| Author |
| Posted on 2006-11-27 11:28:20 |
|
|
| laaran |
 |
 |
|
interested in a discussion about tide ?
I'd like to do it in the forum. Not as a private discussion.
It should be a discussion, that means you need to have an opinion before the discussion.
And try to understand the opinion of others (including mine :) ) during the discussion.
Also accept what I call an honest discussion. That means try to find which scientist was the one who "discovered" something. Not just repeat what we find in our books, try to really understand how the scientists were thinking about it.
Of course, maybe our books can help (I hope that books all around the earth don't tell exactly the same thing...).
Of course, questions are welcome. But questions are only questions. I am looking for a discussion, and this is something different (in my opinion).
Why about tide ? I like this subject. |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-11-29 06:30:12 |
|
|
|
|
what about tide ?
TIDE that move the sea
that is joy of any surfer...
I dont know but I believe that people going to the beach
just to see the tide to arrive in the sand and to run to the sea...
and my life is so empty now !!! |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-11-29 16:03:03 |
|
|
|
|
How can we really discuss about tide, if we are not scientists, which I´m not.
Don´t miss understand me, talking about the tide could be ok, like sharing our knowlidge, but how could we make disscusion when it´s all in facts.
For instance, I know that the tide is related to the movement of the moon and other planets.
Do you know. if there weren´t gient planets like Jupiter and Saturn there wouldn´t be us (Earth) and Moon and tide. |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-11-29 22:30:15 |
|
|
| laaran |
|
|
|
@wis
Waves are created by fishes.
And the waves of the best surf plots are created by big fishes, mainly sharks.
@Ninocka
but how could we make disscusion when it´s all in facts.
How can we really discuss about tide, if we are not scientists, which I´m not.
Your first sentence means that noone can have a discussion about tide. So being scientists would not help more.
I know that the tide is related to the movement of the moon and other planets.
Planets, no.
Sun and moon, yes.
If the sun and moon and eath stop moving, a lot of things would be different here. No more night and days, no more seasons, no more eclipse, no more crescent of the moon (rather, just one crescent, always the same)... |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-11-30 09:17:47 |
|
|
|
|
How come you are so interested in tide? |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-11-30 12:30:08 |
|
|
| laaran |
|
|
|
Because I like waves :)
A (subjective) history of "tide science" :
before 1600
Nothing. Nothing remains from this past.
from 1600 to 1700
Discoveries because scientists discovered mathematical laws which describe the influence of sun and moon.
Yet English and French scientists could not explain the tide along the English-French channel. That sounds so stupid. They could explain why the tide exists, but not it is real cycle in this small channel.
between 1700 and 1870
Not much, and nothing about this channel.
Measures, measures of tides in several places in the world. Europeans were discovering the world, and measured tide in many different countries.
A lot of work about far away, and little work about home...
since 1870
New discoveries. Now we can calculate the exact value of the tide in a place.
The history of "tide science" has big waves...
Now an evil point.
There are two great places to study the tides, in the muslim world :
- mediterranean sea between Tunisia and the North of Egypt. Along a East-West line.
- red sea. Along a North-South line.
I am pretty sure that muslims had science about that, and probably books.
What does remain from this ? Hum. Not much ?
I can compare to something else.
The first book of Kepler about optic (Astronomiae Pars Optica in
1604). This book is a good popularization of a muslim book. From an Iraki scientist, written in arabic.
Proof about this arabic book ? Tycho Brahe tells about this book.
Tycho Brahe is the scientist who invited Kepler in 1600 to Benátky (near Prague). They worked together for one year, and Kepler always said that he got much help from the works of Tycho Brahe.
Did Kepler want to lie ? Maybe, maybe not.
He didn't say about the arabic book ?
Kepler was in troubles with the Church because he was supporting Galileo. Do you think he needed more troubles ? |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-11-30 23:07:22 |
|
|
| -berlin- |
|
 |
|
thats interesting, the facts about muslim and christian history of science. i think you got a point there laaran, that can be used in general - lots of science has probably been copied from observations made a long time ago. but its not good you switched from tide to optics so quickly ;) |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-11-30 23:54:18 |
|
|
|
|
for a moment i thought this was going to be about detergent |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-12-01 02:03:31 |
|
|
| laaran |
|
|
|
@Mishto
Detergent-tide ? I don't understand.
You clean the sea before swimming ?
You want to use the tide to wash the floor of your kitchen ? Put some water in one corner, and watch it go slowly to the other side, and then come back to the original corner ?
@Berlin
lots of science has probably been copied from observations made a long time ago
Copied, yes and no.
Kepler copied. And some years later, applied this knowledge to explain the mystery of lenses. This was something new, and he published a second book about that.
We don't know why Kepler published the (first) book about optic. Because such knowledge was required for good quality observations ? And because he judged that astronomy was lacking observations in Northern latitudes ?
History of science forgets those who brings nothing new at all. It is not fair for those who are good teachers, but it is like that.
but its not good you switched from tide to optics so quickly ;)
Yes and no.
I needed to introduce the Middle East.
I don't care that much for the arabic books. It is probably important for the arabic populations, but these books are theirs, and they probably need no help to rediscover old books.
Why Middle East and not Atlantic ?
Tide in Atlantic... It is very pronounced (5 to 10 meters high). Every sailor there cares about tide, and sailors cared about tide already 1000 years ago.
But tide in atlantic are difficult to understand, because only one extremity of the tide (the Eastern one) was visible. We can easily watch the Western extremity (= USA) ... now, since 100-150 years only.
In the red sea, and in the mediterranean sea, tide are very small (less than 1 meter high), and sailors do not care for them. Interest for tide was probably shared only by scientists.
Why are these tide interesting ? Because scientists could and can watch easily the both extremities.
And better, in both cases, there is a 6 hours shift between the tide of each extremity. The tide at one extremity is the reverse of the tide at the other extremity. For example, when it is low tide in South red sea, it is high tide in North red sea ; 6 hours later, it is high tide in South red sea, and low tide in North red sea. |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-12-01 17:48:22 |
|
|
|
|
http://www.tide.com/countryselector.jsp
although all of your scenarios would be preferred over it. |
|
|
|