus by the moon to produce an interesting view
> of how Regulus appeared relatively to the moon for the two of us
> separated by 2370 km apart.
>
> For an interesting comparison of this apparent view, please see
> http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm .... someone please
> provide oriel with his medication before he starts mumbling het again
> about astrologers, axial rotation, apparent frames of reference and
> whatever else I may have missed.
>
> Clear skies!


Cool! Thanks to both of you for sharing.


Shawn

oriel36

On May 24, 9:09 pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis <anth...@perseus.no2spam.gr>
wrote:
> oriel36 wrote:
> > On May 24, 4:54 pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis <anth...@perseus.no2spam.gr>
> > wrote:
>
> >>Dear group,
>
> >>Pete Lawrence and I pooled our work from yesterday surrounding the
> >>near-occultation of Regulus by the moon to produce an interesting view
> >>of how Regulus appeared relatively to the moon for the two of us
> >>separated by 2370 km apart.
>
> >>For an interesting comparison of this apparent view, please seehttp://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm.... someone please
> >>provide oriel with his medication before he starts mumbling het again
> >>about astrologers, axial rotation, apparent frames of reference and
> >>whatever else I may have missed.
>
> >>Clear skies!
>
> >>Anthony.
>
> > .
>
> > The Roemerian insight on the astronomical adjustment know as the
> > Equation of Light is based on orbital comparisons just as Kepler's
> > refinement of orbital geometries is based on orbital comparisons.
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
> > Go back to occultations,personally I think birdwatching photography is
> > far more difficult than what you do.At least the birdwatchers put
> > thing in correct context.
>
> Does this mean you will not be computing an estimated distance of the
> moon from earth using this collaborative work so that we can compare
> estimates?
>
> The image scale of the resampled image is around 2.51"/pixel. ;-)
>
> Anthony.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Astronomers have made use of occultations and specifically using Io
and Jupiter -

http://www.lafterhall.com/io_occulta..._jferreira.jpg

Of course these astronomers worked with orbital comparisons between
Earth and Jupiter in determining the insight that the illusion of the
irregular motion of Io can be explained in terms of finite light
speed.As yuo creeps can't even acknowledge orbital comparisons between
the Earth and the other planets as the main argument for
heliocentricity,you are unlikely to appreciate the Keplerian and
Roemerian refinements of the system

You should be delighted that you are getting a free education,I would
show you where Newton was very naughty in bundling the Keplerian
insight on orbital geometries with the Roemerian insight on finite
light distance but I just find it funny nowadays -

"For to the earth they appear sometimes direct, sometimes stationary,
nay, and sometimes retrograde. But from the sun they are always seen
direct, and to proceed with a motion nearly uniform, that is to say,
a
little swifter in the perihelion and a little slower in the aphelion
distances, so as to maintain an equality in the description of the
areas. This a noted proposition among astronomers, and particularly
demonstrable in Jupiter, from the eclipses of his satellites; by the
help of which eclipses, as we have said, the heliocentric longitudes
of
that planet, and its distances from the sun, are determined." Newton



The nice thing is that modern imaging removes all the garbage of
Newton and exposes the real reasoning behind Copernican reasoning and
even the later refinements.So far you seem to detest astronomy and
what those images are telling you about not only the motions of the
other planets but also the motion of the Earth -

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ima...loop_tezel.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_fd8O1sk3I

You should enjoy how the faster orbital motion of the Earth accounts
for retrogrades of the outer planets and the faster orbital motion of
the inner planets overtaking the slower Earth accounts for
transits,all bound together in a common heliocentric orbit.

Until you learn that much,you are adhere to the damaging doctrine of
astrology.

