Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.


"Jerry" <Cephalobus_alienus@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1154256530.162070.85340@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| 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.

I've known a Geri (Geraldine), and a Gerald that went by Jerry. Oh well,
it's not important, a name is what you are known by. My brother-in-law
once wrote to the newsgroup and because he shared my views it was
said "It's Androcles", it being a popular pastime among the less literate
to use multiple pseudonyms, hence the incorrect assumption.
You seem to be more concerned about your personal identity than
physics. I'd say that I wonder why if I did, but it is a matter of no
consequence to me who or what you are.


|
| > | 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.


Please don't try to con a retired electronic engineer. You might believe
any garbage you read, but I don't.
Since the supposed "secondary" is at the same point in the sky as
Algol, not even the finest electronics will discriminate the difference.
There can be but one spectrum, and it must contain spectral line splitting
as one star recedes whilst the other approaches, the pair revolving
around a barycentre.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/AlgolOrbit.gif
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Algol%20velocity.JPG

The maximum separation of the supposed pair is
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/AlgolEclipse.JPG

Just look at all the binaries you've missed because the orbit isn't fully
edge-on.

Algol B is yet another canal on Mars that Lowell observed and
drew sketches of.
http://ltpwww.gsfc.nasa.gov/tharsis/canals.html
In other words, imagination.



|
| 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 other words, he's got zilch. Algol is not a binary.



|
| 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

You are now looking at the death of Einstein's junk and the
rebirth of REAL physics and astronomy.
You can't see the forest for the trees with Goodricke's garbage.
Algol B is as real as a canal on Mars.
Polaris is reckoned to be a cepheid. Actually it is a quite ordinary
star, orbited by the planet "Wendy".

http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Wendy/Wendy.htm

I found it, I named it.


Der alte Hexenmeister ist:
Sorcerer Androcles Dumbledore, Headmaster, hogwarts.physics
school for zauberlehrlings.
"One muggle's magic is another sorcerer's engineering"

http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/




.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.
    ... you can fit your theoretical curve to the data, ... theory of "velocity unification" as he calls it, ... Tom and Jerry. ... See if you can find a PHOTOGRAPH of the spectrum of Algol. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.
    ... |> Algol, not even the finest electronics will discriminate the difference. ... |> There can be but one spectrum, and it must contain spectral line ... |> as one star recedes whilst the other approaches, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Perihelion of Mercury question
    ... |>|>| the blue curve shows the radial velocities at the source. ... |>| You haven't graphed the subtle difference between the velocity curves observed ... I'm exasperated by your fucking nonsense. ... There is only one velocity curve, the set you see is the spectrum. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.
    ... | Sorcerer wrote: ... |> Algol, not even the finest electronics will discriminate the difference. ... |> There can be but one spectrum, and it must contain spectral line ... It's another canal on Mars. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Perihelion of Mercury question
    ... it's taken you until 2007 to produce a velocity curve ... |>There is only one velocity curve, the set you see is the spectrum. ... |>| time interval to the elements of an array in order to obtain our brightness ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)