Re: Androcles' and Henri's Theory of Diffraction Grating Behavior


"Rod Ryker" <rryker@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:d6f02$4349809d$d8442623$30506@xxxxxxxxxxx
|
|
| "Androcles" <Androcles@ MyPlace.org> wrote in
| message
| news:K_62f.11613$tS4.6957@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| >
| > "Rod Ryker" <rryker@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > news:248c4$434839e6$d84426ef$24516@xxxxxxxxxxx
| > |
| > |
| > | "Androcles" <Androcles@ MyPlace.org> wrote in
| > | message
| > |
| news:3XP1f.94810$RW.90039@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | >
| > | > "Jerry" <Cephalobus_alienus@xxxxxxxxxxx>
| wrote
| > | in message
| > | >
| > |
| news:1128774624.816332.163280@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | > | Henri Wilson wrote:
| > | > |
| > | > | > Jerry, we don't get many messages here
| from
| > | genuine females.
| > | > |
| > | > | I've noticed. The fake females in this
| > | newsgroup are
| > | > | for the most part SO obvious, expecially
| when
| > | they try
| > | > | to adopt "feminine" mannerisms.
| > | > |
| > | > | > Most of them are
| > | > | > males in disguise...that being a good
| way to
| > | avoid
| > | > | > excessive abuse....
| > | > |
| > | > | Uncle Al certainly has never hesitated
| with
| > | the abuse.
| > | > | Nor have Mike, NunYaBidness, Quantum
| Mirror
| > | etc.
| > | > | I've never spouted back, though. Well,
| almost
| > | never.
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > Hey, don't leave me out! I'll abuse any
| phuckwit
| > | regardless
| > | > of gender.
| > | >
| > | > |
| > | > | Traveler, though, has always been polite
| to
| > | me, even
| > | > | though he realizes that I disagree with
| almost
| > | everything
| > | > | he says. I would hope that his politeness
| has
| > | nothing to
| > | > | do with my gender, but rather because I've
| > | always been
| > | > | respectful in my disagreements.
| > | > |
| > | > | My characterization of Androcles as having
| > | given a "reasonably
| > | > | satisfactory demonstration of incompetent
| > | arrogance" -was-
| > | > | crossing the line, and I shouldn't have
| given
| > | in to the
| > | > | temptation of being able to insult under
| the
| > | safety of
| > | > | anonymity. I won't take my words back, but
| > | I -will- try not
| > | > | to give in to temptation in the future.
| > | >
| > | > Not hungry enough to eat them?
| > | > I'm very competent at arrogance, and I know
| when
| > | I'm right.
| > | > I've posted why a diffraction grating
| doesn't
| > | measure wavelength
| > | > to Ghost, if you are competent to read and
| > | understand then
| > | > you'll swallow your words and your hat for
| > | afters.
| > | > No, I'm not polite. This is about physics,
| not
| > | genuflecting, and I'm
| > | > competent at physics also, phuckwit.
| > | > |
| > | > | > However I notice that Androcles doesn't
| > | adjust his language
| > | > | > for the two genders.
| > | > |
| > | > | I hate hate hate HATE being patronized. So
| > | Androcles'
| > | > | language doesn't bother me.
| > | >
| > | > Good. You don't bother me either. If you
| want to
| > | learn, use
| > | > logic.
| > | >
| > | > |
| > | > | > He suffers from professional jealousy
| you
| > | know...because
| > | > | > MY variable star program is about 1
| billion
| > | time more
| > | > | > powerful than his.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Jerry, you ask a very legitimate
| question
| > | and one that I was
| > | > | > comtemplating just this very day. There
| is
| > | every reason to
| > | > | > believe that, according to the BaT, the
| > | distance between
| > | > | > 'wavepeaks' should remain constant,
| > | irrespective of relative
| > | > | > observer speed.
| > | >
| > | > Anyone that thinks different-sized
| newspapers
| > | come off a
| > | > printing press when the speed of the press
| > | changes has to be
| > | > has to be a complete lunatic.
| > | > The frequency at which newspapers are
| printed
| > | ranges from
| > | > one a day at start up to over a 1000 a
| minute,
| > | but they are all the
| > | > same length. Likewise when you run a paint
| > | roller over your
| > | > wall, the wavelength is pi * diameter of the
| > | roller. Both processes
| > | > are essentially the same.
| > | > Nor is that MY theory, oh arrogant
| incompetent
| > | one that will
| > | > not retract your statement.
| > | >
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > However, observed doppler shift SHOULD BE
| > | > | > dependent on relative observer speed.
| > | > | > So, on the surface, it would appear that
| > | gratings would not
| > | > | > detect doppler shift if the BaT was
| correct.
| > | One explanation
| > | > | > is that diffraction is frequency
| > | sensitive...whatever
| > | > | > 'frequency' implies. The fact that they
| DO
| > | and the BaT MUST
| > | > | > BE correct, promises to tell us
| something
| > | about the properties
| > | > | > and structure of 'photons' (if they
| exist).
| > | > | >
| > | > | > I am presently considering how
| extinction
| > | accounts for
| > | > | > anomalies in many variable star light
| > | curves. You see, if
| > | > | > light speed is unified by low density
| gases
| > | as it travels
| > | > | > through space, then radial velocities
| would
| > | also be unified
| > | > | > and negate the argument that extinction
| > | refutes DeSitter's
| > | > | > disproof of the Ritzian theory.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > I am now working on a model that
| > | accommodates all these
| > | > | > factors... but you will have to wait for
| it.
| > | > |
| > | > | A good starting point for you would be to
| see
| > | how Brecher
| > | > | analyzes the presumed effects of
| extinction on
| > | his data.
| > | > | http://imaginary_nematode.home.comcast.net
| > | > | You naturally would disagree with his
| > | conclusions.
| > | >
| > | > Looks to me (at a glance) that the author
| has
| > | some inkling
| > | > of what he's saying. Thanks for the
| reference, I
| > | shall read it.
| > | >
| > | > Henri (or Henry, he doesn't know how to
| spell
| > | his own name)
| > | > Wilson is listed at crank.net for his
| H-aether
| > | "theory",
| > | > which is where it belongs.
| > | > http://www.crank.net/relativity.html
| > | > refers to
| > | >
| http://www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/H-aether.htm
| > | >
| > | > Androcles
| > | >
| > | Rod: I like you and Henri and disagree
| sometimes,
| > | but that crank comment was very "THE DIRK!" of
| > | you.
| >
| > Perhaps, but I spent a great deal of time
| talking to Henri Wilson
| > who insists planets are to be called Wilson Cool
| Heavies,
| > no reasoned argument will persuade him
| otherwise.
| > I will not associate myself with such an
| egotistical "My Theory"
| > crank.
| >
|
| Rod: Ego is what it is Androcles. ;)
| But you and Henri have similar thoughts re
| the speed of light etc.
| I don't agree, and yet I respect very much
| the both of you. And I will not disrespect
| you as "THE DIRK!" does.
| You were too harsh on Henri A-man. :)

