info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Pulsars and Special Relativity
123 views
Skip to first unread message
Ed Lake
Jul 28, 2019, 11:22:13 AM7/28/19
to
I just finished another paper that debunks the absurd beliefs of
evangelistic mathematicians. The paper is titled
"Pulsars and Special Relativity."
It's available on academia.edu at this link:
https://www.academia.edu/39951190/Pulsars_and_Special_Relativity
And it's available on vixra.org at this link:
http://vixra.org/pdf/1907.0548v1.pdf
The paper describes how radio astronomers routinely MEASURE the
speed of radio energy pulses from pulsars as the earth orbits
the sun. The pulses, of course, travel at the speed of light.
And the pulses are MEASURED as arriving at c+v when the earth is
moving toward the pulsar, and the pulsars are MEASURED as arriving
at c-v when the earth is moving away from the pulsar.
This totally debunks the absurd belief that light arrives at c
for all observers.
I'd be interesting in people's thoughts about this paper.
Ed
evangelistic mathematicians. The paper is titled
"Pulsars and Special Relativity."
It's available on academia.edu at this link:
https://www.academia.edu/39951190/Pulsars_and_Special_Relativity
And it's available on vixra.org at this link:
http://vixra.org/pdf/1907.0548v1.pdf
The paper describes how radio astronomers routinely MEASURE the
speed of radio energy pulses from pulsars as the earth orbits
the sun. The pulses, of course, travel at the speed of light.
And the pulses are MEASURED as arriving at c+v when the earth is
moving toward the pulsar, and the pulsars are MEASURED as arriving
at c-v when the earth is moving away from the pulsar.
This totally debunks the absurd belief that light arrives at c
for all observers.
I'd be interesting in people's thoughts about this paper.
Ed
Dono,
Jul 28, 2019, 11:28:07 AM7/28/19
to
On Sunday, July 28, 2019 at 8:22:13 AM UTC-7, Ed Lake wrote:
>
> I'd be interesting in people's thoughts about this paper.
>
Crackpot shit, as usual
>
> I'd be interesting in people's thoughts about this paper.
>
Paul B. Andersen
Jul 28, 2019, 5:41:09 PM7/28/19
to
"This practice of measuring pulsar pulse rates from
the center of the solar system indirectly confirms
that light arrives at c+v and c-v rates at earth
observatories, since, if the speed of light was
the same for all observers, thus making the pulsar
pulse rate the same for all observers, there would
be no need to convert everything to barycenter counts.
You’d get the same rate regardless of where you were
in earth’s orbit around the sun."
'nuff said!
--
Paul
https://paulba.no/
Python
Jul 28, 2019, 6:14:54 PM7/28/19
to
Ed Lake wrote:
> I'd be interesting in people's thoughts about this paper.
I think that when you have been fighting with radar guns and basic
> I'd be interesting in people's thoughts about this paper.
of Galilean physics for ages, you'd better not try to write anything
on pulsars if you do not want to make a fool of yourself.
But you did.
David (Kronos Prime) Fuller
Jul 28, 2019, 7:12:31 PM7/28/19
to
Eduardo Del Lago escrito
I just finished another paper that debunks the absurd beliefs of evangelistic mathematicians.
<Snip Poop>
Fuckin Fermented Donkey Brains
https://youtu.be/gtQLIU4ze0g
I just finished another paper that debunks the absurd beliefs of evangelistic mathematicians.
Fuckin Fermented Donkey Brains
https://youtu.be/gtQLIU4ze0g
Paparios
Jul 29, 2019, 2:11:26 PM7/29/19
to
comment regarding Paul's sarcastic post:
"I expected a lot more personal attacks and at least two or three mathematical
challenges to the statements in the paper. Moreover, one post from Paul B.
Anderson seemed positive instead of negative:"
Ha ha ha !!! Typical wacko behavior!!!
Dono,
Jul 29, 2019, 2:17:03 PM7/29/19
to
Michael Moroney
Jul 29, 2019, 3:31:24 PM7/29/19
to
Ed Lake <det...@newsguy.com> writes:
>I just finished another paper that debunks the absurd beliefs of
>evangelistic mathematicians. The paper is titled
>"Pulsars and Special Relativity."
Oh boy, another stupid manifesto from Ed Lake!
