Volker.Doormann

It is your problem. If you are interested in physical science, then do your job (verification); if you interested in Inquisiton on astrologers to burn them alive because they speak in public: ‘Around the date of 2003.08.27 there are some geometric planetary geocentric configurations relating to energeticful crash's and earthquakes. " "It is true, that the stress starts in mid of August, but it seems, that this is enhanced +- 2 days to the 'due date', while it is well known to all, that ‘the energy collapse yesterday on the 15. day of August, was the biggest ever happend in U.S.A. history’, I identify this magician hunting as a method practiced by The Catholic Church of Rom, but not as an acknowledged method in science. What you are unable to grasp is, that the arguments given to you, are reasonable arguments from verifiable astronomical data and knowlede. It is science; no reason to burn the knower. Because of learnresistant, EOD.

Volker

Doctor X

Echidna:

I am sure you recognize the "LA!LA!LA!LA!LA! IMNOTLISTENING!!!" that post represented.

For some reason, Volker is afraid to confront the information that debunks astrology. I wonder why?

--J.D.

Armchair dissident

Right. So it was all to do with geometric planetary geocentric configurations? Nothing to do with a fire in a power station? And certainly nothing whatsoever to do with you being 12 days out?

Incidentally, I'm curious as to how your algorithm works. I've had a look at it, and maybe it's just my maths screwing with my head, but I just can't seem to get it. You have an array which is apparently populated with a 3 dimensional position of 10 bodies in space, but I thought arrays could only hold a single value for each element of the array?

Now, I know I'm only a programmer, and my astronomy is frequently out of date, but I've never heard of the "geocentric ecliptic length" that's apparently being stored there - and google was less than helpful. Perhaps you could enlighten me. If it's something exotic, could you also let us know what diff( ) does to calculate the angles?

Finally, and I know this is a trifling point: is your program written in pascal? It appears to me that it may be (certainly the syntax is consistent).

Volker.Doormann

I do argue on the base of natural astronomical relations given in the thread to verify, for those, who interested. I have explained that in this thread. The algorithm calculates one index value, which is related to a time. The time is related to geocentric elliptical spherical coordinates of 10 bodies. These coordinates have two dimensions; length and width of the body. Because the width of a body is max 17° (Pluto) away from the plane of the ecliptic, but in most cases only some degree, astrologers take only the length of the body on the ecliptic plane in account to measure the angular distance of two bodies. The error that is created actually by this practice is mostly neglectable, but it is an error. But it seems, that the actual width of the body has no meaning. So, we have only one dimension left - the elliptically length of the body, and this is the single value, what is hold in one element of the array. Sure. Astronomy make use of an hypothetical sphere.



In this graph the earth is in the center of the sphere. From this the perspective is ‘geocentric’. This differs to a perspective were the sun is in the center, and which is called ‘heliocentric’.

While astronomers measure the coordinates of the bodies from the projected earth equator, astronomers call their system 'geocentric equatorial coordinate system'. In this the two relevant spherical coordinates are ‘equatorial length’ and ‘declination’. The term then is ‘geocentric equatorial length’. Astrologers take the ecliptically plane as reference (on the red circle around the hypothetical sky sphere are placed the bodies of our sun system), and this is called the geocentric ecliptically length, in opposite to the equatorial length measured on the sky equator. diff(a,b) is a function, that results the absolute angular distance between two bodies; for example: a = 15° , b = 354°, diff = 21°. But if you ask for the calculation of the ecliptically length of the 10 bodies, this is done by taking the astronomical data from each planet (for a defined epoch) and by solving the astronomical algorithm for each of the 10 bodies. I have written that code some 10 years ago from an astronomical book about astronomical algorithm. Yes. The code is written in Borland Pascal 7; about 50 kbyte executable DOS code.

Armchair dissident

So, if I understand you correctly, you can show no actual causal relationship between Mars' position in space, and a fire in a power station? Indeed you can't actually demonstrate that 27th August is in anyway connected with 15th?

Sorry, you'll have to excuse my ignorance here - this makes no sense to me. When you discuss length and width - to what precisely are you referring? Are you referring to the distance of each body along and imaginary y and x axis from the Earth's centre?

I'm still not sure I follow. You appear to be stating that the length is a simple distance from the centre of the geocentric sphere, in which case I really can't see:

Here you appear to be stating that diff() measures an angular distance, not between two points but between two distances. Now, again, forgive my lack of mathematical knowledge - but I understood that this was not possible.

In which case, and again, perhaps you know more coding than I, do you realise that the code you posted simply cannot work. Pascal, as I understand it, is a case-insensitive language, yet you have two definitions of 'i': once for a loop variable, and once ('I") as an accumulator. Pascal sees both these variables as one and the same thing.

Volker.Doormann

Correct. You are right. Sorry for this. Variable i is an integer, and I is reduced in the graph only from the origin I1 in the source text, which is a double precision (real) variable.

Shadowy Man

If I am understanding correctly, his "length" is the Right Ascension and his "width" is the declination difference from the ecliptic.

Is this correct?

Volker.Doormann

The hint on energeticful crashes in this month was based on long experience with planetary configurations. 61,800 Megawatts, supplying 50 Mio people were lost on the 14th of August for several hours in the mid of August 2003. This is a fact.
I do not write here for fun. Nobody must be impressed. The full nature of this relations is not to be explained in some words. Maybe it helps you, that in the end of this month Uranus, Jupiter, Mars, Sun and Venus in opposition from earth. On 2003.08.27 Moon is added. In the mid of the month Pluto has some stress angles. Each of this angular relation is relevant and this relevance is intensified by the number of relevant angles (see algorithm). I have no knowledge about which specific planets have special relations to earthquakes, but I have knowledge (as all astrologers in general) about the quality of the planets next to earthquakes. And this knowledge is the base for the interpretation of 'energeticful crashes'. I have no idea about causes of this. No. Spherical coordinates - like used on the surface of earth - have a longitude and a latitude. The longitude relates to the length and the latitude relates to the width. Because this are all angles, there do not exist distances at all. Two values of spherical coordinates defines a location on the sphere perfectly. I think it is best that you take look in a book on spherical trigonometry. As the name speaks, there are angles involved, but absolute no real lengths in meters. The lengths and distances are ever angles and angle distances.

Volker

Volker.Doormann

Nearly yes. But this is not my length and width, it is the common standard designation in astronomy used for ecliptically coordinates to avoid mistakes, and to distinguish them from the RA and Declination of the equatorial coordinate system.

Armchair dissident

You'll forgive me if I can't quite understand this. You see: you posted your algorithm source before you posted the graph. They both contained the same error. If I assume (which I believe is reasonable) that the source code embedded as an insert in the graph was intended to provide an aura of authority by presenting the precise code that generated the graph (overlooking the fact that the code does not, and cannot generate a graph), then I have to ask why you would try to present such a blatantly false impression of authority.

Incidentally: could you provide me an answer to my other questions.