Speed of Light: A universal Constant?
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Joan-Claude van Dirk Helps to Trivialize Special Relativity
Next: GOD=G_uv Measure your IQ in 30 seconds
From: Henri Wilson on 4 Jun 2005 20:18 On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 12:40:51 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen(a)deletethishia.no> wrote: >Henri Wilson wrote: >> On 3 Jun 2005 07:08:42 -0700, paul.b.andersen(a)hia.no (Paul B. Andersen) wrote: >> >>>In a Cepheid there is a standing acoustic wave. >>>The frequency is determined by the dimension of the star >>>and the speed of sound in it. >>>http://www.owlnet.rice.edu/%7Ebonnieb/Physics.html >>> >>>That's why there is a close relationship between >>>the size of the star/crystal and the period. >> >> >> Well Paul, you will now have to show me the connection between a resonant >> acoustic wave through a ball of gas and its surface brightness. > >Done before, won't bother to repeat it. >You never read it anyway. How do you explain why stars of the same approximate size and temperature have periods ranging from a few days to five years or more? Are the acoustics controlled by fairies too? > >>>It is ridiculous to believe that only objects orbiting >>>each other can have a constant period. >> >> >> If you understood anything about diffusive, random and chaotic processes, you >> wouldn't make such a ridiculous claim. >> >> Here is a statement from a paper on cepheids: >> "When one measures the radial velocity of Cepheids, one finds a cyclic >> variation, which has the same period as their change in brightness. " > >Of course. > >> Funny that. It's exactly what theBaT expects. > >Yea, right. :-) >Very apparent from the following. :-) > >>>Cepheids are found in a small strip ("the instability strip") >>>of the HR-diagram. >>>http://www.astro.livjm.ac.uk/courses/one/NOTES/Garry%20Pilkington/loc.htm >>>Their properties are very similar. no connection. >> >> >> Good. >>>>I remember you assuring the late Androcles that binaries can easily have >>>>periods this short. >>> >>>Indeed binaries can easily have periods this short or even shorter. >>>So what? >>> >>>I won't bother to explain why this is irrelevant. >>>Because you know it. >>>Don't you? >>> >>> >>>>>But I sure look forward to your attempt to >>>>>explain how it is possible anyway. >>>>>It is bound to be funny. :-) >>>> >>>>The 'Wilsonian Heavy' cool star. >>> >>>I find this a bit disappointing. >>>Silly isn't good enough. >>>I want it silly AND funny. >>>So can't you do better? > >Henri can indeed do MUCH better: the WCH > >> Well Paul, thanks to your patience and occasionally not unreasonable debating >> skills, I now can. I have been able to dramatically extend the BaT to explain >> cepheids, Miras etc, and put another nail in the SRian coffin. >> >> The truth is, cepheids are mainly small white stars orbiting neutron stars and >> other 'Wilsonian cool heavies' (WCH). The occasional red giant that you mention >> is really a small white but, because the mass of the WHC stars is very high, >> light is greatly redshifted as it escapes the gravity field of the pair. >> >> This also explains the period/brightness relationship. >> The further away from the WCH the orbiting cepheid is, the less redshift and >> the more light energy escapes. Note the plane of the orbit wrt the observer is >> a factor here. >> >> see: spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys240/lectures/lmc/lmc.html. >> >> Very interesting and supportive of the BaT. >> >> Miras are like cephids except no WCH is involved. >> >> I think we can start rewriting the astronomy books right now. > >Much better, Henri. I knew you could! >Incredible silly AND hilarious! >That's the way I want it! >Thanks a lot. > >Nobody can parody Henri Wilson like Henri Wilson. :-) >Possibly a bit too absurd to be a real good parody, >but anyway - well done. Thanks for the help. I will give you a mention. > > >Paul HW. www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm Sometimes I feel like a complete failure. The most useful thing I have ever done is prove Einstein wrong.