oriel36

On May 24, 9:09 pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis <anth...@perseus.no2spam.gr>
wrote:
> oriel36 wrote:
> > On May 24, 4:54 pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis <anth...@perseus.no2spam.gr>
> > wrote:
>
> >>Dear group,
>
> >>Pete Lawrence and I pooled our work from yesterday surrounding the
> >>near-occultation of Regulus by the moon to produce an interesting view
> >>of how Regulus appeared relatively to the moon for the two of us
> >>separated by 2370 km apart.
>
> >>For an interesting comparison of this apparent view, please seehttp://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm.... someone please
> >>provide oriel with his medication before he starts mumbling het again
> >>about astrologers, axial rotation, apparent frames of reference and
> >>whatever else I may have missed.
>
> >>Clear skies!
>
> >>Anthony.
>
> > .
>
> > The Roemerian insight on the astronomical adjustment know as the
> > Equation of Light is based on orbital comparisons just as Kepler's
> > refinement of orbital geometries is based on orbital comparisons.
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
> > Go back to occultations,personally I think birdwatching photography is
> > far more difficult than what you do.At least the birdwatchers put
> > thing in correct context.
>
> Does this mean you will not be computing an estimated distance of the
> moon from earth using this collaborative work so that we can compare
> estimates?
>
> The image scale of the resampled image is around 2.51"/pixel. ;-)
>
> Anthony.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Astronomers have made use of occultations and specifically using Io
and Jupiter -

http://www.lafterhall.com/io_occulta..._jferreira.jpg

Of course these astronomers worked with orbital comparisons between
Earth and Jupiter in determining the insight that the illusion of the
irregular motion of Io can be explained in terms of finite light
speed.As yuo creeps can't even acknowledge orbital comparisons between
the Earth and the other planets as the main argument for
heliocentricity,you are unlikely to appreciate the Keplerian and
Roemerian refinements of the system

You should be delighted that you are getting a free education,I would
show you where Newton was very naughty in bundling the Keplerian
insight on orbital geometries with the Roemerian insight on finite
light distance but I just find it funny nowadays -

"For to the earth they appear sometimes direct, sometimes stationary,
nay, and sometimes retrograde. But from the sun they are always seen
direct, and to proceed with a motion nearly uniform, that is to say,
a
little swifter in the perihelion and a little slower in the aphelion
distances, so as to maintain an equality in the description of the
areas. This a noted proposition among astronomers, and particularly
demonstrable in Jupiter, from the eclipses of his satellites; by the
help of which eclipses, as we have said, the heliocentric longitudes
of
that planet, and its distances from the sun, are determined." Newton



The nice thing is that modern imaging removes all the garbage of
Newton and exposes the real reasoning behind Copernican reasoning and
even the later refinements.So far you seem to detest astronomy and
what those images are telling you about not only the motions of the
other planets but also the motion of the Earth -

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ima...loop_tezel.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_fd8O1sk3I

You should enjoy how the faster orbital motion of the Earth accounts
for retrogrades of the outer planets and the faster orbital motion of
the inner planets overtaking the slower Earth accounts for
transits,all bound together in a common heliocentric orbit.

Until you learn that much,you are adhere to the damaging doctrine of
astrology.

Anthony Ayiomamitis

oriel36 wrote:
> On May 24, 9:09 pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis <anth...@perseus.no2spam.gr>
> wrote:
>
>>oriel36 wrote:
>>
>>>On May 24, 4:54 pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis <anth...@perseus.no2spam.gr>
>>>wrote:
>>
>>>>Dear group,
>>
>>>>Pete Lawrence and I pooled our work from yesterday surrounding the
>>>>near-occultation of Regulus by the moon to produce an interesting view
>>>>of how Regulus appeared relatively to the moon for the two of us
>>>>separated by 2370 km apart.
>>
>>>>For an interesting comparison of this apparent view, please seehttp://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm.... someone please
>>>>provide oriel with his medication before he starts mumbling het again
>>>>about astrologers, axial rotation, apparent frames of reference and
>>>>whatever else I may have missed.
>>
>>>>Clear skies!
>>
>>>>Anthony.
>>
>>>.
>>
>>>The Roemerian insight on the astronomical adjustment know as the
>>>Equation of Light is based on orbital comparisons just as Kepler's
>>>refinement of orbital geometries is based on orbital comparisons.
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Go back to occultations,personally I think birdwatching photography is
>>>far more difficult than what you do.At least the birdwatchers put
>>>thing in correct context.
>>
>>Does this mean you will not be computing an estimated distance of the
>>moon from earth using this collaborative work so that we can compare
>>estimates?
>>
>>The image scale of the resampled image is around 2.51"/pixel. ;-)
>>
>>Anthony.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>- Show quoted text -
>
>
> Astronomers have made use of occultations and specifically using Io
> and Jupiter -

<snip>

>
> You should enjoy how the faster orbital motion of the Earth accounts
> for retrogrades of the outer planets and the faster orbital motion of
> the inner planets overtaking the slower Earth accounts for
> transits,all bound together in a common heliocentric orbit.
>
> Until you learn that much,you are adhere to the damaging doctrine of
> astrology.
>

Oriel,

I get an estimate of 438,988 km for the distance of the moon from the
earth when, in fact, it was 395,520 km at the time of photography. In
other words, there is an error of approximately 10%.

