mirrored file at http://SaturnianCosmology.Org/ 
For complete access to all the files of this collection
	see http://SaturnianCosmology.org/search.php 
==========================================================
polar configuration offset

In posting [1]news:dtalbott.839350180 at kelly , [2]dtalbott at teleport.com
(David N. Talbott) had this to say in response to a point by Leroy
Ellenberger:

[Ellengerger:]
"Due to parallax, in the polar configuration' (PC) Venus would
NEVER be centered on Saturn as seen from latitude 45 degrees, but
would be distinctly off center, unlike the sun-in-circle symbols which
resemble ordinary lunar and solar halos.

[Talbott:]
Not just wrong, but very strange.  In three dimensional renderings that
put Venus close enough to Saturn to provide a general correspondence
with the pictographic motifs, the observer will not even notice the
displacement of Venus from center--Saturn is so much bigger than
Venus.  What will be noticed is the slight displacement of *Mars*
from the visual center, due to its juxtaposition with Venus, which
appears as a narrow band around Mars, therefore emphasizing the
visual displacement.  Because Mars is so small, a viewer at the 45th
parallel will see "over" Mars a bit, so that it will appear in a position
slightly lower than perfect center.  It is the small size of Mars that
permits the planet to visually descend from the center as it approaches
the Earth, even dropping below Saturn without ever departing from the
polar axis, thus fulfilling its role as the hero descending to the
underworld.   In fact, let's be honest about it.  The degree to which the
actual sizes of the participating planets enable the line-up to present
the required images is astonishing--a one in a thousand proposition if
you will think about it.

Let's reproduce the image, and see how Ellenberger's and Talbott's
claims tally up. For the image reproduction methods I use, see a
[3]previous such reconstruction of the polar configuration image on
the [4]Aeon home page.

I've reproduced the saturn-and-venus-only image as from the pole, the
saturn-and-venus-only image as from 45 degrees, and the
saturn-venus-mars image from 45 degrees.

[5]sv90 [6]sv45 [7]svm45 

I think the images speak for themselves, more or less. In my opinion,
Talbott's position is a bit dismissive of a real problem with the
polar configuration or "saturn thesis". True, the images from 45
degrees are still striking, but the offsets and asymmetry are also
quite noticeable, and are more of a problem, even just the venus
offset, than Talbott seems willing to admit.
_________________________________________________________________

[8][home] [9][mail throopw at sheol.org] 
Last edited Fri Aug 9 14:50:04 1996 - Last generated Fri Aug 9
14:50:06 1996

References

1. news:dtalbott.839350180 at kelly
2. mailto:dtallbott at teleport.com
3. http://sheol.org/throopw/aeonHome-image-analysis.html
4. http://www.ames.net/aeon/
5. http://sheol.org/throopw/polar-sv90.gif
6. http://sheol.org/throopw/polar-sv45.gif
7. http://sheol.org/throopw/polar-svm45.gif
8. http://sheol.org/throopw/index.html
9. mailto:throopw at sheol.org