"Ignorant Raving Crackpot" wrote in message
news:0a8bfc2f-c348-4d8a...@googlegroups.com...
On Tuesday, May 20, 2014 12:15:49 PM UTC-5, Lord Androcles wrote:
> "Ignorant Raving Crackpot" wrote in message
> news:de6fe814-a105-428b...@googlegroups.com...
>
> At the distance of the SMC, LMC, M31, M33, NGC 6822, IC 1613 and other
> galaxies of the local group, emission theory predicts
> that variable light curves should practically ALL have horns, yet
> thousands
> of Cepheids and eclipsing binaries have been cataloged in these galaxies,
> and no periodic horned novae.
> ===========================================================
> You have no fucking idea what emission theory predicts, you've never
> modelled it and are mathematically illiterate and stupid.
Of course I've modeled it. I have hundreds of Matlab simulations on an old
desktop machine in the garage with a blown power supply that I don't care to
replace, and I am quite thoroughly familiar with your buggy, amateurish
piece of "Copernicus" crap, which I have running on a virtual 32-bit XP
machine. I prepared this image for you last night:
http://tinyurl.com/ovo4jq2
As seen above, at the distance of M31, it takes only the TINIEST deviation
of a star's orbit from being directly face-on for emission theory to predict
a horned light curve.
===================================================
Twinkle, twinkle.... just noise with no significant change in magnitude. So
what is your point?
===================================================
Twinkle, twinkle.... just noise with no significant change in magnitude. So
what is your point?
Due to severe limitations in your program (it crashes using more than about
2,000,000 or so photons, and you don't have enough horizontal bins),
==============================================
Guilty as charged, but GIGO <shrug>. What do you need 2,000,000 photons for?
I'm modelling instant light curves with 100 photons in a spreadsheet
nowadays.
it is not easy to see that the horns have infinitely steep sides.
=======================================================
Not for 6 magnitudes like V 1493 Aql they don't.
With my Matlab scripts, I ran sequenced sets of runs of fifty million
photons in sixty-four thousand bins, automatically varying a single
parameter (for example, pitch) while holding the other parameters constant.
===================================
And circular orbits?
My scripts generated distinctly named csv files for each choice of
parameters. I'd set it to run overnight, and I'd import the files into a
separate visualization program to see the results. I could even import into
Excel if I wanted to. (That's the reason why I had a maximum of sixty-four
thousand bins.) I could vary filter width, could alter the vertical scale,
and could display multiple curves on a single graph. Your program doesn't
generate a data file, so you are stuck with the filter width that you choose
at the start of the run, and it only generates one curve at a time.
========================================
Guilty as charged. Copernicus.exe was written fro Winsowsa in 1993 on a 12
MHz '386 with a math coprocessor and 4 Mbytes of RAM. Don't expect flat
screen TV in the Wright "Flyer".
Nevertheless wackypedia is lying with its "never been seen" bullshit.
Now, why would I spend so much time in such a ridiculous pursuit, you ask?
=================================================================
Because you now suspect emission theory must be correct but it hasn't sunk
in yet, the alternative is aether and that went out with MMX.
As I've explained before, I am an active member of my local astronomy club
============================================================
Your hobby is of no interest to me or science.
Either light's speed is source dependent, like a bullet, or aether
dependent, like sound, the only other choice is observer dependent and that
is ridiculous.
MMX says it can't be aether dependent, the Earth is being carried through
the aether and the apparatus carried with it can be rotated into and out of
the aether wind.
Cepheids, so-called "eclipsing" variables and recurrent novae are all
modelled using emission theory. Even Einstein realised this when he wrote
"But the ray moves relatively to the initial point of k, when measured in
the stationary system, with the velocity c-v, so that
\begin{displaymath}\frac{x'}{c-v}=t. \end{displaymath} " -- Einstein.
Minor defects in any computer program can't change that. The spikes that
concern you are less than 0.1 magnitude, just noise, you'll get more
variation from atmosphere than that.
If you want to "educate" me with your fairy tales you'll have to explain
what makes the speed of light observer dependent, since you've ruled out
source dependence and MMX ruled out aether dependence; there is not much
else left.