Clear skies!

Anthony.

Anthony Ayiomamitis

oriel36 wrote:
> On May 24, 9:09 pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis <anth...@perseus.no2spam.gr>
> wrote:
>
>>oriel36 wrote:
>>
>>>On May 24, 4:54 pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis <anth...@perseus.no2spam.gr>
>>>wrote:
>>
>>>>Dear group,
>>
>>>>Pete Lawrence and I pooled our work from yesterday surrounding the
>>>>near-occultation of Regulus by the moon to produce an interesting view
>>>>of how Regulus appeared relatively to the moon for the two of us
>>>>separated by 2370 km apart.
>>
>>>>For an interesting comparison of this apparent view, please seehttp://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm.... someone please
>>>>provide oriel with his medication before he starts mumbling het again
>>>>about astrologers, axial rotation, apparent frames of reference and
>>>>whatever else I may have missed.
>>
>>>>Clear skies!
>>
>>>>Anthony.
>>
>>>.
>>
>>>The Roemerian insight on the astronomical adjustment know as the
>>>Equation of Light is based on orbital comparisons just as Kepler's
>>>refinement of orbital geometries is based on orbital comparisons.
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Go back to occultations,personally I think birdwatching photography is
>>>far more difficult than what you do.At least the birdwatchers put
>>>thing in correct context.
>>
>>Does this mean you will not be computing an estimated distance of the
>>moon from earth using this collaborative work so that we can compare
>>estimates?
>>
>>The image scale of the resampled image is around 2.51"/pixel. ;-)
>>
>>Anthony.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>- Show quoted text -
>
>
> Astronomers have made use of occultations and specifically using Io
> and Jupiter -

<snip>

>
> You should enjoy how the faster orbital motion of the Earth accounts
> for retrogrades of the outer planets and the faster orbital motion of
> the inner planets overtaking the slower Earth accounts for
> transits,all bound together in a common heliocentric orbit.
>
> Until you learn that much,you are adhere to the damaging doctrine of
> astrology.
>

Oriel,

I get an estimate of 438,988 km for the distance of the moon from the
earth when, in fact, it was 395,520 km at the time of photography. In
other words, there is an error of approximately 10%.

Clear skies!

Anthony.

Ernie Wright

Anthony Ayiomamitis wrote:

>>>>> http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm
>>>
>>> The image scale of the resampled image is around 2.51"/pixel. ;-)
>
> I get an estimate of 438,988 km for the distance of the moon from the
> earth when, in fact, it was 395,520 km at the time of photography. In
> other words, there is an error of approximately 10%.

I got an estimate of 443,368 km. This is assuming an image scale of
about 3.25"/pixel, which I got from the diameter of the Moon,

557 pixels using the ruler tool in Photoshop CS2
1812" according to http://aa.usno.navy.mil/data/docs/diskmap.html

The distance between the two images of Regulus is 337 pixels = 1096".

Moon distance = (Selsey Athens distance / 2) / tan(1096"/2)

I think the error comes from assuming that the Selsey-Athens base of the
triangle is at right angles to the Earth-Moon vector. In general it
won't be. If tilting that line up to make it perpendicular shortens it
to about 2100 km, we get a very accurate estimate.

- Ernie http://home.comcast.net/~erniew

Ernie Wright

Anthony Ayiomamitis wrote:

>>>>> http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm
>>>
>>> The image scale of the resampled image is around 2.51"/pixel. ;-)
>
> I get an estimate of 438,988 km for the distance of the moon from the
> earth when, in fact, it was 395,520 km at the time of photography. In
> other words, there is an error of approximately 10%.

I got an estimate of 443,368 km. This is assuming an image scale of
about 3.25"/pixel, which I got from the diameter of the Moon,

557 pixels using the ruler tool in Photoshop CS2
1812" according to http://aa.usno.navy.mil/data/docs/diskmap.html

The distance between the two images of Regulus is 337 pixels = 1096".

