Then just lay out the problem, being specific about times, angles and the frame of reference : ) Specifically which time you are talking about, i.e. the time the light is reflected from Pluto or the time your eyes actually see the reflected light, and what your earth based angular references are.
Were not talking about Jupiter's moons. Were talking about the sun and its alleged 2.1 degrees, and Pluto along with its 102 degrees.
If you would read the Feynman reference, you would see that they are all basically the same problem : ) The Feynman reference is a little more complicated of course.
The Sun does appear to rise in the East and set in the West, and its gravitational pull is synchronized within 21 arcseconds of its apparent position.
What is your frame of reference for the 21 arc second discrepancy? I am guessing that you are referring to the earths orbital speed of 30 km/sec to get your 21 arc seconds. If that is the case you are correct, but it should be added the angular component that we are talking about.
does the 2.1 degrees come from the Sun's motion through the galaxy?
Does it come from the rotation of the earth? (would it still be present of the Sun was completely stationary?)
It is from the earths rotation of course. We are using the Earth as our frame of reference. If the Earth wasn't rotating the Sun would be stationary, very much like the Earth is stationary to an observer whose frame of reference is the moon. If you were standing on the Moon you would see a stationary, spinning Earth.
If it is true that the apparent position of the sun and its actual position are separated by 2.1 degrees, Wikipedia, Nasa, etc, should list it as a common fact.
Because we are talking about 'APPARENT' position which is irrelevant to the actual position. At any given time I think I could find two observers on the Earth one of whom could truthfully tell me that the Sun is due East at 90º and the other who could tell me that the Sun is due West at 180º It is a fact, but it is irrelevant to astronomers or anyone else for that matter : ) That is why you don't see it in Wikipedia.
The very first thing Astronomers try to do is factor out the Earths rotation and orbital speed and position. Only then do they try to figure out where things are : )
LeGrande, Your an atheist.
That's "you're" and thank you : )
All you have put forward is slight of hand logic that does not hold up to scrutiny.
Slight of hand logic? All you have to do is go outside and pound a stake into the ground pointed at the Sun so that it doesn't have a shadow. Then 8.3 minutes later pound another stake into the ground (with the same origin point) so that it doesn't have a shadow and measure the angle between the two stakes. If you do it accurately enough the two stakes will be a little over two degrees apart. Which is the difference between the apparent position and actual position of the Sun from your perspective on the Earth.
“Then just lay out the problem, being specific about times, angles and the frame of reference : ) Specifically which time you are talking about, i.e. the time the light is reflected from Pluto or the time your eyes actually see the reflected light, and what your earth based angular references are.” [excerpt]For simplicity, imagine all the planets/sun were stationary, except the earth was rotating 360 degrees per 24 hours.
“If you would read the Feynman reference, you would see that they are all basically the same problem : ) The Feynman reference is a little more complicated of course.” [excerpt]Post a link.
“What is your frame of reference for the 21 arc second discrepancy? I am guessing that you are referring to the earths orbital speed of 30 km/sec to get your 21 arc seconds. If that is the case you are correct, but it should be added the angular component that we are talking about.” [excerpt]Annual aberration(earth's orbit around the sun) is 20.49552 arcseconds, or 0.0056932 degrees.
“It is from the earths rotation of course. We are using the Earth as our frame of reference. If the Earth wasn't rotating the Sun would be stationary, very much like the Earth is stationary to an observer whose frame of reference is the moon. If you were standing on the Moon you would see a stationary, spinning Earth.” [excerpt]Lets say you had a device that had two arrows, one pointing in the direction of the incoming light of the sun, and the other pointing at the gravitation pull of the sun.
“Because we are talking about 'APPARENT' position which is irrelevant to the actual position. At any given time I think I could find two observers on the Earth one of whom could truthfully tell me that the Sun is due East at 90º and the other who could tell me that the Sun is due West at 180º It is a fact, but it is irrelevant to astronomers or anyone else for that matter : ) That is why you don't see it in Wikipedia.” [excerpt]Actually, we are talking about the direction of incoming light from the sun versus the direction of its gravitational pull.
“Slight of hand logic? All you have to do is go outside and pound a stake into the ground pointed at the Sun so that it doesn't have a shadow. Then 8.3 minutes later pound another stake into the ground (with the same origin point) so that it doesn't have a shadow and measure the angle between the two stakes. If you do it accurately enough the two stakes will be a little over two degrees apart. Which is the difference between the apparent position and actual position of the Sun from your perspective on the Earth.” [excerpt]I know what 2.1 degrees looks like.