#21
|
|||
|
|||
Arago vs Vogel
"OG" napisal w wiadomosci ... On 30/10/2011 20:31, Szczepan Bialek wrote: napisal w wiadomosci ... On 30/10/2011 15:37, Szczepan Bialek wrote: It seems to me that the only way to measure the angle of refraction is to measure the absorption line position. You are mistaken. Arago's experiment simply looked at the angle or refraction. But the line position was the same for stars: "http://www.archive.org/stream/spectrumanalysis00esterich/spectrumanalysis00esterich_djvu.txt "Indeed, these observations would scarcely be possible, were it not that in the dark lines crossing the spec- tra of the sun and fixed stars, the places of some of which may be accurately ascertained, we have fixed positions in the spectrum, the degree of refrangibility or wave-length of which may be determined beforehand, both for the sun and terrestrial substances, and also for the stars or other sources of light supposed to be at rest. " What you can't see, because Fig X is not included, is that the positions of the lines is displaced because of the relative movements. So, the line position was NOT the same. The following text makes this clear. Below is the problem of the radial speeds of planets. Also the result is null: http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//...00243.000.html You are mistaken. That experiment was to detect oxygen lines in the atmosphere of Venus. You are right. The Vogel's result do not fit to them. Why not? In all textbooks is wrote that Arago, Mchelson-Morley and Truton-Noble fit together. So what (in your own words) is the problem with Vogel's result? The problem will appear if it is confirmed. What problem? Now it is mentioned only in Wiki. Without any comments. If it is right than: "This experiment, which demonstrated the effect of the earth's orbital movement on refraction is of great historical interest. " Arago's result yes. I still don't know why you think there's a problem with Vogel's result. I know that in the whole World students are told that at measuring of the radial speed of stars they should take into account the orbital speed of the Earth. Yes. The reason is the Vogel's result. Sort of. More accurately, Vogel's result is a measurement of the earth's orbital speed, hence, it needs to be taken into account. Arago's result is "yes" and Vogel's result is "yes". Is it possible? Of course it's possible. The speed of the incoming light is not changed by the relative motion of the source and detector (Arago), but the frequency of the spectral feature is changed (Vogel). It is some problem because in 1905 Einstein wrote that it is impossible to detect the orbital speed. So are the two possibilities: 1. Brace and Einstein did not know about Vogel's result. 2. Vogel's result become wrong. You are mistaken. Einstein wrote no such thing. What he wrote (in effect) is that the earth's orbital speed has no effect on the measured speed of light, which is the explanation behind Arago's null result. For me refraction = line position ("the dark lines crossing the spectra of the sun and fixed stars"). That's a mistake. The only detail which can be measured are the position of that dark lines. Arago used the achromatic prism. So you agree he couldn't have been looking at spectral lines if he was using an achromatic prism. What he measured was the simple angle of refraction. He tried to see if the different speed of the Earth relative to the source star made a difference to the angle of refraction. It doesn't But the next used the dark lines. But is possible that Arago's measurements and that to 1904 were not accurate. No, they were accurate enough - Why than the Vogel's result is totally unknown? Because he measured something that was not unexpected. The spectra methods are a little mystery. And what with the radioscopy: "In 1931, a Bell Telephone engineer, Karl Jansky (1905-1950), was trying to find where the interference disrupting transatlantic radiophone circuits came from. He discovered that some of the radio noise was not from the Earth--it was extraterrestrial. The primary source was the center of the Milky Way, in the constellation of Sagittarius. In 1936, an Illinois radio engineer, Grote Reber (b. 1911), pursued the phenomenon farther." From: http://physics.gmu.edu/~jevans/astr1..._txt.htm#5.2.1. The radio frequences are easy to measure. Are there the diurinal and annual effests? S* |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Arago vs Vogel
On 31/10/2011 09:20, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
