Why are the 'Fixed Stars' so FIXED?

On Mon, 2 Apr 2007 22:29:54 +0100, "OG" wrote:


"Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 2 Apr 2007 19:06:42 +0100, "OG" wrote:




Oh what a surprise, HW doesn't respond. Could it be he's wary of
reality?

Spectral lines don't measure OWLS, idiot.
Cut the insults if you want to be taken seriously.

Since spectral lines are narrow we know that all the light measured at on
time was given off at the same point in the velocity-time cycle.

If some light coming from a cepheid was travelling faster than the rest
(as
you seem to be proposing) we would get broadening of the spectral lines.

Poor boy! You're not related to eric geese by any change, are you?

So what's your explanation then?

Explanation of WHAT? You haven't even described a problem yet.

Einstein's Relativity - the greatest HOAX since jesus christ's mother.

"Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
...
On Mon, 2 Apr 2007 22:29:54 +0100, "OG" wrote:


"Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 2 Apr 2007 19:06:42 +0100, "OG"
wrote:




Oh what a surprise, HW doesn't respond. Could it be he's wary of
reality?

Spectral lines don't measure OWLS, idiot.
Cut the insults if you want to be taken seriously.

Since spectral lines are narrow we know that all the light measured at
on
time was given off at the same point in the velocity-time cycle.

If some light coming from a cepheid was travelling faster than the rest
(as
you seem to be proposing) we would get broadening of the spectral lines.

Poor boy! You're not related to eric geese by any change, are you?

So what's your explanation then?

Explanation of WHAT? You haven't even described a problem yet.

You need it spelling out?

1 You seem to argue that the light we see from gas that is moving away from
us is coming towards us slower than light from gas that is coming towards
us.

2 You also seem to be saying that Cepheid variability is due to 'faster'
light catching up with (and adding to the brightness of) slower light as
stars move in binary orbits or expand/contract as Cepheids do.

3 Doppler shift - speed of emitting gas towards us or away from us changes
the wavelength of the light as we receive it. We can measure the motion of
the gas because spectral lines are narrow and the wavelength can be measured
precisely.

If 2 and 3 are true, then the spectral lines from cepheids _should_ show a
range of wavelengths representing the whole spread of speeds from the
fastest to the slowest at any one time. This range of speeds would be
greatest when the fastest was catching up the slowest (at maximum brightness
I assume)

4 However, we do not see broad spectral lines from cepheid variables - hence
at any one time the light that we are receiving was all emitted at the same
speed relative to us.

If you accept 3 and propose 1 to be true, and imply that 2 is a consequence
of 1, then observation 4 is a problem for you.

On Tue, 3 Apr 2007 01:23:35 +0100, "OG" wrote:


"Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 2 Apr 2007 22:29:54 +0100, "OG" wrote:


Poor boy! You're not related to eric geese by any change, are you?

So what's your explanation then?

Explanation of WHAT? You haven't even described a problem yet.

You need it spelling out?

1 You seem to argue that the light we see from gas that is moving away from
us is coming towards us slower than light from gas that is coming towards
us.

That's correct. Light moves at c wrt its source and c+v wrt us.

2 You also seem to be saying that Cepheid variability is due to 'faster'
light catching up with (and adding to the brightness of) slower light as
stars move in binary orbits or expand/contract as Cepheids do.

Well the light curves match perfectly...that's alI can produce as evidence..

3 Doppler shift - speed of emitting gas towards us or away from us changes
the wavelength of the light as we receive it. We can measure the motion of
the gas because spectral lines are narrow and the wavelength can be measured
precisely.

According to BaTh, the frequency of arrival of 'wavecrests' varies with
incoming light speed. The BaTh doppler equation is virtually the same as those
of SR and LET for vc.

If 2 and 3 are true, then the spectral lines from cepheids _should_ show a
range of wavelengths representing the whole spread of speeds from the
fastest to the slowest at any one time. This range of speeds would be
greatest when the fastest was catching up the slowest (at maximum brightness
I assume)

This is not true. It is apparent that no 'fast light' ever catches the slower
light because of extinction.
For cepheids, a range should be observed because the spherical surface will be
expanding at different rates accros the disk.

4 However, we do not see broad spectral lines from cepheid variables - hence
at any one time the light that we are receiving was all emitted at the same
speed relative to us.

