Had a look at this and saw that the velocity curve of Algol will tell
whether we get the speed of light being constant or depends on the speed
of the emitting star.

It seems surprising that nobody's measured a velocity curve for Algol

On Apr 2, 3:25*pm, Steve Dorman wrote:
Had a look at this and saw that the velocity curve of Algol will tell
whether we get the speed of light being constant or depends on the speed
of the emitting star.

It seems surprising that nobody's measured a velocity curve for Algol

Most bald faced lies are surprising.

Eric Gisse wrote:
On Apr 2, 3:25 pm, Steve Dorman wrote:

Had a look at this and saw that the velocity curve of Algol will tell
whether we get the speed of light being constant or depends on the speed
of the emitting star.

It seems surprising that nobody's measured a velocity curve for Algol


Most bald faced lies are surprising.

What a disappointment that the liar Androcles doesn't have the guts to
own up to his previous lies on this matter.

Not a surprise though!

OG wrote:
Eric Gisse wrote:

On Apr 2, 3:25 pm, Steve Dorman wrote:

Had a look at this and saw that the velocity curve of Algol will tell
whether we get the speed of light being constant or depends on the speed
of the emitting star.

It seems surprising that nobody's measured a velocity curve for Algol



Most bald faced lies are surprising.


What a disappointment that the liar Androcles doesn't have the guts to
own up to his previous lies on this matter.

Not a surprise though!


But why does he continue to put the incorrect light curve on his
website? Surely he must know that it removes all his credibility.

Steve Dorman wrote in message

OG wrote:
Eric Gisse wrote:

On Apr 2, 3:25 pm, Steve Dorman wrote:

Had a look at this and saw that the velocity curve of Algol will tell
whether we get the speed of light being constant or depends on the speed
of the emitting star.

It seems surprising that nobody's measured a velocity curve for Algol



Most bald faced lies are surprising.


What a disappointment that the liar Androcles doesn't have the guts to
own up to his previous lies on this matter.

Not a surprise though!


But why does he continue to put the incorrect light curve on his
website? Surely he must know that it removes all his credibility.

His *what*?

Dirk Vdm

On Apr 6, 4:31*pm, Steve Dorman wrote:
OG wrote:

But why does he continue to put the incorrect light curve
on his website? Surely he must know that it removes all his
credibility.

It has been pointed out many times to Androcles and to
Henri Wilson, that the light curve of Algol depends on
the spectral band in which it is measured:
http://www.astro.psu.edu/~mrichards/...h/journey.html

Conventional eclipsing binary theory has no problem
modeling these curves.

Emission theory cannot explain the spectral band dependence
of the light curve at all.

Jerry

On Apr 6, 4:31*pm, Steve Dorman wrote:
OG wrote:
Eric Gisse wrote:

On Apr 2, 3:25 pm, Steve Dorman wrote:

Had a look at this and saw that the velocity curve of Algol will tell
whether we get the speed of light being constant or depends on the speed
of the emitting star.

It seems surprising that nobody's measured a velocity curve for Algol

Most bald faced lies are surprising.

What a disappointment that the liar Androcles doesn't have the guts to
own up to his previous lies on this matter.

Not a surprise though!

But why does he continue to put the incorrect light curve on his
website? Surely he must know that it removes all his credibility.

Androcles cares not a whit about his credibility. His role is to be a
gadfly. It doesn't matter to him whether it's right or obviously
wrong, as long as it is contrary. He makes frequent tight circles to
Wrong, which he will steadfastly refuse to acknowledge, even when he
appears the fool in doing so. Admitting to being wrong is counter to
the Gadfly Creed.

He is a vandal and a mild source of amusement.

PD

On Mon, 7 Apr 2008 01:56:28 -0700 (PDT), Jerry
wrote:

On Apr 6, 4:31*pm, Steve Dorman wrote:
OG wrote:

But why does he continue to put the incorrect light curve
on his website? Surely he must know that it removes all his
credibility.

It has been pointed out many times to Androcles and to
Henri Wilson, that the light curve of Algol depends on
the spectral band in which it is measured:
http://www.astro.psu.edu/~mrichards/...h/journey.html

Conventional eclipsing binary theory has no problem
modeling these curves.

The above paper makes a mockery of that statement. It is nothing but
speculation from start to finish.
What astronomers see when they view Algol type binaries is a willusion. The
star may or may not involve an eclipsing pair. Most Algol type probably do not.

The secondary spectrum could easily be a reflection from a large cool dead star
or planet. BaTh might also expect the extinction rate in the associated EM
control sphere to vary with wavelength, giving rise to different shaped
brightness curves with wavelength.