napisal w wiadomosci ... On 30/10/2011 20:31, Szczepan Bialek wrote: napisal w wiadomosci ... On 30/10/2011 15:37, Szczepan Bialek wrote: It seems to me that the only way to measure the angle of refraction is to measure the absorption line position. You are mistaken. Arago's experiment simply looked at the angle or refraction. But the line position was the same for stars: "http://www.archive.org/stream/spectrumanalysis00esterich/spectrumanalysis00esterich_djvu.txt "Indeed, these observations would scarcely be possible, were it not that in the dark lines crossing the spec- tra of the sun and fixed stars, the places of some of which may be accurately ascertained, we have fixed positions in the spectrum, the degree of refrangibility or wave-length of which may be determined beforehand, both for the sun and terrestrial substances, and also for the stars or other sources of light supposed to be at rest. " What you can't see, because Fig X is not included, is that the positions of the lines is displaced because of the relative movements. So, the line position was NOT the same. The following text makes this clear. Below is the problem of the radial speeds of planets. Also the result is null: http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//...00243.000.html You are mistaken. That experiment was to detect oxygen lines in the atmosphere of Venus. You are right. The Vogel's result do not fit to them. Why not? In all textbooks is wrote that Arago, Mchelson-Morley and Truton-Noble fit together. So what (in your own words) is the problem with Vogel's result? The problem will appear if it is confirmed. What problem? Now it is mentioned only in Wiki. Without any comments. If it is right than: "This experiment, which demonstrated the effect of the earth's orbital movement on refraction is of great historical interest. " Arago's result yes. I still don't know why you think there's a problem with Vogel's result. I know that in the whole World students are told that at measuring of the radial speed of stars they should take into account the orbital speed of the Earth. Yes. The reason is the Vogel's result. Sort of. More accurately, Vogel's result is a measurement of the earth's orbital speed, hence, it needs to be taken into account. Arago's result is "yes" and Vogel's result is "yes". Is it possible? Of course it's possible. The speed of the incoming light is not changed by the relative motion of the source and detector (Arago), but the frequency of the spectral feature is changed (Vogel). It is some problem because in 1905 Einstein wrote that it is impossible to detect the orbital speed. So are the two possibilities: 1. Brace and Einstein did not know about Vogel's result. 2. Vogel's result become wrong. You are mistaken. Einstein wrote no such thing. What he wrote (in effect) is that the earth's orbital speed has no effect on the measured speed of light, which is the explanation behind Arago's null result. For me refraction = line position ("the dark lines crossing the spectra of the sun and fixed stars"). That's a mistake. The only detail which can be measured are the position of that dark lines. Arago used the achromatic prism. So you agree he couldn't have been looking at spectral lines if he was using an achromatic prism. What he measured was the simple angle of refraction. He tried to see if the different speed of the Earth relative to the source star made a difference to the angle of refraction. It doesn't But the next used the dark lines. But is possible that Arago's measurements and that to 1904 were not accurate. No, they were accurate enough - Why than the Vogel's result is totally unknown? Because he measured something that was not unexpected. The spectra methods are a little mystery. And what with the radioscopy: "In 1931, a Bell Telephone engineer, Karl Jansky (1905-1950), was trying to find where the interference disrupting transatlantic radiophone circuits came from. He discovered that some of the radio noise was not from the Earth--it was extraterrestrial. The primary source was the center of the Milky Way, in the constellation of Sagittarius. In 1936, an Illinois radio engineer, Grote Reber (b. 1911), pursued the phenomenon farther." From: http://physics.gmu.edu/~jevans/astr1..._txt.htm#5.2.1. The radio frequences are easy to measure. Are there the diurinal and annual effests? I'm sure there are, but to detect them you would need to have a radio receiver with good spectral resolution and a sources with narrow frequency spectral features. A bit of googling (using the words astronomical radio doppler effect diurnal) has brought up the user guide for the Miriad software package used by the Australia Telescope Compact Array (ACTA). http://www.atnf.csiro.au/computing/software/miriad/ The section related to Spectral Line Data Reduction makes it clear that the diurnal effect needs to be taken into account for fine velocity resolution observations http://www.atnf.csiro.au/computing/s...e/node134.html |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Arago vs Vogel
On Oct 31, 10:20*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
