|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#2
September 11th 12, 06:37 PM
posted to sci.astro.amateur
|
|||
|
|||
Some pulsating variables and eclipsing binaries
On 9/11/12 12:33 PM, Anthony Ayiomamitis wrote:
Dear group ... and Oriel, An incredible stretch involving pristine clear skies the past 3.5 months is about to come to an end. Unfortunately the seeing was uncharacteristically subpar for this time of the year and which meant a lot of photometry work rather than DSO imaging as a means to be busy and productive given the generous stretch of clear skies. Further to my email from a few weeks ago involving the eight exoplanet transits captured in June/2012, here are some further results involving pulsating variables and eclipsing binaries during the past few weeks: (1) pulsating variables PS Cas - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...S-20120909.htm (quite dim varying between mag 14.6 and 15.0) V1040 Cas - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...0-20120908.htm NSVS 11672463 - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...3-20120907.htm GSC 3986-1266 - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...6-20120903.htm GSC 0513-0624 - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...4-20120901.htm RR Lyr - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...R-20120824.htm (a 14-hr marathon and light curve) GSC 4500-0083 - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...3-20120806.htm GSC 1076-0158 - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...8-20120805.htm GSC 4464-0924 - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...4-20120804.htm DY Her - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...Y-20120708.htm NSVS 14243430 - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...0-20120706.htm V1086 Her - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...6-20120629.htm V2455 Cyg - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...5-20120628.htm GSC 2696-1396 - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...6-20120626.htm GSC 3934-1904 - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...4-20120622.htm LW Dra - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...W-20120621.htm GSC 3043-0463 - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...3-20120616.htm YZ UMi - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...5-20120613.htm GSC 3483-0746 - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...6-20120611.htm GSC 2108-1564 - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...4-20120609.htm V1116 Her - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...6-20120602.htm (2) eclipsing binaries V1139 Cas - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...9-20120909.htm NU Cas - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...U-20120908.htm V1139 Cyg - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...1-20120905.htm (smaller secondary yielding a flat eclipse) V473 Cas - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...3-20120904.htm V1138 Cas - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...8-20120904.htm NW Cep - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...W-20120903.htm V1115 Cas - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...5-20120902.htm V471 Cas - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...1-20120902.htm V1107 Cas - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...7-20120828.htm V700 Cyg - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...0-20120825.htm KN Vul - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...N-20120822.htm DR Vul - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...R-20120819.htm GSC 4466-2476 - http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...6-20120804.htm Anthony. Wow -- Thank You, Anthony. -Sam 
|
|
#3
September 11th 12, 10:52 PM
posted to sci.astro.amateur
|
|||
|
|||
|
Some pulsating variables and eclipsing binaries
"Anthony Ayiomamitis" wrote in message ...
Dear group ... and Oriel, Anthony. http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...R-20120824.htm “A variable star, as its name suggests, is a star whose magnitude varies intrinsically” No it doesn’t. A variable star appears to vary because light from the approaching side of its orbit catches up with light from the receding side of its orbit. The intrinsic magnitude is constant. Contrary to popular myth and magic there is no aether and light’s velocity is c+v relative to Earth. Your outlandish claim is not based on science and mathematics but on bigotry and ignorance. A bent stick in water is, as its name suggests, a stick whose bend varies intrinsically. You don’t need to say “intrinsically”, nor do you have any knowledge of it being intrinsic. http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Doolin'sStar.GIF -- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway
|
|
#4
September 11th 12, 11:27 PM
posted to sci.astro.amateur
|
|||
|
|||
|
Some pulsating variables and eclipsing binaries
Τη Τετάρτη, 12 Σεπτεμβρίου 2012 12:53:40 π.μ. UTC+3, ο χρήστης Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway *γραψε:
"Anthony Ayiomamitis" wrote in message ... Dear group ... and Oriel, Anthony. * http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...R-20120824.htm * “A variable star, as its name suggests, is a star whose magnitude varies intrinsically” * No it doesn’t. A variable star appears to vary because light from the approaching side of its orbit catches up with light from the receding side of its orbit. The intrinsic magnitude is constant. Contrary to popular myth and magic there is no aether and light’s velocity is c+v relative to Earth. Your outlandish claim is not based on science and mathematics but on bigotry and ignorance. A bent stick in water is, as its name suggests, a stick whose bend varies intrinsically.* You don’t need to say “intrinsically”, nor do you have any knowledge of it being intrinsic. * http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Doolin'sStar.GIF * -- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway Androcles, If your logic was correct, would not the light curve then be perfectly symmetrical? The only perfectly symmetrical light curves I have seen or produced are those involving eclipsing binaries and for obvious reasons. Ex. http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...3-20120904.htm . How do you explain this assymetry (amogst MANY others): http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...R-20120824.htm ? Anthony.
|
|
#5
September 12th 12, 12:43 AM
posted to sci.astro.amateur
|
|||
|
|||
|
Some pulsating variables and eclipsing binaries
"Anthony Ayiomamitis" wrote in message ...
