Re: Time Dilation disappears

On Nov 29, 2:56 pm, hw@..(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 05:47:07 -0800 (PST), Jerry
<Cephalobus_alie...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 25, 8:59 am, Jürgen Clade <cl...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

How can a variable star curve provide a test of Lorentz invariance vs.
Galileo invariance?

Briefly, Henri believes that variable stars result from faster
light periodically overtaking slower light from different parts
of a binary star's orbit.

Correction. It never actually overtakes. It just bunches up and separates.....so
the star appears to vary in brightness.

Henri's only so-called "successful fits" to variable star data
have come from fits to (1) time-averaged Cepheid variable star
curves measured in a single wavelength band, (2) algol-type
eclipsing binary curves measured in a single wavelength band.
http://www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/group1.jpg

Henri is unable to fit Cepheid time-series data, nor can he
account for multi-spectral measurements of pulsating or eclipsing
variables.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
FACT:
Henri has not succeeded in matching the time-series luminosity
curve of ANY variable star!!!

Many light curves are a result of the presence of multiple planetry systems.
The mother star's orbit around the barycentre of its solar system is often a
complicated mixture of several frequencies. The result is a brightness curve
that appears to have 'beats', which it effectively does have. There are many
stars that exhibit this kind of brightness variation.
The curves of Cepheids, on the other hand possess only overtones of the
fundamental. The 'c+v' velocity components of pulsating Cepheids are typically
similar to the movement of a star in elliptical orbit with eccentricity around
2-3 and major axis angled at about 135deg.

Henri has at best ONLY matched SINGLE CYCLES of the light curve
of a pulsator and/or time-averaged curves. Over multiple cycles,
the luminosity curves of pulsators show period noise and
amplitude noise.

In his web page, Henri displayed his fits for R Drac and S Urs at
a tiny scale so as to hide the deviations between his program's
fits and the actual data.

Anyone including you is free to use my program at any time. It is on my
website. All you have to do is copy any light curve into a folder on your
computer c:/testcurves and call it 'curve1.jpg'. You can them import it into my
program and adjust the scales and parameter values till you get a match.

Uh, sure Henri...
Consider your fit to S Umi, which you mistakenly designate "S Urs".
(Remember that there are TWO bears in the northern hemisphere...)
You wrote:
"In the case of the curve for S Urs, the main feature is a
noticeable dip just before the peak. Such a dip appears quite
frequently in the curves shown on the britastro website..
I had trouble reproducing that type of curve until I included a
smaller star (or group of asteroids?) in the same orbit but
positioned at the stable 60 degree Lagrange point. I have named
that star 'Wilsonius'"
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/8e1e6afb4f76b852

Henri, there are a lot of basic facts about the three-body
problem of which you are obviously totally ignorant. Take, for
instance, your placement of large "planets" at the stable
Lagrange points of your binaries. The Lagrange points, stable and
unstable, arise from solution of the "restricted" three body
problem, i.e. the third body must be of negligible mass compared
with the two major bodies.

As soon as you make your third body non-negligible in mass such
that it exerts significant perturbation on the other two masses,
the system becomes chaotic and the Lagrange points, stable and
unstable, disappear.

The vast majority of starting configurations are unstable. The
usual result is that after a relatively short period of time, one
of the masses "slingshots" around another and becomes ejected
from the system.

Are too scared to do it? Are you afraid of having to admit to a lifetime of
self-delusion?

Consider the luminosity curve of S Cas, which Henri matched
(poorly) over two cycles on his web page.

Henri failed to meet a challenge to fit the ENTIRE curve from
1921 to 2000 with a single set of parameters.
http://www.britastro.org/vss/gifl/00064.gif

You are obviously becoming quite desperate....a sure sign that you are starting
to realise I am correct.

I note that you still have not attempted to meet this challenge.

The plain fact of the matter is that he CAN'T.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
FACT:
Henri has only matched the light curve of Algol-type binaries
AT A SINGLE WAVELENGTH. BaTh predicts the same light curve for
Algol in IR, visible, and X-rays. In reality, the light curves
are dramatically different when measured at different wavelengths.
http://www.astro.psu.edu/~mrichards/research/journey.html

There now is good reason to believe that EM speed wrt its source is slightly
energy dependent.
That will result in different light curves.

