[Home] [How to Measure Your Beliefs] [The Man-Made Church] [Miscellaneous]

[Home]>[Miscellaneous]>[8. Astronomy]>[1. Astronomical questions and answers]>[1.4 Astronomical questions and answers, Part 4]

Previous webpage:           1.3 Astronomical questions and answers, Part 3
To the end of this webpage: End
Next webpage:               201

 

1.4 Astronomical questions and answers, Part 4

 

Frank L. Preuss

 

^ Contents

1.4 Astronomical questions and answers, Part 4

151 152 153 154 155  156 157 158 159 160
161 162 163 164 165  166 167 168 169 170
171 172 173 174 175  176 177 178 179 180
181 182 183 184 185  186 187 188 189 190
191 192 193 194 195  196 197 198 199 200

 

Astronomical questions and answers
No.QuestionAnswer
^ 151 Generally seen, how is the relationship between moon phases and earth phases? This double planet consisting of earth and moon moves in the course of one earth year, which is also one moon year, around the sun.

And the moon revolves in the course of one month around the earth and the earth revolves in the course of one month around the moon.

But the phases of the earth and the phases of the moon depend only on their mutual rotation. And the mutual rotation time is one month.

The sun is their common lamp, which illuminates both.

The rotation of these two heavenly bodies around their own axis does not actually influence their phases.

What influences their phases is the turning of one of the celestial bodies around the other, therefore their mutual rotation.

And the two phases are contra rotating to each other. Is the moon waning, then the earth is waxing, and vice versa. And it is full moon when it is new earth.

Moon phases are phases, which are observed from earth. Earth phases are phases, which are observed from the moon.

See 15. Das Erde-Mond-System

^ 152 With the caption of the picture of the answer 144 it says, "The image shows . . . as well as the northern hemisphere of the lunar far side." What would one have to expect, when it would say, "as well as the southern hemisphere of the lunar far side?" There the round side of earth would not be on the right side, but on the left. And on the right side would not be seen Europe and West Africa, but the eastern part of Russia and the western part of North America, therefore also the line between the illuminated and non-illuminated part of the earth, but this time not the left part of the illuminated part of the earth, but the right part - seen from the moon.

And instead of the Persian Gulf one would perhaps see China. And instead of the Arabic Peninsular perhaps the Indian or the Further India Peninsular or the Japanese Islands.

The sun illuminates the whole eastern half of the terrestrial globe. But in the north more than half of the northern hemisphere and in the south less than half of the southern hemisphere. And in the north the illumination goes beyond the north pole and in the south the south pole remains unlit.

But of the whole area of the surface of the earth one half is illuminated.

^ 153 In which detail is the following picture wrong? Mondphasen2

This illustration neglects to clarify that the given information applies to the northern hemisphere only, but not to the southern.

The man, who looks at the waxing half-moon, looking from Berlin, sees the right part of the sphere of the moon illuminated. But the man, who looks at the waxing half-moon from Sydney, sees the left part of the sphere of the moon illuminated. Both men actually see something completely different. They both indeed look onto that part of the sphere of the moon, which is illuminated by the sun, but what the man in Berlin sees of the moon is something completely different than what the man in Sydney sees.

Both see completely different parts of the moon.

Imagine an elephant standing on the equator. The trunk is in the west of the body and the tail in the east of the body. The man, who looks from the north, sees the right side of the elephant and he sees the trunk to the right of the elephant, and the man, who looks from the south, sees the left side of the elephant, and he sees the trunk to the left of the elephant. Both see the elephant, but both also see something what the other does not see. Everyone sees the other side of the animal.

For the man in the north of the animal the trunk is to the right of the animal and for the man south of the animal the trunk is on the left side of the animal.

^ 154 Is the following statement correct? The equator forms one plane and in this plane is also the sun. This statement is valid only for the 20th of March and the 23rd of September, for the equinoxes.

The position of the equator is not determined by the position of the sun, but by the position of the earth's axis, therefore the line about which the earth rotates.

The equator is the line on the surface of the earth, which describes a circle, which centre is also the centre of the earth and this area of the circle forms a right angle to the earth's axis.

On the equator are those points of the earth, which a furthest away from the earth's axis.

^ 155 How then can the so-called scientists now prove that light is visible? They just have to find the right painter:

VisibleLight

See The so-called scientists

^ 156 The picture of answer 144 was taken on June 8. How would a corresponding picture look like, when it would be taken on June 21? On June 21 is solstice, summer solstice for the northern hemisphere and winter solstice for the southern hemisphere.

And that means that the sun shines perpendicular on the Tropic of Cancer at midday.

The line between the illuminated and the non-illuminated part of the earth runs also here perpendicular to the rays of the sun. And a tangent to the illuminated edge of the earth, which is parallel to the just mentioned line, is tangent to the surface of the earth also there again, where the rays of the sun hit the edge of the earth perpendicularly, only in this case it is the Tropic of Cancer.

On the 8. June 2018 was waning half-moon and therefore waxing half earth. On the 21. June 2018 was waxing half-moon and therefore waning half earth. Between these two days therefore is half an orbit time. Seen from the moon, seen from the same place of the moon, therefore not the right part of the earth will be seen, but the left, and the right is then dark.

^ 157 On the picture of answer 144 one sees the desert of Saudi Arabia in its natural colour, yellow or yellow-brown or beige. Why are the clouds white? Because also here on earth, when the sun shines against clouds, the clouds are white.
^ 158 On the picture of answer 144 one sees the desert of Saudi Arabia in its natural colour. The clouds are white. But the Persian Gulf is black. Why? When I go before the door and look at the ocean and the sky is clear und the sun shines, then I see the sky and the ocean are blue. The sky is light-blue and the ocean is dark-blue. It seems to be so that the more I would look perpendicularly onto the water and the further I move away from the water, the darker the water gets. When I now move away so far that I see the earth as a whole, therefore also the surroundings of the earth, then the water on the earth gets completely black.

