North Star

You have simply failed to understand what irush is saying, because you are so wrapped up in rotundity. On the map you presented the North Star is right in the centre above earth. Now if you were at the North Pole you'd look up through a few miles of air and see the star 3100 miles above you. A

I'd like to seem some evidence that the North star is only 3,100 miles away. Rather than the Illuminati/NWO reported distance of 2,545,000,000,000,000 miles.
The distance to the North star and to other visible stars, like Vega and 61 Cygni for example, have been measured MANY times using the stellar parallax method.

So if 3,100 miles is correct how was this measurement obtained? I intend to test it for myself.

Uppsala, Sweden, is 2090 miles from north pole,
and from there you see Polaris by 59.859 degrees.
Hp = 2090 * TAN (59.859) = 3599.5 miles.

Cairo, Egypt, is 4149 miles from north pole,
and from there you see Polaris by 30.046 degrees.
Hp = 4149 * TAN (30.046) = 2399.8 miles.

As you can see, there are some difficulties to prove that Polaris is 3100 (or 3300) miles above Earth.

Quote from: Thork on June 02, 2012, 03:03:26 AM

You have simply failed to understand what irush is saying, because you are so wrapped up in rotundity. On the map you presented the North Star is right in the centre above earth. Now if you were at the North Pole you'd look up through a few miles of air and see the star 3100 miles above you. A

I'd like to seem some evidence that the North star is only 3,100 miles away. Rather than the Illuminati/NWO reported distance of 2,545,000,000,000,000 miles.
The distance to the North star and to other visible stars, like Vega and 61 Cygni for example, have been measured MANY times using the stellar parallax method.

So if 3,100 miles is correct how was this measurement obtained? I intend to test it for myself.

From what I have been able to determine " this measurement" has never been "obtained".

The only reference I can find is

The Stars
The sun, moon, and stars are all rotating around a central point over the North Pole. The underlying cause for this rotation is due to vast cornucopia of stellar systems orbiting around its center of attraction - an imaginary point of shared attraction. This is an extrapolated and more complex binary star movement. Think of a binary star system which moves around an invisible common barycenter. Now add a third body which shares that common center of attraction. Now a fourth. When we add enough bodies the system looks like a swirling multiple system.

The stars in the night sky rotate around common barycenters above the earth just as the sun and moon do. From a location on the earth's surface the stars in the sky might seem to scroll across the night sky with Polaris at the hub. The underlying cause for this rotation is due to vast cornucopia of stellar systems orbiting around its center of mass - an imaginary point completely compliant with the Newtonian system. This is an extrapolated and more complex binary star movement.

No mention of height.

So if 3,100 miles is correct how was this measurement obtained? I intend to test it for myself.

Rowbotham provided some calculations regarding stars and the Sun, but never provided actual numbers. Then people came up with 3100 miles from somewhere. If my memory stands still, they took 45 degree argument, the same as the one for the Sun.

This distance is of course incorrect, because, as SpJunk pointed, an object can't be at two disctinct altitudes at the same time.

There isin't "South star" 

There isin't "South star" 

Breaking your own rules from your signature? This post is irrelevant.

1- measure the angle of the Polaris on place A that you are sitting.
2- Go to X km to the any direction of W,S,N or E.
3- Measure the angle of the polaris again on the place B that you gone.
4- Calculate L1, L2 and H the altitude of the polaris.

You can use this drawing for to give an idea.

Quote from: JeebusCrist on September 05, 2016, 09:06:05 PM

So if 3,100 miles is correct how was this measurement obtained? I intend to test it for myself.

Rowbotham provided some calculations regarding stars and the Sun, but never provided actual numbers. Then people came up with 3100 miles from somewhere. If my memory stands still, they took 45 degree argument, the same as the one for the Sun.

This distance is of course incorrect, because, as SpJunk pointed, an object can't be at two disctinct altitudes at the same time.

