From: "Uhomann" To: Subject: Re: Homann's paper on Precession Date: Sat, 20 May 2000 18:48:12 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3

Dear Mr. Robbins,
 
I owe you a belated but still sincere thank you for posting my paper 'The Precession -Time Paradox' on your website. 
Only a few days ago I noticed my article to be on the web by using the Infoseek search engine. As you can tell I am not a good "Internet-browser". 
 
By the way, thanks to Mr. Greene of COSMOLOGYREVIEW my paper has also been posted on his  website at www.cosmolgyreview.com , along with some other letters and articles written by my son (see Reader's Forum Section).
 
In case you are interested in this issue, I have also enclosed the latest information on the subject Precession.
 
Thanks for your time.
 
With best regards, 
 
Karl-Heinz Homann 
 
 

The Precession Paradigm

Experts at the International Astronomical Union (IAU) are in an uproar. Worldwide, thousands of students and teachers have been confronted with the most controversial astronomical problem in the history of science. In 1955 the IAU substituted the tropical year of 31,556,925.97474 seconds for the sidereal year as the fundamental unit of time. But in authoritative textbooks it is asserted that the time interval of the sidereal year or Earth's complete period of revolution measured with respect to inertial space is about 31,558,149.5 seconds. The IAU refuses to confirm this assertion. Experts have recognized the fact that such a sidereal year does NOT exist in reality. The IAU is accused of willfully misleading the scientific community. www.cosmologyreview.com/uhomann_letter.html

 

Introduction:

The following paper examines the simple mathematical and physical relationship between earth's complete rotation period, its complete revolution period and precession. It questions the assumption that the sidereal year is supposedly about 1223 seconds longer than the tropical year. This time difference is the most crucial scientific argument in order to prove whether earth's precession is a physical fact or NOT. The solution to this unique problem must be based on the laws of logic and mathematics, as well as on the results of practical observations.

 

Definitions:

Tropical-sidereal year: 31,556,925.97474 seconds

Mean sidereal day: 86164.0905382 seconds

Mean solar day: 86400 seconds

Sidereal day: 86164.09966 seconds 

 

Assertions:

1.      No matter what the motion of the earth in its orbit or the orientation of its axis in space is, the complete 360° rotation period of the earth on its axis is 86164.0905382 seconds.

2.      The orientation of the earth's polar axis in space (e.g. with respect to the sun) has no influence on earth's period of revolution.


3.      The axis of the earth slowly changes its orientation in space - either (a) directly due to a precession of earth's polar axis or (b) indirectly as a result of our entire solar system moving around a point x in space. Please note, that if the axis of the earth remains aligned to point x, then earth's period of rotation measured with respect to point x has to be about 86164.0905382 seconds.


4.      The time interval of a complete rotation of the earth measured with respect to inertial space is about 9.12 ms more; i.e. an actual time difference of about 9.12 ms exists between a sidereal day and the mean sidereal day.


5.      The civil calendar is aligned to the time interval of the tropical-sidereal year, which is determined by measuring earth's daily rotation period with respect to inertial space.


6.      A time span of about 31,558,150 seconds relates to an orbit period of 360° plus 50.26". Such a time interval has no relevance to astronomy.


7.      The equation 365.24219878 86400s = 31,556,925.97s = 366.24219878 86164.09054s describes a 360° revolution period of the earth.


8.      The equation 365.256361 86400s = 31,558,149.59s = 366.256361 86164.09966s describes a different 360° revolution period, whereby the solar day has also 86400 s but the sidereal day has 86164.09966 s.


9.      The precise time interval of a sidereal year - i.e. a complete 360° revolution around an inner fixed point of reference (sun) with respect to an outer fixed point of reference (inertial space) - can ONLY be determined by:


a.      Measuring the daily rotations of the earth with respect to the outer point of reference (e.g. fixed stars), in order to determine earth's mean sidereal rotation period.

b.      Applying the physical relationship that the earth describes after a complete 360° period of revolution EXACTLY ONE rotation more relative to the outer point of reference than relative to the sun.

c.      Considering the physical fact that only the actual 360° rotation period of the earth on its axis can be used for the determination of earth's complete 360° period of revolution.


