Re: Photon bend another photon


"Henri Wilson" <HW@..> wrote in message
news:l3qvf29l7mv4ufkp2g8d22o45c1t3h9vul@xxxxxxxxxx
| On Wed, 06 Sep 2006 10:26:34 GMT, "Sorcerer"
<Headmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
| wrote:
|
| >
| >"Henri Wilson" <HW@..> wrote in message
| >news:e9nsf25ah9dcohkj97vhr7je95541bp7ai@xxxxxxxxxx
|
| >| >| of such a contact binary rotate very rapidly in spite of their old
ages
| >| >(vsin i
| >| >| ~ 100-200 kms/s)
| >| >
| >| >
| >| >Hmm... What does vsin i mean, H?
| >|
| >| I assume that's what we observe. The unknown pitch angle is i.
| >
| >You are good at assuming, aren't you?
| >Actually pitch is 90-i, cos(pitch) = sin(inclination). Wrong again,
Wilson.
|
| these people obviously define zero pitch as face on.

Yes, that is so. Spiritualists think the celestial plane is a surface
where you live after you are dead, it is a level surface on which
heaven sits and you need wings to overcome gravity, like angels.
http://wilber.shambhala.com/html/misc/habermas/appendix1.cfm/

Astronomers see it as tangential to the celestial sphere, orthogonal
to the line of sight.
http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect/celestial/celestial.gif



|
| >| >Is that the sine of the inclination to the celestial plane, by any
| >chance?
| >| >That's included in the data, and how can you find the inclination of
| >| >a point source?
| >|
| >| I don't have to.
| >
| >So you assume. Wrong again, Wilson.
|

CRAP:
| I'm not wrong...never am...
|
| Take any elliptical orbit in space. Rotate your 'ead until a perpendicular
to
| your LOS lies in the orbit plane. ..or is that too hard for an engineer?
| Now, you can rotate the ellipse around that axis and all the peripheral
| velocity components in your direction will be multiplied by the same cos
| factor.
|
| What is observed by those gentlemen who spend all night gazing down
telescopes
| and measuring star spectra is the edge-on' peripheral velocity times cose
| pitch, which is unkown and which doesn;'t have to be known in order than
MY
| program will produce the right kind of brightness curve for any star.
|
/CRAP

Wrong again, Wilson. That is ROLL.
Pitch, Roll, Yaw.
You can leave out roll, you cannot leave out pitch.

Why would I rotate my head with one of these, fuckhead?
http://www.starizona.com/basics/basics/nwtoptic.jpg

That is FAR too hard for a fuckwit physicist, but astronomers can manage it.


| Your program includes a 'cheat factor' which allows you to vary the pitch
at
| will to produce the right answer.

Yes, it does. Real orbits are inclined. v sin i, remember, SHITHEAD?



| >| >| as a result of spin-orbit synchronisation due to strong tidal
| >| >| interactions between the stars. W UMa stars are very common,
comprising
| >| >some
| >| >| 95% of eclipsing binary variables in the solar neighbourhood, or one
| >star
| >| >in
| >| >| every 1000 - 2000 in the same spectral range (Eggen, 1967).
| >| >| "
| >| >
| >| >Amazing. Up to times the speed of Earth in its orbit.
| >| >So light from very common W Uma stars travels at 1.001c and
| >| >0.999c, critical distance where fast light passes slow is what, H?
| >|
| >| c= 1LY /year
| >| D/1.001 + period/2=(D/0.999)
| >| Let period = 1 day
| >|
| >| D=250/365
| >|
| >| ~0.7 LYs.
| >|
| >| But it doesn't happen like that.
| >|
| >| Magnitude changes are only of the order of 0.5 or so at those kinds of
| >| distances.
| >
| >That's a good one.
|
| Of course. It's true..

True that you are full of ***.

|
| >You see my flashlight through a telescope, I turn it off and
| >on again.
| >"Delta magnitude is a function of distance" -- FUCKHEAD Wilson.
| >
| >HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
|
| What the *** are you talking about now?