And the surroundings of the earth are then also completely black. But that is because light is not visible. It shines against no object.

And when I am down, then the sky is blue. But that is because I am in the atmosphere and it is illuminated from above by the sun. When I therefore look up, I see the blue sky, and the rays of the sun hit onto the molecules of the air and their reaction becomes apparent to me. But when I am above this atmosphere, and then look up, then everything there is black. And since I am in the area of sunlight, I also see no stars. If I want to see stars, I must move into the shade of the earth or into the shade of the moon.

And when I from quite high up above the earth look down, onto the earth, then the air has hardly any influence on me, it is below me, and I can see through it, and recognize everything quite well, what there is to be seen on earth.

The air, therefore the atmosphere, could form something like a fluorescent space, and let the whole surface of the earth be bright during the day, also when no direct sunshine exists because of clouding or objects casting shadows directly on earth. When I have a look at the pictures from the surface of the moon, which were taken from the surface of the moon, then one has the impression that the shadow there is total, that it is therefore completely dark in the shadow. And that because of the lacking atmosphere. One should once bring a camera into a position that it is in the shadow, on the moon, and take photos, where also the sky is seen, and then see, whether stars are seen on it. And then one should also take photos, on the moon, when it is night on the moon, and then see, how the stars look like there. And then also compare these two kinds of photos.

And then one should take photos at night from the moon, where the earth is seen, and see, whether stars are seen there or whether the earth shine is too strong. But that would have then to be done from the side of the moon that is turned towards the earth.

Water is translucent. Could it be that the water of our oceans lets sunlight through and does not reflect it and therefore the oceans are black on the photos taken from the moon?

^ 159 Today is full moon. When I look at the full moon, then I see the edge of the moon quite sharply. When I now look at the picture of answer 144, then I see the edge of the earth also quite clearly. The moon has no atmosphere, but the earth has one. Why don't I then see any signs of the atmosphere at the edge of the earth? The atmosphere of the earth has no hard and sharp boundary, but which simply 'tails off' into space. The mass of the atmosphere is concentrated in the bottom 6 or 8 km.

The Persian Gulf is about 800 km long. Something of the dimension of 8 km would therefore hardly be noticeable. When the length of the Persian Gulf is 4 mm on the screen, then something that is 8 km long in nature, is only 0.04 mm on the screen.

^ 160 When an astronaut walks on the far side of the moon and has the sun in the back and his own shadow before him, can he then see the ground of the moon, can he see a stone that lies on the ground? One would have to know, whether the shadow on the moon is total. Does the fact that the moon has no atmosphere cause that everything behind a shadow casting object is completely dark? And how is it with other objects, which reflect light into this shadow?
^ 161 How is the transition from blue to black sky? The following picture shows this transition:

BlueBlack

"Sept. 20, 2010"
Crescent Moon
A last quarter crescent moon above Earth's horizon is featured in this image photographed by the Expedition 24 crew on the International Space Station."

 

And the next shows the earth from a sight, which is still so close to earth that also the water is still blue, but the sky next to earth is black:

BlueMarble

"June 19, 2012
Blue Marble 2012 - Arctic View
Fifteen orbits of the recently launched Suomi NPP satellite provided the VIRS instrument enough time (and longitude) to gather the pixels for this synthesized view of Earth showing the Arctic, Europe, and Asia.
Suomi NPP orbits the Earth about 14 times each day and observes nearly the entire surface. The NPP satellite continues key data records that are critical for climate change science."

^ 162 Is there a difference between a calendar on the northern hemisphere and a calendar of the southern hemisphere? Yes. And that is the information, which the respective calendar gives regarding the moon phases, particularly regarding half-moon. Full moon and new moon, and waxing half-moon and waning half-moon are the same on both hemispheres, therefore happen on the same days, but the picture, which the waxing moon offers the observer is reversed, and the picture that the waning moon offers the observer is also reversed.

Here a detail from a calendar of the southern hemisphere:

Halbmond

TIDE TIMETABLE 2019
FIRST QUARTER       LAST QUARTER
NEW MOON            FULL MOON

The calendar makers in the south orientate themselves of course often towards those in the north, therefore the English-speaking towards those in England and the Portuguese-speaking towards those in Portugal and the Spanish-speaking towards those in Spain, and then it can sometimes happen that they forget to correct the moon phases.

And then the man looks at the calendar and then at the moon and thinks there is something wrong. But then it is mostly the calendar, which is wrong, rarely the moon.

^ 163 What is the barycentre? Barycentre

See The earth-moon system

^ 164 When does the sun shine perpendicularly on the Tropic of Cancer? Midday in June - summer solstice northern hemisphere.
Seasons
^ 165 What does the following picture tell us? 2Crescents

"This picture of a crescent-shaped Earth and Moon - the first of its kind ever taken by a spacecraft - was recorded Sept. 18, 1977, by NASA's Voyager 1 when it was 7.25 million miles (11.66 million kilometres) from Earth.

The Moon is at the top of the picture and beyond the Earth as viewed by Voyager. In view on the Earth are eastern Asia, the western Pacific Ocean and part of the Arctic. Voyager 1 was directly above Mt. Everest (on the night side of the planet at 25 degrees north latitude) when the picture was taken. The photo was made from three images taken through color filters, then processed by the Image Processing Lab at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). Because the Earth is many times brighter than the Moon, the Moon was artificially brightened by a factor of three relative to the Earth by computer enhancement so that both bodies would show clearly in the prints."

 

The photo was taken on the 18. September 1977. That is very close to the equinox on the 23. September 1977. The camera was directly over Mt. Everest, on the night side of the planet and that is about the 28th parallel North, therefore on the northern hemisphere. The moon is behind the earth.

The earth has on the picture so about a diameter of 24 mm and the moon of about 6.5 mm.

When the distance of the camera to earth is 11.66 million kilometres and one assumes that the moon is behind the earth, then the distance of the camera from the moon is 11.66 + 0.40 = 12.06 million km.

