"Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message ...
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 16:18:52 GMT, "Androcles"
wrote:


"Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message ...
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 10:12:26 GMT, "Androcles"
wrote:

Stupid old wabo, I've been modelling variables since 1987, of course I know.

The thing is, our brightness curves are also the true velocity curves....or
they would be if only one star was contributing to the curves.

The luminosity is out of phase with velocity.

The phasing is far more complicated than you think..

Don't be so ****ing stupid. The phasing is more complicated than
*YOU* don't think, it isn't more complicated than *I* KNOW.
Gawd, you **** me off sometimes, you think others are as ignorant
as you.



Astronomers have
used doppler shifts of incoming light to calculate orbital velocities.


Of course. Why shouldn't they?


This is
where they have been going wrong for years.

The problem, H, is phase. Let's say a star is in a perfectly circular
orbit, seen edge-on. When it is coming directly toward us the
light gets here earlier than it should, and when it s moving directly
away the light gets here later than it should. That means we see
an elliptical orbit from the timing of max velocity and min velocity,
yet the orbit was a perfect circle. Max luminosity occurs when
the star is approaching.

The change in 'luminosity' due to velocity is generally negligible.
The change in 'brightness' is what we are discussing.

luminosity:
Pronunciation: "lü-m&-'nä-s&-tE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ties
1 a : the quality or state of being luminous b : something luminous
2 a : the relative quantity of light b : relative brightness of something
3 : the relative quantity of radiation emitted by a celestial source (as a star)

The change in 'luminosity' and the change in 'brightness'
are the same thing, you dumb cluck.

What the **** is wrong with you?

Listen, moron, the luminosity curve and the velocity curve
are different animals, but they are related.

Now, are you discussing the velocity or the luminosity?


It is caused by the bunching and rarification [snip]

I know ****ing well what causes the change in luminosity that
you call 'brightness'. I modelled it long before you ever did.
I thought we'd at last got around to velocity curves after
8 years of your struggling and waffling and crazy theorizing.
Sheesh, you are stupid.



So while astronomers get the right velocities, they get them at
the wrong time. I thought you already knew this.

No A.

Ok, so you don't know it and now you have another crazy
theory of your own.
It must be time to put you back on the killfile.

They get completely wrong velocities.

****ing moron.



Astronomers observe ADoppler shifts and then treat them with VDoppler equations
......and get hugely exaggerated velocity figures.

STUPID ****ing moron.

It was only through arguing with
George about pulsars that I realised the mistake.
As you know, pulses bunch together as they travel due to c+v.

Of course.


Astronomers have treated this bunching as Einsteinian doppler shift and arrived
at completely exaggerated velocity values....so when you see a published
velocity curve...don't believe it.

Well, ok, that would make the *acceleration* wrong, and
it is from the acceleration that we determine longitude of
periastron. The velocity is still directly related to the doppler.

This is where George corrected me....and contributed somewhat to his own
downfall.
I was previously working on the assumption that INDIVIDUAL photons did not
experience the same kind of 'bunching' as the pulses. It was only by analysing
pulsar pulse that I found the alternative possibility.

You couldn't analyze a ****in' pizza and tell if it had cheese in it.
Questioning Doppler now, sheesh.

According to our theory, pulses emitted as the neutron star [snip]

Does it ever occur to you that neutrons do not emit photons?

It's just that the velocity is stretched and contracted along
the time axis, and that is ... tada... a function of distance.
Remember that the SLOPE of a velocity/time graph is
acceleration. So the max and min velocity values are correct,
but the velocity curve should appear more sinusoidal than it does.

No.

**** off, ****head.