Nothing you'd understand, you are too stupid.
I'll try again.
I am on a hill 20 miles away from you.
I have a flashlight.
You have a telescope.
You see the flashlight.
You measure its magnitude.
It's magnitude is 0.
I turn the flashlight off.
What is its magnitude now?
I come down off the hill and
shove the flashlight in you face.
I turn the flashlight on.
What is its magnitude now?
I turn you upside down (you are anyway).
What did that do the brightness of the
flashlight?
I rotate the flashlight away from you.
What is its magnitude now?

|
| >| WHY ?
| >|
| >| UNIFICATION OF COURSE!!!!!!
| >
| >
| >Produce the spectrum and PROVE IT!
|
| The spectrum is part of the known data, fuckhead engineer.

Produce it and find vspectrum, then tell me what vsprectum sin i is.
200-300 km/sec = vspectrum / sin i, REAL ORBITS ARE INCLINED
AND MORE THAN ~0.3 LY AWAY, YOU FUCKING STUPID
MORON!



|
| >| >Y'know, contact soap bubbles are gas filled, usually air, and there
| >| >is a planar membrane between them. When that membrane
| >| >breaks, we get a larger spherical bubble.
| >| >As a brilliant physicist, perhaps you can tell this stupid old pommie
| >| >engineer what the membrane between contact stars is made of?
| >|
| >| I can't see anything wrong with two small stars orbiting each other
every
| >half
| >| day.
| >
| >You can't see anything, you have no telescope and not even HST
| >could resolve contact stars.
| >
| >You did not answer my question:
| >As a FUCKHEAD physicist, perhaps you can tell this BRILLIANT
| >old pommie engineer what the membrane between
| >************ CONTACT ********* stars is made of, ***-FOR-BRAINS?
|
| I don't fucking know.


No, of course you don't, you are not even a physicist.


| All I know is that frequent observations of point sources reveal doppler
shifts
| that suggest a binary pair is responsible.

PHYSICS says a contact binary is NOT possible, so whatever
observations might suggest, the theory of close binaries is FUCKED,
and YOU are supposed to be a physicist.


The brightness of the point varies
| by maybe 0.5 to 1 magnitudes with a constancy that I reckon MUST be
associated
| with an orbit.

Ok...

| Astronomers make fools of themselves trying to explain variable
| such stars using Einsteiniana.

Ok...



| YOU make a fool of yourself even without it...

As a FUCKHEAD physicist, perhaps you can tell this BRILLIANT
old pommie engineer what the membrane between
******* CONTACT ******* stars is made of, ***-FOR-BRAINS?
|
| "I don't fucking know." -- Wilson.

That was a physics question, wabo. You should know.

Yes, there IS an orbit involved, it looks like this:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Algol/Barycentre.gif,
slightly tilted.
Rotate your dumbell any way you like, it ain't gonna change.

That is planet "Androcles" which you call a "Wilson Cool Heavy"
because you head is a dumbell with 0.7 LY between the ears and
a full light year from crown to nose, you fucking bigheaded ***.

There is a small velocity component toward your eye
that looks exactly like v sin i for this:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Algol/AlgolOrbit.gif
which is unifuckation Einsteiniana!



| >| >| >
| >| >| >Distance = speed * time
| >| >| >
| >| >| >d1 = (c-v) * (t+0.5)
| >| >| >d2 = (c+v) * t
| >| >| >d1 = d2
| >| >| >
| >| >| >(c-v) * (t+0.5) = (c+v) * t
| >| >| >0.9999 *(t+0.5) = 1.0001 *t
| >| >| >t = 0.9999 *(t+0.5) / 1.0001
| >| >| > = 0.9998 (t+0.5)
| >| >| > = 0.9998t + 0.9998 * 0.5
| >| >| > t- 0.9998t = 0.4999
| >| >| > t (1-0.9998) = 0.4999
| >| >| > t = 0.4999/ 0.00019998
| >| >| > = about 2500 years, distance 767 parsecs
| >| >|
| >| >| I notice you calculate for the edge-on orbit.
| >| >
| >| >Of course! If you viewed Earth from Polaris
| >| >then you'd see it face on and there would be
| >| >no critical distance in our galaxy.
| >| >
| >| >W Uma has to be edge on, it's a contact binary
| >| >with a membrane between the halves to keep the
| >| >plasma separated. p = 0.003 years (about 1 day):
| >| >0.999 *(t+0.003) = 1.001 *t
| >| >
| >| >Which is ... not even up the street, more like next door.
| >| >That's some pretty good unifuckating.
| >|
| >
| >
| >| It's like a dumbell.
| >
| >That is your big head. Dumb and empty, ~0.7 LY between the ears,
| > eccentricity enormous, matches ego.
|
| *** off.

