Requiem for Relativity

Sidereal days and solar days are fit in the same solar year? The difference in a solar and sidereal year is ~1/4 day. About the barycenter-the model I have seen indicates the the Earth/moon system barycenter orbits the sun and the math is done with that built-in error. In actual fact the barycenter is nearer the sun at New Moon and further at Full Moon. In the case of 1st&3rd quarter moon the Earth/moon system is moving at a different rate in its orbit around the sun. Its faster at 3rd quarter and slower at 1st quarter. How do star guys correct for that? That motion would account for spring and neap tide height rather than assuming the math used is correct.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jim</i>
<br />Sidereal days and solar days are fit in the same solar year?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Yes, of course. See
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidereal_day

"Another way to see this difference is to notice that, relative to the stars, the Sun appears to move around the Earth once per year. Therefore, there is one less solar day per year than there are sidereal days. This makes a sidereal day approximately 365.24/366.24 times the length of the 24-hour solar day, giving approximately 23 hours, 56 minutes, 4.1 seconds (86,164.1 seconds)."

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The difference in a solar and sidereal year is ~1/4 day.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

The difference is the mentioned above(one day), because related to the stars, it is like the Sun makes one revolution around the Earth in a year. In other words: when the Earth returns to the equivalent position in its orbit around the Sun, 366.24 revolutions have been elapsed, related to the stars, because the Sun has also "orbited" the Earth once.

I now think that this is anyways irrelevant, because the Sun movement is in fact hidden/masked in the orbital dynamics of the planets.
That is: we can consider that there is exactly one more sidereal day than solar days per year(we can leave that fixed), and the other elements are enough to mask or compensate for the Sun's(the Solar system, actually) movement.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
About the barycenter-the model I have seen indicates the the Earth/moon system barycenter orbits the sun and the math is done with that built-in error. In actual fact the barycenter is nearer the sun at New Moon and further at Full Moon. In the case of 1st&3rd quarter moon the Earth/moon system is moving at a different rate in its orbit around the sun. Its faster at 3rd quarter and slower at 1st quarter. How do star guys correct for that? That motion would account for spring and neap tide height rather than assuming the math used is correct.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I suppose that that difference is not taken into consideration for most, if not all, measurements and observations. But I don't know for sure.

Well, don't you think the moon causes more motion of interest than say Mars or other minor player in these motions?

Shaltout & Belmonte, "On the Orientation of Ancient Egyptian Temples (3)...", Journal for the History of Astronomy 38:141-160, 2007

This article, so hard to find on the internet, is on the shelf at Iowa State Univ. Sec. III, p. 154: "...average declination of ~ 11 3/4 deg would include temples orientated to a peculiar interval of positive and negative declinations between +/- 11 and +/- 13 deg...". Fig. 6, p. 148, shows that if the pyramid-related temples are omitted, then by far the most Declinations correspond to NSEW orientation, but after these, the next tallest histogram peak (peak 3) is that of temples corresponding to Declination +12.69 (by my ruler measurement and interpolation on their graph)(not -, only + !).

Sec. III, p. 155, footnote 28 (p. 159): "A striking parallelism might be established for the '17deg family' of orientations in ancient Mesoamerica." Checking their reference and a prior article by that author, I find Sprajc, Latin American Antiquity 11:403+, 2000, which says that the early first millenium AD city of Teotihuacan (19deg42' N), which seems to have been imitated by other great cities, shows two alignments in its layout, skewed 15.5 & 16.5deg clockwise from the cardinal directions.

Hathor and Crater

Wm. T. Olcott, "Star Lore of All Ages" (digitized by Google), p. 166, refers to an ancient Egyptian vase with a poem relating the constellation Crater, to Nile floods. Crater was one of the astronomer Ptolemy's 48 constellations. Ptolemy's Almagest lists only seven stars for Crater, forming a "V" shape.

Here is a speculation: Crater originally symbolized the horns of Hathor, the early Egyptian cow-Goddess (who already quite early was being depicted as a stately horned woman: see the statue of Mycerinus flanked by Hathor and another Goddess, in, inter alia, Lange, "Egypt", 4th ed., 1968; pl. 39). (Later, Isis absorbed Hathor's appearance.) Barbarossa will lie between the handles of Crater (horns of Hathor?) only a few years after 2012.

This might be worth a look, www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/starsgalaxi...itzerf-20051129.html