Τη Τετάρτη, 12 Σεπτεμβρίου 2012 12:53:40 π.μ. UTC+3, ο χρήστης Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway *γραψε: "Anthony Ayiomamitis" wrote in message ... Dear group ... and Oriel, Anthony. http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...R-20120824.htm “A variable star, as its name suggests, is a star whose magnitude varies intrinsically” No it doesn’t. A variable star appears to vary because light from the approaching side of its orbit catches up with light from the receding side of its orbit. The intrinsic magnitude is constant. Contrary to popular myth and magic there is no aether and light’s velocity is c+v relative to Earth. Your outlandish claim is not based on science and mathematics but on bigotry and ignorance. A bent stick in water is, as its name suggests, a stick whose bend varies intrinsically. You don’t need to say “intrinsically”, nor do you have any knowledge of it being intrinsic. http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Doolin'sStar.GIF -- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway Androcles, If your logic was correct, would not the light curve then be perfectly symmetrical? ================================================== ======= Good thought, Anthony, but no. Orbits are usually elliptical and their orientation to the observer is (to date) only guessed at. The only perfectly symmetrical light curves I have seen or produced are those involving eclipsing binaries and for obvious reasons. Ex. http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...3-20120904.htm . ========================================== Bent sticks in water are “obviously” bent because we can see they are. No reasons are “obvious”, Anthony. They have to be carefully computed. How do you explain this assymetry (amogst MANY others): http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...R-20120824.htm ? =================================== So–called “eclipsing binaries” have the major axis of the ellipse aligned with the line-of-sight. They are not binaries at all, except in the sense that they have planets. The source of light, the primary, orbits a common centre it shares with the planet, and therefore it MUST move. Algol playing peek-a-boo behind a “dark companion” is nonsensical, a dark star as big as Algol itself but emits no light of its own? Inconceivable. Amongst many others the asymmetry doesn’t have the major axis of the ellipse aligned with the line-of-sight. Changing b-Persei to d-Cephei and back again without changing distance. http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...rnicus/A2C.gif Angle of inclination to the celestial plane, eccentricity, Major Axis, Period and Yaw to the line of sight all change: Carefully computed, not hand drawn. -- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway
|
|
#6
September 12th 12, 06:24 AM
posted to sci.astro.amateur
|
|||
|
|||
|
Some pulsating variables and eclipsing binaries
On Sep 11, 7:33*pm, Anthony Ayiomamitis wrote:
Dear group ... and Oriel, That should be - 'Dear magnification enthusiasts' and with good reason. The great astronomers in antiquity,at least those who set the foundations for planetary dynamics around the Sun, all share one trait with those astronomers who first worked on the Earth's motions - they could distinguish between the normal sense which assigns 'above' and below' to celestial observations as opposed to the more productive line of thought which abolishes the 'above/ below' conception when working with solar system or Universal structure - "And we do not go wrong, I think, when we assign to those bodies above denominated such immense depth and distance, and leave to that which is below a certain circular course and broadway as much as lies between earth and the moon: for neither the man who pretends the summit of heaven to be the sole above, and denominates all the rest as below, is reasonable in his definition; nor yet is he who circumscribes below by the limits of Earth, or rather by the Center, to be listened to: but even moveable. . . . inasmuch as the universe allows of the interval required by reason of its own extensiveness. But in reply to such as demand that all which is separate from earth shall be consequently above and on high, another directly responds with the contrary axiom, that all which is reckoned from the fixed circumference is to be considered as below.".Plutarch http://thriceholy.net/Texts/Moon.html It is the most notable feature of magnification enthusiasts or even those who sit on their porch and go star hopping or whatever they call it that they are entirely oblivious to the fact that they are on a moving Earth and traveling through space.You let a clock dictate the motions of the Sun whereas not a single astronomer until the late 17th century ever considered a wandering analemma Sun much less explain it and this alone is why you are outsiders in context of the historical and technical details which hold astronomy together.I use quotes from people like Galileo to encourage those who can raise themselves above the standard of a magnification driven ideology of 'above/below' to the idea that we look out into the celestial arena and work with structure,cause and effect and things like that. "Copernicus himself knew the power over our ideas that is exerted by custom and by our inveterate way of conceiving things since infancy. Hence, in order not to increase for us the confusion and difficulty of abstraction, after he had first demonstrated that the motions which appear to us to belong to the sun or to the firmament are really not there but in the earth, he went on calling them motions of the sun and of the heavens when he later constructed his tables to apply them to use. He thus speaks of sunrise and sunset, of the rising and setting of the stars, of changes in the obliquity of the ecliptic and of variations in the equinoctial points, of the mean motion and variations in motion of the sun, and so on. All these things really relate to the earth, but since we are fixed to the earth and consequently share in its every motion, we cannot discover them in the earth directly, and are obliged to refer them to the heavenly bodies in which they make their appearance to us. Hence we name them as if they took place where they appear to us to take place; and from this one may see how natural it is to accommodate things to our customary way of seeing them." Galileo You had plenty of time to alter your analemma section in your website and haven't budged -fair enough,your descendants will certainly pay dearly for having their name attached to the only Greek ever to imagine a wandering Sun and I have nothing further to say to you on this matter.