>I just finished another paper that debunks the absurd beliefs of
>evangelistic mathematicians. The paper is titled
>"Pulsars and Special Relativity."
>The paper describes how radio astronomers routinely MEASURE the
>speed of radio energy pulses from pulsars as the earth orbits
>the sun. The pulses, of course, travel at the speed of light.
>And the pulses are MEASURED as arriving at c+v when the earth is
>moving toward the pulsar, and the pulsars are MEASURED as arriving
>at c-v when the earth is moving away from the pulsar.
pulse, and just don't understand the Doppler Effect? Oh wait, you are assuming
that a photon strikes its target at c+v, just like you do in your radar gun
manifestos, and are projecting your mistaken belief on the radio astronomers?
>This totally debunks the absurd belief that light arrives at c
>for all observers.
Einstein, and even before Maxwell, and is why Einstein came up with his second
postulate in the first place.
>I'd be interesting in people's thoughts about this paper.
very interesting.
Ed Lake
Jul 29, 2019, 4:38:43 PM7/29/19
to
On Monday, July 29, 2019 at 2:31:24 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
There are several references in the paper where pulses arrive more quickly
when the earth is moving toward the pulsar. And pulses arrive farther
apart when the earth is moving away from the pulsar.
Astronomers KNOW this, so they calculate what the pulse rate would be
at the center of the solar system. That way they can use a specific
pulse rate for a given pulsar. If the pulses always arrived a constant
rate, there would be no need for such calculations.
The Doppler Effect is mentioned many times in the paper. Astronomers
mostly talk about the Doppler Effect when the pulsar is in a BINARY
SYSTEM. That way, the pulsar is moving around in its orbit, and it is
more like the Doppler Effect with sound and an approaching or receding
train horn. When the pulsar is moving toward earth, the pulses are
closer together. When the pulses are moving away from the earth, the
pulses are farther apart. Astronomers measure that constantly.
By calculating pulse rates from the center of the solar system, astronomers
evidently avoid arguing with mathematicians. But the paper has quotes
about pulses arriving at different rates in June versus December. And it
even contains plotted charts showing the Doppler Effect where the earth
is moving toward the pulsar and away from the pulsar.
Light travels at c, but if the difference in pulse rates tells you that
light is NOT arriving at c. It is arriving at c plus or minus YOUR speed.
>
> >This totally debunks the absurd belief that light arrives at c
> >for all observers.
>
> Even though all experimental results say otherwise.
And what "experimental results" would those be? You make claims but
show no support for your claims. Instead, you show papers which
confirm that light is always EMITTED at c, and you IDIOTICALLY CLAIM
that ALSO means light is always received at c. IDIOTIC CLAIMS ARE NOT
PROOF!
Ed
> Ed Lake writes:
>
> >I just finished another paper that debunks the absurd beliefs of
> >evangelistic mathematicians. The paper is titled
> >"Pulsars and Special Relativity."
>
> Oh boy, another stupid manifesto from Ed Lake!
>
> >The paper describes how radio astronomers routinely MEASURE the
> >speed of radio energy pulses from pulsars as the earth orbits
> >the sun. The pulses, of course, travel at the speed of light.
> >And the pulses are MEASURED as arriving at c+v when the earth is
> >moving toward the pulsar, and the pulsars are MEASURED as arriving
> >at c-v when the earth is moving away from the pulsar.
>
> Measured? Reference? Or are you simply assuming a constant wavelength of the
> pulse, and just don't understand the Doppler Effect? Oh wait, you are assuming
> that a photon strikes its target at c+v, just like you do in your radar gun
> manifestos, and are projecting your mistaken belief on the radio astronomers?
Read the paper! It gives references. And it describes how pulsars work.
>
> >I just finished another paper that debunks the absurd beliefs of
> >evangelistic mathematicians. The paper is titled
> >"Pulsars and Special Relativity."
>
> Oh boy, another stupid manifesto from Ed Lake!
>
> >The paper describes how radio astronomers routinely MEASURE the
> >speed of radio energy pulses from pulsars as the earth orbits
> >the sun. The pulses, of course, travel at the speed of light.
> >And the pulses are MEASURED as arriving at c+v when the earth is
> >moving toward the pulsar, and the pulsars are MEASURED as arriving
> >at c-v when the earth is moving away from the pulsar.
