A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Amateur Astronomy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

VLBI



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 7th 12, 08:58 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
oriel36[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,478
Default VLBI

http://celebrating200years.noaa.gov/...come.html#vlbi

The use of VLBI has about the same intellectual substance as
photographing the wandering Sun analemma and these people are not only
wasting time with their wayward assertions, the connection between
planetary dynamics and terrestrial effects will continue to suffer due
to this intolerable notion.

I look at all these doctorates at the IERS and they can't seem to get
that right ascension techniques are homocentric but they assume their
telescopes are tracking an extra-galactic source as the Earth turns
but it takes one person with common sense to see that the telescope
turns around its own individual axis and besides,it is an extension of
the 24 hour AM/PM system which meshes with the Lat/Long system.

You do not have to talk like you are about to lay an egg with these
things and a blizzard of abbreviations are not going to disguise that
a great injustice prevails at the expense of not just astronomy with
humanity itself.If a concept that hinges on VLBI is throwing up 1465
rotations in 1461 days ,as this is what right ascension adherents
truly believe,then chant voodoo all you will,it began with a mistake
and has now grown into a monstrosity that nobody wants to touch apart
from what is discussed in this forum.
  #2  
Old December 9th 12, 12:09 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Quadibloc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,018
Default VLBI

On Dec 7, 12:58*pm, oriel36 wrote:
The use of VLBI has about the same intellectual substance as
photographing the wandering Sun analemma


You are saying this to a newsgroup filled with people who have
frequently seen with their own eyes that the resolving power of a
telescope increases with its aperture - which is another manifestation
of the wave nature of light (Newton was partial to the opposing
corpuscular theory) on which VLBI is based.

At long last, have you no sense of irony?

John Savard
  #3  
Old December 9th 12, 06:33 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Davoud[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,989
Default VLBI

Quadibloc:
You are saying this to a newsgroup filled with people who have
frequently seen with their own eyes that the resolving power of a
telescope increases with its aperture - which is another manifestation
of the wave nature of light (Newton was partial to the opposing
corpuscular theory) on which VLBI is based.


"I want to emphasize that light comes in this form‹particles. It is
very important to know that light behaves like particles, especially
for those of you have gone to school, where you probably learned
something about light behaving like waves. IŒm telling you the way it
/does/ behave‹like particles." ‹Richard Feynman in QED. (Emphasis his.)

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm
  #4  
Old December 9th 12, 02:31 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Quadibloc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,018
Default VLBI

On Dec 8, 10:33Â*pm, Davoud wrote:
Quadibloc:

You are saying this to a newsgroup filled with people who have
frequently seen with their own eyes that the resolving power of a
telescope increases with its aperture - which is another manifestation
of the wave nature of light (Newton was partial to the opposing
corpuscular theory) on which VLBI is based.


"I want to emphasize that light comes in this form‹particles. It is
very important to know that light behaves like particles, especially
for those of you have gone to school, where you probably learned
something about light behaving like waves. IÅ’m telling you the way it
/does/ behave‹like particles." ‹Richard Feynman in QED. (Emphasis his.)


I'm well aware of the photoelectric effect.

But no doubt Oriel would regard the wave-particle duality as
pretentious mathematical obfuscation by those nasty empiricists; I was
addressing very simply the point where he was wrong without wading
into deep quantum-mechanical waters.

John Savard
  #5  
Old December 9th 12, 08:24 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
oriel36[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,478
Default VLBI

On Dec 9, 6:33Â*am, Davoud wrote:
Quadibloc:

You are saying this to a newsgroup filled with people who have
frequently seen with their own eyes that the resolving power of a
telescope increases with its aperture - which is another manifestation
of the wave nature of light (Newton was partial to the opposing
corpuscular theory) on which VLBI is based.


"I want to emphasize that light comes in this form‹particles. It is
very important to know that light behaves like particles, especially
for those of you have gone to school, where you probably learned
something about light behaving like waves. IÅ’m telling you the way it
/does/ behave‹like particles." ‹Richard Feynman in QED. (Emphasis his.)


Feynman indeed !,just another empiricist chancing his arm knowing that
there were no astronomers around in attaching Roemer's name to Newton
and his 'predictions' agenda -

"The Character of Physical Law", and in the pages on Newton's law of
gravity (pages 22-23) he mentions that observations of the moons of
jupiter showed that they "were ahead of schedule when Jupiter was
close to the earth and behind schedule when it was far away, a rather
odd circumstance. Mr. Roemer [Olaus Roemer, 1644-1710, Danish
astronomer], having confidence in the Law of Gravitation, came to the
interesting conclusion that it takes light some time to travel from
the moons of Jupiter to the earth..." Feynman

Considering Roemer proposed his solution for the anomalous motion of
Io in the 1670's while Newton's work of mathematical fiction was
written in the late 1680's I am sure somebody like Feymann could
doctor history to insert Newton but not now in the presence of an
astronomer.

Isaac mentioned Roemer's use of the Equation of Time as absolute/
relative time but not even Roemer could have known that the Equation
is discontinuous by virtue of the 11 minute discrepancy each annual
cycle but such things would only interest a genuine astronomer who can
understand why natural noon cycles vary in the first place.

"Absolute time, in astronomy, is distinguished from relative, by the
equation or correlation of the vulgar time. For the natural days are
truly unequal, though they are commonly considered as equal and used
for a measure of time; astronomers correct this inequality for their
more accurate deducing of the celestial motions.... The necessity of
which equation, for determining the times of a phænomenon, is evinced
as well from the experiments of the pendulum clock, as by eclipses of
the satellites of Jupiter." Principia

All this early 20th century relativity nonsense and I can obliterate
it so easily using modern imaging - all it needs are honest people who
can set aside their reputations and work to correct things for a
change.

At least Newton was interesting in the same way a rogue knows how to
exploit genuine articles of discovery and bend them to his
purpose,works great as long as you can get away with it,even for
centuries but ultimately is is as far removed from the achievements of
astronomy as anything.





--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm


  #6  
Old December 9th 12, 09:55 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Martin Brown
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,707
Default VLBI

On 08/12/2012 23:09, Quadibloc wrote:
On Dec 7, 12:58 pm, oriel36 wrote:


The use of VLBI has about the same intellectual substance as
photographing the wandering Sun analemma


In the sense that both are based on the knowledge of the physical laws
that govern the universe he is actually right.

The great thing about VLBI and any other large network of interferometer
telscopes is that with N scopes you get N(N-1)(N-2)/6 good phase
observables Jennison (1958) and N(N-1)(N-2)(N-3)/12 good amplitude
observables. It is for this reason that the VLBI network scopes tend to
take chances in stormy weather to stay on the network. Dropping from N=9
to 8 is a big hit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closure_phase

You are saying this to a newsgroup filled with people who have
frequently seen with their own eyes that the resolving power of a
telescope increases with its aperture - which is another manifestation
of the wave nature of light (Newton was partial to the opposing
corpuscular theory) on which VLBI is based.

At long last, have you no sense of irony?


Much harder to explain is intensity interferometry where photon counting
detectors were used to measure the diameters of the most promising super
giants were measured by Hanbury-Brown and Twiss at Jodrell Bank to prove
the concept and later with a much larger setup at Narrabi in South
Africa. The book is fairly rare but the technique led to a very fierce
debate in the physics community about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanbury...d_Twiss_effect

Wave paricle duality has some very interesting consequences. These guys
deserve much better recognition for their ground breaking research!

I don't actually like thi semi-classical derivation but it is online.
ISTR someone in s.e.d posted a link to a scan of the book but I don't
believe in copyright infringement so I am not reposting it here.

http://szczypka.web.cern.ch/szczypka...wiss/twiss.pdf

Note that in the implementation of the H-B intensity interferometer the
detectors were photon counting devices 931A phototubes if memory serves.
The correlation are real and determined by the baeline length and the
angular diameter of the source.

