The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
In sci.physics.relativity, Androcles

wrote
on Sun, 02 Sep 2007 11:10:04 GMT
:
"The Ghost In The Machine" wrote in message
...
: In sci.physics.relativity, Androcles
:
: wrote
: on Sat, 01 Sep 2007 14:03:45 GMT
: :
:
: "Paul B. Andersen" wrote in message
: ...
: : Androcles wrote:
: : "Paul B. Andersen" wrote in message
: : ...
: : : Androcles wrote:
: : : "Paul B. Andersen" wrote in
: message
: : : ...
: : : : Henri Wilson wrote:
: : : : Explain the 90 deg phase lag then George.
: : : :
: : : : Not hard at all to explain why the curves are different.
: : : : If the radius of the star didn't change, it is obvious
: : : : from Planck's blackbody equation that the luminosity
: : : : variation due to the changing temperature is much
: : : : bigger in visible light (V-band) than it is in IR (K-band
2.2u).
: : :
: : : Everything is "obvious". Obviously you are a lunatic.
: : :
: : : I note with a yawn that Androcles doesn't find the obvious
: : : consequence of Planck's black body radiation law to be obvious.
: : :
: : : Nothing is obvious in a haze, is it?
: :
: : ASSistant Professor "Paul B. Andersen" of :
: : Agder University College (HiA)
: : Serviceboks 422, N-4604 Kristiansand, NORWAY Tel (+47) 38 14 10 00
Fax
: : (+47) 38 14 10 01
: : has executed the biggest fumble ever seen in the history of
: : sci.physics.relativity
: : in message
: : ...
: :
: : "The spectral class [of stars] is determined by the relative
positions
: : and intensities
: : of the absorption lines, and these are unaffected by a Doppler
shift."
: :
: : The all time classic:
: :
: : "That is, we can reverse the directions of the frames
: : which is the same as interchanging the frames,
: : which - as I have told you a LOT of times,
: : OBVIOUSLY will lead to the transform:
: : t = (tau-xi*v/c^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
: : x = (xi - v*tau)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
: : or:
: : tau = (t+xv/c^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
: : xi = (x + vt)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)" -Paul B. Andersen
: :
: :
: The faster you go the longer it takes to get there, OBVIOUSLY.
: yawn
:
: Here's how I look at it.

[snip wrong argument]

... reach the star, d-vt = 0.

The Andersen Transforms are d+vt 0.
The faster you go the longer it takes to get there, OBVIOUSLY.
yawn

Since I was assuming a different transform:

xi = (x - vt) * g
tau = (t - vx/c^2) * g

this doesn't quite work. However, I'd have to dig through
the posts to see what Paul was claiming and your objections
thereto, and I'd highly prefer a different nomenclature anyway,
something along the following lines.

What I claim should be quite clear from Androcles'
correct quotation, even if it is quoted out of context.

The LT as written i Einstein's 1905 paper is:
tau = (t - xv/c^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
xi = (x - vt)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
or:
t = (tau + xi*v/c^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
x = (xi + v*tau)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)

Here the origin of the "Greek frame" is moving along
the positive x-axis of the "Latin frame" with speed v.

But alternatively we could let the origin of the "Latin frame"
move along the positive xi-axis of the "Greek frame".

"That is, we can reverse the directions of the frames
which is the same as interchanging the frames,
which - as I have told you a LOT of times,
OBVIOUSLY will lead to the transform:
t = (tau-xi*v/c^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
x = (xi - v*tau)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
or:
tau = (t+xv/c^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
xi = (x + vt)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)"

This is but an obvious triviality, and Androcles'
'objectons thereto' are so nonsensical that they
are not worth wasting your time at.

Or mine.

Paul