The diameter of the earth in comparison to that of the moon is 12756/3474=3.65. The diameter of the earth in comparison to that of the moon, on the picture, is 24/6.5=3.70. That agrees.

The statement that the earth is many times brighter than the moon could mean that on the earth's side of the moon one could almost only see the stars at new earth, when therefore the earth shine of the earth equals zero. But since at new earth the side of the moon, that is turned towards the earth, is fully illuminated by the sun, therefore there is full moon, it is probably so on the moon, that one never sees stars there, at least not on the side turned towards the earth. No matter from which side, one could anyway only see the stars at night, when it is therefore night on the moon. The night last two weeks on the moon and in these two weeks the earth goes through half of its phases, therefore from full earth to new earth, for example. And the closer it comes to the new earth, the more it also comes to the full moon. So it looks like that when the man in the moon wants to see stars, he has to move to the side remote from the earth.

This now could again mean that one can only then take photos from the moon of stars, when the camera is on the far side of the moon, and when there is night.

We want to take an example. The man in the moon stays in the middle of the moon, in the middle of that side of the moon that is turned towards the earth. When it is getting dark, it is half-moon there, waning half-moon, the illuminated area of the moon gets smaller. At that time it is also half earth on the earth, but waxing half earth, the illuminated area of the earth is getting larger, the earth shine on the moon is as a result also getting larger and the possibility to see stars there on the moon gets smaller. This earth shine now gets larger, until the complete side of the moon, which is turned towards earth, has night, for then it is new moon and full earth, and the earth shine has reached its maximum; it is therefore quite bright on the moon, much brighter than when the full moon shines here with us. When now after this, this earth shine decreases on the moon, it also comes to an end of the night on the moon and at the end of night, therefore with waxing half-moon, shortly before it is getting light with the man in the moon, it is therefore still full night, it is half earth on the earth, there is therefore still amply earth shine. So it is therefore never really getting dark on the near side of the moon, and the earth always illuminates, when it is night with the man in the moon, also when a large part of earth is cloudy. And since the moon has no atmosphere, there are no clouds there, which could decrease the earth shine. And when now the earth loses its earth shine more and more, then the moon moves more and more behind the earth, seen from the sun, and the side of the moon turned towards the earth is getting more and more fully illuminated from the sun. And the man in the moon has then also no need to see stars, but great need to protect himself from the terrible heat of the sun and has long since gone underground. Only after the day draws to a close, he will come again to the surface and remain there until the night has progressed so far, that the terrible cold drives him again underground. For the earth shine would indeed give him light, but no warmth.

^ 166 What is wrong with the following picture? HistoricalMoonPhase

It should mention that the picture only applies to the northern atmosphere.

^ 167 Have men on the northern hemisphere lost their overall view? Good question.
^ 168 On the picture of answer 165 one sees the waxing moon on top. The picture was taken from the northern hemisphere. Below one sees the earth. What earth phase is it? The right part of the moon is illuminated. Since the sun shines from the right, also the right part of earth is illuminated. But the earth has waning earth. And with waning earth, the left part is illuminated.

But that is no contradiction, since the definition of the phases does not only refer to the celestial body, but also to the place of the observer. When we speak of moon phases, then this refers to our standpoint here on earth. And when here on this website the talk is about earth phases, then the moon is meant as the position of the observer - at least until now.

One might imagine a line, not exactly straight, from the camera to earth and then to the moon and then going further beyond it. When one now sees the situation from the other end of the line, then one sees the moon, and then its left side is illuminated, and then one sees the earth, and also its left side is illuminated, but this sight also corresponds to the sight of the observer, who is on the moon and who observes from there the light phases of earth, the light phases, which result from the illumination of the earth by the sun.

^ 169 The moon is now indeed not only illuminated by the sun, but also by the earth. What are then now the moon phases, which result from the earth shine? That would be for instance so as when the sun rotates around the moon, that it always illuminates that side of the moon that is facing the earth. Since the moon always shows the same side to the earth, the earth shine also always falls on this side of the moon, which is turned towards the earth. One cannot therefore really speak of phases.

One can also explain that simpler: There are no phases, since the starting point of the rays of light and of the observer is the same.

^ 170 Is question No. 167 ironically meant? Not really. Men on the northern hemisphere, particularly in the western part, seem to be completely obsessed with materialism. They indeed tried to also contaminate the southern hemisphere with it, but there are still gigantic masses of people, who have preserved a spiritual life for themselves. In the north, to take this as an example, they also remember the dead, and this remembering has indeed something to do with thinking, and consequently with thoughts. And to think about someone, to be in exchange of thoughts with someone, is thought-transference, called telepathy. But it is so that in the north this is more a tradition, for which one feels obliged, but does not believe in it that something is really happening there. But in the south that is completely different. There this relationship to the deceased is real and concrete and men there experience results of this kind of communication, which, at least for them, are clear proofs of the reality of such spiritual life. The problem of those in the north is therefore that they no longer know the most important part of life, and as a result have lost the overall view.

See Intercession and Prayer of intercession.

^ 171 When one with the real new moon, therefore with that new moon, where one can see, for the first time, the crescent moon, also the rest of the moon can see, because of the earth shine, why cannot the theoretical new moon be seen, therefore the new moon, which has no crescent at all, for it is also illuminated by the earth? First it is difficult to decide at all where one should look at in the sky. A real astronomer could hire an observatory, then direct the telescope towards the moon and then, when he is lucky and has no clouds, see, what he can see there.

So about 3 days after the theoretical new moon one can discover the real new moon, for example at sunset in the west, perhaps about 45 degrees above the horizon, but this already explains the problem that the more accurate new moon is, the more accurately it stays directly before the sun and when one sees into the sun, even when it is sunset, one sees next to nothing.