|
|
#7
September 12th 12, 12:22 PM
posted to sci.astro.amateur
|
|||
|
|||
|
Some pulsating variables and eclipsing binaries
Τη Τετάρτη, 12 Σεπτεμβρίου 2012 2:44:16 π.μ. UTC+3, ο χρήστης Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway *γραψε:
"Anthony Ayiomamitis" wrote in message ... Τη Τετάρτη, 12 Σεπτεμβρίου 2012 12:53:40 π.μ. UTC+3, ο χρήστης Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway *γραψε: "Anthony Ayiomamitis" wrote in message ... Dear group ... and Oriel, Anthony. * http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...R-20120824.htm * “A variable star, as its name suggests, is a star whose magnitude varies intrinsically” * No it doesn’t. A variable star appears to vary because light from the approaching side of its orbit catches up with light from the receding side of its orbit. The intrinsic magnitude is constant. Contrary to popular myth and magic there is no aether and light’s velocity is c+v relative to Earth. Your outlandish claim is not based on science and mathematics but on bigotry and ignorance. A bent stick in water is, as its name suggests, a stick whose bend varies intrinsically. You don’t need to say “intrinsically”, nor do you have any knowledge of it being intrinsic. ** http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Doolin'sStar.GIF * -- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway Androcles, If your logic was correct, would not the light curve then be perfectly symmetrical? ================================================== ======= Good thought, Anthony, but no. Orbits are usually elliptical and their orientation to the observer is (to date) only guessed at. * * The only perfectly symmetrical light curves I have seen or produced are those involving eclipsing binaries and for obvious reasons. Ex. http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...3-20120904.htm . ========================================== Bent sticks in water are “obviously” bent because we can see they are. No reasons are “obvious”, Anthony. They have to be carefully computed. * * How do you explain this assymetry (amogst MANY others): http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...R-20120824.htm ? =================================== So–called “eclipsing binaries” have the major axis of the ellipse aligned with the line-of-sight. They are not binaries at all, except in the sense that they have planets. The source of light, the primary, orbits a common centre it shares with the planet, and therefore it MUST move. Algol playing peek-a-boo behind a “dark companion” is nonsensical, a dark star as big as Algol itself but emits no light of its own? Inconceivable. Amongst many others the asymmetry doesn’t have the major axis of the ellipse aligned with the line-of-sight. Changing b-Persei to d-Cephei and back again without changing distance. http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...rnicus/A2C.gif Angle of inclination to the celestial plane, eccentricity, Major Axis, Period and Yaw to the line of sight all change: Carefully computed, not hand drawn. * -- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway Whenever a star is suspected to be variable, spectroscopy does ensue in order to check whether the cycle of the variability is correlated to the orbit.. There are examples where this has been shown to be the case and, to this end, the variability is artificial for the reason you cite earlier. However, your citation suggests that this is the case for all pulsating variables and this is something which is not true. Stars have their outer "surface" expand and contract with the dominating theory suggesting ionization is at play where a hot core leads to ionization and expansion; the expansion leads to cooling (of the outer layers) and where ionization now stops; thus leading to contraction and a reheating which activates ionization again etc. It is my understanding, right or wrong, that the incessant expansion and contraction of (variables) stars is basically a given fact. If ionization is really at play or not is something which is to be proven. Your earlier suggestion does have a basis but only for "variable" stars whose cycle has been correlated to their orbit. However, this is not an all-inclusive conclusion. For example, how do you explain the Blazhko effect where every 85-86 days RR Lyr goes through a complete cycle related to the amplitude of its maxima? Ditto for other pulsators which show a steady and constant anomaly in the ascending branch of the light-curve (and delta Scuti's which show a similar anomaly in the descending branch - ex. http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...5-20120103.htm ). Also, here is a nice weird pulsator and for which I fail to see how your earlier suggestion can be used to explain its behaviour: http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...4-20120609.htm . Finally, let's go to BL Cam: http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...L-20111128.htm ... the amplitude of the maximum here also varies and I fail to see how your earlier comment can explain this observation. As an aside, in a few months I will spend a complete evening on BL Cam so as to get 10-12 such cycles and where the variability in the amplitude of the maximum will really show up nicely. Anthony.
