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: bz on 14 Jun 2005 04:53 H@..(Henri Wilson) wrote in news:p1fsa1pt24bmi2c83ha9t314o9pm1snhdf(a)4ax.com: > On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 00:20:24 +0000 (UTC), bz > <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote: > >>H@..(Henri Wilson) wrote in >>news:774sa1d1600fo6hfemtmjrh1smfiqqo52s(a)4ax.com: >> >>> On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 08:47:29 +0000 (UTC), bz >>> <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote: >>> >>>>H@..(Henri Wilson) wrote in >>>>news:jtkpa1hu4tuk4ik1dtp62t42ro69d82jde(a)4ax.com: >>>> >>>>> Paul, Earth is about 100 solar diameters from the sun. >>>>> >>>>> The sun 'orbits the Earth' in one day. >>>> >>>>??? >>>> >>>>The earth rotates on its axis in one day. The sun does NOT orbit the >>>>earth any more than the entire universe orbits the earth every 24 >>>>hours. >>> >>> Bob, Did you notice the ' ' ? >> >>I did, but you were talking about a star orbiting in 5 days, implying >>that was possible because the sun orbited the earth in 24 hours. >> >>> I was merely trying to provide a visual impression of an object >>> orbiting another once per day. A large object orbiting every five >>> days, eg D Cep, would move a lot slower than that. >> >>Your image failed because to orbit in 24 hours, the sun would have had >>to be in synchronous orbit altitude at 22,235 miles. Which would kinds >>scorce my grass. > > Orbit diameter depends on the mass of the other object. > > Bob, my only concern was the apparent rate of movement, the angular > velocity of something in a 1 day orbit. The sun doesn't appear to move > very fast. The apparant angular velocity due to OUR rotation can not be counted. A 24 hour orbit will be at a radius of 22,235 miles. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_period The orbital period depends on the masses involved, the semi major axis, and the universal constant G. P=2 pi sqrt(a^3/(G(M1+M2))) solving for 'a' gives a=1/(2 pi) 2^(1/3) (P^2 G(M1+M2) pi)^(1/3) With the mass of the sun as 1.9891E+30*kg and the mass of the earth 5.9742E+24*kg, a 24 hour orbit is at 2.928E+6*km and the diameter of the sun is 1.392E+6*km, so it would be theoretically possible for the earth to orbit the sun in 24 hours. It would need to move at 213 km/s (7.1E-4 c) (assuming a circular orbit) in order to do so But two stars the mass of the sun would have to orbit each other at 3.6E6 KM at 268 km/s (8.9e-4 c). > Use the moon if you want to be happy about it. It moves at about the > same angular speed. Not at all, it orbits in 28 days. You MUST separate the apparent motion due to the earths rotation. The earths rotation must be disregarded. >>> The sun orbits the Earth/sun barycentre once per year. It also orbits >>> the Jupiter/sun barycentre once per Jupiter year. >> >>> If the sun had a large close companion, the two would orbit the >>> barycentre at the common period. >> >>Provided the orbits were circular or close thereto. > > No, the period would be the same for both, no matter what the > eccentricity.. correct. > I want to know more about the orbit shape though. -- 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: Paul B. Andersen on 14 Jun 2005 05:29 Henri Wilson wrote: > On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 10:29:05 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" > <paul.b.andersen(a)deletethishia.no> wrote: > > >>Henri Wilson wrote: >> >>>On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 17:13:03 +0000 (UTC), bz <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> >>>wrote: >>> >>>>YOU invoked multiple images as the cause of the curves making little sense. >>>>Then you turn around and argue against your own point. Make up your mind. >>>> >>>>By whom shown to be wrong? References? >>> >>>Multiple images should appear as occasional bright flashes. This kind of >>>phenomenon is observed regularly. >> >>You mean the flashes the BaT predicts should be in >>the light curve of the binary HD80715 are observed regularly? > > > That has been explained to you a thousand times. > > Now....... HoHoHohahahahaha! And what the explanation is that your program doesn't work for real binaries where the orbital parameters are measured? :-) > Please compare