Re: GR time question

Strich.9 wrote:
On Jan 21, 7:37 am, "Paul B. Andersen"
<paul.b.ander...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Strich.9 wrote:
On Jan 20, 4:42 pm, "Paul B. Andersen"
<paul.b.ander...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Strich.9 wrote:
On Jan 19, 10:10 am, "Paul B. Andersen"
<paul.b.ander...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Another example of one of the ultra-smart anti-relativists using his BRAIN:
http://tinyurl.com/7rxwt9
Strich re-asking the question I have re-answered a number
of times, and which he every time has re-failed to read:
Paul, still trying to figure out the cause of Aberration? Still
denying the diagonal motion of light in a moving lightclock? Gee, I
wonder what do you call that diagonal movement of light in a light
clock... (Hint: starts with the letter 'A').
.. and I am re-answering again:
http://tinyurl.com/79qc2g
I am re-stating your answer is wrong!
[Unsnip]

You insisted that the velocities of the stars should
affect the stellar aberration we observe from the Earth,
remember?
CHALLENGE TO THE ULTRA-SMART ANTI-RELATIVIST:
Do you dare to repeat that claim?
===================================
As I explained to Eric, saying that aberration is due to earth motion
is INCOMPLETE, since by relativity, we can regard the earth in its
rest frame and the star as moving. Aberration is due to motion of the
earth (OBSERVER) OR the star (light source). There is no getting
around this Anderthal. you can't invoke one without invoking the
other, unless of course you are stupid. Are you stupid Paul? Are you
really that stupid?
OK.
I take this to mean that you do indeed dare to repeat
your claim, possibly with a slight modification like
this:

Strich claims that the relative velocity between the Earth
and the star should affect the stellar aberration we observe
from the Earth.

This is indeed a move worthy of an ultra-smart anti-relativist. :-)

Because:
We observe that the light from both the stars in a spectroscopic
binary come from the same direction, even if the two stars move at high
velocities in opposite directions. The velocity difference between
the stars can be up to 600 km/s, 20 times higher than the orbital
velocity of the Earth. The difference in the velocities
of the stars relative to the Earth will obviously be the same.

It is thus a fact that the velocity of the star relative to
the Earth doesn't affect the direction in which we see the star,
and there is no aberration of the light from the star due to
the velocity of the star relative to the Earth.

So it is an experimentally proven fact that the velocity of the star
relative to the Earth contributes nothing to stellar aberration.
Stellar aberration depend _only_ on the _change_ of the velocity
of the observer. That's why the semi-major axis in the ellipse
the star appears to move along _always_ is v/c radians,
were v is the orbital velocity of the Earth.

You have yet again made a fool of yourself by claiming what
is experimentally proven to be wrong.

I repeat my challenge:
Do you dare to yet again repeat your claim?
===========================================

Come on, Strich.
You are not afraid of making an even bigger fool of yourself, are you?
So please repeat your claim, it's so fun when you do!

--
Paul, having fun

http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

See Strich flee the challenge by asking irrelevant queations:

Paul, before you focus on distant stars whose image we see trillions
of mils away may not reflect what is going on, first let us settle a
few basics: (don't worry we'll get to your star eventually; i have to
do this since we all know your cognitive capacity is a bit limited)

1) is velocity relative?

i take it that's a yes.

2) a source A emits light to observer B. according to A, A is at rest
and B is moving at velocity vb. can we also say that B is at rest and
A is moving at velocity va?

i take it that's a yes.

3) your claim is that only the velocity of B creates aberration?

yes?

Why do you ask questions which are answered in the very posting
you are responding to? Can't you read?

I wrote:
"Stellar aberration depend _only_ on the _change_ of the velocity
of the observer."

The _change_ of the velocity of an Earth observer is 2v during
6 months. That's why the major axis in the aberration ellipse
_always_ is 2v/c radians = 41", regardless of what the velocity
of the star relative to the Earth might be, and regardless of
how the relative velocity might change.

This is an experimentally proven _fact_, and is as such
indisputable and not open to discussion.

Why is it so hard to grasp that when what your claim is
experimentally proven to be wrong, THEN YOU ARE WRONG?
In stead of moronically claiming what is proven to be false,
you should rather ask yourself why reality is different from
what you think it should be. What did you miss? Where did you
go wrong?

You could try reading this (and the references in it) while
using your super-smart HEAD:

http://tinyurl.com/79qc2g

4) your claim is that velocity of B is DISTINGUISHABLE from velocity
A?

If you answer questions 1 and 2 correctly and follow your heart with
3, then your answer to 4 puts you on the hot seat... as that would be
a yes (which should be a no, is it not?)

The challenge was:

Do you dare to yet again repeat the claim that the velocity of
the stars relative to the Earth affects the stellar aberration
we observe from the Earth?

Admitting that your claim is wrong seems to be no option to you.

So you will either yet again make a fool of yourself by claiming
what is experimentally proven to be wrong, or you will have to keep fleeing.


--
Paul, getting tired of chasing the chicken

http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: GR time question
    ... saying that aberration is due to earth motion ... earth OR the star. ... The velocity difference between ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: GR time question
    ... saying that aberration is due to earth motion ... earth OR the star. ... The velocity difference between ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: GR time question
    ... saying that aberration is due to earth motion ... is INCOMPLETE, since by relativity, we can regard the earth in its ... earth OR the star. ... Strich claims that the relative velocity between the Earth ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: GR time question
    ... saying that aberration is due to earth motion ... earth OR the star. ... The velocity difference between ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Unanswered S.R. Paradoxes
    ... attempted to answer them and he suggested that the spaceship was ... Professor Wolfson used an example of an earth and star frame of ... In the lecture Professor Wolfson noted an observer on the space ship ...
    (sci.physics)
Quantcast