>
> Measured? Reference? Or are you simply assuming a constant wavelength of the
> pulse, and just don't understand the Doppler Effect? Oh wait, you are assuming
> that a photon strikes its target at c+v, just like you do in your radar gun
> manifestos, and are projecting your mistaken belief on the radio astronomers?
There are several references in the paper where pulses arrive more quickly
when the earth is moving toward the pulsar. And pulses arrive farther
apart when the earth is moving away from the pulsar.
Astronomers KNOW this, so they calculate what the pulse rate would be
at the center of the solar system. That way they can use a specific
pulse rate for a given pulsar. If the pulses always arrived a constant
rate, there would be no need for such calculations.
The Doppler Effect is mentioned many times in the paper. Astronomers
mostly talk about the Doppler Effect when the pulsar is in a BINARY
SYSTEM. That way, the pulsar is moving around in its orbit, and it is
more like the Doppler Effect with sound and an approaching or receding
train horn. When the pulsar is moving toward earth, the pulses are
closer together. When the pulses are moving away from the earth, the
pulses are farther apart. Astronomers measure that constantly.
By calculating pulse rates from the center of the solar system, astronomers
evidently avoid arguing with mathematicians. But the paper has quotes
about pulses arriving at different rates in June versus December. And it
even contains plotted charts showing the Doppler Effect where the earth
is moving toward the pulsar and away from the pulsar.
Light travels at c, but if the difference in pulse rates tells you that
light is NOT arriving at c. It is arriving at c plus or minus YOUR speed.
>
> >This totally debunks the absurd belief that light arrives at c
> >for all observers.
>
> Even though all experimental results say otherwise.
show no support for your claims. Instead, you show papers which
confirm that light is always EMITTED at c, and you IDIOTICALLY CLAIM
that ALSO means light is always received at c. IDIOTIC CLAIMS ARE NOT
PROOF!
Ed
Paparios
Jul 29, 2019, 5:01:18 PM7/29/19
to
El lunes, 29 de julio de 2019, 16:38:43 (UTC-4), Ed Lake escribió:
> Read the paper! It gives references. And it describes how pulsars work.
>
> There are several references in the paper where pulses arrive more quickly
> when the earth is moving toward the pulsar. And pulses arrive farther
> apart when the earth is moving away from the pulsar.
>
> Astronomers KNOW this, so they calculate what the pulse rate would be
> at the center of the solar system. That way they can use a specific
> pulse rate for a given pulsar. If the pulses always arrived a constant
> rate, there would be no need for such calculations.
>
> The Doppler Effect is mentioned many times in the paper. Astronomers
> mostly talk about the Doppler Effect when the pulsar is in a BINARY
> SYSTEM. That way, the pulsar is moving around in its orbit, and it is
> more like the Doppler Effect with sound and an approaching or receding
> train horn. When the pulsar is moving toward earth, the pulses are
> closer together. When the pulses are moving away from the earth, the
> pulses are farther apart. Astronomers measure that constantly.
>
> By calculating pulse rates from the center of the solar system, astronomers
> evidently avoid arguing with mathematicians. But the paper has quotes
> about pulses arriving at different rates in June versus December. And it
> even contains plotted charts showing the Doppler Effect where the earth
> is moving toward the pulsar and away from the pulsar.
>
> Light travels at c, but if the difference in pulse rates tells you that
> light is NOT arriving at c. It is arriving at c plus or minus YOUR speed.
>
> Read the paper! It gives references. And it describes how pulsars work.
>
> There are several references in the paper where pulses arrive more quickly
> when the earth is moving toward the pulsar. And pulses arrive farther
> apart when the earth is moving away from the pulsar.
>
> Astronomers KNOW this, so they calculate what the pulse rate would be
> at the center of the solar system. That way they can use a specific
> pulse rate for a given pulsar. If the pulses always arrived a constant
> rate, there would be no need for such calculations.
>
> The Doppler Effect is mentioned many times in the paper. Astronomers
> mostly talk about the Doppler Effect when the pulsar is in a BINARY
> SYSTEM. That way, the pulsar is moving around in its orbit, and it is
> more like the Doppler Effect with sound and an approaching or receding
> train horn. When the pulsar is moving toward earth, the pulses are
> closer together. When the pulses are moving away from the earth, the
> pulses are farther apart. Astronomers measure that constantly.