From: Henri Wilson on 4 Jun 2005 20:25 On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 12:37:53 +0000 (UTC), bz <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote: >H@..(Henri Wilson) wrote in >news:g4n1a11q7ia6pestvnasp45tk5utoq55e7(a)4ax.com: > >> Well Paul, you will now have to show me the connection between a >> resonant acoustic wave through a ball of gas and its surface brightness. >> >> >>> >>>It is ridiculous to believe that only objects orbiting >>>each other can have a constant period. >> >> If you understood anything about diffusive, random and chaotic >> processes, you wouldn't make such a ridiculous claim. > >Seems like we live near a star that regularly goes through a 11 year cycle. A very approximate 11 year cycle. The actual period is all over hte place..as one would expect with gaseous diffusion, etc.. > >I guess those diffusive, random, and chaotic processes only prevent DISTANT >stars from undergoing periodic variations. Learn a few facts, bz. How can similar stars exhibit very constant 'acoustic variation' frequencies ranging from days to years? > >> Here is a statement from a paper on cepheids: >> "When one measures the radial velocity of Cepheids, one finds a cyclic >> variation, which has the same period as their change in brightness. " >> >> Funny that. It's exactly what theBaT expects. > >Funny also, that is what one would see from a fusion relaxation oscillator. If one was a DHR desperate for any piece of remote evidence. > >Star core is too cool for sustained fusion of some particular fuel. Starts >to collapse under gravity, heats up enough to start fusing at the core, >expands [and cools] under the sudden flux of photons, neutrons and >neutrinos produced. Stops fusing, but keeps expanding due to inertia for a >while, and starts to collapse again, under gravity. All in a perfect sphere, of course? :) > >Of course, such oscillations would only occur in certain sized[total mass] >stars with certain compositions. Within that size range, there would be >considerable variation in oscillation frequency and in the stability of the >oscillator. Double stars and stars with planets would probably be LESS >stable and regular than more isolated stars. > >The relaxation oscillator would normally have a 'sawtooth' waveform, >although other circuit elements change the shape. ........desperate for any piece of remote evidence. > >Does BaT also predict a sawtooth? Precisely, I thought you knew that. > >What shaped curve do most cepheids display? HW. www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm Sometimes I feel like a complete failure. The most useful thing I have ever done is prove Einstein wrong.
From: bz on 4 Jun 2005 21:43 H@..(Henri Wilson) wrote in news:a7h4a15kv74e548ab5ip7bj8m20r7ojhcl(a)4ax.com: > On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 12:37:53 +0000 (UTC), bz <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> > wrote: > >>H@..(Henri Wilson) wrote in >>news:g4n1a11q7ia6pestvnasp45tk5utoq55e7(a)4ax.com: >> >>> Well Paul, you will now have to show me the connection between a >>> resonant acoustic wave through a ball of gas and its surface >>> brightness. >>> >>> >>>> >>>>It is ridiculous to believe that only objects orbiting >>>>each other can have a constant period. >>> >>> If you understood anything about diffusive, random and chaotic >>> processes, you wouldn't make such a ridiculous claim. >> >>Seems like we live near a star that regularly goes through a 11 year >>cycle. > > A very approximate 11 year cycle. The actual period is all over hte > place..as one would expect with gaseous diffusion, etc.. How do you think it looks from a few dozen light years away. >>I guess those diffusive, random, and chaotic processes only prevent >>DISTANT stars from undergoing periodic variations. > > Learn a few facts, bz. > How can similar stars exhibit very constant 'acoustic variation' > frequencies ranging from days to years? Stars differ in size, composition and rotation rate. Any one of which is sufficient to account for the variations in frequency >>> Here is a statement from a paper on cepheids: >>> "When one measures the radial velocity of Cepheids, one finds a cyclic >>> variation, which has the same period as their change in brightness. " >>> >>> Funny that. It's exactly what theBaT expects. >> >>Funny also, that is what one would see from a fusion relaxation >>oscillator. > > If one was a DHR desperate for any piece of remote evidence. What if one is interested in truth? >>Star core