^ 172 Yes, but when there are clouds in the sky, I also see them, why not the moon? I also see it, but only at solar eclipse. And when there is a cloud before the sun, there is also an eclipse of the sun.
^ 173 But I also see clouds, when they are next to the sun, why do I then not see the moon, when it is next to the sun? When there is a leaf hanging from a tree seen next to the sun, or a bird, or a balloon, or an aeroplane, then I can see all these things next to the sun, but why not the moon, when it is next to the sun? All these things are in the atmosphere, but not the moon. Why should that then make any difference? Our stay in the atmosphere is like a stay in a fluorescent tube. In this fluorescent space the rays of the sun strike against the molecules of the air; in the ether - the so-called scientists do not like this word, because in the past they made fun of it and believed in a vacuum, until they then found out that there is no real vacuum, and so they then created new words, like "interstellar medium" or "intergalactic medium" - therefore in this ether there are no air molecules, there it is like on the moon, there is no atmosphere.

At half-moon one does not see one half of the moon and at new moon one does not see the whole area of the moon.

The photons of the ray of light can shoot out electrons from the illuminated matter of the moon; no photons hit the unlit matter.

^ 174 The moon phases, as they are observable from the northern hemisphere, therefore look differently than those from the southern. How do they then look like from the equator? There is a sphere in the room hanging from the ceiling like a lamp and is illuminated from the window, from the sun, from the west, just before sunset. From the north wall I can look at the sphere and also from the south wall. And then I can go beneath the sphere and look at it from below. Also there I see again the one half illuminated, only that the line between the illuminated and the unlit part is not vertical, but depends on the direction, in which my body is orientated.
^ 175 The earth is now not only illuminated from the sun, but also from the moon. How are then the earth phases, which result from the moon shine? The moon shine also falls onto that side of the earth, which is turned towards the moon. Only that in this case the earth rotates and does not always show the same side towards the moon, as the moon does. But this has no influence on the earth phases, which result from the moon shine and which can be observed from the moon.

Also in this case always the whole earth is illuminated, no matter how great the crescent of the moon is, whether small, as with new moon, or the full moon shines. Therefore also here one cannot speak of earth phases.

^ 176 Are there phases of the planets? I quote from page 79 of the book by Joachim Herrmann with the title "dtv-Atlas zur Astronomie," 1976:

"Since we observe all planets only in the reflected sun light, the planets must show phases at the observation with a telescope. But in praxis only the lower planets, which carry out their rotation between the sun and earth, offer all possible phases. With Mars at least at certain times a kind of "three-quarter-phase" can be seen, with the planets still being further outside one sees on the other hand practically a full phase, since the line of sight from earth to these planets shows no larger difference against the direction, from which the rays of the sun come.

The change of phases from Mercury and Venus is on the other hand excellently to be pursued. With Venus sometimes even good binoculars are enough, with Mercury a telescope of about 5-7 cm opening. In contrast to the change of phases of the moon a strong change of the size of the planet disc still combines here, caused through the changing distance from earth."

^ 177 With waxing or waning moon a part of the moon is illuminated by the sun and the other part not. This is the case, when one sees the moon at night and also, when one sees it by day. Why is then the non-illuminated part not also at night like it is also during the day? At night the non-illuminated part of the moon is black and during the day it is blue. Why the difference? At night the non-illuminated part of the moon is black, because no light falls upon it. And the surroundings of the moon are black, because light is not visible.

During the day the non-illuminated part of the moon is blue, because no light falls upon it?

Why does that make the moon blue?

Why are then the surroundings of the moon blue during the day?

All right, because the earth has an atmosphere.

But the moon is outside of the atmosphere after all?

When the earth is seen from the moon, then the non-illuminated part of the earth is certainly probably always black, also during the day. There is then therefore no difference between day and night. The moon has no atmosphere, the earth has one. Therefore it must after all be because of the atmosphere.

The moon is outside of the atmosphere, but we see it through the atmosphere.

At night the non-illuminated part has the same colour as the surroundings, black, and during the day the non-illuminated part of the moon has the same colour as the surroundings, blue.

That argument does not convince me.

That is simply so that everything, what cannot be bothered by light, is getting ignored and considered as not existing.

When I look at the moon at night, then I really also see the non-illuminated part of the moon, because it is visible a little bid, through the earth shine, but when I look at the visible part of the moon during the day, what is then actually that what I see there, next to the visible part, is that really a part of the moon, or is it just the atmosphere?

That is the atmosphere illuminated by the sun, and it is much brighter than the non-illuminated part of the moon, but the illuminated part of the moon is brighter than the atmosphere, and that is what I see.

And also the stars, which are brighter than the non-illuminated part of the moon, I also do not see.

Things, which are outside of the atmosphere, I therefore see during the day only, when they are brighter than the atmosphere, and that are the shining part of the moon and the sun. When I would still see further things, they would have to be quite close to earth and shine strongly or reflect light.

See Brightness.

^ 178 What problems then do have people now living on the southern hemisphere to cope with the negative influence of the people from the northern hemisphere, who are therefore influenced by people, who are obsessed by materialism and also try to contaminate them with it? See answer No. 170. Please read the following webpage: Ancestors and guardian angels
^ 179 We have said that one should not try to prove spiritual things; that was the answer No. 140. How is it then with the opposite; can one prove that spiritual things do not exist? "From out of the kingdom of light men are constantly influenced, so that they mentally deal with that kingdom, which lies outside of the earthly world, which is not grasped with earthly senses, but which exist irrefutably, even so it cannot be proven. But every man knows that an area exists, which is still closed to him, as long as he is unbelieving, for whether he also would like to deny it, he cannot do it with that certainty, which could give him proofs, and a proof for it, that that kingdom does not exist, is not there." B.D. NR. 5319.
^ 180 Why is it that, when the moon crescent is small, therefore at new moon, the part of the moon, which is not illuminated, is better recognizable than at half-moon? Because then, at new-moon, the earth is fully illuminated by the sun; the earth shine before and during and after new-moon is fully upon the moon; while at half-moon, for example at waxing half-moon, is waning half-earth, and the earth is then illuminating the moon with less than 50 % of the earth shine.
^ 181 What is then now an important component of the creed of the so-called astronomers and astrophysicists? Now comes a statement from an entry in the "Encyclopaedia Britannica 2007" and there under the headword "star":

"Source of stellar energy
The most basic property of stars is that their radiant energy must derive from internal sources. Given the great length of time that stars endure (some 10,000,000,000 years in the case of the Sun), it can be shown that neither chemical nor gravitational effects could possibly yield the required energies. Instead, the cause must be nuclear events wherein lighter nuclei are fused to create heavier nuclei, an inevitable by-product being energy."

