Re: Time Dilation disappears
- From: hw@..(Dr. Henri Wilson)
- Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 21:53:14 GMT
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 05:12:16 -0800 (PST), Jerry <Cephalobus_alienus@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Nov 30, 4:31 pm, hw@..(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote:
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 04:36:01 -0800 (PST), Jerry
<Cephalobus_alie...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
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.
OK, My reference to Lagrange points was only a suggestion. However observation
shows that the curves can be generated if a smaller wave is added shifted by
about 60 degrees. Maybe there is another way this can happen. I haven't really
gone into it...but it seems to be a fairly common feature of star curves. I
don't think anyone has come up with a better explanation...and nobody will as
long as Einsteinia prevails.
Meanwhile, since you have no viable explanation of this feature,
there is NO REASON for anybody to accept the BaTh explanation
of variable star curves.
It happens whether or not I currently have an explanation.
Another common feature is the presence of harmonics. These are normally in
phase with the fundamental as would be expected in the case of cepheids and the
like.
<snip>
I note that you still have not attempted to meet this challenge.
What challenge is that? The only challenge that really matters is ridding
science of Einsteiniana.
I asked you to consider the luminosity curve of S Cas, which you
matched (poorly) over two cycles on your web page.
I challenged you to fit the ENTIRE curve from 1921 to 2000 with a
single set of parameters.
http://www.britastro.org/vss/gifl/00064.gif
Well I'm sure you'll agree that the dip maintains the same phase relationship
over that time. The variation is probably due to different spatial path
conditions over that time scale. Remember these curves are based mainly on
visual estimates.
Anyway, BaTh cannot generate smooth light curves with magnitude variations
above about 5. So either the estimates of the faint end of S Cas are way out or
there are other factors involved in its brightness variation.
The plain fact of the matter is that you CAN'T.
I don't have to. It is more than coincidence that so many brightness curves can
be matched solely on c+v principles.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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.
No evidence for energy-dependent velocity of light in range from
radio waves to X-rays:
Essen and Froome, The Velocity of Light and Radio Waves (1969).
Brown et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 30 no. 16 (1973), pg 763.
Florman, J. Res. N.B.S. 54 (1955), pg 355.
Schaefer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 no. 25 (1999), pg 4964.
Well, we are talkiing about pretty small differences in speeds, if any. I don't
think lab experiments would be sensitive enough to check this.
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?
Well your inability to consider anything new that was not drummed into you for
years is a sure sign of impending dementia.
Meanwhile, please explain why Algol's luminosity at X-ray wavelengths
shows practically no variability.
I haven't seen this.
If it is true then the Xray source is probably not the star itself.
<snip>
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/mai...
Polaris provides another example:
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdf/10.1086/338583
No comment, Henri?
All I can say is that an explanation is far more likely to be forthcoming if
BaTh simulations are used instead of the stupid 'constant c' method.
Do you really believe that all starlight has been magically adjusted so that it
moves towards little planet Earth at precisely c wrt Earth?
Don't you see how primatively stupid that idea is.
It obviously doesn't happen....with the result that light from orbiting stars
must bunch up and separate periodically. One of the most interesting mysteries
is why the faster light never appears to actually catch the slower light. i
have suggested speed unification as the most likely cause.
Unification explains neither secular nor random variations in Cepheid
period, nor sudden changes in Cepheid behavior.
Nor can any otehr theory. The bloody think was probably hit by a comet or
something similar..
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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?
Cepheids are proven to pulsate in size. You want more references?
No, I have already accepted this as a distinct possibility...although I have
other ideas too. Each annular ring of the surface moves backwards and forwards
towards Earth in a manner very similar to a star in elliptical orbit. So a
similar brightness curve will result from the surface speed variations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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?
I have previously explained to you that different wavelengths tend to come from
different layers at slightly different times and radial velocities.
It is not
at all surprising that their brightness curves are slightly different.
1) You are obviously ignorant of how black body radiators work.
Hahahaha!
2) Why should effective stellar radius make a difference unless
Cepheids are pulsators?
they can be pulsators. That's OK. It makes no difference. The radial velocities
are of the same order as many orbiting stars...so Bath principles still apply.
3) You have no "stellar radius" control on your program's control
panel. So either you have just spouted a nonsense explanation,
or your program is missing an important control that influences
shape, phase and amplitude of the luminosity curves.
irrelevant...
<snip>
1) BaT needs to explain the fine details of light curves, not
merely gross averaged features.
My program is available for anyone to use. (I will soon upgrade it with the
addition of a second companion star with a different orbit period)
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.
there are only 24 hours in a day.
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.
the presence of third bodies might be responsible, who knows?
ONE THING IS CERTAIN, YOU ARE MORE LIKELY TO FIND AN EXPLANATION IF YOU USE
BaTh instead of constant c models.
In other words, you have no explanation.
I could probably find oone easily if I looked. Why don't YOU have a go?
2) BaT needs to explain the spectral data, not merely amplitude
data.
It can and will.
In other words, it currently can't.
It hasn't tried...except for RT Aur....where George Dishman and I discoverd the
exstence of ADoppler.
Unfortunately it is not easy to find the required data.
a) Explain periodic line broadening and narrowing in Cepheid
spectra.
Probably temperature/pressure effects.
Why should orbiting stars exhibit marked temperature/pressure
cycles?
Many Cepheids are pulsating. Some might be in orbit. It is impossible to tell
the difference just from a light curve.
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.
how do you know that is in contradiction of BaTh.... you don't.... you are just
dreaming that up.
Review your radial velocity discussions with George Dishman.
there is no contradiction.
3) BaT needs to explain the interferometric data.
No problems...
a) Cepheid stars have been observed to swell and shrink, size
changes being correlated with amplitude changes and changes
in line broadening.
From what I have read, there is no current theory that adequately links cepheid
pulsation to their brightness. Bath explains it perfectly well.
BaTh explains the observed pulsations in size?
You accept that Cepheids pulsate?
many, yes. I thought you knew that. It is the only way to explain the presence
of overtones. But I also believe that many stars that are classified as
pulsating cepheids are just orbiting stars.
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.
You mean "a Willusion has been observed" and astronomers have tried to use
Einsteiniana to interpret the facts. They don't have a hope of coming up with a
correct explanation.
In other words, you fantasize that all data disproving BaTh
are false...
It must be. Light movement across remote space is unquestionably ballistic. How
could it not be? What criteria would determine otherwise?
Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm.
......
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Time Dilation disappears
- From: Jerry
- Re: Time Dilation disappears
- References:
- Re: Time Dilation disappears
- From: Dr. Henri Wilson
- Re: Time Dilation disappears
- From: Jerry
- Re: Time Dilation disappears
- Prev by Date: Re: Einstein's Second Postulate Violates His First.
- Next by Date: Re: Can Photons have many speed at One Point in Space.
- Previous by thread: Re: Time Dilation disappears
- Next by thread: Re: Time Dilation disappears
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