The radio frequences are easy to measure. Are there the diurinal and annual effests? S* The both of you are childish but are no better or worse than the rest. It would take 3 satellites referenced off each other and each of those to a planetary trait to work out the change in the orbital speed of the Earth from day to day,that hasn't been done and it cannot be done until an astronomer arrives on the scene with a healthy respect for planetary dynamics and less for stellar circumpolar motion. Let me guess,none of you have the faintest idea how the referencing works and even if I did explain how the equation of time works to extract the daily rotational component from the variations in orbital speed,you still wouldn't get it right as additional information is required and adjustments made. Continue on trying to impress yourselves,the great English innovator John Harrison had you lot pegged centuries ago when engineering innovation is required - "Now, in the former part of this book, I have treated about matters pertaining to the strictness of measuring time; and have shewn the deficiencies of such means as Mr. Graham had taken or made use of for that purpose; and I have also treated of the improper, troublesome, erroneous - tedious method, which the professors at Cambridge and Oxford would have to be for the longitude at sea:" " But indeed, had I continued under the hands of the rude commissioners, this completion, or great accomplishment, neither would, nor could, ever have been obtained; but however, providence otherwise ordered the matter, and I can now boldly say, that if the provision for the heat and cold could properly be in the balance itself, as it is in the pendulum, the watch [or my longitude time-keeper] would then perform to a few seconds in a year, yea, to such perfection now are imaginary impossibilities conquered; so the priests at Cambridge and Oxford, &c. may cease their pursuit in the longitude affair, and as otherwise then to occupy their time." John Harrison Dullards now as they were back then in Harrison's time,they are lost in the timekeeping system and their celestial sphere carousel and waste theirs and everyone else's time as Harrison rightly pointed out. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Arago vs Vogel
"oriel36" napisal w wiadomosci ... On Oct 31, 10:20 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote: The radio frequences are easy to measure. Are there the diurinal and annual effects? S* The both of you are childish but are no better or worse than the rest. It would take 3 satellites referenced off each other and each of those to a planetary trait to work out the change in the orbital speed of the Earth from day to day, I am not asking about changes in the orbital speed or the rotational speed. I am asking who was right: Arago or Vogel. For Brace (100 years ago) Arago and many others were right. Now (200 years later) the specra methods are so accurate that they detect the diurinal effect. Does they detect the annual efect? that hasn't been done and it cannot be done until an astronomer arrives on the scene with a healthy respect for planetary dynamics and less for stellar circumpolar motion. Let me guess,none of you have the faintest idea how the referencing works and even if I did explain how the equation of time works to extract the daily rotational component from the variations in orbital speed,you still wouldn't get it right as additional information is required and adjustments made. Continue on trying to impress yourselves,the great English innovator John Harrison had you lot pegged centuries ago when engineering innovation is required - "Now, in the former part of this book, I have treated about matters pertaining to the strictness of measuring time; and have shewn the deficiencies of such means as Mr. Graham had taken or made use of for that purpose; and I have also treated of the improper, troublesome, erroneous - tedious method, which the professors at Cambridge and Oxford would have to be for the longitude at sea:" " But indeed, had I continued under the hands of the rude commissioners, this completion, or great accomplishment, neither would, nor could, ever have been obtained; but however, providence otherwise ordered the matter, and I can now boldly say, that if the provision for the heat and cold could properly be in the balance itself, as it is in the pendulum, the watch [or my longitude time-keeper] would then perform to a few seconds in a year, yea, to such perfection now are imaginary impossibilities conquered; so the priests at Cambridge and Oxford, &c. may cease their pursuit in the longitude affair, and as otherwise then to occupy their time." John Harrison Dullards now as they were back then in Harrison's time,they are lost in the timekeeping system and their celestial sphere carousel and waste theirs and everyone else's time as Harrison rightly pointed out. May be that the spectra method are still inacurrate. So what are the result from the radio communications with spacecrafts? S* |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Arago vs Vogel