Moon distance = (Selsey Athens distance / 2) / tan(1096"/2)

I think the error comes from assuming that the Selsey-Athens base of the
triangle is at right angles to the Earth-Moon vector. In general it
won't be. If tilting that line up to make it perpendicular shortens it
to about 2100 km, we get a very accurate estimate.

- Ernie http://home.comcast.net/~erniew

oriel36

On May 24, 9:59 pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis <anth...@perseus.no2spam.gr>
wrote:
> oriel36 wrote:
> > On May 24, 9:09 pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis <anth...@perseus.no2spam.gr>
> > wrote:
>
> >>oriel36 wrote:
>
> >>>On May 24, 4:54 pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis <anth...@perseus.no2spam.gr>
> >>>wrote:
>
> >>>>Dear group,
>
> >>>>Pete Lawrence and I pooled our work from yesterday surrounding the
> >>>>near-occultation of Regulus by the moon to produce an interesting view
> >>>>of how Regulus appeared relatively to the moon for the two of us
> >>>>separated by 2370 km apart.
>
> >>>>For an interesting comparison of this apparent view, please seehttp://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm.... someone please
> >>>>provide oriel with his medication before he starts mumbling het again
> >>>>about astrologers, axial rotation, apparent frames of reference and
> >>>>whatever else I may have missed.
>
> >>>>Clear skies!
>
> >>>>Anthony.
>
> >>>.
>
> >>>The Roemerian insight on the astronomical adjustment know as the
> >>>Equation of Light is based on orbital comparisons just as Kepler's
> >>>refinement of orbital geometries is based on orbital comparisons.
>
> >><snip>
>
> >>>Go back to occultations,personally I think birdwatching photography is
> >>>far more difficult than what you do.At least the birdwatchers put
> >>>thing in correct context.
>
> >>Does this mean you will not be computing an estimated distance of the
> >>moon from earth using this collaborative work so that we can compare
> >>estimates?
>
> >>The image scale of the resampled image is around 2.51"/pixel. ;-)
>
> >>Anthony.- Hide quoted text -
>
> >>- Show quoted text -
>
> > Astronomers have made use of occultations and specifically using Io
> > and Jupiter -
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
> > You should enjoy how the faster orbital motion of the Earth accounts
> > for retrogrades of the outer planets and the faster orbital motion of
> > the inner planets overtaking the slower Earth accounts for
> > transits,all bound together in a common heliocentric orbit.
>
> > Until you learn that much,you are adhere to the damaging doctrine of
> > astrology.
>
> Oriel,
>
> I get an estimate of 438,988 km for the distance of the moon from the
> earth when, in fact, it was 395,520 km at the time of photography. In
> other words, there is an error of approximately 10%.
>
> Clear skies!
>
> Anthony.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

You openly mock the methods of astronomers,first the Copernican
insight based on the orbital motion of the Earth,then Kepler's use of
orbital comparisons between Earth and Mars to determine a more refined
orbital geometry and the Romerian Equation of Light insight based on
orbital comparisons between Earth and Jupiter.

The motion of the visble stars of our galaxy around a central axis
will change their orientation to the external galaxies,as you
creatures have the visible stars stuck on an astrological framework
there is no possibility of appreciating this great cycle,even in
principle.The appreciation of Milky Way stellar carousel should be a
matter of course along with the normal perception that the foreground
stars would alter their positions to the external galaxies but this is
the dark ages of astronomy and external galaxies are referenced off
the constellations and its celestial sphere geometry.

Successful people do not do this,men have always had clear geometric
judgements based on physical considerations to create some of the
great achievements of mankind but not this,not this astrological/
magnification exercise .You openly mock uygens treatise on how the 24
hour day is created from variations in the length of the daily cycle
determined at noon or rather the tremedous amount of effort by
civilisation after civilisation to refine the methods that now
constitute the clock/calendar system.