is too cool for sustained fusion of some particular fuel. >>Starts to collapse under gravity, heats up enough to start fusing at the >>core, expands [and cools] under the sudden flux of photons, neutrons and >>neutrinos produced. Stops fusing, but keeps expanding due to inertia for >>a while, and starts to collapse again, under gravity. > > All in a perfect sphere, of course? :) Stars that rotate are not perfect spheres. >>Of course, such oscillations would only occur in certain sized[total >>mass] stars with certain compositions. Within that size range, there >>would be considerable variation in oscillation frequency and in the >>stability of the oscillator. Double stars and stars with planets would >>probably be LESS stable and regular than more isolated stars. >> >>The relaxation oscillator would normally have a 'sawtooth' waveform, >>although other circuit elements change the shape. > > .......desperate for any piece of remote evidence. I am not the one with faith. >>Does BaT also predict a sawtooth? > > Precisely, I thought you knew that. Not from your simulations. >>What shaped curve do most cepheids display? -- bz please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an infinite set. bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap
From: Henri Wilson on 5 Jun 2005 19:01 On Sun, 5 Jun 2005 01:43:43 +0000 (UTC), bz <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote: >H@..(Henri Wilson) wrote in >news:a7h4a15kv74e548ab5ip7bj8m20r7ojhcl(a)4ax.com: > >> On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 12:37:53 +0000 (UTC), bz <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> >> wrote: >> >>>> If you understood anything about diffusive, random and chaotic >>>> processes, you wouldn't make such a ridiculous claim. >>> >>>Seems like we live near a star that regularly goes through a 11 year >>>cycle. >> >> A very approximate 11 year cycle. The actual period is all over hte >> place..as one would expect with gaseous diffusion, etc.. > >How do you think it looks from a few dozen light years away. A star with constant brightness. > >>>I guess those diffusive, random, and chaotic processes only prevent >>>DISTANT stars from undergoing periodic variations. >> >> Learn a few facts, bz. >> How can similar stars exhibit very constant 'acoustic variation' >> frequencies ranging from days to years? > >Stars differ in size, composition and rotation rate. >Any one of which is sufficient to account for the variations in frequency HoHoHohahahahh! 1 day to 5 years? Same kind of star? > >>>> Here is a statement from a paper on cepheids: >>>> "When one measures the radial velocity of Cepheids, one finds a cyclic >>>> variation, which has the same period as their change in brightness. " >>>> >>>> Funny that. It's exactly what theBaT expects. >>> >>>Funny also, that is what one would see from a fusion relaxation >>>oscillator. >> >> If one was a DHR desperate for any piece of remote evidence. > >What if one is interested in truth? > >>>Star core is too cool for sustained fusion of some particular fuel. >>>Starts to collapse under gravity, heats up enough to start fusing at the >>>core, expands [and cools] under the sudden flux of photons, neutrons and >>>neutrinos produced. Stops fusing, but keeps expanding due to inertia for >>>a while, and starts to collapse again, under gravity. (This sounds like the nuclear 'pogo stick' that someone once invented) >> >> All in a perfect sphere, of course? :) > >Stars that rotate are not perfect spheres. Stars that puff and blow every few days would certainly NOT be perfect spheres either. > >>>Of course, such oscillations would only occur in certain sized[total >>>mass] stars with certain compositions. Within that size range, there >>>would be considerable variation in oscillation frequency and in the >>>stability of the oscillator. Double stars and stars with planets would >>>probably be LESS stable and regular than more isolated stars. >>> >>>The relaxation oscillator would normally have a 'sawtooth' waveform, >>>although other circuit elements change the shape. >> >> .......desperate for any piece of remote evidence. > >I am not the one with faith. > >>>Does BaT also predict a sawtooth? >> >> Precisely, I thought you knew that. > >Not from your simulations.' eccentricity 0.05-0.2 > >>>What shaped curve do most cepheids display? HW. www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm Sometimes I feel like a complete failure. The most useful thing I have ever done is prove Einstein wrong.