>
> By calculating pulse rates from the center of the solar system, astronomers
> evidently avoid arguing with mathematicians. But the paper has quotes
> about pulses arriving at different rates in June versus December. And it
> even contains plotted charts showing the Doppler Effect where the earth
> is moving toward the pulsar and away from the pulsar.
>
> Light travels at c, but if the difference in pulse rates tells you that
> light is NOT arriving at c. It is arriving at c plus or minus YOUR speed.
>
> And what "experimental results" would those be? You make claims but
> show no support for your claims. Instead, you show papers which
> confirm that light is always EMITTED at c, and you IDIOTICALLY CLAIM
> that ALSO means light is always received at c. IDIOTIC CLAIMS ARE NOT
> PROOF!
>
You disregard what Eintein wrote in his 1905 paper, available at
> show no support for your claims. Instead, you show papers which
> confirm that light is always EMITTED at c, and you IDIOTICALLY CLAIM
> that ALSO means light is always received at c. IDIOTIC CLAIMS ARE NOT
> PROOF!
>
https://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/specrel.pdf
In that paper, which you have only read page 1, on page 11 it is discussed
the composition of velocities.
Einstein writes there:
"In the system k moving along the axis of X of the system K with velocity v,let
a point move in accordance with the equations ξ=wξτ,η=wητ,ζ=0,where wξ and wη
denote constants. Required: the motion of the point relatively to the system K.
If with the help of the equations of transformation developed in §3 we introduce
the quantities x,y,z,t into the equations of motion of the point, we obtain"
He then derived the relativistic equation of composition of velocities (see page
12):
V = (v+w) / (1+vw/c^2)
Then he writes:
"It follows from this equation that from a composition of two velocities
which are less than c, there always results a velocity less than c."
and:
"It follows, further, that the velocity of light c cannot be altered by
composition with a velocity less than that of light. For this case we
obtain
V = (c+w) / (1+w/c)=c"
So what Eintein proved is that the composition of one speed c (such as the
speed of a photon of light) with the speed v, of an object approaching the
photon is NOT c+v BUT is equal to c!!!!
JanPB
Jul 29, 2019, 5:23:03 PM7/29/19
to
On Sunday, July 28, 2019 at 8:22:13 AM UTC-7, Ed Lake wrote:
> I just finished another paper that debunks the absurd beliefs of
> evangelistic mathematicians.
Why do you waste your time on writing junk?
> evangelistic mathematicians.
--
Jan
JanPB
Jul 29, 2019, 5:24:11 PM7/29/19
to
the content goes.
--
Jan
Odd Bodkin
Jul 29, 2019, 5:33:28 PM7/29/19
to
which is how he would feel otherwise. So while he’s at his hobby of trying
to do something useful, he just upped the emotional ante for himself by
declaring himself the savior of physics who understands everything just by
thinking about it a while and watching YouTube videos VERY carefully.
If you want a short list of lonely people who are staving off invisibility
and irrelevance, it’s easy to come up with here: Ken Seto, Keith Stein, Ed
Lake, Richard Hertz, Henry Wilson, John Armistead, Pentcho Valev,
Archimedes Plutonium, Maciel Wozniak, a few others. I think it is generally
true that these people are unemployed or retired, and who no longer have an
occupation that makes them feel worthwhile, and so being the octogenarian
iconoclast is the balm for their enfeebled spirits.
--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
maluw...@gmail.com
Jul 29, 2019, 6:19:11 PM7/29/19
to
maluw...@gmail.com
Jul 29, 2019, 6:23:07 PM7/29/19
to
On Monday, 29 July 2019 23:33:28 UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> JanPB <fil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 28, 2019 at 8:22:13 AM UTC-7, Ed Lake wrote:
> >> I just finished another paper that debunks the absurd beliefs of
> >> evangelistic mathematicians.
> >
> > Why do you waste your time on writing junk?
> >
> > --
> > Jan
> >
>
> Because it’s better than feeling completely useless and disenfranchised,
I'm sure you know it well, poor idiot.
> JanPB <fil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 28, 2019 at 8:22:13 AM UTC-7, Ed Lake wrote:
> >> I just finished another paper that debunks the absurd beliefs of
> >> evangelistic mathematicians.
> >
> > Why do you waste your time on writing junk?