What is it with the English,did John Harrison not put you astrologers
to bed when he invented accurate clocks based on Huygens 24 hour/360
degree principles.The same miserable astrological atmosphere still
prevails not only on account of your stupid correlation between
clocks and axial rotation but the greatest Western astronomical
discovery of all - the Copernican heliocentric system.I well
understand Harrison's frustrations when faced with festering hypocrisy
and it is far worse today.,the difference is that I have the actual
images to show exactly what you lot are- astrologers with telescopes.

oriel36

On May 24, 9:59 pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis <anth...@perseus.no2spam.gr>
wrote:
> oriel36 wrote:
> > On May 24, 9:09 pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis <anth...@perseus.no2spam.gr>
> > wrote:
>
> >>oriel36 wrote:
>
> >>>On May 24, 4:54 pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis <anth...@perseus.no2spam.gr>
> >>>wrote:
>
> >>>>Dear group,
>
> >>>>Pete Lawrence and I pooled our work from yesterday surrounding the
> >>>>near-occultation of Regulus by the moon to produce an interesting view
> >>>>of how Regulus appeared relatively to the moon for the two of us
> >>>>separated by 2370 km apart.
>
> >>>>For an interesting comparison of this apparent view, please seehttp://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Lunar-Parallax.htm.... someone please
> >>>>provide oriel with his medication before he starts mumbling het again
> >>>>about astrologers, axial rotation, apparent frames of reference and
> >>>>whatever else I may have missed.
>
> >>>>Clear skies!
>
> >>>>Anthony.
>
> >>>.
>
> >>>The Roemerian insight on the astronomical adjustment know as the
> >>>Equation of Light is based on orbital comparisons just as Kepler's
> >>>refinement of orbital geometries is based on orbital comparisons.
>
> >><snip>
>
> >>>Go back to occultations,personally I think birdwatching photography is
> >>>far more difficult than what you do.At least the birdwatchers put
> >>>thing in correct context.
>
> >>Does this mean you will not be computing an estimated distance of the
> >>moon from earth using this collaborative work so that we can compare
> >>estimates?
>
> >>The image scale of the resampled image is around 2.51"/pixel. ;-)
>
> >>Anthony.- Hide quoted text -
>
> >>- Show quoted text -
>
> > Astronomers have made use of occultations and specifically using Io
> > and Jupiter -
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
> > You should enjoy how the faster orbital motion of the Earth accounts
> > for retrogrades of the outer planets and the faster orbital motion of
> > the inner planets overtaking the slower Earth accounts for
> > transits,all bound together in a common heliocentric orbit.
>
> > Until you learn that much,you are adhere to the damaging doctrine of
> > astrology.
>
> Oriel,
>
> I get an estimate of 438,988 km for the distance of the moon from the
> earth when, in fact, it was 395,520 km at the time of photography. In
> other words, there is an error of approximately 10%.
>
> Clear skies!
>
> Anthony.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

You openly mock the methods of astronomers,first the Copernican
insight based on the orbital motion of the Earth,then Kepler's use of
orbital comparisons between Earth and Mars to determine a more refined
orbital geometry and the Romerian Equation of Light insight based on
orbital comparisons between Earth and Jupiter.

The motion of the visble stars of our galaxy around a central axis
will change their orientation to the external galaxies,as you
creatures have the visible stars stuck on an astrological framework
there is no possibility of appreciating this great cycle,even in
principle.The appreciation of Milky Way stellar carousel should be a
matter of course along with the normal perception that the foreground
stars would alter their positions to the external galaxies but this is
the dark ages of astronomy and external galaxies are referenced off
the constellations and its celestial sphere geometry.

Successful people do not do this,men have always had clear geometric
judgements based on physical considerations to create some of the
great achievements of mankind but not this,not this astrological/
magnification exercise .You openly mock uygens treatise on how the 24
hour day is created from variations in the length of the daily cycle
determined at noon or rather the tremedous amount of effort by
civilisation after civilisation to refine the methods that now
constitute the clock/calendar system.

What is it with the English,did John Harrison not put you astrologers
to bed when he invented accurate clocks based on Huygens 24 hour/360
degree principles.The same miserable astrological atmosphere still
prevails not only on account of your stupid correlation between
clocks and axial rotation but the greatest Western astronomical
discovery of all - the Copernican heliocentric system.I well
understand Harrison's frustrations when faced with festering hypocrisy
and it is far worse today.,the difference is that I have the actual
images to show exactly what you lot are- astrologers with telescopes.