From: bz on 6 Jun 2005 04:33
H@..(Henri Wilson) wrote in news:lm07a19eiegnpvdrji2bnqf4mvgs5n10jj(a)4ax.com: > On Sun, 5 Jun 2005 01:43:43 +0000 (UTC), bz <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> > wrote: > >>H@..(Henri Wilson) wrote in >>news:a7h4a15kv74e548ab5ip7bj8m20r7ojhcl(a)4ax.com: >> >>> On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 12:37:53 +0000 (UTC), bz >>> <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote: >>> > >>>>> If you understood anything about diffusive, random and chaotic >>>>> processes, you wouldn't make such a ridiculous claim. >>>> >>>>Seems like we live near a star that regularly goes through a 11 year >>>>cycle. >>> >>> A very approximate 11 year cycle. The actual period is all over hte >>> place..as one would expect with gaseous diffusion, etc.. >> >>How do you think it looks from a few dozen light years away. > > A star with constant brightness. How about a 11 year variable with rather small brightness variation? >>>>I guess those diffusive, random, and chaotic processes only prevent >>>>DISTANT stars from undergoing periodic variations. >>> >>> Learn a few facts, bz. >>> How can similar stars exhibit very constant 'acoustic variation' >>> frequencies ranging from days to years? >> >>Stars differ in size, composition and rotation rate. >>Any one of which is sufficient to account for the variations in >>frequency > > HoHoHohahahahh! Hanson does it better. > > 1 day to 5 years? Same kind of star? http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/sao/downloads/het611-m18a01.ppt >>>>> Here is a statement from a paper on cepheids: >>>>> "When one measures the radial velocity of Cepheids, one finds a >>>>> cyclic variation, which has the same period as their change in >>>>> brightness. " >>>>> >>>>> Funny that. It's exactly what theBaT expects. >>>> >>>>Funny also, that is what one would see from a fusion relaxation >>>>oscillator. >>> >>> If one was a DHR desperate for any piece of remote evidence. >>What if one is interested in truth? >>>>Star core is too cool for sustained fusion of some particular fuel. >>>>Starts to collapse under gravity, heats up enough to start fusing at >>>>the core, expands [and cools] under the sudden flux of photons, >>>>neutrons and neutrinos produced. Stops fusing, but keeps expanding due >>>>to inertia for a while, and starts to collapse again, under gravity. > > (This sounds like the nuclear 'pogo stick' that someone once invented) I seek truth. You play 'one-upsmanship games'. >>> >>> All in a perfect sphere, of course? :) >> >>Stars that rotate are not perfect spheres. > > Stars that puff and blow every few days would certainly NOT be perfect > spheres either. http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/sao/downloads/het611-m18a01.ppt >>>>Of course, such oscillations would only occur in certain sized[total >>>>mass] stars with certain compositions. Within that size range, there >>>>would be considerable variation in oscillation frequency and in the >>>>stability of the oscillator. Double stars and stars with planets would >>>>probably be LESS stable and regular than more isolated stars. >>>> >>>>The relaxation oscillator would normally have a 'sawtooth' waveform, >>>>although other circuit elements change the shape. >>> >>> .......desperate for any piece of remote evidence. >>I am not the one with faith. >>>>Does BaT also predict a sawtooth? >>> >>> Precisely, I thought you knew that. >> >>Not from your simulations.' > eccentricity 0.05-0.2 I see a sine wave variation at 0.05 I see a distorted sine wave at 0.2 with narrow decreases in brightness. I see nothing like a sawtooth at either. Perhaps I need other than default values for other parameters. >>>>What shaped curve do most cepheids display? -- bz please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an infinite set. bz+nanae(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu -- bz please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an infinite set. bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap |