On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 21:13:25 +0100, "George Dishman"
wrote:


"Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
.. .


No comment George?
Don't understand maths again?

Pointless, the 2.5:1 luminosity variation is
dominated by temperature and radius changes
and you have to remove those before attempting
to work out K. Also, before you can work it out,
you need to say where it goes in the luminosity
equation and then solve for K.

I will calculate K for more stars in future to see if there is any
consistency.

Don't waste your time tossing meaningles numbers
around, you cannot calculate 'K' until you decide
where it goes in the equations.

Well apart from the fact that it is not likely to be linear, I know exactly
where it goes.


You are yet to acknowledge that the Time for light to go from A to B is
not
constant.

You forget I am the one who has consistently corrected
your error of ignoring refractive index.

I don't ignore it...I just asume it is small and leave it out.
If RI is significant, we are clearly dealing with a 'medium'.

George




www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

The difference between a preacher and a used car salesman is that the latter at least has a product to sell.