Their own discoveries speak against it; we had a look at this with the entrance The so-called scientists; the real causes are known; can be read here on this website; they themselves send machines in the direction of the sun to investigate their own contradictions, and they still hold on to their creed, and that is repeated as often as possible, for their experience has proven that that is the method to supply "evidence"; their idea of the teaching of evolution is there the best example.

A popular word with them is the word "must" – it must be so.

And on this word "must" a great part of all their research is now based and accordingly is a great part of their sciences an assumption so as this assumption.

But the nicest of this statement, "Instead, the cause must be nuclear events," is that there is no evidence for it. They have none.

^ 182 What is the difference between astronomers and astrologers? The difference is not very great; above all they have much faith in common.

The astronomers believe that nuclear events produce the illuminating energy of the stars. They believe that the scientific laws, which are valid on the planet earth, are exactly the same way valid on other heavenly bodies. They believe that the laws of time and space are universal. They believe that beings, which possibly exist somewhere else, must have the same state of consciousness, which they themselves have. They believe that light is visible. They believe that communication is material communication. They believe that consciousness originates from matter. They believe that space travel is bodily travel. They believe that past, presence and future are reality. They believe that the speed of light is the maximal speed, and at the same time they also believe however that entangled particles can exchange information over an endless long distance in zero time. They believe that matter is created by matter. They believe that spiritual things do not exist.

And this last mentioned belief of them that spiritual things are not there, is their fundamental mistake, because with it they exclude everything, about which life is all about in the first place and from which everything emerged and is preserved, and that then results in them having imprisoned themselves in their ghetto, and consider their tiny world of matter as the only one existing.

When one then has a look at this list, then one has the feeling that the list of the astronomers is probably much longer than that of the astrologers.

When you read your horoscope, the probability that that, what you read there, being true, is higher, than when you read the newest discoveries of the astronomers.

^ 183 When does the moon set? The moon does not set; the earth turns away from the moon.

And that is actually also not correct. Actually only the horizon, which you see, turns away from the moon.

^ 184 When the moon "sets," under which angle does it do it? With the sun we have said that that depends on the latitude; that this angle in Cairo, which lies on 30 degrees of latitude, on the 30th parallel, is also 30 degrees measured against the vertical, and consequently 60 degrees against the horizontal. In principle there should be no difference between sun and moon; the proof one proves best through own observations.

With the sun one can follow the shade of the sun, therefore put up a dot on the window pane, and mark the shade of the dot at two moments at least. But since one can look to the moon, one can also take a sight on it directly, therefore mark two dots on the window pane from a point having been fixed.

With the sun one can do this investigation only during the day, but with the moon at night and also during the day.

What then actually determines this angle? The object to be observed is far away and therefore stands as good as still, at least during the time of observation. What moves is the terrestrial globe. It turns around its own axis. Seen from the equator these objects rise vertically in the east and set vertically in the west, and at the poles they move horizontally. And in between in an angle between 90 degrees and zero degrees.

See The two angles.

^ 185 The sun one can only see during the day, but the moon during the day and at night. Why? That is because the day is determined through the sun. The moon does not determine the day.

The sun determines the day and also the night. The moon does not determine the day and also not the night.

The day is determined through the revolution of the sun around the earth, not the month. The month is determined through the revolution of the moon around the earth.

And since the moon does not determine the day, it can appear at night and also during the day.

The revolution of the moon around the earth is independent from the revolution of the sun around the earth.

The time the earth needs to once turn around itself determines the length of one day. The time the moon needs to once turn around the earth determines the length of one month. The duration which the earth needs to turn once around the sun determines the duration of one year.

These periods are relatively independent from each other and stand in no particular relationship to each other. A special condition is the relationship, which the moon has to earth; and that as a result of the moon always turning the same side to earth. That causes that the front of the moon quite distinctively distinguishes itself from the back; and that in various respects.

One cannot see the sun at night, because the word night defines that part of the 24 hour day, where the sun is below us and not above us. The moon one can see during the day and at night, because its revolution around the earth does not depend on the sun’s revolution, but on the revolution of the moon around the earth. But both, sun and moon, one can only see, when they are above us, not when they are below us.

See Moon where? und Moon when?.

^ 186 What is real space travel? See Finding intelligent beings and Going anywhere via OBEs.

On the webpage of the second link one reads the following: "Thus we saw and knew the other side of the moon before the NASA probes took their pictures."

And this kind of space travel, space travel to find intelligent beings, and to go anywhere via OBEs, is as old as mankind.

^ 187 When does the sun rise in the east and sets in the west? Equinoxes: 20th March and 23rd September.

With the curve, as it is described, among others, under the answer 104, one can determine the north direction, therefore where north or south is, and on the 20th March and on the 23rd September the east and the west direction. And that even simpler, when the sea forms the horizon, by simply marking the direction, where the sun comes up or goes down.

And then one can compare the won results and see, whether they are okay and how large are the deviations. One can check if the east west direction is perpendicular to the north south direction.

^ 188 In answer 176 it was said, "The change of phases from Mercury and Venus is on the other hand excellently to be pursued. With Venus sometimes even good binoculars are enough, with Mercury a telescope of about 5-7 cm opening."

What kinds of problems result from using binoculars?

