🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <5331@uwmcsd1.UUCP>, markh@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (Mark William Hopkins) writes:


>Time to step in here.  You want actual calculations?  Well, you'll get them.
>You may not like the verdict however.  
>                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Oh, you'd be suprised! At the right frequencies Jupiter predominates over
>the Earth.
>
>
>Let's put the moon in the calculations anyway for comparison.
>
>GRAVITATIONAL EFFECTS:
>To really do this justice, we should be taking Fourier components of the
>gravity fields involved.  What you'll find will suprise you.
>
>1 nano-G = 1 billionth of the acceleration of gravity 
>	   (1000-million)th for European readers.
>
>EMPIRE STATE BUILDING:             JUPITER:
>1.17 millionth of a nano-G         20 nano-G (DC)
>(DC component)                     AC components exist with a fundamental
>No appreciable AC components.      frequency of .917 cycles per year.
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^      Only the first several harmonics are
>				   appreciable.
>
>To calculate the AC components for Jupiter, find the Fourier series of
>                                                     -1
>        20.9 nano-G * [ 1 + .371 * cos (2 PI t / T) ]
>where
>			    T = 1.08 years ( = 1/.917)
>
>I believe they are Legendre polynomials evaluated at .371 multiplied by 20.9.
>
>I am assuming that the Empire State Building is a million (metic) tons and
>about 1500 miles from where I sit (Milwaukee).
>
>The DC components alone: Jupiter's is about 20 MILLION times larger.
>You'd have to get within SEEING distance of the building for the gravity
>fields to be the same.  Further, the Empire State building is not in orbit
>so it does not have any appreciable frequency components other than DC.
>
>The MOON:
>36000 nano-G (DC).
>AC components exist with a fundamental frequency of 12.5 cycles per year.
>
>I've ignored the effects of the Earth's rotation here.  However, there are
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^IT IS TO SNICKER^^^^^^^^

>harmonics with the fundamental requency of 1 cycle per day (thereabouts) that
>cause tidal actions on the Earth.
>
>Clearly, we are talking about response to low frequencies.  The real question
>to ask is whether or not the fields of Jupiter and the Moon are drowned out
>by the noise around the Earth.  The calculations involving the Empire State
>Building answer that question fairly well.  NO.

>
>... and this is the real issue here : the signal-to-noise ratio.
>
>
>Turn on your radio for that. It is a measuring instrument, after all.
>A calculator, by the way, transmits in the FM band (at least the old ones do).
>
>A historical note : Astrology and Astronomy did not become fully distinguished
>until the end of the Middle Ages.  Up to that time, both had been studied under
>the topic of "Astronomy", which was one of the four major fields in the
>Quadrivium.  Now guess where the word "Trivia" came from?  (A meta-Trivia
>question.)
>
>
If I understand this posting correctly, the claim is that rhythmic 
gravitational forces from distant "plantes" might be a physical basis
for astrological claims, which should therefore not be dismissed out of
hand. 
	***I APPLAUD the injection of numbers into this discussion.***

BUT the 1/R^2 field of Jupiter influences the path of the Earth; what is
observable by a critter such as you or me on the surface of said Earth is 
the somewhat!! weaker 1/R^3 tidal psuedo-force. Does this change your 
calculations? If so does it change your conclusions? If not why not?


BTW, there is no such thing as meta-trivia - although there IS ortho, para,
and meta-duvia!

Cheers,
	Ed