the BaT predictions for RTAur with your reference: > > Just run my program again and see how it produces the exact characteristics of > RT Aurigae. > > I have set the parameters to the right values. > Run the distance to about 130-140 LYs. > Then compare what you see with the reference you provided: > http://mb-soft.com/public2/cepheid.html ... but you insist that your program does works for imaginary binaries where you have invented the orbital parametres in such a way that the the Cepheid is orbiting a star within itself? Some program, eh? :-) > > Note: the distance setting does not have to be accurate to produce this curve. > It is the shape that matters. > > HoHoHohahahahaha! > > Who gets the last laugh, hey, Paul? A babbling idiot? Paul
From: Paul B. Andersen on 14 Jun 2005 08:21 Henri Wilson wrote: > On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 10:23:06 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" > <paul.b.andersen(a)deletethishia.no> wrote: > > >>Henri Wilson wrote: >> >>>On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 15:13:51 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen(a)hia.no> >>>wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>Henri Wilson wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 14:17:20 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" >>>>><paul.b.andersen(a)deletethishia.no> wrote: >> >>Delta Cep: >>period = 5.366270 days >>radius = 41.6 solar radii >>mass = 5 solar masses >> >>If we assume a large mass with zero diameter >>is orbiting Delta Cep, skimming its surface, >>its mass would have to be 28 solar masses. >>If we allow the companion it a little space, >>assuming the distance between their centres to be >>twice the radius of the Cepheid, its mass would have >>to be 260 solar masses. >> >> >>>>>>So we have an invisible star with hundreds of solar masses. >>>>>>Such stars do not exist. >>>>>>The most massive stars are in the order of 50 solar masses. >>>>>>Their luminocity is in the order of 500000 times the Sun. >>>>>>They would be brighter than the Cepheid. >>>>>> >>>>>>In other words, it is utterly impossible that >>>>>>Cepheids are binaries with orbital period >>>>>>equal to their light curve period. >> >>>>>No it isn't. >>>>>The companion stars are WCHs.... Very heavy.. >>>>> >>>>>You know there is a lot of dark matter in the universe. I'm telling you where >>>>>it is. >>>> >>>>Yawn. >>>>Sorry. >>>>Your ridiculous claims are getting boring. >>> >>> >>>Paul, Earth is about 100 solar diameters from the sun. >>> >>>The sun 'orbits the Earth' in one day. >>>Something 40 times bigger orbiting every five days would not appear to move >>>very quickly, as seen by an observer on Earth. >>>If Jupiter was even five times larger, it would cause the sun, no matter how >>>big it might become to orbit around the barycentre at quite a large radius. >>> >>>D Cep doesn't need a neutron star as its companion, at all. >> >>OK. I am retracting my statement. >>Your ridiculous claims are not boring at all, >>quite the contrary, they are very entertaining. >> >>All we have to do to make Delta Cep orbit another star >>in five days is to let the other star rotate once in five days, >>and view it from the other star. >> >>Keep it up! >>You are doing better all the time, Henri. :-) > > > You apparently have no idea how two stars orbit each other. Quite. I can obviously not compete with your superior ideas of how stars orbit each other. > But I have good reason to laugh. > > Just run my program again and see how it produces the exact characteristics of > RT Aurigae. > > I have set the parameters to the right values. Quite. And one of the right values is that it is orbiting an invisible giant >100 solar masses. Could it be a massive fairy? They ARE invisible, you know. > Run the distance to about 130-140 LYs. It does of course not matter that you have got the distance wrong by a decade. It is not as if your fantasy parameters have anything with reality to do. > Then compare what you see with the reference you provided: > http://mb-soft.com/public2/cepheid.html Since you have an infinite set of fantasy parameters to chose from, I do not doubt that your program will produce the correct light curve. That all the parameter sets producing the right light curve are physically