"OG" napisal w wiadomosci ... On 31/10/2011 09:20, Szczepan Bialek wrote: The spectra methods are a little mystery. And what with the radioscopy: "In 1931, a Bell Telephone engineer, Karl Jansky (1905-1950), was trying to find where the interference disrupting transatlantic radiophone circuits came from. He discovered that some of the radio noise was not from the Earth--it was extraterrestrial. The primary source was the center of the Milky Way, in the constellation of Sagittarius. In 1936, an Illinois radio engineer, Grote Reber (b. 1911), pursued the phenomenon farther." From: http://physics.gmu.edu/~jevans/astr1..._txt.htm#5.2.1. The radio frequences are easy to measure. Are there the diurinal and annual effests? I'm sure there are, but to detect them you would need to have a radio receiver with good spectral resolution and a sources with narrow frequency spectral features. A bit of googling (using the words astronomical radio doppler effect diurnal) has brought up the user guide for the Miriad software package used by the Australia Telescope Compact Array (ACTA). http://www.atnf.csiro.au/computing/software/miriad/ The section related to Spectral Line Data Reduction makes it clear that the diurnal effect needs to be taken into account for fine velocity resolution observations http://www.atnf.csiro.au/computing/s...e/node134.html The diurinal effect is confirmed by everybody. Using words astronomical radio annual doppler effect we have: "It is also possible to infer the position in the sky of a spacecraft from the Doppler data. This is accomplished by examining the diurnal variation imparted to the Doppler shift by the Earth's rotation. As the ground station rotates underneath a spacecraft, the Doppler shift is modulated by a sinusoid. The sinusoid's amplitude depends on the declination angle of the spacecraft and its phase depends upon the right ascension. These angles can therefore be estimated from a record of the Doppler shift that is ~at least! of several days duration. This allows for a determination of the distance to the spacecraft through the dynamics of spacecraft motion using standard orbit theory contained in the orbit determination programs." On the page 37 is wrote: "At early times the annual term is largest. During Interval II, the interval of the large spin-rate change anomaly, coherent oscillation is lost. During Interval III the oscillation is smaller and begins to die out." Who was right: Arago or Vogel? S* |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Arago vs Vogel
"Szczepan Bialek" napisał w wiadomo¶ci ... Using words astronomical radio annual doppler effect we have: The link: http://chaos.swarthmore.edu/courses/...er_Anomaly.pdf "It is also possible to infer the position in the sky of a spacecraft from the Doppler data. This is accomplished by examining the diurnal variation imparted to the Doppler shift by the Earth's rotation. As the ground station rotates underneath a spacecraft, the Doppler shift is modulated by a sinusoid. The sinusoid's amplitude depends on the declination angle of the spacecraft and its phase depends upon the right ascension. These angles can therefore be estimated from a record of the Doppler shift that is ~at least! of several days duration. This allows for a determination of the distance to the spacecraft through the dynamics of spacecraft motion using standard orbit theory contained in the orbit determination programs." On the page 37 is wrote: "At early times the annual term is largest. During Interval II, the interval of the large spin-rate change anomaly, coherent oscillation is lost. During Interval III the oscillation is smaller and begins to die out." Who was right: Arago or Vogel? S* |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Arago vs Vogel
On Nov 1, 6:11*pm, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
*"oriel36" napisal w ... On Oct 31, 10:20 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote: The radio frequences are easy to measure. Are there the diurinal and annual effects? S* The both of you are childish but are no better or worse than the rest. It would take 3 satellites referenced off each other and each of those to a planetary trait to work out the change in the *orbital speed of the Earth from day to day, I am not asking about changes in the orbital speed or the rotational speed. I am asking who was right: Arago or Vogel. You poor thing,you still believe that right ascension is a way to gauge planetary dynamics or what amounts to the same thing - that daily rotation/orbital motion and stellar circumpolar motion are equivalent. The polar coordinates turn in a 10366 mile annual circle about a traveling axis that is separate to daily rotation,that is the location where one satellite is fixed to a planetary trait,the rest is far too sophisticated for you and your approach and you would continuously miss the point,and 'missing the point' is an interjection I am seeing more and more lately as more of a symptom than a inquisitive position of readers. In normal times the issue of how the orbital speed of the Earth varies from day to day and especially right as this moment as empiricists once recognized at allhallontide - http://books.google.com/books?id=RyB...page&q&f=false I could answer those men why natural noon cycles vary as a reflection of two separate types of rotation to the Sun with the above value for the polar coordinates representing that orbital behavior of the Earth and right now is a significant orbital event as those men noticed in the behavior of the tides.There is no excitement in teasing out a new orbital component and a major one and that but such is this extremely dull situation which shows no signs of abating,not even with all out technological wonders. What empiricists are prepared to believe today is either crude or subhuman,it could be different but that is not my problem. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Arago vs Vogel