Indeed, satellite observations have shown practically no
variability in Algol's luminosity at X-ray wavelengths.

Algol's X-ray spectrum shows Doppler shifts which are 180 degrees
out of phase with the Doppler shifts measured in visible light
(the visible light spectrum being dominated by that of the
primary), but which are completely in phase with the absorption
lines of the secondary which have been resolved.

BaTh has FAILED even at the single task in which Henri claims it
has succeeded.

If you cared to properly examine the full rammifications of BaTh you would
achieve a lot more than by raving like an indoctrinated old fool.

No meaningful comment, Henri? Reduced to mere insults?

-----------------------------------------------------------------
FACT:
The mean periods of pulsating stars show secular changes in
length that, in the case of Cepheids, amounts to an increase or
decrease of mean period by seconds per year. They also exhibit
"period noise" which, in the case of Cepheids, means the interval
from one peak to another varies randomly by amounts up to a good
fraction of an hour. Other pulsator types, such as Mira variables,
show far greater period variability. This is a well-documented
phenomenon.
http://www.aavso.org/publications/journal/v26n2/turner.pdf
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?bibcode=1983Ap&SS..96...185S
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?bibcode=1981AJ.....86.1870S

BaTh provides no plausible mechanism to explain these changes.

Szabados wrote: "In spite of the fact that the Cepheids pulsate
quite regularly their pulsation period remains constant only in
the first approximation. These variables (as well as other
pulsating stars) spend only a tiny part of their lifetime in the
instability strip of the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram.... These
variations of individual Cepheids do indicate, however, that the
observed period variation is mainly due to stellar evolution, at
least in the case of the rapidly evolving long period Cepheids..."
http://www.springerlink.com/content/h886030t157508gq/
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1984IAUS..105..445S

There are quite a number of examples of Cepheids "suddenly"
changing their behavior. RU Cam is a classic example. RU Cam was
discovered to be a variable in 1907. From 1907 to 1965, its
behavior was that of a classic Cepheid variable. In 1965, the
amplitude of its pulsations began to decrease, and its period
became irregular.
http://www.aavso.org/observing/programs/pep/pepnewsletter/may1998/main.shtml#rucam

Polaris provides another example:
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdf/10.1086/338583

No comment, Henri?

-----------------------------------------------------------------
FACT:
Changes in size of Cepheid variables have been directly measured:

"Thanks to the very high spatial resolution of the VLTI
interferometer, a team of french astronomers led by Pierre
Kervella from Paris Observatory, has measured directly the change
of size of four Cepheids, during their pulsation cycle. The mean
size of three other stars was also measured. By combining these
observations with spectroscopic measurements of radial velocity,
it was then possible to measure precisely the distances in a
quasi-geometrical way, and thus to calibrate the zero point of
the empirical Period-Luminosity relation of Cepheids. These
observations are an important sterp forwards an independent
verification of the extragalactic distance scale by
interferometry.
http://www.obspm.fr/actual/nouvelle/oct04/cep.en.shtml

No comment, Henri?

-----------------------------------------------------------------
FACT:
BaTh cannot explain the wavelength-dependent shape and phasing
of Cepheid luminosity curves.

How would YOU know? You're just an narrow minded, indoctrinated old fart.

No success in duplicating the wavelength-dependent shape and phasing
of Cepheid luminosity curves, Henri? Reduced to mere insults?

Consider the dramatic differences seen in the luminosity curves
of HV12198 measured in the V and K bands:
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0003213

The K luminosity curve peaks at about a 105 degree lag relative
to the V luminosity peak. There is nothing in BaTh that can
explain the difference in phasing between the luminosity curves
of light in the greenish-yellow V band versus light in the
infrared K band.

HV 12198 is by no means unique. ALL Cepheids that have been
studied show marked color changes during their cycle.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

The above are merely the tip of the iceberg. Henri's Bath fails
practically every observational and experimental test.