Regards,
Martin Brown
  #7  
Old December 10th 12, 04:08 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
oriel36[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,478
Default VLBI

On Dec 9, 9:55*pm, Martin Brown
wrote:
On 08/12/2012 23:09, Quadibloc wrote:

On Dec 7, 12:58 pm, oriel36 wrote:
The use of VLBI has about the same intellectual substance as
photographing the wandering Sun analemma


In the sense that both are based on the knowledge of the physical laws
that govern the universe he is actually right.

The great thing about VLBI and any other large network of interferometer
telscopes is that with N scopes you get N(N-1)(N-2)/6 good phase
observables Jennison (1958) and N(N-1)(N-2)(N-3)/12 good amplitude
observables. It is for this reason that the VLBI network scopes tend to
take chances in stormy weather to stay on the network. Dropping from N=9
to 8 is a big hit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closure_phase

You are saying this to a newsgroup filled with people who have
frequently seen with their own eyes that the resolving power of a
telescope increases with its aperture - which is another manifestation
of the wave nature of light (Newton was partial to the opposing
corpuscular theory) on which VLBI is based.


At long last, have you no sense of irony?


Much harder to explain is intensity interferometry where photon counting
detectors were used to measure the diameters of the most promising super
giants were measured by Hanbury-Brown and Twiss at Jodrell Bank to prove
the concept and later with a much larger setup at Narrabi in South
Africa. The book is fairly rare but the technique led to a very fierce
debate in the physics community about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanbury...d_Twiss_effect

Wave paricle duality has some very interesting consequences. These guys
deserve much better recognition for their ground breaking research!

I don't actually like thi semi-classical derivation but it is online.
ISTR someone in s.e.d posted a link to a scan of the book but I don't
believe in copyright infringement so I am not reposting it here.

http://szczypka.web.cern.ch/szczypka...wiss/twiss.pdf

Note that in the implementation of the H-B intensity interferometer the
detectors were photon counting devices 931A phototubes if memory serves.
The correlation are real and determined by the baeline length and the
angular diameter of the source.

Regards,
Martin Brown


It doesn't matter whether a pendulum clock is used or VLBI,the
determination that local tracking of a star in stellar circumpolar
motion reflects daily rotation is false by virtue that it is a
homocentric determination which happens to be one step lower that
geocentricity and equivalent to astronomical oblivion.

I notice with greater frequency that they no longer call their
imaginative conceptions by the name of 'theories' but 'models' and the
first one was trying to model the motions of the Earth using the 24
hour AM/PM cycle allied with the Lat/Long system which in turn happen
to be an extension of the 1461 day calendar cycle in a format of 365
day/366 day rotations.

You don't have a feel for astronomical timekeeping nor structural
astronomy Brown and although you and your colleagues will continue
like this for a while,even a long while,but technically you are
finished as astronomy recovers the ability to correlate cause and
effect between dynamics and what happens on Earth.
  #8  
Old December 10th 12, 04:35 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Davoud[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,989
Default VLBI

Quadibloc:
But no doubt Oriel would regard the wave-particle duality as...


I wouldn't know how Oriel would regard anything because he's in my
kill-file.

I was addressing very simply the point where he was wrong...


That's a relief. So you've straightened him out once and for all and I
can take him out of my kill-file because now that you have set him
straight he will hereafter post only logical and cogent thoughts. Is
that the way you see it? If I had a ha'penny for every time Oriel has
made a fool of those who are obsessed with setting him straight once
and for all I'd be a rich man today!

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm
  #9  
Old December 10th 12, 05:46 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 74
Default VLBI

"oriel36" wrote in message
...