As far as I know Rowbotham was the only one to take measurements. In Zetetic Astronomy, CHAPTER V, please 104, THE TRUE DISTANCE OF THE SUN he states

that it is perfectly safe to affirm that the under edge of the sun is considerably less than 700 statute miles above the earth

then

The above method of measuring distances applies equally to the moon and stars; and it is easy to demonstrate, to place it beyond the possibility of error, so long as assumed premises are excluded, that the moon is nearer to the earth than the sun, and that all the visible luminaries in the firmament are contained within a vertical distance of 1000 statute miles.

It might be worth referring to a couple of posts of mine:
With distances from "the Wiki": Re: Does ANYONE have ANY evidence that we live on a spinning ball? and
With distances form Google earth: So you think the sun is about 5,000 km high?.

1- measure the angle of the Polaris on place A that you are sitting.
2- Go to X km to the any direction of W,S,N or E.
3- Measure the angle of the polaris again on the place B that you gone.
4- Calculate L1, L2 and H the altitude of the polaris.

You can use this drawing for to give an idea.

The idea is correct, but once you start applying actual numbers, calculations and the final results stop making any sense.

Quote from: İntikam on September 06, 2016, 12:59:40 AM

1- measure the angle of the Polaris on place A that you are sitting.
2- Go to X km to the any direction of W,S,N or E.
3- Measure the angle of the polaris again on the place B that you gone.
4- Calculate L1, L2 and H the altitude of the polaris.

You can use this drawing for to give an idea.

The idea is correct, but once you start applying actual numbers, calculations and the final results stop making any sense.

I don't understand what you mean but i calculated it before, but i don't need to show the results. The enthusiast can calculate it by using the trigonometryc formulas as follow:

L1/sin(180-b)= L2/sina = X/sing  Then calculate L1 and L2 depends on X, a and b. Then calculate H depends on others.

I just did suggest a way to calculate it, didn't try to prove anything .

Quote from: Brouwer on September 06, 2016, 01:12:09 AM

Quote from: İntikam on September 06, 2016, 12:59:40 AM

1- measure the angle of the Polaris on place A that you are sitting.
2- Go to X km to the any direction of W,S,N or E.
3- Measure the angle of the polaris again on the place B that you gone.
4- Calculate L1, L2 and H the altitude of the polaris.

You can use this drawing for to give an idea.

The idea is correct, but once you start applying actual numbers, calculations and the final results stop making any sense.

I don't understand what you mean but i calculated it before, but i don't need to show the results. The enthusiast can calculate it by using the trigonometryc formulas as follow:

L1/sin(180-b)= L2/sina = X/sing  Then calculate L1 and L2 depends on X, a and b. Then calculate H depends on others.

I just did suggest a way to calculate it, didn't try to prove anything .

The calculation methods are known.

The results only work for a round earth with the star zillions of miles from the observer.

Arab travellers knew this thousands of years ago.

1- measure the angle of the Polaris on place A that you are sitting.
2- Go to X km to the any direction of W,S,N or E.
3- Measure the angle of the polaris again on the place B that you gone.
4- Calculate L1, L2 and H the altitude of the polaris.

You can use this drawing for to give an idea.

I just gave you two cases of calculations where Beta is 90 degrees.
When Beta is 90 degrees, then you have Pytagoras' triangle.

X (kilometers) is when you calculate height in kilometers.
X (miles) is when you calculate height in miles.

In both cities X is distance to north pole.

If you don't believe it, use your metod in these two cases yourself:

CASE 1:
Uppsala.
Alpha = 59.859 degrees
Beta = 90 degrees
X = 2090 miles

CASE 2:
Cairo.
Alpha = 30.046 degrees
Beta = 90 degrees
X = 4149 miles

Quote from: Brouwer on September 06, 2016, 01:12:09 AM

The idea is correct, but once you start applying actual numbers, calculations and the final results stop making any sense.

I don't understand what you mean but i calculated it before, but i don't need to show the results. The enthusiast can calculate it by using the trigonometryc formulas as follow:

L1/sin(180-b)= L2/sina = X/sing  Then calculate L1 and L2 depends on X, a and b. Then calculate H depends on others.

I just did suggest a way to calculate it, didn't try to prove anything

Sure, you don't "need to show the results", but would you be willing to do so anyway?  Just to humor us?