impossible does obviously not matter. > HoHoHohahahahaha! > Who gets the last laugh, hey, Paul? You, obviously. You are still laughing at the beautiful way you refuted my claim that it is physically impossible for a Cepheid to be a binary with orbital period equal to the variation period, are you not? "The sun 'orbits the Earth' in one day. Something 40 times bigger orbiting every five days would not appear to move very quickly, as seen by an observer on Earth. If Jupiter was even five times larger, it would cause the sun, no matter how big it might become to orbit around the barycentre at quite a large radius. D Cep doesn't need a neutron star as its companion, at all." So keep laughing, Henri. Your genial refutation deserves it. Paul
From: Paul B. Andersen on 14 Jun 2005 08:38 Henri Wilson wrote: > On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 08:47:29 +0000 (UTC), bz <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> > wrote: > > >>H@..(Henri Wilson) wrote in >>news:jtkpa1hu4tuk4ik1dtp62t42ro69d82jde(a)4ax.com: >> >> >>>Paul, Earth is about 100 solar diameters from the sun. >>> >>>The sun 'orbits the Earth' in one day. >> >>??? >> >>The earth rotates on its axis in one day. The sun does NOT orbit the earth >>any more than the entire universe orbits the earth every 24 hours. > > > Bob, Did you notice the ' ' ? > > I was merely trying to provide a visual impression of an object orbiting > another once per day. A large object orbiting every five days, eg D Cep, would > move a lot slower than that. > > The sun orbits the Earth/sun barycentre once per year. It also orbits the > Jupiter/sun barycentre once per Jupiter year. > > If the sun had a large close companion, the two would orbit the barycentre at > the common period. Quite. And this obviously explains how the 40 solar diameter delta Cep and a star which hasn't got to be a neutron star at all, can orbit their barycentre in the common period five days. Paul
From: bz on 14 Jun 2005 09:55
"Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen(a)deletethishia.no> wrote in news:d8mj45$ocm$1(a)dolly.uninett.no: > Henri Wilson wrote: >> On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 08:47:29 +0000 (UTC), bz >> <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote: >> >> >>>H@..(Henri Wilson) wrote in >>>news:jtkpa1hu4tuk4ik1dtp62t42ro69d82jde(a)4ax.com: >>> >>> >>>>Paul, Earth is about 100 solar diameters from the sun. >>>> >>>>The sun 'orbits the Earth' in one day. >>> >>>??? >>> >>>The earth rotates on its axis in one day. The sun does NOT orbit the >>>earth any more than the entire universe orbits the earth every 24 >>>hours. >> >> >> Bob, Did you notice the ' ' ? >> >> I was merely trying to provide a visual impression of an object >> orbiting another once per day. A large object orbiting every five days, >> eg D Cep, would move a lot slower than that. >> >> The sun orbits the Earth/sun barycentre once per year. It also orbits >> the Jupiter/sun barycentre once per Jupiter year. >> >> If the sun had a large close companion, the two would orbit the >> barycentre at the common period. > > Quite. > And this obviously explains how the 40 solar diameter delta Cep > and a star which hasn't got to be a neutron star at all, > can orbit their barycentre in the common period five days. >>Delta Cep: >>period = 5.366270 days >>radius = 41.6 solar radii >>mass = 5 solar masses two stars of 5 solar masses would orbit at 1.9e7 km 41.6 solar radii is 2.8e7 km, which, as you have noted, is larger in than the orbital radius. So the stars would merge. In fact, in order for one to skim the surface (assuming zero radius for it), it would have to have a mass of 5.72 times the mass of delta Cep: This gives an orbital velocity of 268 km/s or 1.3e-3c I figure you need a very heavy black hole of at least 50 times the mass of Delta Cep. That gives a separation of 1.96 radii, orbital velocity of 771 km/s or 2.5e-3 c All of these present a small problem, however, as the actual doppler data figures for RT Aurigae show a maximum velocity of 38 km/sec. At 38 km/sec, there is no way for the two stars to maintain orbit and they will fall into each other. That will make a big splash and, I fear, swamp Henri's model. -- 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 |