#97753 - 03/05/03 10:58 PM
A home course in Astronomy
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
wwh
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
|
I suggested to etaoin, who is an astronmy enthusiast, that there are a lot of interesting words to be learned about astronomy. Plato would not consider anybody ignorant of geometry worthy of his company. Today, ignorance of astronomy is worse. And I am ignorant of it. But I have found a place to Learn: http://www.synapses.co.uk/astro/astro.htmlHere's a small sample from glossary at the site: Corona Cusp Declination Deuteron Doppler effect double convex Draconic month ecliptic & inclination ecliptic, ecliptic plane epicycles event horizon Fraunhofer lines Heliopause Hertzsprung-Russell Diagram, H-R Diagram inverse square law Kepler's first law Kepler's Laws of Planetary Motion Kepler's second law Kepler's third law Kerr black hole kinetic energy
|
|
|
|
#97756 - 03/06/03 10:08 AM
Re: A home course in Astronomy
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296
Wordwind
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296
Piedmont Region of Virginia, U...
|
Comment on Kepler: The most interesting aspect of reading about the development of astronomy is learning how each pivotal figure struggled with past theories, moved forward (sometimes) in an attempt to either refute or further develop those theories, and developed a theory which would eventually be disproven by others. Kepler realized that Copernicus's math was off, but the calculations could be made more accurate by showing that the planets moved in elliptical, rather than circular, orbits. However, Kepler based his theory on perfect elliptical orbits so his calculations remained slightly off. He had not calculated in the various planetary wobbles caused by the various gravitational pulls among the planets (and other bodies moving through the solar system)that led to variations in the elliptical orbits.
But these early astronomers are amazing in how they carried out their observations and worked calculations to support their theories--and without the aid of a telescope. Galileo was just up ahead of Kepler, but I must edit here: I don't know what effect Gallileo's telescope had on Kepler's math. [Did we have to wait for Newton to factor in gravitational pull of the planets upon each other?] Or any of the astronomers preceding Galileo. Of course, that's as much a waste of time to consider as adding twenty years to Mozart's life and trying to predict how his music may have developed.
|
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,878
Posts223,916
Members9,019
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
1 registered members (wofahulicodoc),
53
guests, and
4
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