> >
> > --
> > Jan
> >
>
> Because it’s better than feeling completely useless and disenfranchised,
> If you want a short list of lonely people who are staving off invisibility
> and irrelevance, it’s easy to come up with here: Ken Seto, Keith Stein, Ed
> Lake, Richard Hertz, Henry Wilson, John Armistead, Pentcho Valev,
> Archimedes Plutonium, Maciel Wozniak, a few others
Michael Moroney and others.
. I think it is generally
> true that these people are unemployed or retired, and who no longer have an
> occupation that makes them feel worthwhile
average, poor idiot.
Dono,
Jul 29, 2019, 6:25:27 PM7/29/19
to
On Monday, July 29, 2019 at 1:38:43 PM UTC-7, Ed Lake wrote:
> On Monday, July 29, 2019 at 2:31:24 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>
> There are several references in the paper where pulses arrive more quickly
> when the earth is moving toward the pulsar.
It (c+v) is called "closing speed", utter imbecile.
> On Monday, July 29, 2019 at 2:31:24 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>
> There are several references in the paper where pulses arrive more quickly
> when the earth is moving toward the pulsar.
>And pulses arrive farther
> apart when the earth is moving away from the pulsar.
>
Michael Moroney
Jul 29, 2019, 6:38:08 PM7/29/19
to
Ed Lake <det...@newsguy.com> writes:
>On Monday, July 29, 2019 at 2:31:24 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> Ed Lake writes:
>>
>> >I just finished another paper that debunks the absurd beliefs of
>> >evangelistic mathematicians. The paper is titled
>> >"Pulsars and Special Relativity."
>>
>> Oh boy, another stupid manifesto from Ed Lake!
>>
>> >The paper describes how radio astronomers routinely MEASURE the
>> >speed of radio energy pulses from pulsars as the earth orbits
>> >the sun. The pulses, of course, travel at the speed of light.
>> >And the pulses are MEASURED as arriving at c+v when the earth is
>> >moving toward the pulsar, and the pulsars are MEASURED as arriving
>> >at c-v when the earth is moving away from the pulsar.
>>
>> Measured? Reference? Or are you simply assuming a constant wavelength of the
>> pulse, and just don't understand the Doppler Effect? Oh wait, you are assuming
>> that a photon strikes its target at c+v, just like you do in your radar gun
>> manifestos, and are projecting your mistaken belief on the radio astronomers?
>Read the paper! It gives references.
You just can't copy them here? I have to slog through a manifesto?
>On Monday, July 29, 2019 at 2:31:24 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> Ed Lake writes:
>>
>> >I just finished another paper that debunks the absurd beliefs of
>> >evangelistic mathematicians. The paper is titled
>> >"Pulsars and Special Relativity."
>>
>> Oh boy, another stupid manifesto from Ed Lake!
>>
>> >The paper describes how radio astronomers routinely MEASURE the
>> >speed of radio energy pulses from pulsars as the earth orbits
>> >the sun. The pulses, of course, travel at the speed of light.
>> >And the pulses are MEASURED as arriving at c+v when the earth is
>> >moving toward the pulsar, and the pulsars are MEASURED as arriving
>> >at c-v when the earth is moving away from the pulsar.
>>
>> Measured? Reference? Or are you simply assuming a constant wavelength of the
>> pulse, and just don't understand the Doppler Effect? Oh wait, you are assuming
>> that a photon strikes its target at c+v, just like you do in your radar gun
>> manifestos, and are projecting your mistaken belief on the radio astronomers?
>Read the paper! It gives references.
> And it describes how pulsars work.
>There are several references in the paper where pulses arrive more quickly
>when the earth is moving toward the pulsar. And pulses arrive farther
>apart when the earth is moving away from the pulsar.
>Astronomers KNOW this, so they calculate what the pulse rate would be
>at the center of the solar system. That way they can use a specific
>pulse rate for a given pulsar. If the pulses always arrived a constant
>rate, there would be no need for such calculations.
>The Doppler Effect is mentioned many times in the paper. Astronomers
>mostly talk about the Doppler Effect when the pulsar is in a BINARY
>SYSTEM.
So let's see what we have here. Earth moves in an orbit and the pulse rate
increases when the earth moves towards the pulsar and decreases when moving away.
