Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.
- From: "Jerry" <Cephalobus_alienus@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 30 Jul 2006 03:48:50 -0700
Sorcerer wrote:
Ok, right now there is a problem with my mind. My apologies, I
should not have said that. My granddaughter went ahead tonight
with her concert as scheduled and danced on stage. That in my
book is the right stuff. Alas, her mother could not be there, so I
went in her place to show my support and I was in a hurry.
That doesn't excuse me, I know, so all I can do is say I'm sorry.
The point is, neither H or myself are disputing empirical data.
We dispute the popular theory expounded by John Goodricke
in 1782 as to the CAUSE of the light curve. It doesn't matter that
you can fit your theoretical curve to the data, both Henri and I
can fit our respective and independent "theoretical" curves to the
same data.
The vector addition of velocities is an AXIOM, not a theory,
and is born out by Sagnac.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Sagnac/Sagnac.htm
Aether was a theory, and it was wrong. Time dilation cannot
explain the light curve of Algol (if you think it can, then produce
a computer simulation), there is no aether, hence the light curve
is as modelled by H and myself, and Algol is a "cepheid".
The difference in the curves is one of distance, eccentricity, period,
angle of inclination and longitude of periastron only.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Copernicus/A2C.gif
John Goodricke guessed and he got it wrong, he omitted c+v.
Another misfortune is Henri's propensity to create his own crackpot
theory of "velocity unification" as he calls it, to boost his own ego.
Henri omits the angle of inclination of the orbit to the line of sight,
so that he is compelled to assume this:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/unification.JPG
Henri's theory would indeed produce a luminosity curve but
no velocity curve, there is no doppler shift. Henri does not model
doppler.
| Also, don't you know the difference between a "light curve"
| and a "spectrum"?
Yes, of course I do, you are being facetious.
Let's stick to the facts, Tom and Jerry. (Are they not well-known
cartoon characters, Tom a cat and Jerry a mouse?)
Tom is the real first name of my brother. Jerry is my handle. My real
name is, like Jerry, gender-ambiguous. It never occurred to me about
the cartoon until you pointed it out to me.
| You've just demonstrated either an abysmal lack of reading
| comprehension, or a broken browser that picks up unrelated articles.
| Take your pick.
It was an abysmal lack of humour. I'm not my usual acid self
at this time, somehow I can't even work up a decent cuss or I'd
brow-beat you right back. Let's stick to the facts and forget
the one-up-manship, shall we?
| I prefer to think that your browser is acting up.
Yes, ok... vertvergon has the best grasp on physicists...
too much ego and not enough mathematics. You should heed his
words. You might heed Einstein's as well.
"Everything should be as simple as possible, but not simpler."
See if you can find a PHOTOGRAPH of the spectrum of Algol.
We'll compute the velocities from that. Good luck.
Nowadays all spectra are collected electronically. Due to the
difference in magnitude between primary and secondary, nobody had
succeeded in getting line spectra from the secondary until 1978.
Electronically collected data allows a degree of mathematical
analysis that is not possible with photographs.
We read from Tomkin and Lambert:
"In our search for the spectrum of the secondary, we had originally
looked for the Ca II infrared triplet lines... Secondary lines were
detected. However, all three Ca II lines are blended with Paschen
lines from the primary... the observed spectrum is complicated by
the presence of Algol C, which contributes Paschen lines and Ca II
lines of its own. There appears to be no reliable way to solve these
blending problems; therefore we chose to prosecute our investigation
via the Na D lines instead of the Ca II infrared triplet lines."
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?bibcode=1978ApJ...222L.119T
In the subsequent paragraphs, we learn that for limited periods of
phase between 0.0 to 0.5, they could resolve the 5896 A Na D line,
while for limited periods of phase between 0.5 to 1.0, they could
resolve the 5890 Na D line. To determine the phase shifts of these
lines more accurately than they could by attempting to measure their
peaks, they cross-correlated the D-line profiles with the D-lines
of another star of similar spectral class, a method of analysis they
had verified in studies of other ecipsing binaries as well as single
stars. The use of sophisticated statistical methods was essential to
their ability to generate the radial velocity curve in Figure 2.
I can go to the university library to look for more recent articles,
but I don't see getting much time until fall classes. It will be a
relief going to the library. The last few weeks have been rough at
work. I've been seeing too much death.
Jerry
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.
- From: Sorcerer
- Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.
- References:
- Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.
- From: Jerry
- Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.
- From: Jerry
- Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.
- From: Jerry
- Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.
- From: Paul B. Andersen
- Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.
- From: Jerry
- Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.
- From: Jerry
- Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.
- From: Sorcerer
- Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.
- From: Jerry
- Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.
- From: Sorcerer
- Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.
- Prev by Date: Re: Santa Claus, on the other hand, is real.
- Next by Date: Re: Evidences for the ether
- Previous by thread: Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.
- Next by thread: Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