Harsh it has to be, planets are not called "Wilson Cool Heavies"
If Wilson will not relent...<shrug> I've offered to help, he
doesn't want it. Amen.

|
| > | Conquer and divide saith "THE DIRK!"
| >
| > I have no interest in anything the phuckwit
| moortel says.
| > If Henri Wilson wants to go it alone, I can't
| stop him.
|
| Rod: Exactly what I'm saying.
| "THE DIRK!" is nothing but a NG bully.
| He knows better, yet he discourages thought
| that disagrees with mainstream physics.
| Indeed, he hasn't the time nor the balls to stand
| up.
|
So why respond? <shrug again>




| >
| > | How many strings does "THE DIRK!" have on you
| > | and Henri now?
| >
| > I have no interest in the stooopid ***.
| >
| > | I however, am not bound by the strings of a
| JERK
| > | that JERK'S via "THE DIRK!"
| >
| > Ok... you are a free man, why are you interested
| in the arsehole?
|
| Rod: "THE DIRK!" cares about strength in numbers
| re opposition
| to mainstream physics. I am interested in keeping
| US from desolving.

I was never in solution. The way to handle moortel is to let
him scribble what he likes on his padded cell walls. All he wants
is attention, let him stew. Nobody seriously believes his crap,
or those that do are phuckwits anyway.

Androcles.

.

Quantcast