A pulsar in a binary system moves in an orbit and the pulse rate increases when the
pulsar moves towards the earth and decreases when moving away.
Isn't it cool how the Doppler Effect is symmetrical?
> That way, the pulsar is moving around in its orbit, and it is
>more like the Doppler Effect with sound and an approaching or receding
>train horn. When the pulsar is moving toward earth, the pulses are
>closer together. When the pulses are moving away from the earth, the
>pulses are farther apart. Astronomers measure that constantly.
when the bodies are moving toward each other. The pulses arrive less quickly and the
pulses are further apart when the bodies are moving away from each other.
The Doppler Effect!!!!!
And in each case, if you take the pulse rate in Hz and multiply it by the
distance between the pulses, you get....
...
..wait for it...
...did you guess yet?...
...no peeking...
...you get...
c!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>Light travels at c, but if the difference in pulse rates tells you that
>light is NOT arriving at c. It is arriving at c plus or minus YOUR speed.
manifestoes!
>> >This totally debunks the absurd belief that light arrives at c
>> >for all observers.
>>
>> Even though all experimental results say otherwise.
>And what "experimental results" would those be? You make claims but
>show no support for your claims.
Should I supply them yet again? (Yes I know what Einstein said about doing the
same thing over and over, but at least I don't expect any different results)
> Instead, you show papers which
>confirm that light is always EMITTED at c, and you IDIOTICALLY CLAIM
>that ALSO means light is always received at c. IDIOTIC CLAIMS ARE NOT
>PROOF!
Besides, why would Einstein say in his second postulate that light is always
received at c?
JanPB
Jul 29, 2019, 7:36:41 PM7/29/19
to
On Monday, July 29, 2019 at 2:33:28 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> JanPB <fil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 28, 2019 at 8:22:13 AM UTC-7, Ed Lake wrote:
> >> I just finished another paper that debunks the absurd beliefs of
> >> evangelistic mathematicians.
> >
> > Why do you waste your time on writing junk?
> >
> > --
> > Jan
> >
>
> Because it’s better than feeling completely useless and disenfranchised,
> which is how he would feel otherwise.
That's one standard emotional defect around here. Another one is
> JanPB <fil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 28, 2019 at 8:22:13 AM UTC-7, Ed Lake wrote:
> >> I just finished another paper that debunks the absurd beliefs of
> >> evangelistic mathematicians.
> >
> > Why do you waste your time on writing junk?
> >
> > --
> > Jan
> >
>
> Because it’s better than feeling completely useless and disenfranchised,
> which is how he would feel otherwise.
the OCD or monomania (e.g. Valev).
One can describe this NG as the psychiatrist in Fawlty Towers: "There is
enough material here for an entire conference."
--
Jan
Richard Hertz
Jul 30, 2019, 12:02:58 AM7/30/19
to
For me, what is needed is to measure (at least) round trip times of long range spatial ranging using shaped pulses of microwaves or laser, which have a very precise temporal separation. With well known values of distance and velocity, you can fact-check how the longitudinal component of the path between Earth and the celestial body contain a train of pulses, the timing of its arrival being a function of the velocity "v" of the distant body.
This was done in the '60s by the US and USSR military, to indirectly know the exact distance Earth-Sun and its orbital parameters (using Newton). There, by using Mars as a reflector of radiowave pulses, such addition was proved.
But the divulgation of such information cost the job of the "whistleblower", Dr. Bryan G. Wallace, who wrote the book "The Farce of Physics" in 1992.
Or, in another direction, the violation of the "Hubble's Law", which cost the job of a gifted and respected astronomer, Dr. Halton Arp.
You can google about them, but I'm shure that you know them already.
maluw...@gmail.com
Jul 30, 2019, 2:18:49 AM7/30/19
to
On Tuesday, 30 July 2019 01:36:41 UTC+2, JanPB wrote:
> On Monday, July 29, 2019 at 2:33:28 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> > JanPB <fil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Sunday, July 28, 2019 at 8:22:13 AM UTC-7, Ed Lake wrote:
> > >> I just finished another paper that debunks the absurd beliefs of
> > >> evangelistic mathematicians.
> > >
> > > Why do you waste your time on writing junk?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jan
> > >
> >
> > Because it’s better than feeling completely useless and disenfranchised,
> > which is how he would feel otherwise.