You WOULD EXPECT to see broadened lines from huff-puff cepheids for the above
reason.
If they are narrow, then it backs up the BaTh and the theory that they are
really just ordinary stars in orbit..

If you accept 3 and propose 1 to be true, and imply that 2 is a consequence
of 1, then observation 4 is a problem for you.

Thankyou Og for backing up the BaTh and shooting yourself in the foot.


Einstein's Relativity - the greatest HOAX since jesus christ's mother.

"Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
...
On Tue, 3 Apr 2007 01:23:35 +0100, "OG" wrote:


"Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 2 Apr 2007 22:29:54 +0100, "OG"
wrote:


Poor boy! You're not related to eric geese by any change, are you?

So what's your explanation then?

Explanation of WHAT? You haven't even described a problem yet.

You need it spelling out?

1 You seem to argue that the light we see from gas that is moving away
from
us is coming towards us slower than light from gas that is coming towards
us.

That's correct. Light moves at c wrt its source and c+v wrt us.

2 You also seem to be saying that Cepheid variability is due to 'faster'
light catching up with (and adding to the brightness of) slower light as
stars move in binary orbits or expand/contract as Cepheids do.

Well the light curves match perfectly...that's alI can produce as
evidence..

3 Doppler shift - speed of emitting gas towards us or away from us changes
the wavelength of the light as we receive it. We can measure the motion of
the gas because spectral lines are narrow and the wavelength can be
measured
precisely.

According to BaTh, the frequency of arrival of 'wavecrests' varies with
incoming light speed. The BaTh doppler equation is virtually the same as
those
of SR and LET for vc.

If 2 and 3 are true, then the spectral lines from cepheids _should_ show a
range of wavelengths representing the whole spread of speeds from the
fastest to the slowest at any one time. This range of speeds would be
greatest when the fastest was catching up the slowest (at maximum
brightness
I assume)

This is not true. It is apparent that no 'fast light' ever catches the
slower
light because of extinction.
For cepheids, a range should be observed because the spherical surface
will be
expanding at different rates accros the disk.

4 However, we do not see broad spectral lines from cepheid variables -
hence
at any one time the light that we are receiving was all emitted at the
same
speed relative to us.

You WOULD EXPECT to see broadened lines from huff-puff cepheids for the
above
reason.
If they are narrow, then it backs up the BaTh and the theory that they are
really just ordinary stars in orbit..

If you accept 3 and propose 1 to be true, and imply that 2 is a
consequence
of 1, then observation 4 is a problem for you.

Thankyou Og for backing up the BaTh and shooting yourself in the foot.


Einstein's Relativity - the greatest HOAX since jesus christ's mother.

"Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
...
On Tue, 3 Apr 2007 01:23:35 +0100, "OG" wrote:


"Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 2 Apr 2007 22:29:54 +0100, "OG"
wrote:


Poor boy! You're not related to eric geese by any change, are you?

So what's your explanation then?

Explanation of WHAT? You haven't even described a problem yet.

You need it spelling out?

1 You seem to argue that the light we see from gas that is moving away
from
us is coming towards us slower than light from gas that is coming towards
us.

That's correct. Light moves at c wrt its source and c+v wrt us.

2 You also seem to be saying that Cepheid variability is due to 'faster'
light catching up with (and adding to the brightness of) slower light as
stars move in binary orbits or expand/contract as Cepheids do.

Well the light curves match perfectly...that's alI can produce as
evidence..

3 Doppler shift - speed of emitting gas towards us or away from us changes
the wavelength of the light as we receive it. We can measure the motion of
the gas because spectral lines are narrow and the wavelength can be
measured
precisely.

According to BaTh, the frequency of arrival of 'wavecrests' varies with
incoming light speed. The BaTh doppler equation is virtually the same as
those
of SR and LET for vc.

What is BaTh?

If 2 and 3 are true, then the spectral lines from cepheids _should_ show a
range of wavelengths representing the whole spread of speeds from the
fastest to the slowest at any one time. This range of speeds would be
greatest when the fastest was catching up the slowest (at maximum
brightness
I assume)

This is not true. It is apparent that no 'fast light' ever catches the
slower
light because of extinction.

That's convenient - you had better explain 'extinction and why it only
affects some light and not all of it

For cepheids, a range should be observed because the spherical surface
will be
expanding at different rates accros the disk.