|
|
#8
September 12th 12, 01:32 PM
posted to sci.astro.amateur
|
|||
|
|||
|
Some pulsating variables and eclipsing binaries
"Anthony Ayiomamitis" wrote in message ...
Τη Τετάρτη, 12 Σεπτεμβρίου 2012 2:44:16 π.μ. UTC+3, ο χρήστης Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway *γραψε: "Anthony Ayiomamitis" wrote in message ... Τη Τετάρτη, 12 Σεπτεμβρίου 2012 12:53:40 π.μ. UTC+3, ο χρήστης Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway *γραψε: "Anthony Ayiomamitis" wrote in message ... Dear group ... and Oriel, Anthony. http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...R-20120824.htm “A variable star, as its name suggests, is a star whose magnitude varies intrinsically” No it doesn’t. A variable star appears to vary because light from the approaching side of its orbit catches up with light from the receding side of its orbit. The intrinsic magnitude is constant. Contrary to popular myth and magic there is no aether and light’s velocity is c+v relative to Earth. Your outlandish claim is not based on science and mathematics but on bigotry and ignorance. A bent stick in water is, as its name suggests, a stick whose bend varies intrinsically. You don’t need to say “intrinsically”, nor do you have any knowledge of it being intrinsic. http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Doolin'sStar.GIF -- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway Androcles, If your logic was correct, would not the light curve then be perfectly symmetrical? ================================================== ======= Good thought, Anthony, but no. Orbits are usually elliptical and their orientation to the observer is (to date) only guessed at. The only perfectly symmetrical light curves I have seen or produced are those involving eclipsing binaries and for obvious reasons. Ex. http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...3-20120904.htm . ========================================== Bent sticks in water are “obviously” bent because we can see they are. No reasons are “obvious”, Anthony. They have to be carefully computed. How do you explain this assymetry (amogst MANY others): http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...R-20120824.htm ? =================================== So–called “eclipsing binaries” have the major axis of the ellipse aligned with the line-of-sight. They are not binaries at all, except in the sense that they have planets. The source of light, the primary, orbits a common centre it shares with the planet, and therefore it MUST move. Algol playing peek-a-boo behind a “dark companion” is nonsensical, a dark star as big as Algol itself but emits no light of its own? Inconceivable. Amongst many others the asymmetry doesn’t have the major axis of the ellipse aligned with the line-of-sight. Changing b-Persei to d-Cephei and back again without changing distance. http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...rnicus/A2C.gif Angle of inclination to the celestial plane, eccentricity, Major Axis, Period and Yaw to the line of sight all change: Carefully computed, not hand drawn. -- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway Whenever a star is suspected to be variable, spectroscopy does ensue in order to check whether the cycle of the variability is correlated to the orbit. There are examples where this has been shown to be the case and, to this end, the variability is artificial for the reason you cite earlier. ================================================= You have never seen the orbit of a star and neither has anyone else (with the possible exception of Sol orbiting the barycentre it shares with Jupiter, or Sirius A with Sirius B). Perhaps you are referring to the orbit of the Earth. -- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway However, your citation suggests that this is the case for all pulsating variables and this is something which is not true. ====================== As I stated earlier, your outlandish claim is not based on science and mathematics but on bigotry and ignorance. -- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway Stars have their outer "surface" expand and contract with the dominating theory suggesting ionization is at play where a hot core leads to ionization and expansion; the expansion leads to cooling (of the outer layers) and where ionization now stops; thus leading to contraction and a reheating which activates ionization again etc. ================================ So you are claiming the surface expands at 30 km/sec for two days, then collapses at 20 km/sec for three days. - Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway It is my understanding, right or wrong, that the incessant expansion and contraction of (variables) stars is basically a given fact. If ionization is really at play or not is something which is to be proven. ================================ I suggest you commence proving. It is my understanding, right or wrong, that water saturates the wood, softening it, the part above the surface tries to float and the part below the surface sags and tries to sink, thus bending the stick at the surface, which is basically a given fact. If saturation is really at play or not is something which is to be proven. On the other hand it could be light that bends, but that notion is preposterous. The dominant theory is light travels in perfectly straight lines at exactly 299792458 m/s in nothing at all, and of course it is a fact that dominant theories