One starts to employ technical equipment, buys and uses binoculars. To deal with technical devices can lead to a situation, where this activity becomes more important than the thinking about heavenly bodies and their movements and particularly about their purpose. These pieces of equipment and instruments become a kind of toys. Their handling can lead to a possession. It starts with binoculars, then a telescope is added, photographic equipment, and then carries on to employ rockets and institutions like Nasa emerge.

One relies on material things and not on the own higher self in oneself.

To go in for real astronomy we must not create for ourselves better possibilities to see with our outer eyes, but we must see into the inside, train our spiritual eye.

^ 189 Where is the full moon at midnight? High up in the sky.
^ 190 When we look at the picture to answer 144, then we see in the foreground the moon and in the background the earth. The moon is barren and empty; but the earth is full of life, colours and movement, movement of the masses of clouds. Spiritual writings tell us now that all heavenly bodies are inhabited. How does it now come that whenever we have a look at others, or look at photos of them, they look barren and empty? Because we look at them with our state of consciousness, or because we look at photos of them, which were made with cameras, which make photos, which show that, what our state of consciousness can see, "by the KACST-developed camera."

When we do not change our state of consciousness, or cannot change it, because our spiritual maturity does not allow it, then we cannot see that, what one can see at other states of consciousness. And that does not just apply to our life here I earth, but also for our life after that.

The following message coming from Bertha Dudde gives us information about this.

 

Reunion in the hereafter. Degree of maturity.

10. April 1952. B.D. NR. 5360.

There is for all a happy reunion in the spiritual kingdom, who leave earth life in a certain maturity and are therefore able to see with spiritual eyes, i.e. therefore: the good will see each other again, but the evil not so long, until they themselves have also changed and want to be good. A certain level of cognition is necessary that the beings can see each other, because also the complete loneliness, having to rely on oneself, is to have the first great educational effect that they think about their state so long until they have come to a result, where they can be helped further. Evil beings are indeed together with equal evil, but every being remains unrecognizable for the other. They only know one another by their acts as opponents and therefore always show enmity to each other. But those souls, which are still able to improve, which have departed without faith and still cannot be counted to the complete bad souls, must be brought to the cognition of their pitiable state to finally strive for a change of it, what then already means a step upwards. The loneliness torments such souls particularly, which long for their loved ones and cannot find them. But these can be close to them and want to help them, but they remain invisible for the immature souls, until they, after the change of their attitude, show their willingness to be enlightened. Then often their loved ones approach them, but still unrecognized. Only in a certain degree of maturity they are allowed to reveal their identity to the soul, and this is an unspeakable fortune, which is also always an incentive for the ascent for the souls, which now only recognize the reality of the spiritual kingdom and are willing to completely fit in the will of God. A reunion in the hereafter prematurely would insofar have a compulsorily effect on the beings as they now would have to believe in an after-life of the soul, while they themselves very often still have no knowledge of their own death, just believe to have been transferred to another area and therefore often rise up against their own fate. But through own thought they must come so far that they turn to Jesus Christ calling for help. And faith in him they must win themselves, when the knowledge about it is made accessible to them by beings willing to help. They must recognize their trouble, their powerlessness and also the way out – Jesus Christ, the divine redeemer. Only then so much light can be supplied to them that they themselves become seeing; but without this faith they are of dark spirit, and they recognize nothing than only an extreme hopeless deserted area, which they constantly walk through, in trouble and agony, for they live in want and suffer terribly, and they find no way out, until they take themselves to task and seek to change or also still sink deeper through defiant rising up against it and completely harden in their feelings. They are never forsaken by their loved ones, but according to divine law entry is denied to them so long until the soul longs upwards, until it wants an improvement of its situation and its thoughts become soft and requesting. Then help is granted to it from all sides, and it can climb up very fast and see again all its loved ones.

But an indescribable happiness is granted to those, who depart from this earth in light and over there find all their loved ones again, who have entered the spiritual kingdom before them.
(Continuation on the 15th of April 1952 Nr. 5365)
B.D. NR. 5360.

 

What one can see with other states of consciousness, we hear for example on the webpage, to which the following link leads:

Journey to a star.

When I am in my normal state of consciousness, then I see with my eyes. When I change over to my second most important state of consciousness, then I see, with dreaming, also with my eyes, but those are then not my outer eyes, but my inner eyes.

But these inner eyes I also use all the time in my first, the most important, state of consciousness. And that always then, when I imagine something. When I am at home and imagine my place of work, which is somewhere else, then I imagine something, and that I do with my inner eyes.

And that is the reason, why one can train his inner eyes by training this ability of imagining. One has a good look at an object, and then one closes the eyes, and perhaps turns around, and tries to have this object in front of his eyes in his imagination.

The dealing with different states of consciousness is therefore a quite normal matter.

Go to From man to angel and there have a look what Rudolf Steiner has to say. And also Body, soul and spirit.

I want to bring an example, what one can see in another state of consciousness:

"Partial separation of the ether body also takes place, when a member has gone to sleep. When for example the hand has gone to sleep, so the seer can observe, how the ether part, which corresponds to the hand, hangs out like a glove."

That comes from the book of Rudolf Steiner, a seer, with the title "Die Theosophie des Rosenkreuzers" and there from page 38.

^ 191 When does the waning half-moon rise? Midnight.
^ 192 When the sky above Earth is also black during the day, why is it then that, with sunshine and a clear sky, we see the sky light blue and not black? Because the earth has an atmosphere. If the earth would not have an atmosphere, then we would also see the sky black, so black, as one sees the sky from the moon, as a man in the moon or a camera on the moon would see it.
^ 193 When does the waxing half-moon stand high up in the sky? In the evening.
^ 194 I look out of the window and see the waning half-moon standing so on half the height in the west in the sky. What time is it? 9 o’clock in the morning.
^ 195 I look out of the window and see the waning half-moon standing in the west in the sky. What does this picture tell me? The moon points a little upwards. That tells me, where the sun is – a little higher than the moon.

This tells me that it is daytime.

The moon, the illuminated part of the moon, is visible, and that tells me that this moon crescent is brighter than the atmosphere.