 

Experts claim that:

A precession of the earth's polar axis must occur and the rate of precession is about 50.26" or 3.35 seconds per tropical year.


Due to a precession of the earth a time difference of about 1223 seconds occurs between a sidereal year and a tropical year (i.e. a difference of about 3.35 seconds per day), since the vernal point of reference retrogrades around the sun.


The time interval of a tropical year relates to an orbit period of 360° minus 50.26".


The time interval of about 31,558,150 seconds is earth's true 360° orbit period, measured with respect to inertial space.


The sidereal year of about 31,558,150 s is no longer a fundamental time in astronomy.


 

Conclusion:

Conforming to mathematical and physical laws precession relates to periods of rotation and NOT to periods of revolution. Assuming that the precession period (the period of time for the earth's polar axis to describe a complete circle in space) is approx. 8.142 1011 seconds, then the total number of earth's rotations that could in fact be measured during such a period of time is:

8.142 1011 s ÷ 86164.09054 s = 9,449,412 rotations (w.r.t. the moving equinox or point x)

8.142 1011 s ÷ 86164.09966 s = 9,449,411 rotations (w.r.t. the inertial space)

 

In order to simplify the problem let us assume that the earth does NOT revolve around the sun. There are two possibilities:

1. Precession occurs

This means, 0 revolution periods or 0 sidereal years. However, due to precession a time interval of exactly one tropical year or about 365 days w.r.t the sun is seemingly created (shifting of earth's seasons w.r.t the sun). But in reality only a time difference of exactly one rotation (day) can be measured w.r.t. the moving point of reference, which has a retrograde angular velocity of about 0.1368" per day. The assumption that a measurable time difference equal to a period of one year or more than 365 days occurs, supposedly due to the moving point of reference retrograding around the sun, is therefore false.

Note: Since this time-discrepancy does not exist in reality, a so-called sidereal year of about 31,558,150 s was declared to be earth's true orbit time, which is about 1223 seconds longer than the actual tropical-sidereal year of 31,556,925.97474 seconds.

2. Precession does not occur and our entire solar system revolves around a point x

This means, 0 revolutions, 0 sidereal years and also 0 tropical years. However, due to the revolution period of our solar system around point x, a time difference of exactly one rotation (day) can be measured w.r.t. to inertial space. Consequently, the vernal point (and point x) moves with respect to the fixed stars by about 9.12 ms per day, and NOT by about 3.35 seconds per day or 1223 seconds per year around the sun.

If precession were to occur as claimed, not a single fixed star can be measured that has a mean meridian transition time of about 86164.09054 s (equal to the vernal-equinox transition period). But the transit periods of Sirius, as described in the paper www.cosmologyreview.com/beel_dog.html, prove otherwise.

Dr. Myles Standish, an expert on Planetary Ephemerides at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, made the following comment on March 3, 2000 after reading my letter www.cosmologyreview.com/uhomann_standish.html:

"… I believe that your timings (of the transits of Sirius) are accurate, but I think that you are misinterpreting what they are measuring. Again, they are being taken from a precessing earth and are, therefore, subject to precession."

If the measurement of Sirius is taken from a precessing earth, can anyone explain why the mean transit time of Sirius is identical to the mean transit time of the vernal equinox, considering the indisputable fact that Sirius does not retrograde around our sun by about 1223 seconds per year?

As you will undoubtedly agree, physical relationships are established or disproved by whether they work in practice and not by a vote of majority. The assumptions regarding the theory of earth's precession are inconsistent with practical observations and mathematical results.

Thanks for your time,

 

Uwe Homann

 

Please, send your comments to uhomann@telusplanet.net