Aether or whatever

"sean" wrote in message oups.com...
On 9 Mar, 16:28, "George Dishman" wrote:
"sean" wrote in message
For simulations showing how emission theory can explain the MMx and
sagnac results see..
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=sagnac


You have it exactly right, Sean. Well one.
Now see how it explains a cepheid.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...lgol/Algol.htm


Needless to say you are wasting your time with Dishwater.

On 16 Mar, 19:53, "Androcles" wrote:
"sean" wrote in ooglegroups.com...
On 9 Mar, 16:28, "George Dishman" wrote:
"sean" wrote in message
For simulations showing how emission theory can explain the MMx and
sagnac results see..
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=sagnac

You have it exactly right,Sean. Well one.
Now see how it explains a cepheid.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...lgol/Algol.htm
Hi
I cant answer this right away as Im not sure if your algol page is
about cepheids? It doesnt mention them on the page . The luminosity
lightcurve you reproduce at the top of the page is quite different
from the cepheid luminosity lightcurves I ve looked at elsewhere which
confuses me a bit as other lightcurves Ive seen look more lile wave
forms with a fred like shape rather than a flat line with a periodic
dip as your graph shows (or is that Goodrichs (sory about the spelling
of his name is Ive got that wrong). However these other lightcurves
Ive seen do look a lot like your emmision theory doppler shifted
lightcurve rather than the SR lightcurve.
Are you saying that cepheids variability is due to a doppler shifted
lightsource rotating around a companion? Rather than the standard
explanation of a star that varies in size due to reionization etc. ?
The only other point I can think of is.. how do you work out that a
non SR doppler shift lightcurve would have a fred like profile(fast
rise extended decay profile). Ive thought about it and to me if a star
rotates about a companion then the light if its velocity is source
dependent would be the same as a SR profile. Both increase as the star
moves towards and decrease at the same rate as it moves away. And I
would have thought that the increase in luminosity as it moves towards
us would have the same shape as the decrease as it moves away?
Sean

"sean" wrote in message oups.com...
On 16 Mar, 19:53, "Androcles" wrote:
"sean" wrote in ooglegroups.com...
On 9 Mar, 16:28, "George Dishman" wrote:
"sean" wrote in message
For simulations showing how emission theory can explain the MMx and
sagnac results see..
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=sagnac

You have it exactly right,Sean. Well one.
Now see how it explains a cepheid.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...lgol/Algol.htm
Hi
I cant answer this right away as Im not sure if your algol page is
about cepheids?

Oh yes, it is very much about cepheids. Look at this curve.

http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...rnicus/A2C.gif

Algol is a cepheid with its peristron aligned with the line of sight.
The only thing I'm changing is a few orbital parameters.

Here's a newer model of Sagnac,
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde.../Sagnac/Z1.gif
taken from
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...nac/Sagnac.htm


It doesnt mention them on the page . The luminosity
lightcurve you reproduce at the top of the page is quite different
from the cepheid luminosity lightcurves I ve looked at elsewhere which
confuses me a bit as other lightcurves Ive seen look more lile wave
forms with a fred like shape rather than a flat line with a periodic
dip as your graph shows (or is that Goodrichs (sory about the spelling
of his name is Ive got that wrong). However these other lightcurves
Ive seen do look a lot like your emmision theory doppler shifted
lightcurve rather than the SR lightcurve.

When I first started modelling the effect of what we'd see from
a moving source I thought to myself this can't be right, Algol
throws a real wobbler into it and gave up for a couple of years.
Then later I decided to rewrite the program from scratch and
suddenly I saw the luminosity curve of Algol appear.


Are you saying that cepheids variability is due to a doppler shifted
lightsource rotating around a companion?


No. I'm saying that cepheid variability is caused by the speed
of light being c+v with respect to the observer and that Algol
is just another cepheid whose ellipictical orbit just happens
to be aligned with our line of sight to it. Fast light emitted
later catches up with slow light emitted earlier and we see
both arriving at the same time.



Rather than the standard
explanation of a star that varies in size due to reionization etc. ?

Nope.

The only other point I can think of is.. how do you work out that a
non SR doppler shift lightcurve would have a fred like profile(fast
rise extended decay profile).

SR is total garbage, and of course I have.


Ive thought about it and to me if a star
rotates about a companion then the light if its velocity is source
dependent would be the same as a SR profile.

What's an "SR profile"? I've never heard of it.


Both increase as the star
moves towards and decrease at the same rate as it moves away. And I
would have thought that the increase in luminosity as it moves towards
us would have the same shape as the decrease as it moves away?

Don't think, let a computer do the modelling. Why keep a dog
and bark yourself?
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...rnicus/LCV.htm