View Single Post
  #8  
Old March 12th 11, 10:49 AM posted to sci.astro
Androcles[_40_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 94
Default Most 'Variable Stars' are not Varying at all..


"Henry Wilson DSc" Hw@.. wrote in message
...
| On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 22:15:32 -0000, "Androcles"
| wrote:
|
|
| "Henry Wilson DSc" Hw@.. wrote in message
| .. .
| | On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 02:37:54 -0000, "Androcles"
| | wrote:
|
| | Even if the orbit were perfectly circular (which in most cases it is
not)
| | the function would give an initial velocity of c+v.sin(t/period modulo
| 2pi),
| | you need to convert t/period to a pure number for dimensional analysis
| | and then convert to radians to become the argument of the function
sin()
| | (or cos(), depending on your arbitrary choice of axes).
| |
| | t/T IS already a pure number. The 2pi turns it into a phase angle, in
| | radians....also a pure number...I usually leave out the 2pi because it
is
| | understood.
|
| What you call T is the period, P.
| When I wrote Doolin'sStar I used T for the APPARENT time interval.
| http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Doolin'sStar.GIF
| You are not helping by changing the definition of variables.
|
| Let's not argue about trivialities, chief. When you adjust your time axis
for
| arrival time of each sample 'bunch' your program will produce the same
curves
| that mine does.

Yes, but now that we agree on the principles involved it is time to step
back, look around and tidy up the mess left behind. That's what you are
writing about, so let's cross the 't's and dot the 'i's and leave a neat and
tidy theory without any loose ends.


| | So T must be the
| | period (symbol P) and t must lie between 0 and 2pi.
| |
| | We know the correct equation is c + v(cos(2pi.t/T), where v is the
radial
| | velocity. That means it already includes cos(pitch)
|
| *I* know that v is your sqrt(vellx^2 + velly^2), see sheet 2 of
| http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...lsonMethod.xls
| because Wilson's Wobbly Worbits are Wedge-on and v does not
| include cos(pitch).
|
| Cos pitch is included in my velocity value. that should be obvious.

Obvious to you but it isn't obvious to others. The orbital velocity isn't
even close to the radial velocity, yet you want to call both of them v.
You know what you mean but nobody else does.
Look, if I go into a shop in Britain to make a purchase, the price on
the sticker is the price I pay and it includes value added tax (VAT).
That should be obvious.
But if I go into a shop in the USA to make a purchase, the price on the
sticker does NOT include sales tax. I have to pay more than the sticker
price. That should be obvious.
Two different conventions are never "obvious".
The date today in Britain is 12/3/2011, obviously.
The date today in the USA is 3/12/2011, obviously.
No, it is not the 3rd of December yet, it is still the 12th of March.
The USA has a conventional way of writing the date: month first,
then day, then year. It's no good saying which is right and which
is wrong, it is their convention, and anyway both are wrong, it
should be year first as that is the most significant. But when in
Rome, do as the Romans do. What you are saying is NOT obvious.

|
| | If the orbit is inclined the light moves at
| | c+v.cos(inclination).sin(t/P mod 2pi), again for a circular orbit.
| | If a starting point is defined for periapsis (not relevant for
circular
| | orbits,
| | but needed for elliptical orbits) then the equation becomes
| | c+v.cos(inclination).sin( [phi + t/P] mod 2pi), where phi is the angle
| | of periapsis to the line of sight. For elliptical orbits the sin
function
| | cannot be used except as an approximation.
| |
| | Of course...
|
| Ok, so v isn't the radial velocity, it is the orbital velocity composed
| of vellx and velly, and P is the period, not T.
|
| The usual convention for period in for instance, the traveling wave
equation is
| the agreek letter Tor, which is replaced by T in ascii.

The greek letter is 'tau', not 'tor'.
That is precisely the kind of ugly mess and confusion you are leaving
behind that I'm talking about. The relativists confuse t, tau and t' because
they are following their own convention and think it is obvious, but
Einstein has a clear distinction between x, x' and xi and does not use t'
at all. That's how the arguments begin.
We are talking here about the time to complete an orbit, and that means
there is a one-one mapping from t/P to angle. We are not discussing
a ****ing wave equation.

|
| I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm saying we need to be consistent
| and clear. When writing a paper or a program, the first thing is to
| list definitions so that we all know what they mean.
| Radial velocity = c+v.cos(psi).sin([phi + t/P] mod 2pi).
| psi = 0 for edge on. psi and phi are constants.
|
| I have explained how all orbit configurations can be accomodated by using
edge
| on ones. I also expect my readers to be able to understand what my (few)
| equations imply.
|
It's ok to have few equations. Indeed, the fewer the better. It is not ok to
embed cos(psi) in v.sin(phi+t/P) and then assume it is "obvious". The time
has come to be clear and concise, you are now at the writing stage, and I
expect you to be able to understand common ****ing sense. Why is it
difficult for you to understand other people are not going to make your
assumptions?
Britain: price includes VAT.
Round the price up, take off a penny, it's £4.99 inc VAT.
I get a penny change from a £5 note.
USA: price does NOT include sales tax.
Round the price up, take off a penny, it's $4.99 + tax = $5.34,
let the purchaser know how much his government is charging.
I need another few cents to pay for my chocolate and now I'm
embarrassed, I don't have enough change and didn't understand
the "obvious" convention.