Phuckwit Duck's SR (PDSR)

"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 07:47:48 -0000, "Androcles"

wrote:


"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote in message

why, do you think there would be more redshift than blue? Please
explain.

http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Doolin'sStar.GIF
Open your ****in' eyes!

there is both red and blue shift.

Well done! In any orbit part of the period the star is coming toward us
and part of the period it is receding, so there is both red and blue shift.
Hang on, I'll have a word with the Queen, she may want to pin a ****in'
medal on you for that brilliant observation.

Can you prove there is more red than blue?

Why would I want to do that? Please explain.



http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Wendy/Wendy.gif
Accelerated photons (c+v) are drawn longer than decelerated ones (c-v).

That doesn't tell us anything.

Blind as a ****in' bat...
Accelerated photons [(x+dx)/t] are drawn longer than decelerated ones
[(x-dx)/t].
t is the time between frames. Length is the distance moved in time t.
You don't think that has something to do with velocity? Nah...
you don't think at all, you are ****in' dead from the neck up.





...You are starting to sound more like Phuckwit Duck every day......


Henry Wilson...

.......provider of free physics lessons

On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 09:26:03 -0000, "Androcles"
wrote:


"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote in message
.. .


why, do you think there would be more redshift than blue? Please
explain.

http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Doolin'sStar.GIF
Open your ****in' eyes!

there is both red and blue shift.

Well done! In any orbit part of the period the star is coming toward us
and part of the period it is receding, so there is both red and blue shift.
Hang on, I'll have a word with the Queen, she may want to pin a ****in'
medal on you for that brilliant observation.

Can you prove there is more red than blue?

Why would I want to do that? Please explain.

You were asked if your theory could explain the cosmic redshift by which stars
and galaxies exhibit far more red shift than blue.
So that's why you should want to do that.

Ask your pet chimp if you cannot understand.

http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Wendy/Wendy.gif
Accelerated photons (c+v) are drawn longer than decelerated ones (c-v).

That doesn't tell us anything.

Blind as a ****in' bat...
Accelerated photons [(x+dx)/t] are drawn longer than decelerated ones
[(x-dx)/t].
t is the time between frames. Length is the distance moved in time t.
You don't think that has something to do with velocity? Nah...
you don't think at all, you are ****in' dead from the neck up.

......definitely your worst effort yet.

Henry Wilson...

........provider of free physics lessons

"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 09:26:03 -0000, "Androcles"

wrote:


"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote in message
. ..


why, do you think there would be more redshift than blue? Please
explain.

http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Doolin'sStar.GIF
Open your ****in' eyes!

there is both red and blue shift.

Well done! In any orbit part of the period the star is coming toward us
and part of the period it is receding, so there is both red and blue
shift.
Hang on, I'll have a word with the Queen, she may want to pin a ****in'
medal on you for that brilliant observation.

Can you prove there is more red than blue?

Why would I want to do that? Please explain.

You were asked if your theory could explain the cosmic redshift by which
stars
and galaxies exhibit far more red shift than blue.
So that's why you should want to do that.

Ask your pet chimp if you cannot understand.

Ok, since you've snipped and the only names above are Androcles and
"Awilson", you must have nominated yourself as my pet chimp.
If half the photons arrive together then the rest must be spread
throughout the rest of the period, pet chimp, as Doolin's star
(and indeed does Awilson the pet chimp's star) clearly shows.
http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Awilson'sStar.GIF
So even though there are equal numbers of red and blue shifted
photons, anytime you look you'll only see the red ones. The exception
is the nova, which doesn't last long and is all the blue photons arriving
together. Got it now, pet chimp?






http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Wendy/Wendy.gif
Accelerated photons (c+v) are drawn longer than decelerated ones (c-v).

That doesn't tell us anything.

Blind as a ****in' bat...
Accelerated photons [(x+dx)/t] are drawn longer than decelerated ones
[(x-dx)/t].
t is the time between frames. Length is the distance moved in time t.
You don't think that has something to do with velocity? Nah...
you don't think at all, you are ****in' dead from the neck up.

.....definitely your worst effort yet.

Henry Wilson...

.......provider of free physics lessons

On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:37:00 -0000, "Androcles"
wrote:


"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 09:26:03 -0000, "Androcles"

wrote:


"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote in message
...


why, do you think there would be more redshift than blue? Please
explain.

http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Doolin'sStar.GIF
Open your ****in' eyes!

there is both red and blue shift.

Well done! In any orbit part of the period the star is coming toward us
and part of the period it is receding, so there is both red and blue
shift.
Hang on, I'll have a word with the Queen, she may want to pin a ****in'
medal on you for that brilliant observation.

Can you prove there is more red than blue?

Why would I want to do that? Please explain.

You were asked if your theory could explain the cosmic redshift by which
stars
and galaxies exhibit far more red shift than blue.
So that's why you should want to do that.

Ask your pet chimp if you cannot understand.

Ok, since you've snipped and the only names above are Androcles and
"Awilson", you must have nominated yourself as my pet chimp.
If half the photons arrive together then the rest must be spread
throughout the rest of the period, pet chimp, as Doolin's star
(and indeed does Awilson the pet chimp's star) clearly shows.
http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Awilson'sStar.GIF
So even though there are equal numbers of red and blue shifted
photons, anytime you look you'll only see the red ones. The exception
is the nova, which doesn't last long and is all the blue photons arriving
together. Got it now, pet chimp?

I have already said all that.

I said that the redshifts might be more common but the blue shifts would, on
average, be larger.


Henry Wilson...

........provider of free physics lessons

"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:37:00 -0000, "Androcles"

wrote:


"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 09:26:03 -0000, "Androcles"

wrote:


"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote in message
m...


why, do you think there would be more redshift than blue? Please
explain.

http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Doolin'sStar.GIF
Open your ****in' eyes!

there is both red and blue shift.

Well done! In any orbit part of the period the star is coming toward us
and part of the period it is receding, so there is both red and blue
shift.
Hang on, I'll have a word with the Queen, she may want to pin a ****in'
medal on you for that brilliant observation.

Can you prove there is more red than blue?

Why would I want to do that? Please explain.

You were asked if your theory could explain the cosmic redshift by which
stars
and galaxies exhibit far more red shift than blue.
So that's why you should want to do that.

Ask your pet chimp if you cannot understand.

Ok, since you've snipped and the only names above are Androcles and
"Awilson", you must have nominated yourself as my pet chimp.
If half the photons arrive together then the rest must be spread
throughout the rest of the period, pet chimp, as Doolin's star
(and indeed does Awilson the pet chimp's star) clearly shows.
http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Awilson'sStar.GIF
So even though there are equal numbers of red and blue shifted
photons, anytime you look you'll only see the red ones. The exception
is the nova, which doesn't last long and is all the blue photons arriving
together. Got it now, pet chimp?

I have already said all that.

I said that the redshifts might be more common but the blue shifts would,
on
average, be larger.

What more do you want, pet chimp?

--
Androcles
........provider of expensive physics lessons pet chimp can't afford.

On Feb 14, 5:37*pm, "Androcles" wrote:
"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote in messagenews:59qgn5ddq5pucjpn9h6ial4ro4bmk5lmjg@4ax .com...





On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 09:26:03 -0000, "Androcles"

wrote:

"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote in message
. ..

why, do you think there would be more redshift than blue? Please
explain.

*http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Doolin'sStar.GIF
Open your ****in' eyes!

there is both red and blue shift.

Well done! In any orbit part of the period the star is coming toward us
and part of the period it is receding, so there is both red and blue
shift.
Hang on, I'll have a word with the Queen, she may want to pin a ****in'
medal on you for that brilliant observation.

Can you prove there is more red than blue?

Why would I want to do that? Please explain.

You were asked if your theory could explain the cosmic redshift by which
stars
and galaxies exhibit far more red shift than blue.
So that's why you should want to do that.

Ask your pet chimp if you cannot understand.

Ok, since you've snipped and the only names above are Androcles and
"Awilson", you must have nominated yourself as my pet chimp.
If half the photons arrive together then the rest must be spread
throughout the rest of the period, pet chimp, as Doolin's star
(and indeed does Awilson the pet chimp's star) clearly shows.
*http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Awilson'sStar.GIF
So even though there are equal numbers of red and blue shifted
photons, anytime you look you'll only see the red ones. The exception
is the nova, which doesn't last long and is all the blue photons arriving
together. Got it now, pet chimp?


I'm the one that asked the question, and I am willing to listen to
you. Your argument about the varying intensity makes sense. I was
just wondering about the spectral lines observed from these variable
stars. Seems to me that if you have a mix of photons with different
velocities they would have different red shifts, which would blur the
lines.




*http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Wendy/Wendy.gif
Accelerated photons (c+v) are drawn longer than decelerated ones (c-v).

That doesn't tell us anything.

Blind as a ****in' bat...
Accelerated photons [(x+dx)/t] are drawn longer than decelerated ones
[(x-dx)/t].
t is the time between frames. Length is the distance moved in time t.
You don't think that has something to do with velocity? Nah...
you don't think at all, you are ****in' dead from the neck up.

