Replies

Are you saying that when I look up at the night sky half the stars I see are actually on the other side of the world?

They might be. They have had billions of years to move around. They most certainly aren't where you see them. Also except for the stars in our galaxy most of the stars that you see when you look into the sky are galaxies.

When I look up and see mars, is it also not where it appears? When nasa sent the mars rovers up to mars, did they have to calculate this in?

It isn't a big factor but they certainly calculate it in. You don't think that they simply point the rocket at Mars and fire it do you?

Can you find anyone at nasa who plans space missions and who agrees with you? The more I hear of your idea the more crazy it sounds.

LOL They all agree with me : ) If this sounds crazy to you, then I need to withdraw my reading recommendations. May I suggest "Physics for Dummy's" I think I saw that title at a bookstore once. And no I haven't read it, but I tend to trust elementary Physics books.

Said mrjesse: Are you saying that when I look up at the night sky half the stars I see are actually on the other side of the world?
They might be. They have had billions of years to move around. They most certainly aren't where you see them. Also except for the stars in our galaxy most of the stars that you see when you look into the sky are galaxies.

May I say that you sidestepped the question. It ought to be clear from the context of our conversation that I meant "Are you saying that when I look up at the night sky half the stars I see are actually on the other side of the word because of and to a degree as a function of the earth's rate of rotation?"

said mrjesse: Can you find anyone at nasa who plans space missions and who agrees with you? The more I hear of your idea the more crazy it sounds.

LOL They all agree with me : )

Great to hear! Now can you find a single official NASA statement that says "The sun when viewed from earth appears ~2.13 degrees behind its actual position due to the rotation of the earth ~2.13 degrees per ~8.5 minutes and the light-distance of ~8.5 minutes from the sun to the earth?"

thanks,

-Jesse

Now that the LeGrandeic 2.1 degree System is dead and buried, let's have an explanation for this (yet another) gross blunder of yours, LeGrande:

[mrjesse] Are you saying that when I look up at the night sky half the stars I see are actually on the other side of the world?
[LeGrande] They might be. They have had billions of years to move around.

So how is it, in your conception of physics, that stars can end up behind us in the time it takes for their light to get to us? How is it that some stars you presently see are actually on the other side of the world?

Said mrjesse: Can you find anyone at nasa who plans space missions and who agrees with you? The more I hear of your idea the more crazy it sounds.
LOL They all agree with me : )

You still haven't substantiated your claim. If all of NASA agrees with you, and if it's true, you've gotta find some mention of it online. Heh, even if it's not true you ought to find some references online. I mean, the internet covers everything that is and most of what isn't. If this is such a simple concept as you claimed there ought to be lots of websites or beginning astronomy books that talk about it.

So what do we have? Lots of websites that say your wrong, and zero that say you're right? Isn't it a time you took that into consideration? Is it really honest to say that it's such a simple concept and that all of nasa agrees with you when you can't find any articles that claim the same?

Here are some websites that say you are wrong:
Light-time correction, The Indological Knowledgebase

Actually, during its light-time, the Sun does move slightly around the barycenter (center of mass) of the solar system as a counter-balance to the massive jovian planets (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune). Thus the true light-time correction of the Sun is extremely small, usually much smaller than 0.03".

That's nowheres near your 2.1 degrees.

PVAstro0702, James Bradley report

Light-time correction has absolutely no relation to the motion of the Earth with respect to the Sun.

Fundamentals of Astrodynamics and Applications By David Anthony Vallado, Wayne D. McClain, page 299

For stars, we ignore light-time correction.

Control Software for the Bochum Radio Telescope by James Miller G3RUH

It is able to calculate objects' coordinates properly, accounting for the whole litany of small corrections without regarding each as a special case and with various degrees of approximation. These are:
* Light-time correction (excepting stars)
* Gravitational deflection of light by the Sun
* Aberration due to velocity of Earth around Sun

Notice how they correct for the 20 arcseconds of Stellar Aberration but not for light-time correction of stars (the Sun is a star!) Why is this? I'm telling you that it is because like the sun, the stars are relatively motionless!

http://mysite.du.edu/~jcalvert/phys/doppler.htm#Aber

There is another reason why observed positions differ from actual ones, which is simply movement that takes place while the light is on its way. This is called the light-time correction, and is of interest for satellites and other nearby, rapidly moving, objects. For stars, it is usually neglected.

It does matter what is spinning and what is orbiting.

It's time to face the choir. This idea of yours isn't working. And it's gone past the point of innocent or honest ignorance.

-Jesse