Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.


"Jerry" <Cephalobus_alienus@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1154518965.286237.137850@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| Sorcerer wrote:
| > "Jerry" <Cephalobus_alienus@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > news:1154352267.460071.295550@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
| > | The Chandra data cannot be dismissed.
| >
| > I'm not dismissing any data. The Lowell data cannot be dismissed.
| > http://ltpwww.gsfc.nasa.gov/tharsis/canals.html
| >
| > What are they seeing, if not a canal dug out by highly intelligent
| > red Martian lobsters and helped by bright green flying elephants
| > with a civilization more advanced than ours? It pretty obvious
| > that if we dug canals before we had railways the Martians would
| > have done the same.
|
| We are discussing electronically gathered data, not
| subjective visual interpretations.

This data was electronically gathered.
As you can clearly see, the straw is both bent and broken.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/straw.gif
I've used electronic means to distort the image and prove
that the straw really is objectively broken by taking out any
vague subjective impression you may have had that refraction has
anything to do with it. I do realise you are not too bright,
so I've added a star.

|
| The Chandra data cannot be dismissed. It shows an
| X-ray bright body whose estimated orbital parameters
| are the same as the orbital parameters of the secondary
| visible light body which shows up in optical spectra
| (except for being "pulled in" a little).
|
| >
| > | What are they measuring, if not an X-ray bright secondary which
| > | recedes then the primary is advancing, and advances when the
| > | primary is receding?
| >
| > They are seeing X-rays that are faster than visible light, from a
| > single source.
| > I mean, c'mon, a "dark star" that is brighter at higher frequencies?
| > Haven't you ever heard of the Rayleigh-Jeans law?
| >
| > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rayleigh-Jeans_law
|
| X-rays are emitted by the corona, which has a temperature
| of millions of degrees.
|
| Visible light is emitted by the photosphere.

Even if you are correct, what does that have to do with proving a
double star? The straw really is broken and bent, we know that because
light only has one speed (according to your blind faith) and I gathered
the data electronically. After all, we don't want to be subjective, do we?
We have to accept the electronically gathered data as it is in an
objective manner and conclude, because the light has one speed only,
that the straw is doubled.
Usually when people see double as you do I conclude they are drunk.


|
| > |
| > | READ THE PAPER.
| > |
| >
| > No. LEARN PHYSICS. I'm not interested in supposition, if a
| > star emits X-rays it is hot.
|
| The corona is hot.

Then it should emit visible light from somewhere between the hot
corona and the cold photosphere. Lots of it, that's a huge surface
area.

|
| The Sun's corona has a temperature of about 2 million degrees,
| much hotter than the photosphere.
|
| The Sun is an X-ray emitter. Only 1/1000 as bright as
| Algol B, but it still emits.

The Sun is a visible light emitter. Algol's supposed companion
is a full magnitude less bright than Algol, but it is bigger and it
is an accretion disk when it isn't blocking light from Algol, which
is why the Sun's asteroid belt is such an incredibly bright source
of X-rays. We know that light has one speed only, St. Einstein
the Divine said so.


|
| > X-rays were first produced from
| > cathode ray tubes by RAISING the anode voltage. Algol is hot,
| > and it is NOT occulted.
| >
| > If X-radiation is faster than visible light then it will arrive here out
| > of phase with the visible light, and it can still be in phase with IR.
|
| The X-rays are in phase with the optical spectrum of the
| secondary, which has been resolved from that of the primary.

And they travel at one speed only, that data has been electronically
gathered and St. Einstein the Prophet said so. Straws in glasses
of water really are broken. Why not have your head X-rayed
to see if anyone can find the rheostat for that dim lightbulb you
use for a brain and turn it up a notch?




|
| > Haven't you heard of racing cars being lapped?
| > If you can't see the whole race the winner is first over the line,
| > even if it completed 1 lap less than the car following.
| >
| > _____) _____) _____) _____) _____) _____) _____) IR
| > _______|_______|_______|_______|_______|_______| Visible
| > __________!__________!__________!__________! UV
| >
| > Algol
<--------------------------x-------------------------------->Earth
| >
| > The race between UV photons, IR photons and visible photons
| > is continuous and you can't know during which lap they left Algol.
| > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Wendy/Wendy.gif
| > This whole concept of one speed only is totally ridiculous, based on
| > aether.
|
| Except that this hypothesis matches observed fact.
|
Yes, it is an observed fact that straws in water are broken,
an observed fact Algol is really a double with a B8 primary and a
K2 accretion disk and an observed fact that Tom and Jerry do
not know what "objective" means.




| > How come you have a deeper secondary minimum in IR
| > in this obviously contrived chart that YOU referred to?
| > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Algolagain.JPG
| > The dark star emits more UV and more IR than visible light?
| > NONSENSE! It's another Martian canal, seeing things that are not there.
| > You are hallucinating. You are not alone, there are many just as
| > crazy as you. Andersen wants the B8 star eclipsed by a K2 accretion
| > disk. He's totally cuckoo, like all dumb relativists and aetherialists.
| > "But the two stars of Algol have different mass, radius and density, and
the
| > B8 is well outside of the Roche limit of the K2, while the K2 is just at
the
| > Roche limit of the B8. That is, the K2 fills its Roche lobe completely,
and
| > mass is transferred to the B8. So the K2 IS torn apart and there is an
| > accretion disk around the B8 akin to the rings of Saturn. (This
accretion
| > disk is not stable, though. It is a transient disk; the mass transferred
| > from the K2 bounces off the surface of the B8 and eventually falls back
to
| > the surface.) "- Andersen
|
| Jerry

No answer, Jeery?
Androcles.




.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.
    ... |> I'm not dismissing any data. ... | visible light body which shows up in optical spectra ... | X-rays are emitted by the corona, ... is a full magnitude less bright than Algol, but it is bigger and it ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Your own personal black hole?
    ... than visible light and I've done a lot of analysis on light speed. ... and x-rays, or indeed any comparison of emr transit time vs. ... My sides are hurting from laughing too much. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Your own personal black hole?
    ... than visible light and I've done a lot of analysis on light speed. ... and x-rays, or indeed any comparison of emr transit time vs. ... light rays - no?As the sun sets the x-rays are cut off before the visible, ... trailing edge be redder - you agree?HAHAHAHA! ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.
    ... that if we dug canals before we had railways the Martians would ... visible light body which shows up in optical spectra ... I mean, c'mon, a "dark star" that is brighter at higher frequencies? ... star emits X-rays it is hot. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.
    ... hardly is observable in visible light while it is very ... The parameters of the Algol binary are found by ... A eclipses B: 26 ... Observation of the secondary minimum at 10um can be found in: ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Quantcast