.....definitely your worst effort yet.

Henry Wilson...

.......provider of free physics lessons- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:23:43 -0800 (PST), Bruce Richmond
wrote:

On Feb 14, 5:37*pm, "Androcles" wrote:
"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote in messagenews:59qgn5ddq5pucjpn9h6ial4ro4bmk5lmjg@4ax .com...





On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 09:26:03 -0000, "Androcles"

wrote:

"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote in message
. ..

why, do you think there would be more redshift than blue? Please
explain.

*http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Doolin'sStar.GIF
Open your ****in' eyes!

there is both red and blue shift.

Well done! In any orbit part of the period the star is coming toward us
and part of the period it is receding, so there is both red and blue
shift.
Hang on, I'll have a word with the Queen, she may want to pin a ****in'
medal on you for that brilliant observation.

Can you prove there is more red than blue?

Why would I want to do that? Please explain.

You were asked if your theory could explain the cosmic redshift by which
stars
and galaxies exhibit far more red shift than blue.
So that's why you should want to do that.

Ask your pet chimp if you cannot understand.

Ok, since you've snipped and the only names above are Androcles and
"Awilson", you must have nominated yourself as my pet chimp.
If half the photons arrive together then the rest must be spread
throughout the rest of the period, pet chimp, as Doolin's star
(and indeed does Awilson the pet chimp's star) clearly shows.
*http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Awilson'sStar.GIF
So even though there are equal numbers of red and blue shifted
photons, anytime you look you'll only see the red ones. The exception
is the nova, which doesn't last long and is all the blue photons arriving
together. Got it now, pet chimp?


I'm the one that asked the question, and I am willing to listen to
you. Your argument about the varying intensity makes sense. I was
just wondering about the spectral lines observed from these variable
stars. Seems to me that if you have a mix of photons with different
velocities they would have different red shifts, which would blur the
lines.

I have a suspicion that lines from variable stars do tend to be blurred. I know
that there is always some difficulty in separating out the two components if a
binary pair is involved.

However, unless you understand ADoppler and its dominance over conventional
VDoppler shifts, nothing Andro tells you will be of much use.


Henry Wilson...

........provider of free physics lessons

On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:23:43 -0800 (PST), Bruce Richmond

wrote:

On Feb 14, 5:37 pm, "Androcles" wrote:
"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote in
messagenews:59qgn5ddq5pucjpn9h6ial4ro4bmk5lmjg@4ax .com...





On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 09:26:03 -0000, "Androcles"

wrote:

"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote in message
. ..

why, do you think there would be more redshift than blue? Please
explain.

http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Doolin'sStar.GIF
Open your ****in' eyes!

there is both red and blue shift.

Well done! In any orbit part of the period the star is coming toward
us
and part of the period it is receding, so there is both red and blue
shift.
Hang on, I'll have a word with the Queen, she may want to pin a
****in'
medal on you for that brilliant observation.

Can you prove there is more red than blue?

Why would I want to do that? Please explain.

You were asked if your theory could explain the cosmic redshift by
which
stars
and galaxies exhibit far more red shift than blue.
So that's why you should want to do that.

Ask your pet chimp if you cannot understand.

Ok, since you've snipped and the only names above are Androcles and
"Awilson", you must have nominated yourself as my pet chimp.
If half the photons arrive together then the rest must be spread
throughout the rest of the period, pet chimp, as Doolin's star
(and indeed does Awilson the pet chimp's star) clearly shows.
http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Awilson'sStar.GIF
So even though there are equal numbers of red and blue shifted
photons, anytime you look you'll only see the red ones. The exception
is the nova, which doesn't last long and is all the blue photons
arriving
together. Got it now, pet chimp?


I'm the one that asked the question, and I am willing to listen to
you. Your argument about the varying intensity makes sense. I was
just wondering about the spectral lines observed from these variable
stars. Seems to me that if you have a mix of photons with different
velocities they would have different red shifts, which would blur the
lines.

Richmond, you were high on my killfile for whatever reason earned
you that. I've taken you off it now since I give benefit of any doubt
to those that MAY be deserving. Take no notice of my uneducated
pet chimp Awilson, he's from Australia and is upside-down when
he's pulling his dick.
You get more than just spectral line splitting/blurring, you get whole
image blurring if you can see the star clearly enough.
http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Orbit/Orbit.htm
Unfortunately not too many of us get time on HST.
Did you see the thread "Lunar Laser-Ranging Detection of Light-Speed
Anisotropy" from Surfer? Take a careful look.