On 01/11/2011 18:16, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
napisal w wiadomosci ... On 31/10/2011 09:20, Szczepan Bialek wrote: The spectra methods are a little mystery. And what with the radioscopy: "In 1931, a Bell Telephone engineer, Karl Jansky (1905-1950), was trying to find where the interference disrupting transatlantic radiophone circuits came from. He discovered that some of the radio noise was not from the Earth--it was extraterrestrial. The primary source was the center of the Milky Way, in the constellation of Sagittarius. In 1936, an Illinois radio engineer, Grote Reber (b. 1911), pursued the phenomenon farther." From: http://physics.gmu.edu/~jevans/astr1..._txt.htm#5.2.1. The radio frequences are easy to measure. Are there the diurinal and annual effests? I'm sure there are, but to detect them you would need to have a radio receiver with good spectral resolution and a sources with narrow frequency spectral features. A bit of googling (using the words astronomical radio doppler effect diurnal) has brought up the user guide for the Miriad software package used by the Australia Telescope Compact Array (ACTA). http://www.atnf.csiro.au/computing/software/miriad/ The section related to Spectral Line Data Reduction makes it clear that the diurnal effect needs to be taken into account for fine velocity resolution observations http://www.atnf.csiro.au/computing/s...e/node134.html The diurinal effect is confirmed by everybody. Using words astronomical radio annual doppler effect we have: "It is also possible to infer the position in the sky of a spacecraft from the Doppler data. This is accomplished by examining the diurnal variation imparted to the Doppler shift by the Earth's rotation. As the ground station rotates underneath a spacecraft, the Doppler shift is modulated by a sinusoid. The sinusoid's amplitude depends on the declination angle of the spacecraft and its phase depends upon the right ascension. These angles can therefore be estimated from a record of the Doppler shift that is ~at least! of several days duration. This allows for a determination of the distance to the spacecraft through the dynamics of spacecraft motion using standard orbit theory contained in the orbit determination programs." On the page 37 is wrote: "At early times the annual term is largest. During Interval II, the interval of the large spin-rate change anomaly, coherent oscillation is lost. During Interval III the oscillation is smaller and begins to die out." Who was right: Arago or Vogel? Once again - they were both right. Arago attempted to measure a predicted* diurnal variation in the SPEED of incoming light by measuring a difference in the angle of refraction for white light. Arago did not measure any difference. He was right. Vogel measured a diurnal variation in the frequency/wavelength of spectral features as a result of the movement of the Earth. He was right. Arago was NOT looking at anything specifically related to spectral features. * I assume the prediction was based on a classical analysis of Snell's law in which the ratio of light speeds in the air and in the block is the same as the ratio of the (sine of) the angles. The hypothesis (I assume) was that incoming light would have greater speed when the Earth's movement had his laboratory approaching the source; this would increase the 'effective refractive index', thus increasing the angle of refraction. 12 hours later, when there is a relative movement away from the source, the angle of refraction would be reduced. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Arago vs Vogel
On Nov 1, 7:18*pm, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