On Dec 9, 9:55 pm, Martin Brown
wrote:
On 08/12/2012 23:09, Quadibloc wrote:

On Dec 7, 12:58 pm, oriel36 wrote:
The use of VLBI has about the same intellectual substance as
photographing the wandering Sun analemma


In the sense that both are based on the knowledge of the physical laws
that govern the universe he is actually right.

The great thing about VLBI and any other large network of interferometer
telscopes is that with N scopes you get N(N-1)(N-2)/6 good phase
observables Jennison (1958) and N(N-1)(N-2)(N-3)/12 good amplitude
observables. It is for this reason that the VLBI network scopes tend to
take chances in stormy weather to stay on the network. Dropping from N=9
to 8 is a big hit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closure_phase

You are saying this to a newsgroup filled with people who have
frequently seen with their own eyes that the resolving power of a
telescope increases with its aperture - which is another manifestation
of the wave nature of light (Newton was partial to the opposing
corpuscular theory) on which VLBI is based.


At long last, have you no sense of irony?


Much harder to explain is intensity interferometry where photon counting
detectors were used to measure the diameters of the most promising super
giants were measured by Hanbury-Brown and Twiss at Jodrell Bank to prove
the concept and later with a much larger setup at Narrabi in South
Africa. The book is fairly rare but the technique led to a very fierce
debate in the physics community about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanbury...d_Twiss_effect

Wave paricle duality has some very interesting consequences. These guys
deserve much better recognition for their ground breaking research!

I don't actually like thi semi-classical derivation but it is online.
ISTR someone in s.e.d posted a link to a scan of the book but I don't
believe in copyright infringement so I am not reposting it here.

http://szczypka.web.cern.ch/szczypka...wiss/twiss.pdf

Note that in the implementation of the H-B intensity interferometer the
detectors were photon counting devices 931A phototubes if memory serves.
The correlation are real and determined by the baeline length and the
angular diameter of the source.

Regards,
Martin Brown


It doesn't matter whether a pendulum clock is used or VLBI,the
determination that local tracking of a star in stellar circumpolar
motion reflects daily rotation is false by virtue that it is a
homocentric determination which happens to be one step lower that
geocentricity and equivalent to astronomical oblivion.

I notice with greater frequency that they no longer call their
imaginative conceptions by the name of 'theories' but 'models' and the
first one was trying to model the motions of the Earth using the 24
hour AM/PM cycle allied with the Lat/Long system which in turn happen
to be an extension of the 1461 day calendar cycle in a format of 365
day/366 day rotations.

You don't have a feel for astronomical timekeeping nor structural
astronomy Brown and although you and your colleagues will continue
like this for a while,even a long while,but technically you are
finished as astronomy recovers the ability to correlate cause and
effect between dynamics and what happens on Earth.
================================================== ==
Rut roh... Kelleher is now preaching astrology. My star sign is Cepheus,
Kelleher. What do the dynamic stars foretell my future to be, here on Earth?
Will I go on a journey? Will I meet a short, blond and chubby woman?
Consult the crystal ball and the star charts for me, Kelleher.

-- This message is brought to you from the keyboard of
Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway

  #10  
Old December 10th 12, 06:03 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
palsing[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,068
Default VLBI

On Sunday, December 9, 2012 7:08:39 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote:

...the determination that local tracking of a star in stellar circumpolar

motion reflects daily rotation is false...


So, what does it indicate?
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Space based VLBI - next steps beyond Hubble [email protected] Policy 19 April 23rd 08 07:13 PM
A paper detailing the pros and cons of combining VLBI and GPS Sam Wormley Amateur Astronomy 3 December 15th 05 12:55 AM
NEW PAPER RELATED TO GPS AND VLBI PUBLISHED Sam Wormley Amateur Astronomy 0 August 17th 05 03:53 AM
Quantum Paradox of a Self-Interference of a Photon in VLBI Aleksandr Timofeev Astronomy Misc 130 December 4th 04 12:46 PM
Ultimate DX ? e-VLBI Thierry Amateur Astronomy 2 October 14th 04 12:48 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.