I actually feel very sorry for all those poor astrophysicists like you who are
being totally mislead by the strange notion that all starlight in the universe
was specifically designed to travel to little planet Earth at the same speed c.
The whole idea is ludicrous. Earth wasn't even in existence when much of the
light was emitted.
Does Jerry believe in fairies I wonder?

Jerry
Henri Wilson's Lies
http://mysite.verizon.net/cephalobus_alienus/henri/diploma.htm
http://mysite.verizon.net/cephalobus_alienus/henri/deception.htm
http://mysite.verizon.net/cephalobus_alienus/henri/rt_aurigae.htm
http://mysite.verizon.net/cephalobus_alienus/henri/history.htm
http://mysite.verizon.net/cephalobus_alienus/henri/snips.htm
http://mysite.verizon.net/cephalobus_alienus/henri/accuses.htm
http://mysite.verizon.net/cephalobus_alienus/henri/oh_dear.htm

1) BaT needs to explain the fine details of light curves, not
merely gross averaged features.
a) High precision photometric studies demonstrate "period noise"
in Cepheid light curves. This comprises both peak-to-peak
variability in phase, and peak-to-peak variability in
amplitude. You have in the past "explained" period noise as
evidence of interstellar "twinkling". Explain why
amplitude "twinkling" is not seen for most stars.
b) Explain long term variability in Cepheids, "sudden" changes
between fundamental and overtone mode oscillations, and
"sudden" -permanent- loss of Cepheid variability in some stars.
2) BaT needs to explain the spectral data, not merely amplitude
data.
a) Explain periodic line broadening and narrowing in Cepheid
spectra.
b) Explain line splitting showing spectra of two distinct stars
in eclipsing binaries such as Algol. Explain the relative
phase of this periodic line splitting, which peaks when the
stars are maximally separated as expected in traditional
theory, in complete contradiction to the predictions of BaTh.
3) BaT needs to explain the interferometric data.
a) Cepheid stars have been observed to swell and shrink, size
changes being correlated with amplitude changes and changes
in line broadening.
b) VLBI can track the motions of individual stars in some binary
systems. For example, synchrotron emission from one of the
components of the Algol system can be tracked. The actual
motions of this star have been observed, and are consistent
with traditional theory.
4) Traditional theory of variable stars is backed up by multiple
interlocking observations using multiple techniques, and
results from all of these techniques add up to form a coherent
story of variable star behavior. No unexpected anomalies have
been seen between results obtained from these widely varying
techniques.
5) BaT needs to be shown to be consistent with all of the data,
and not merely capable of reproducing gross features of
averaged light curves. Henri's Bath fails practically every
observational and experimental test.

Jerry
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Time Dilation disappears
    ... frequently in the curves shown on the britastro website.. ... that star 'Wilsonius'" ... there is NO REASON for anybody to accept the BaTh explanation ... Unification explains neither secular nor random variations in Cepheid ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Time Dilation disappears
    ... gone into it...but it seems to be a fairly common feature of star curves. ... phase with the fundamental as would be expected in the case of cepheids and the ... BaTh cannot generate smooth light curves with magnitude variations ... It obviously doesn't happen....with the result that light from orbiting stars ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: 1c+1c Closing Velocity...,answer to Henri Wilson
    ... > For some stars it will, ... The ballistic theory obviously predicts what's observed. ... >>Why should they cease slowing when their speed are c relative to the gas? ... > The two brightness curves from each member of the pair are 180 out of phase. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Androcles and Henris Theory of Diffraction Grating Behavior
    ... >>> be larger the further the stars are from us. ... > Your magnitude estimates are way out. ... variable star brightness curves are mainly based ... "[Mira] Variables are named after the most famous Mira variable, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Doubt : Newtons Second Law
    ... Anyway, here's the latest Algol: ... It should be a flat top for it to be an eclipsing binary. ... |>| My feelings are that genuinely varying stars DO exist but the vast ... | of most brightness curves without connecting them to an orbit period. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Loading