>
> That's one standard emotional defect around here. Another one is
> the OCD or monomania (e.g. Valev).
And you're a guru. Criticizing you is like criticizing Bach.
> On Monday, July 29, 2019 at 2:33:28 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> > JanPB <fil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Sunday, July 28, 2019 at 8:22:13 AM UTC-7, Ed Lake wrote:
> > >> I just finished another paper that debunks the absurd beliefs of
> > >> evangelistic mathematicians.
> > >
> > > Why do you waste your time on writing junk?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jan
> > >
> >
> > Because it’s better than feeling completely useless and disenfranchised,
> > which is how he would feel otherwise.
>
> That's one standard emotional defect around here. Another one is
> the OCD or monomania (e.g. Valev).
And you don't have to read dictionaries, you could write them
yourself instead. When you say "an idiot!!" it's a fact, while
others using this word are just insulting. Etc, etc, etc.
Dono,
Jul 30, 2019, 2:21:59 AM7/30/19
to
On Monday, July 29, 2019 at 9:02:58 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Sunday, 28 July 2019 12:22:13 UTC-3, Ed Lake wrote:
> > I just finished another paper that debunks the absurd beliefs of
> > evangelistic mathematicians. The paper is titled
> > "Pulsars and Special Relativity."
> >
> > It's available on academia.edu at this link:
> > https://www.academia.edu/39951190/Pulsars_and_Special_Relativity
> > And it's available on vixra.org at this link:
> > http://vixra.org/pdf/1907.0548v1.pdf
> >
> > The paper describes how radio astronomers routinely MEASURE the
> > speed of radio energy pulses from pulsars as the earth orbits
> > the sun. The pulses, of course, travel at the speed of light.
> > And the pulses are MEASURED as arriving at c+v when the earth is
> > moving toward the pulsar, and the pulsars are MEASURED as arriving
> > at c-v when the earth is moving away from the pulsar.
> >
> > This totally debunks the absurd belief that light arrives at c
> > for all observers.
> >
> > I'd be interesting in people's thoughts about this paper.
> >
> > Ed
>
> Ed, I'm with you all the way on these matters.
Of course you are, birds of a feather......
> On Sunday, 28 July 2019 12:22:13 UTC-3, Ed Lake wrote:
> > I just finished another paper that debunks the absurd beliefs of
> > evangelistic mathematicians. The paper is titled
> > "Pulsars and Special Relativity."
> >
> > It's available on academia.edu at this link:
> > https://www.academia.edu/39951190/Pulsars_and_Special_Relativity
> > And it's available on vixra.org at this link:
> > http://vixra.org/pdf/1907.0548v1.pdf
> >
> > The paper describes how radio astronomers routinely MEASURE the
> > speed of radio energy pulses from pulsars as the earth orbits
> > the sun. The pulses, of course, travel at the speed of light.
> > And the pulses are MEASURED as arriving at c+v when the earth is
> > moving toward the pulsar, and the pulsars are MEASURED as arriving
> > at c-v when the earth is moving away from the pulsar.
> >
> > This totally debunks the absurd belief that light arrives at c
> > for all observers.
> >
> > I'd be interesting in people's thoughts about this paper.
> >
> > Ed
>
> Ed, I'm with you all the way on these matters.
Paul B. Andersen
Jul 30, 2019, 7:39:29 AM7/30/19
to
If Ed had understood what his statement said,
he wouldn't have written it. :-D
--
Paul
https://paulba.no/
Ed Lake
Jul 30, 2019, 11:05:58 AM7/30/19
to
On Monday, July 29, 2019 at 5:38:08 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> Ed Lake writes:
>
> >On Monday, July 29, 2019 at 2:31:24 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >> Ed Lake writes:
> >>
> >> >I just finished another paper that debunks the absurd beliefs of
> >> >evangelistic mathematicians. The paper is titled
> >> >"Pulsars and Special Relativity."
> >>
> >> Oh boy, another stupid manifesto from Ed Lake!
> >>
> >> >The paper describes how radio astronomers routinely MEASURE the
> >> >speed of radio energy pulses from pulsars as the earth orbits
> >> >the sun. The pulses, of course, travel at the speed of light.
> >> >And the pulses are MEASURED as arriving at c+v when the earth is
> >> >moving toward the pulsar, and the pulsars are MEASURED as arriving
> >> >at c-v when the earth is moving away from the pulsar.