Agreed, but the profile will be modulated as the sine of the cepheid's
surface so that majority of the light emitted will be relatively close to
the actual surface velocity. The shape of a spectral line is known and
explained.

4 However, we do not see broad spectral lines from cepheid variables -
hence
at any one time the light that we are receiving was all emitted at the
same
speed relative to us.

You WOULD EXPECT to see broadened lines from huff-puff cepheids for the
above
reason.

See the above.

If they are narrow, then it backs up the BaTh and the theory that they are
really just ordinary stars in orbit..

No because you haven't explained 'extinction'

Nor does it explain why different elements have different velocity profiles
across the light curve.

If you accept 3 and propose 1 to be true, and imply that 2 is a
consequence
of 1, then observation 4 is a problem for you.

Thankyou Og for backing up the BaTh and shooting yourself in the foot.

On the contrary - you need to explain yourself

So 3 questions
What is BaTh ?
What is extinction and how precisely does it prevent fast light from
catching up slow light?
What is your explanation for the variable light curve of cepheids

I'm away from fast internet for the next few days so you can take your time
over these answers.

On Wed, 4 Apr 2007 00:28:34 +0100, "OG" wrote:


"Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 3 Apr 2007 01:23:35 +0100, "OG" wrote:


"Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
...
On Mon, 2 Apr 2007 22:29:54 +0100, "OG"
wrote:


Poor boy! You're not related to eric geese by any change, are you?

So what's your explanation then?

Explanation of WHAT? You haven't even described a problem yet.

You need it spelling out?

1 You seem to argue that the light we see from gas that is moving away
from
us is coming towards us slower than light from gas that is coming towards
us.

That's correct. Light moves at c wrt its source and c+v wrt us.

2 You also seem to be saying that Cepheid variability is due to 'faster'
light catching up with (and adding to the brightness of) slower light as
stars move in binary orbits or expand/contract as Cepheids do.

Well the light curves match perfectly...that's alI can produce as
evidence..

3 Doppler shift - speed of emitting gas towards us or away from us changes
the wavelength of the light as we receive it. We can measure the motion of
the gas because spectral lines are narrow and the wavelength can be
measured
precisely.

According to BaTh, the frequency of arrival of 'wavecrests' varies with
incoming light speed. The BaTh doppler equation is virtually the same as
those
of SR and LET for vc.

What is BaTh?

If 2 and 3 are true, then the spectral lines from cepheids _should_ show a
range of wavelengths representing the whole spread of speeds from the
fastest to the slowest at any one time. This range of speeds would be
greatest when the fastest was catching up the slowest (at maximum
brightness
I assume)

This is not true. It is apparent that no 'fast light' ever catches the
slower
light because of extinction.

That's convenient - you had better explain 'extinction and why it only
affects some light and not all of it

For cepheids, a range should be observed because the spherical surface
will be
expanding at different rates accros the disk.

Agreed, but the profile will be modulated as the sine of the cepheid's
surface so that majority of the light emitted will be relatively close to
the actual surface velocity. The shape of a spectral line is known and
explained.

4 However, we do not see broad spectral lines from cepheid variables -
hence
at any one time the light that we are receiving was all emitted at the
same
speed relative to us.

You WOULD EXPECT to see broadened lines from huff-puff cepheids for the
above
reason.

See the above.

If they are narrow, then it backs up the BaTh and the theory that they are
really just ordinary stars in orbit..

No because you haven't explained 'extinction'

Nor does it explain why different elements have different velocity profiles
across the light curve.

If you accept 3 and propose 1 to be true, and imply that 2 is a
consequence
of 1, then observation 4 is a problem for you.

Thankyou Og for backing up the BaTh and shooting yourself in the foot.

On the contrary - you need to explain yourself

So 3 questions
What is BaTh ?
What is extinction and how precisely does it prevent fast light from
catching up slow light?
What is your explanation for the variable light curve of cepheids

I'm away from fast internet for the next few days so you can take your time
over these answers.

Why should I bother to answer at all?



Einstein's Relativity - the greatest HOAX since jesus christ's mother.

"Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
...
On Wed, 4 Apr 2007 00:28:34 +0100, "OG" wrote:

On the contrary - you need to explain yourself

So 3 questions
What is BaTh ?
What is extinction and how precisely does it prevent fast light from
catching up slow light?
What is your explanation for the variable light curve of cepheids

I'm away from fast internet for the next few days so you can take your
time
over these answers.