dominate. -- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway Your earlier suggestion does have a basis but only for "variable" stars whose cycle has been correlated to their orbit. ========================== What orbit? -- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway However, this is not an all-inclusive conclusion. For example, how do you explain the Blazhko effect where every 85-86 days RR Lyr goes through a complete cycle related to the amplitude of its maxima? ============================== I explain it by there being more than one planet involved. An outer planet has a period of 85-86 days, the inner planet a much shorter period. - Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway Ditto for other pulsators which show a steady and constant anomaly in the ascending branch of the light-curve (and delta Scuti's which show a similar anomaly in the descending branch - ex. http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...5-20120103.htm ). Also, here is a nice weird pulsator and for which I fail to see how your earlier suggestion can be used to explain its behaviour: http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...4-20120609.htm . ============================== It is your failure to see that I am trying to help you with. - Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway Finally, let's go to BL Cam: http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photomet...L-20111128.htm ... the amplitude of the maximum here also varies and I fail to see how your earlier comment can explain this observation. As an aside, in a few months I will spend a complete evening on BL Cam so as to get 10-12 such cycles and where the variability in the amplitude of the maximum will really show up nicely. Anthony. ================================ Regrettably, as long as you continue to believe in dominant theories about the speed of light being constant in empty space you will never gain any insight into the true nature of astronomical bodies. Stars that huff and puff, stars that play peek-a-boo behind a dark companion, stars that blow themselves to smithereens twice in three months then settle back to normal only to blow up twice again 200 years later, stars that fire off flares brighter than the star itself, all can be explained by the speed of light being constant wrt the source and c+v with respect to the observer. Faster light arrives sooner, slower light arrives later, making the true sinusoidal velocity curve look like this: http://ts1.mm.bing.net/images/thumbn...d79cd3696b1291 with it's impossible acceleration. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor The razor asserts that one should proceed to simpler theories until simplicity can be traded for greater explanatory power. -- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway.
|
|
#9
September 12th 12, 03:22 PM
posted to sci.astro.amateur
|
|||
|
|||
|
Some pulsating variables and eclipsing binaries
On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 13:32:32 +0100, "Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of
Medway" wrote: HTMLHEAD/HEAD BODY dir=ltr DIV dir=ltr DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: = 14pt" DIV style="BORDER-BOTTOM-COLOR: #000000; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 4px solid; = Why do you post in HTML???? Please post in plain text.
|
|
#10
September 12th 12, 04:22 PM
posted to sci.astro.amateur
|
|||
|
|||
|
Some pulsating variables and eclipsing binaries
"Paul Schlyter" wrote in message . ..
On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 13:32:32 +0100, "Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway" wrote: HTMLHEAD/HEAD BODY dir=ltr DIV dir=ltr DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: = 14pt" DIV style="BORDER-BOTTOM-COLOR: #000000; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 4px solid; = Why do you post in HTML???? ================================== I write in html because this is 2012, not MCMXII, because it has a greater usefulness and because I can. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML I suggest you get a free web browser that can interpret it for you. Please post in plain text. ====================== No. Plain text does not support Greek letters and I’m tired of writing \alpha \beta \gamma \delta et cetera, letters that are still in use today around the world and frequently used in mathematics. I don’t agree that only Latin characters can be used just because some retarded Americans think communication ends with antique ASCII. Please evolve to at least 1991 and start using html yourself, you’ve had 21 years to get used to it. Otherwise don’t read my posts, you have that freedom of choice even in Sweden (Sverige). Post in Swedish and I won’t read your posts either. -- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Pulsating variables and two exoplanet transits | Anthony Ayiomamitis[_1_] | Amateur Astronomy | 2 | May 1st 11 07:33 PM |
| KZ Hya / GW UMa - High-amplitude short-duration pulsating variables | Anthony Ayiomamitis[_1_] | Amateur Astronomy | 2 | February 22nd 11 08:56 AM |
| pre 2006 catalogued FASTT candidate variables in Nicholson's"uncatalogued" red variables' paper | newvariables | Amateur Astronomy | 2 | July 4th 09 09:41 PM |
| Anyone know anything about eclipsing binaries? | Robin Leadbeater | UK Astronomy | 5 | October 5th 05 12:06 PM |
| Eclipsing sun | Toma | Amateur Astronomy | 23 | December 2nd 03 03:04 AM |
Linear Mode
