Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #392178

Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics

Show all headers | View raw

On 13/09/16 02:41, Tom Roberts wrote:
> On 9/6/16 9/6/16 - 2:55 PM, HGWilson, DSc. wrote:
>> On 07/09/16 01:14, Tom Roberts wrote:

>>
>> There is good reason to believe that unification is rapid near a large
>> mass such
>> as a star but to be able to provide more details one would need more
>> evidence
>> about the way fields behave in extreme vacuum.
>
> But I am NOT talking about "a star", I am talking about TWO stars
> orbiting each other, millions of kilometers apart, and visibly separate
> on earth for at least part of their orbit -- these are called "visible
> binaries".

Wiki, "Binary stars are often detected optically, in which case they are 
called visual binaries. Many visual binaries have long orbital periods 
of several centuries or millennia and therefore have orbits which are 
uncertain or poorly known".
" Binary stars that are both visual and spectroscopic binaries are rare, 
and are a precious source of valuable information when found. Visual 
binary stars often have large true separations, with periods measured in 
decades to centuries; consequently, they usually have orbital speeds too 
small to be measured spectroscopically. Conversely, spectroscopic binary 
stars move fast in their orbits because they are close together, usually 
too close to be detected as visual binaries. Binaries that are both 
visual and spectroscopic thus must be relatively close to Earth."

The mistake you and astronomers make is to assume that the images you 
are seeing have all come to Earth at speed c. In reality, your data is 
wrongly interpreted and the orbit is not what you think it is. Also, the 
radial component of orbital speeds are usually pretty small at the kinds 
of separations and orbit orientations you are talking about.
The velocities that are estimated from spectra are not to be believed 
because the observed line displacement includes the dominant 
acceleration component that nobody except I and, now, Paul Andersen know 
anything about.

> For your "unification" to happen, the light must be co-located (say,
> within a few meters) and moving in nearly the same direction (say,
> within a few degrees) [#]. For light rays emitted from each star of a
> visible binary and viewed on earth, those conditions do NOT hold until
> the light is VERY FAR AWAY from the binary and approaching earth.

No you go it all wrong, Tom. The light from any binary pair travels 
through roughly the same space conditions for its entire journey. 
Therefore it is subject to the same kind of unifying processes.

>      [#] That is, I assume that light is not clairvoyant.
>      (The values I suggest are MUCH larger than I think reasonable,
>       to give your "model" the best possible chance.)
>
> So unless you believe light is clairvoyant, your special plead of
> "unification" does not save observations of visible binaries. Your model
> must predict that their light travels >99% of the path to earth at c+v
> (i.e. before the rays are close enough for "unification"), which would
> completely screw up the way their orbit appears on earth -- THAT IS NOT
> OBSERVED. That's why I say that visible binaries refute your "model".
>
>      Exercise for Wilson: For two stars 1 million kilometers apart
>      in a direction perpendicular to the path to earth, located
>      10 lightyears away, how far from earth do their visible rays
>      come within 1 meter of each other? What fraction of their
>      light path is this?

That is irrelevant. Unification (call it extinction if you like) is 
determined by the conditions of the space through which the beams travel.

>
>> [... further obfuscation and refusal to address the issue I raised]
>
> (There are two other aspects to this that are quite obvious [@]; let's
> see if Wilson can figure out what they are. Hint: I referred to both of
> them above.)
>
>      [@] Plus others that are not so obvious....

As I said, your mistake it to base your statements on information which 
assumed constant light speed in the first place. Naturally predictions 
wrongly based on willusory data will not support a variable light speed 
theory.
The plain fact is, because light comes to us at different speeds, no 
cosmic observation should be regarded as a true representation of fact.

> Tom Roberts
>


-- 

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-16 12:16 -0700
  Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-08-16 13:17 -0700
    Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics "HGW." <hw@....> - 2016-08-17 08:34 +1000
      Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-08-16 16:04 -0700
        Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics "HGW." <hw@....> - 2016-08-17 13:43 +1000
          Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-08-17 00:12 -0700
            Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-19 05:31 +1000
              Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 13:20 -0700
                Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-19 06:38 +1000
                Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 13:59 -0700
  Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-21 17:33 -0500
    Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-22 12:12 -0700
      Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-23 10:56 -0700
        Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-08-23 12:13 -0700
          Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-24 06:29 +1000
        Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-08-23 18:47 -0500
          Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-25 03:36 +1000
            Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-08-24 21:00 +0200
            Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-08-24 17:13 -0500
              Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-25 20:02 +1000
                Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-08-28 10:56 -0500
                Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-29 06:00 +1000
                Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-08-28 21:51 -0500
                Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-29 20:40 +1000
                Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-08-29 07:04 -0700
                Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-30 05:17 +1000
                Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-08-30 08:59 -0500
                Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics astrofoton@interia.pl - 2016-08-30 10:45 -0700
                Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics "HGW." <hw@....> - 2016-09-05 16:28 +1000
                Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-09-06 10:14 -0500
                Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-09-06 20:39 +0200
                Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-07 05:55 +1000
                Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-09-12 11:41 -0500
                Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-13 09:20 +1000
                Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 22:34 -0700
                Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-08-29 14:11 +0200
              Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-08-25 03:13 -0700
    Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-23 05:59 +1000
      Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-08-22 22:59 -0700
        Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-23 19:42 +1000
          Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-08-23 03:17 -0700
            Re: Relativity of Simultaneity (RoS) is a bogus concept of physics "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-24 06:34 +1000

csiph-web