Fucking Einsteinian dumbell.

Wilson's Wobbly Worbits are wedge on and 0.3 LY away, so
he invents unifuckation.
Astronomers say v sin i.




|
| >| >| You haven't got a clue.
| >| >| You don't even know what I am talking about.
| >| >| I didn't say the light will catch up in 0.3 Lyears.
| >| >
| >| >W Uma will. That definitely needs a some serious unifuckating.
| >|
| >| Light from all stars unificates in as very short distance.
| >
| >Then you should see the spectrum without any shift, FUCKHEAD.
|
| I HAVE EXPLAINED WHY THAT IS NOT TRUE. PLEASE DON'T REPEAT YOUR
NONSENSICAL
| CLAIM.
| NORMAL DOPPLER SHIFTS WILL STILL BE OBSERVED UNDER MY UNIFICATION THEORY.

Fucking Einsteinian dumbell.

Wilson's Wobbly Worbits are wedge on and 0.3 LY away, so
he invents unifuckation.
Astronomers say v sin i, real orbits are tilted.


|
| >| >| distance.
|
| >|
| >| I laugh at YOU often enough.
| >| So does everyone else here.
| >| They take ME seriously....because they know MY theories are a genuine
| >threat to
| >| their religion.
| >
| >" Androcles, your animations and explanations are brilliant. I can see
| > why your opponents try to vilify you. They have no arguments and cannot
| > rebut you. " --| Peter Riedt
|
| Never 'eard of 'im....

"Peri of Pera" is the pseudonym of Peter Riedt. He's more of a lurker
than a contributor, but he's smart. Certainly smarter than you, dumbell.
In your dreams they take you seriously.
I took you seriously when you came up with Wilson time because
I hadn't seen it myself, it was the only thing that made any sense.
This unifuckation Einsteiniana wipes that out.



|
| >| YOU don't even believe your own theories. You have to make excuses as
to
| >why
| >| your car's odometer reads zero. ..when you know it hasn't traveled any
| >distance
| >| becasue you always return it to the same place. HoHohahahaha!
|
| >
| >Show us the spectrum, FUCKHEAD.
|
| I feed in the spectrum..you fucking stoopid old pommie engineer...

Wilson's Wobbly Worbits are wedge on and 0.3 LY away, so
he invents unifuckation.
Astronomers say v sin i, real orbits are tilted.

|
| >| >| Of course. Einstein said so....
| >| >|
| >| >| >
| >| >| >If you drive across Australia at 70 mph and I leave Sydney
| >| >| >an hour later at 75 mph, I'll catch up at 1050 miles and 15 hours
| >later,
| >| >| >beat you to Alice Springs and no cop is going to complain at me
| >| >| >going 5 mph faster than you. Unifuckation my arse.
| >| >| >Get a fucking grip on reality!
| >| >|
| >| >| Unfortunately, your theory doesn't work. All your orbits have to be
| >face
| >| >on.
| >| >| ...which is a joke, surely.
| >| >| My explanation, on the other hand, is pretty consistent with
| >observation.
| >| >
| >| >Oh, do *** off. You have to be the least competent mathematician
| >| >in history.
| >|
| >| What's the pitch of a point source, A?
| >
| >Nearly 90 degrees
|
| Very good! Was that a guess?
|
| >| What is vsin(i)
| >
| >See the spectrum.
| bulll

Wilson's Wobbly Worbits are wedge on and 0.3 LY away, so
he invents unifuckation.
Astronomers say v sin i, real orbits are tilted.

Androcles


.

Quantcast