The non-illuminated part of the moon is light blue, as the rest of the sky, and not black, as at night, and this tells me that this part of the moon is darker than the atmosphere - and that despite it being illuminated by the earth.

And this again tells me, that it is not really a part of the moon what I see there, but just the atmosphere in front of the moon.

I see no stars, and this tells me that the stars are darker than the atmosphere.

See Brightness.

Next to the moon I see clouds. The clouds have the same colour as the moon crescent – white. This tells me that the moon crescent is illuminated by the sun and that the clouds are illuminated by the sun – from below.

The round edge of the moon crescent I see quit sharply, the straight edge not sharp at all. This tells me that with the round edge the rays of the sun, at least in the middle, are hitting vertically. But with the straight edge tangential and therefore strongly emphasize every irregularity and therefore no clear edge results.

The moon is illuminated half. This shows me that the angle between earth, the moon and the sun is 90 degrees at the moon. And this tells me also that the earth and the moon have the same distance from the sun and that the moon in the next days now makes its way more and more between the sun and the earth, therefore approaches new moon.

See The earth-moon system

The straight edge of the half-moon is inclined and this inclination will increase, against the vertical, the more the setting of the moon approaches.

The moon setting will be midday.

^ 196 I go outside the door and see the waning moon standing in the east in the sky. What does this picture tell me? The moon points downwards. This tells me where the sun is – deeper than the moon.

And this tells me that it is night and indeed after midnight.

The straight edge of the moon is no longer a straight edge, but also already curved, for it is now two days after half-moon, after waning half-moon. Yesterday I also wanted to look out for the moon, but it was overcast.

The moon is now no longer next to the earth - seen from the sun. The earth and the moon now have no longer the same distance from the sun, but the moon is now closer to the sun and is no longer illuminated by the sun directly, seen from me, seen from earth, but more from behind, and this results that the straight edge has approached the round edge closer and is also curved and now the real moon crescent is shown.

And this former straight edge is inclined and this inclination gets smaller and smaller, the more morning is approached.

And the more the morning is approaching, the more the influence of the atmosphere appears, the atmosphere of the earth. The non-illuminated part of the moon changes from black to blue. When it is still black, then I see this black part of the moon unhindered through the atmosphere. The moon is far above the atmosphere and is not influenced by it. But the sun, the rays of the sun, start to influence the atmosphere. The atmosphere becomes a body, which molecules react to the light, and which now produce a blue sky and this blue sky brings about that those objects, which are weaker than the atmosphere in their illuminating power, are no longer seen. And the non-illuminated part of the moon belongs to this. At night I can see it, perhaps even that it is a little illuminated by the earth shine and is therefore not completely black, but stands out a little against the completely black surroundings. But then, during the day, I do not any longer see the non-illuminated part of the moon at all, but still only the blue atmosphere, and there where the non-illuminated part of the moon is, I only see the atmosphere, exactly so as at the rest of the sky. And only objects outside of the atmosphere are seen, which illuminating power is brighter than the atmosphere and that are the sun and the illuminated part of the moon and perhaps planets, which are close to earth.

At waning half-moon, which was two days ago, the situation is like the following. In the morning the sun is at the very bottom, at the horizon, in the east, and the moon at the very top, its culmination. In the morning, so at 9 o’clock, the sun is half up and the moon half down. And at midday the sun is at the very top, at its culmination, and the moon at the very bottom, at the horizon, in the West.

The line connecting the two points of the moon crescent is always perpendicular to the direction to the sun. The second line, from the centre of the first line to the sun, intersects the round edge of the moon at its thickest part of the moon crescent and gives the direction to the sun. And this direction changes all the time.

At sunrise the moon will have reached its culmination in the sky, and at midday it will set, and rise again at midnight.

These reflections apply to the waning half-moon and that was 2 days ago. But since the moon is about 50 minutes later every day, it is now, after 2 days, 1 hour and 40 minutes later. We had discussed this in question 31.

The more new moon is approached, the more the moon approaches the sun. The inclination of the line connecting the two points of the moon crescent to the vertical also approaches theoretically 90 degrees, is therefore horizontal, in the morning at sunrise; it then turns and is zero degrees at midday, therefore vertically, therefore when the moon is at the very top; and then turns further, until in the evening the moon is at the very bottom, therefore again horizontally, again 90 degrees.

^ 197 I go outside the door, 3 days after waning half-moon, and 5 days before new moon, and see the waning moon standing in the east in the sky. What does this picture tell me? The moon points downwards. The line between the two points of the moon crescent is horizontal. It is night, between mid-night and sunrise. The sky is black.

At sunrise the sky is already blue. The line between the two points of the moon crescent is no longer horizontal, but has already turned a little. This rotation will now increase during the day, until it is vertically and then again decrease.

^ 198 The time between sunrise and sunset is 12 hours at the equator - throughout the whole year. The time at the tropics is between 10.5 and 13.5 hours. The time outside of the Tropic varies still more and can be up to half a year long. Why does not the time between moonrise and moonset vary in the same degree? The time between sunrise and sunset is `determined by the seasons and by the rotation time of the earth around its own axis. The seasons result from the inclination of the axis of the earth. But this inclination of the axis of the earth does not influence the relationship of the earth to the moon. This time of the moon is determined through the orbit time of the earth around its own axis only, not through the inclination of this axis.

And therefore the time of the moon does not vary so as the time of the sun.

^ 199 I go outside the door, 4 days after waning half-moon, and 4 days before new moon, and see the waning moon standing in the east in the sky. What does this picture tell me? The moon points downwards. The line between the two points of the moon crescent is horizontal. It is night, between midnight and sunrise. The sky is black.