"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:23:43 -0800 (PST), Bruce Richmond

wrote:

On Feb 14, 5:37 pm, "Androcles" wrote:
"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote in
messagenews:59qgn5ddq5pucjpn9h6ial4ro4bmk5lmjg@4ax .com...





On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 09:26:03 -0000, "Androcles"

wrote:

"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote in message
. ..

why, do you think there would be more redshift than blue? Please
explain.

http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Doolin'sStar.GIF
Open your ****in' eyes!

there is both red and blue shift.

Well done! In any orbit part of the period the star is coming toward
us
and part of the period it is receding, so there is both red and blue
shift.
Hang on, I'll have a word with the Queen, she may want to pin a
****in'
medal on you for that brilliant observation.

Can you prove there is more red than blue?

Why would I want to do that? Please explain.

You were asked if your theory could explain the cosmic redshift by
which
stars
and galaxies exhibit far more red shift than blue.
So that's why you should want to do that.

Ask your pet chimp if you cannot understand.

Ok, since you've snipped and the only names above are Androcles and
"Awilson", you must have nominated yourself as my pet chimp.
If half the photons arrive together then the rest must be spread
throughout the rest of the period, pet chimp, as Doolin's star
(and indeed does Awilson the pet chimp's star) clearly shows.
http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Awilson'sStar.GIF
So even though there are equal numbers of red and blue shifted
photons, anytime you look you'll only see the red ones. The exception
is the nova, which doesn't last long and is all the blue photons
arriving
together. Got it now, pet chimp?


I'm the one that asked the question, and I am willing to listen to
you. Your argument about the varying intensity makes sense. I was
just wondering about the spectral lines observed from these variable
stars. Seems to me that if you have a mix of photons with different
velocities they would have different red shifts, which would blur the
lines.

I have a suspicion that lines from variable stars do tend to be blurred. I
know
that there is always some difficulty in separating out the two components
if a
binary pair is involved.

However, unless you understand ADoppler and its dominance over
conventional
VDoppler shifts, nothing Andro tells you will be of much use.

You ****in' bull****ting *******! If you understood your own stupid theory
you'd be able to write an equation for it, you dumb ozzie.

On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 11:10:10 -0000, "Androcles"
wrote:


"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:23:43 -0800 (PST), Bruce Richmond

wrote:

On Feb 14, 5:37 pm, "Androcles" wrote:
"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote in
messagenews:59qgn5ddq5pucjpn9h6ial4ro4bmk5lmjg@4ax .com...





On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 09:26:03 -0000, "Androcles"

wrote:

"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote in message
. ..

why, do you think there would be more redshift than blue? Please
explain.

http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Doolin'sStar.GIF
Open your ****in' eyes!

there is both red and blue shift.

Well done! In any orbit part of the period the star is coming toward
us
and part of the period it is receding, so there is both red and blue
shift.
Hang on, I'll have a word with the Queen, she may want to pin a
****in'
medal on you for that brilliant observation.

Can you prove there is more red than blue?

Why would I want to do that? Please explain.

You were asked if your theory could explain the cosmic redshift by
which
stars
and galaxies exhibit far more red shift than blue.
So that's why you should want to do that.

Ask your pet chimp if you cannot understand.

Ok, since you've snipped and the only names above are Androcles and
"Awilson", you must have nominated yourself as my pet chimp.
If half the photons arrive together then the rest must be spread
throughout the rest of the period, pet chimp, as Doolin's star
(and indeed does Awilson the pet chimp's star) clearly shows.
http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Awilson'sStar.GIF
So even though there are equal numbers of red and blue shifted
photons, anytime you look you'll only see the red ones. The exception
is the nova, which doesn't last long and is all the blue photons
arriving
together. Got it now, pet chimp?


I'm the one that asked the question, and I am willing to listen to
you. Your argument about the varying intensity makes sense. I was
just wondering about the spectral lines observed from these variable
stars. Seems to me that if you have a mix of photons with different
velocities they would have different red shifts, which would blur the
lines.

I have a suspicion that lines from variable stars do tend to be blurred. I
know
that there is always some difficulty in separating out the two components
if a
binary pair is involved.

However, unless you understand ADoppler and its dominance over
conventional
VDoppler shifts, nothing Andro tells you will be of much use.

You ****in' bull****ting *******! If you understood your own stupid theory
you'd be able to write an equation for it, you dumb ozzie.

I have given you the equation. It's not my fault if you cannot understand it.


Henry Wilson...

........provider of free physics lessons