*"Szczepan Bialek" napisał w rada.pl... Using words astronomical radio annual doppler effect we have: The link:http://chaos.swarthmore.edu/courses/...er_Anomaly.pdf "It is also possible to infer the position in the sky of a spacecraft from the Doppler data. This is accomplished by examining the diurnal variation imparted to the Doppler shift by the Earth's rotation. As the ground station rotates underneath a spacecraft, the Doppler shift is modulated by a sinusoid. The sinusoid's amplitude depends on the declination angle of the spacecraft and its phase depends upon the right ascension. These angles can therefore be estimated from a record of the Doppler shift that is ~at least! of several days duration. This allows for a determination of the distance to the spacecraft through the dynamics of spacecraft motion using standard orbit theory contained in the orbit determination programs." On the page 37 is wrote: "At early times the annual term is largest. During Interval II, the interval of the large spin-rate change anomaly, coherent oscillation is lost. During Interval III the oscillation is smaller and begins to die out." Who was right: Arago or Vogel? S* I actually don't mind working through these things,despite my poor descriptive skills I have this God given talent for the type of spacial awareness and physical considerations that comes with being an astronomer. Kepler's flawed insight between orbital periods and distance from the Sun is not an accurate description of orbital geometries but rather an equalization of orbital geometries,he even states it himself in a matter of fact way - "The proportion existing between the periodic times of any two planets is exactly the sesquiplicate proportion of the mean distances of the orbits, or as generally given,the squares of the periodic times are proportional to the cubes of the mean distances." Kepler "But it is absolutely certain and exact that the ratio which exists between the periodic times of any two planets is precisely the ratio of the 3/2th power of the mean distances, i.e., of the spheres themselves; provided, however, that the arithmetic mean between both diameters of the elliptic orbit be slightly less than the longer diameter." Kepler This is a long way from the ideology that planetary orbital trajectories are explained by way of Kepler so that of you are looking at any individual trajectory,such as that of a spacecraft,an acceleration is going to happen anyway against a mean orbital speed and you must understand that I really couldn't care less about this apparent anomalous 'acceleration' when there is a major modification to orbital geometries being held up by this irritating addiction to right ascension ideologies. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Arago vs Vogel
Uzytkownik "OG" napisal w wiadomosci ... On 01/11/2011 18:16, Szczepan Bialek wrote: The diurinal effect is confirmed by everybody. Using words astronomical radio annual doppler effect we have: The link: http://chaos.swarthmore.edu/courses/...er_Anomaly.pdf "It is also possible to infer the position in the sky of a spacecraft from the Doppler data. This is accomplished by examining the diurnal variation imparted to the Doppler shift by the Earth's rotation. As the ground station rotates underneath a spacecraft, the Doppler shift is modulated by a sinusoid. The sinusoid's amplitude depends on the declination angle of the spacecraft and its phase depends upon the right ascension. These angles can therefore be estimated from a record of the Doppler shift that is ~at least! of several days duration. This allows for a determination of the distance to the spacecraft through the dynamics of spacecraft motion using standard orbit theory contained in the orbit determination programs." On the page 37 is wrote: "At early times the annual term is largest. During Interval II, the interval of the large spin-rate change anomaly, coherent oscillation is lost. During Interval III the oscillation is smaller and begins to die out." Who was right: Arago or Vogel? Once again - they were both right. Arago attempted to measure a predicted* diurnal variation It was the annual variation: "In 1818 Arago found that the refraction of a prism for star light was the same for light incident in the direction of the earth's orbital velocity vs. as for that coming in the opposite direction" in the SPEED of incoming light by measuring a difference in the angle of refraction for white light. Arago did not measure any difference. He was right. Vogel measured a diurnal variation It was also the annual variation. in the frequency/wavelength of spectral features as a result of the movement of the Earth. He was right. Arago was NOT looking at anything specifically related to spectral features. But Brace in 1904 did. * I assume the prediction was based on a classical analysis of Snell's law in which the ratio of light speeds in the air and in the block is the same as the ratio of the (sine of) the angles. Yes. The hypothesis (I assume) was that incoming light would have greater speed when the Earth's movement had his laboratory approaching the source; this would increase the 'effective refractive index', thus increasing the angle of refraction. 12 hours later, The both checked after 6 months. when there is a relative movement away from the source, the angle of refraction would be reduced. Everywhere are the same result: Diurinal effects exsists, annual is null. " During Interval III the oscillation is smaller and begins to die out." Stars are at a little long distances than Pionier. And no the annual oscillations. Do you agree? S* |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|