Why should I bother to answer at all?

No reason - if you don't want to support your claims, I can't force you to.
You are in the position of wanting to promote your hypothesis, if you don't
want to support it . . .

On Wed, 4 Apr 2007 09:40:25 +0100, "OG" wrote:


"Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 4 Apr 2007 00:28:34 +0100, "OG" wrote:

On the contrary - you need to explain yourself

So 3 questions
What is BaTh ?
What is extinction and how precisely does it prevent fast light from
catching up slow light?
What is your explanation for the variable light curve of cepheids

I'm away from fast internet for the next few days so you can take your
time
over these answers.

Why should I bother to answer at all?

No reason - if you don't want to support your claims, I can't force you to.
You are in the position of wanting to promote your hypothesis, if you don't
want to support it . . .

It is in constant process of being supported.

If you want to enlarge on Einstei's second postulate then please do.

Tell me how and why light from differently moving sources should travel at the
same speed through space.

Einstein's Relativity - the greatest HOAX since jesus christ's mother.

On Apr 3, 5:07 pm, HW@....(Henri Wilson) wrote:
On Tue, 3 Apr 2007 01:23:35 +0100, "OG" wrote:

4 However, we do not see broad spectral lines from cepheid
variables - hence at any one time the light that we are
receiving was all emitted at the same speed relative to us.

You WOULD EXPECT to see broadened lines from huff-puff cepheids
for the above reason.
If they are narrow, then it backs up the BaTh and the theory
that they are really just ordinary stars in orbit..

If you accept 3 and propose 1 to be true, and imply that 2
is a consequenceof 1, then observation 4 is a problem for you.

Thankyou Og for backing up the BaTh and shooting yourself
in the foot.

Actually, Henri, you've just shot YOURSELF in the foot.

Periodic broadening and narrowing of the spectral lines of Cepheids
is a well documented phenomenon. This periodic Doppler broadening
results from three phenomena operating concurrently:

1) Projection effect. The parts of the photosphere pulsating in
our line of sight show greater Doppler shift than the parts of
the photosphere which are pulsating tangentially with respect
to us.
2) Thermal effect. Doppler broadening due to kinetic effects
varies as the Cepheid heats and cools through its cycle.
3) Turbulence effect. Spectral lines show periodic Doppler
broadening as the Cepheid "boils up" and relaxes.

Here is a good reference for you to read.
http://www.obs-hp.fr/www/preprints/pp119/pp119.html

BaTh fails yet again!!!!!

Jerry

On 3 Apr 2007 17:19:13 -0700, "Jerry" wrote:

On Apr 3, 5:07 pm, HW@....(Henri Wilson) wrote:
On Tue, 3 Apr 2007 01:23:35 +0100, "OG" wrote:

4 However, we do not see broad spectral lines from cepheid
variables - hence at any one time the light that we are
receiving was all emitted at the same speed relative to us.

You WOULD EXPECT to see broadened lines from huff-puff cepheids
for the above reason.
If they are narrow, then it backs up the BaTh and the theory
that they are really just ordinary stars in orbit..

If you accept 3 and propose 1 to be true, and imply that 2
is a consequenceof 1, then observation 4 is a problem for you.

Thankyou Og for backing up the BaTh and shooting yourself
in the foot.

Actually, Henri, you've just shot YOURSELF in the foot.

Periodic broadening and narrowing of the spectral lines of Cepheids
is a well documented phenomenon. This periodic Doppler broadening
results from three phenomena operating concurrently:

1) Projection effect. The parts of the photosphere pulsating in
our line of sight show greater Doppler shift than the parts of
the photosphere which are pulsating tangentially with respect
to us.
2) Thermal effect. Doppler broadening due to kinetic effects
varies as the Cepheid heats and cools through its cycle.
3) Turbulence effect. Spectral lines show periodic Doppler
broadening as the Cepheid "boils up" and relaxes.

Here is a good reference for you to read.
http://www.obs-hp.fr/www/preprints/pp119/pp119.html

BaTh fails yet again!!!!!

Where did I disagree with any of the above....?

I suggest you go back to sticking needles in dead bodies...


Jerry





Einstein's Relativity - the greatest HOAX since jesus christ's mother.