Emission theory cannot explain the spectral band dependence
of the light curve at all.

If you opened your eyes you would soon learn what BaTh can explain. There are
many possibilities that haven't even been explored....and are not likely to be
while Einsteiniana attracts so many brainwahsed fools.

I have already shut you up about Sagnac, why don't you realise that most
variable stars 'vary' because little planet earth is NOT the centre of the
universe, as the religions preach, and starlight does not travel towards us at
c but at c+v.

Jerry



Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

.....specialising in teaching physics to engineers and mathematicians....

On Apr 13, 9:14*pm, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2008 01:56:28 -0700 (PDT), Jerry
wrote:

On Apr 6, 4:31*pm, Steve Dorman wrote:
OG wrote:

But why does he continue to put the incorrect light curve
on his website? Surely he must know that it removes all his
credibility.

It has been pointed out many times to Androcles and to
Henri Wilson, that the light curve of Algol depends on
the spectral band in which it is measured:
http://www.astro.psu.edu/~mrichards/...h/journey.html

Conventional eclipsing binary theory has no problem
modeling these curves.

The above paper makes a mockery of that statement. It is nothing but
speculation from start to finish.
What astronomers see when they view Algol type binaries is a willusion. The
star may or may not involve an eclipsing pair. Most Algol type probably do not.

The secondary spectrum could easily be a reflection from a large cool dead star
or planet. BaTh might also expect the extinction rate in the associated EM
control sphere to vary with wavelength, giving rise to different shaped
brightness curves with wavelength.

Emission theory cannot explain the spectral band dependence
of the light curve at all.

If you opened your eyes you would soon learn what BaTh can explain. There are
many possibilities that haven't even been explored....and are not likely to be
while Einsteiniana attracts so many brainwahsed fools.

I have already shut you up about Sagnac, why don't you realise that most
variable stars 'vary' because little planet earth is NOT the centre of the
universe, as the religions preach, and starlight does not travel towards us at
c but at c+v.

No, you didn't "shut me up." I just got sick of your
perpetual lies and megalomania.

You are just too plain stupid to realize how worthless your
theories are. You'll die soon enough, and the world will soon
forget you as just another crackpot who never amounted to
anything.

Jerry
Henri Wilson's Lies
http://mysite.verizon.net/cephalobus...ri/diploma.htm
http://mysite.verizon.net/cephalobus.../deception.htm
http://mysite.verizon.net/cephalobus...rt_aurigae.htm
http://mysite.verizon.net/cephalobus...ri/history.htm
http://mysite.verizon.net/cephalobus...enri/snips.htm
http://mysite.verizon.net/cephalobus...ri/accuses.htm
http://mysite.verizon.net/cephalobus...ri/oh_dear.htm

On Apr 13, 6:55*pm, Jerry wrote:
On Apr 13, 9:14*pm, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote:



On Mon, 7 Apr 2008 01:56:28 -0700 (PDT), Jerry
wrote:

On Apr 6, 4:31*pm, Steve Dorman wrote:
OG wrote:

But why does he continue to put the incorrect light curve
on his website? Surely he must know that it removes all his
credibility.

It has been pointed out many times to Androcles and to
Henri Wilson, that the light curve of Algol depends on
the spectral band in which it is measured:
http://www.astro.psu.edu/~mrichards/...h/journey.html

Conventional eclipsing binary theory has no problem
modeling these curves.

The above paper makes a mockery of that statement. It is nothing but
speculation from start to finish.
What astronomers see when they view Algol type binaries is a willusion. The
star may or may not involve an eclipsing pair. Most Algol type probably do not.

The secondary spectrum could easily be a reflection from a large cool dead star
or planet. BaTh might also expect the extinction rate in the associated EM
control sphere to vary with wavelength, giving rise to different shaped
brightness curves with wavelength.

Emission theory cannot explain the spectral band dependence
of the light curve at all.

If you opened your eyes you would soon learn what BaTh can explain. There are
many possibilities that haven't even been explored....and are not likely to be
while Einsteiniana attracts so many brainwahsed fools.

I have already shut you up about Sagnac, why don't you realise that most
variable stars 'vary' because little planet earth is NOT the centre of the
universe, as the religions preach, and starlight does not travel towards us at
c but at c+v.

No, you didn't "shut me up." *I just got sick of your
perpetual lies and megalomania.

You are just too plain stupid to realize how worthless your
theories are. You'll die soon enough, and the world will soon
forget you as just another crackpot who never amounted to
anything.

I knew you could be harsh!

[...]