I also see the non-illuminated part of the moon quite well. It is illuminated by the earth, by the earth shine. In four days it will be new moon. And then it will be full earth at the same time, and that means that the earth will be fully illuminated by the sun, and can therefore reflect the light fully upon the moon. The earth shine will therefore increase in the next four days. When the talk is here about the full earth, then this refers to the situation for the man on the moon, exactly the same as the full-moon refers to the man on earth. For the man on the moon the earth shine will therefore increase in the next 4 days, only for the man on earth the earth shine upon the moon will indeed also increase, but at that moment as good as no longer be perceptible, when the moon crescent is no longer visible, because then it is difficult to find the moon at all in the sky, particularly during the day of course, but also at night.

I have just now gone once again outside, after I have written the preceding section, and I could now see the start of twilight at the horizon in the east. But there, where the moon is, therefore higher than the horizon, the sky is still completely black and that part of the moon, which is not illuminated by the sun, was still quite well visible. The atmosphere of the earth is therefore still as good as not influenced by the sun light and can therefore not out-shine the earth shine on the moon.

I have now gone outside the door the third time. The twilight had now already progressed. Above the horizon the sky was reddish. The whole sky already started to no longer be black, but blue, also in the west. The line between the two points of the moon crescent was no longer horizontal, but had started to turn. But that part of the moon, which is not illuminated by the sun, was still clearly visible. Between the moon and the horizon a star was seen, quite big. That is probably a planet, probably an inner planet.

I was outside a fourth time. The moon had again climbed higher and the crescent hat further turned hardly noticeably. But it had become a little hazy and got, as I looked up, hazier and even cloudy. The star I could in the beginning still see weakly, then no longer. The moon I could still see well in the beginning, but no longer that part not illuminate by the sun.

I was outside a fifth time. It was now the time of sunrise. But I could not see the sun. It was cloudy directly above the horizon; further above just a strip of clouds. The rest of the sky seemed to be a little hazy. But the star, which was still lower than the moon and still had the same distance from the moon, had now climbed higher above the horizon and could hardly be seen. The moon could be seen well, but no longer the part not illuminated by the sun.

I have now been outside the door a sixth time. The moon crescent could well be seen. It still seemed to be hazy. Suddenly I could see how the sun rose. But that was above the strip of clouds, which was close above the horizon. The star I could no longer see and of the moon also just the crescent, nothing further.

Seventh time. I have problems to see the screen. I was again outside and saw directly into the sun. And this causes now that I am a little blinded. It still seemed to be a little hazy. The moon was now on half height of its midday height. The line between the two points of the crescent was now more inclined, from the horizontal in direction to the vertical. Since I saw the moon and the sun at the same time, I also saw quit well that the moon was exactly lined up to the sun. The line between moon and sun went right through the centre of the two points of the moon crescent and the point of the edge of the moon, where the crescent is the thickest. The moon crescent was an arrow directed towards the sun.

Eighth time. I am again blinded. It is still a little hazy. I still could look directly into the sun. But when I wanted to see the moon, I had to hold the hand before the eyes to shield the sun. The moon crescent was only weakly seen.

Number nine: I was now again outside. It is hazy, but one cannot see into the sun. I sat in the shade and looked for the moon, but did not find it. At full moon the angle between moon and sun is 180 degrees, at half-moon 90 degrees and at new moon zero degrees, and between half-moon and new moon it should then be 45 degrees. But this also did not help me. One should sit in the centre of a glass sphere and mark the position of the sun and the moon on the shell of the glass sphere and then extrapolate the line of the course of the movement, where the new position is. When one is in an observatory, one could line up the telescope to that place, where the heavenly body must be, and then look for it there.

One could also take a small glass sphere, so of the size of a globe, and there fix a centre and then put up the marks on the surface of the shell of the sphere.

Still until the time of the setting of the moon I looked for it, but without success. The sky was relatively free from clouds, but still hazy.

^ 200 This morning the moon can still be seen. What has changed to yesterday? It is 5 days after waning half-moon and 3 days before new moon.

Also today it is a little hazy and strips of thin clouds are in the sky, but I can clearly see the moon and also the star below it. It is now closer to the moon, but also clearly to be seen, despite the sky already starting to get blue. Between the moon and the horizon, the sea, the sky is full of rosy dawn. The sun is almost vertically below the moon, but has not yet risen. The line between the two points of the now thinner crescent is almost horizontal.

The moon has therefore moved more into a position between the earth and the sun, but is still so far from the new moon position that a part of the moon, a thin crescent, is illuminated by the sun.

Moments later the sun rises, but the moon and the star I can no longer see, but that is because the clouds have increased.

Interesting in this connexion is that there is hardly any difference for the observer on the northern or the southern hemisphere with such almost simultaneous rising of the moon and the sun. The difference only becomes gradually clearer. And also only then properly, when one somehow records the moon and the sun position. For the observer in the north of the Tropic the direction of movement of the two or the three heavenly bodies goes to the right, and for the one in the south to the left.

For both observers is the direction, which the moon indicates, almost exactly vertically downwards, to the sun. For both the line between the two points of the moon crescent is almost horizontally.

The difference, which the moon offers in its image, whether the crescent is now on the left, as in the north, or whether the crescent is to the right, as in the south, only becomes more apparent in the course of the day, the more the line between the two points of the crescent turns from the horizontal to the vertical. North shows a right turning, the south a left turning.

This is the case with the waning moon.

What kind of question results from this?

^ 201 Zur nächsten Frage. 201 Zur nächsten Antwort. 201

 

^

 

This is the end of "1.4 Astronomical questions and answers, Part 4"
To the German version of this chapter: 1.4 Astronomische Fragen und Antworten, Teil 4

 

 

Previous webpage:                 1.3 Astronomical questions and answers, Part 3    
To the beginning of this webpage: Beginning
Next webpage:                     201

[Home]>[Miscellaneous]>[8. Astronomy]>[1. Astronomical questions and answers]>[1.4 Astronomical questions and answers, Part 4]

[Home] [How to Measure Your Beliefs] [The Man-Made Church] [Miscellaneous]

The address of this webpage is:
http://www.fpreuss.com/en3/en03/en030104.htm