Received: by 10.66.81.170 with SMTP id b10mr1618032pay.31.1350115510112;
        Sat, 13 Oct 2012 01:05:10 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Path: s9ni5008pbb.0!nntp.google.com!news.glorb.com!rt.uk.eu.org!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Robert L. Oldershaw" <rlolders...@amherst.edu>
Newsgroups: sci.astro.research
Subject: Re: Exoplanet Mass Spectrum: New Data
Date: Sat, 13 Oct 12 08:04:48 GMT
Lines: 61
Approved: sci.astro.research-requ...@slimy.greenend.org.uk (mjh)
Message-ID: <mt2.0-9974-1350115488@hydra.herts.ac.uk>
References: <mt2.0-16993-1349763633@hydra.herts.ac.uk>
      <mt2.0-29359-1349785034@hydra.herts.ac.uk>
      <mt2.0-12008-1349855258@hydra.herts.ac.uk>
      <mt2.0-14589-1349899400@hydra.herts.ac.uk>
      <mt2.0-26836-1349936145@hydra.herts.ac.uk>
      <mt2.0-7598-1350066574@hydra.herts.ac.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: chiark.greenend.org.uk
X-Trace: chiark.greenend.org.uk 1350115509 19933 212.13.197.229 (13 Oct 2012 08:05:09 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@chiark.greenend.org.uk
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2012 08:05:09 +0000 (UTC)
X-Posting-Tool: modtool v2.0
Originator: @hydra.herts.ac.uk ([147.197.230.94])

[As discussions of the details of fringe theories such as this one are
prohibited by the s.a.r. charter, I suggest that anyone who wants to
discuss, say, why 'plutonium' is the domain of crackpots but 'excited
lithium' is absolutely fine should do it with Mr Oldershaw by personal
e-mail. Further posts in this thread, if any, should focus on
observational astrophysics -- mjh]

On Oct 12, 2:29 pm, Jos Bergervoet <jos.bergerv...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
>
> OK, the "relativity" meant here is then scale relativity
> between a solar system and an atom. And "discrete" refers
> to the discreteness of atomic spectra which supposedly
> is also present at larger scales.
------------------------------------------------------------------

The paradigm is far more sophisticated than that, and one has to put
some effort into understanding it before one is qualified to describe
it or evaluate it.  Fifteen minutes is not enough.

>
> Your predictions 5 and 7 seem rather similar to those
> of Archimedes Plutonium, except that he is proposing
> a Pu-atom, where you mention a Li-atom as model for the
> solar system (and I have to admit that I never gave the
> idea of a Pu-atom much credit..)
----------------------------------------------------------

This comment does not warrant a response. It is an insult. Well ok,
maybe a brief response. If you bother to read papers #1 and #2 in the
Selected Papers section of the website, you will find out why the
Solar System/Li atom in high Rydberg state analogy is unique and
supported by physical evidence.

>
> Still, I would expect that we could quickly agree that
> the whole idea of such an equivalence is now ruled out
> and that we can conclude that such discreteness of
> stellar spectra simply does not exist.
-------------------------------------------------------

Did you carefully read the "New Development" #10 at the website? It
shows very strong self-similarity between RR lyrae variable stars and
helium atoms in excited states making primarily single-level
transitions between n=7 and n=10. The frequency spectra match up quite
well given the physical phenomena (discussed at length in the cited
material) that cause some unavoidable shifting and broadening of the
stellar frequency peaks.  You cannot bring a star into the lab,
isolate it from various disturbances, and cool it to low temps, then
excite it with a laser, can you?

A paper on this research has been published.

Analogies bewteen stars and atoms have been very important to the
development of physics (think Rutherford and Bohr). I predict such
analogies will again be very important again, biased and outdated
assumptions notwithstanding.

Robert L. Oldershaw
http:/www3.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw
Discrete Scale Relativity