> >>
> >> Measured? Reference? Or are you simply assuming a constant wavelength of the
> >> pulse, and just don't understand the Doppler Effect? Oh wait, you are assuming
> >> that a photon strikes its target at c+v, just like you do in your radar gun
> >> manifestos, and are projecting your mistaken belief on the radio astronomers?
>
> >Read the paper! It gives references.
>
> You just can't copy them here? I have to slog through a manifesto?
I quote:
> Ed Lake writes:
>
> >On Monday, July 29, 2019 at 2:31:24 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >> Ed Lake writes:
> >>
> >> >I just finished another paper that debunks the absurd beliefs of
> >> >evangelistic mathematicians. The paper is titled
> >> >"Pulsars and Special Relativity."
> >>
> >> Oh boy, another stupid manifesto from Ed Lake!
> >>
> >> >The paper describes how radio astronomers routinely MEASURE the
> >> >speed of radio energy pulses from pulsars as the earth orbits
> >> >the sun. The pulses, of course, travel at the speed of light.
> >> >And the pulses are MEASURED as arriving at c+v when the earth is
> >> >moving toward the pulsar, and the pulsars are MEASURED as arriving
> >> >at c-v when the earth is moving away from the pulsar.
> >>
> >> Measured? Reference? Or are you simply assuming a constant wavelength of the
> >> pulse, and just don't understand the Doppler Effect? Oh wait, you are assuming
> >> that a photon strikes its target at c+v, just like you do in your radar gun
> >> manifestos, and are projecting your mistaken belief on the radio astronomers?
>
> >Read the paper! It gives references.
>
> You just can't copy them here? I have to slog through a manifesto?
---- start quote ---
The movement of the Earth due to its orbit around the Sun introduces a
Doppler Effect which modifies the signal frequency measured at the telescope
compared to its value in the ISM [Inter-Stellar Medium]. The delay between
reception of the high and low frequencies is also subject to the Doppler
Effect due to the Earth’s motion. The Earth is “catching up” or “moving away”
from the signal, and so the time between reception of the high and low
frequencies is reduced or delayed. The value of the Dispersion Measure varies
throughout the year due to the Earth’s orbit around the Sun as a function of
the projected velocity onto the line of site to the pulsar.
----- end quote ----
Source: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275030606_EMBRACENancay_an_ultra_wide_field_of_view_prototype_for_the_SKA
The article was written by professional astronomers working at the Nançay
decimetric radio telescope (Le radiotélescope décimétrique de Nançay (NRT),
which is part of the Nançay Radio Observatory, located in Nançay, two hours'
drive south of Paris, France.
They also provide a graph showing how the pulse arrival rates differ during
the course of a year.
My paper also includes other references to articles written by other
astronomers saying the same things.
(snip repetitious crap)
> Besides, why would Einstein say in his second postulate that light is always
> received at c?
"receive"!!! It is only about what is EMITTED. Here it is:
"light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which
is independent of the state of motion of the EMITTING body."
The IDIOTIC MATHEMATICIANS twist and distort what Einstein wrote to include
what they BELIEVE an observer would see. They CLAIM it is what Einstein
MEANT. They refused to accept that Einstein meant what he wrote.
Ed
Dono,
Jul 30, 2019, 11:24:17 AM7/30/19
to
On Tuesday, July 30, 2019 at 8:05:58 AM UTC-7, Ed Lake wrote:
>
> CAN'T YOU READ????? Einstein's Second Postulate does NOT use the word
> "receive"!!! It is only about what is EMITTED. Here it is:
>
Motion is relative, old fart. There is no difference between the motion of the emitter and the receiver. They move RELATIVE to each other. All these years and you still don't get it.
>
> CAN'T YOU READ????? Einstein's Second Postulate does NOT use the word
> "receive"!!! It is only about what is EMITTED. Here it is:
>
Michael Moroney
Jul 30, 2019, 12:16:01 PM7/30/19
to
Ed Lake <det...@newsguy.com> writes:
>On Monday, July 29, 2019 at 5:38:08 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> Ed Lake writes:
>> >> Measured? Reference? Or are you simply assuming a constant wavelength of the
>> >> pulse, and just don't understand the Doppler Effect? Oh wait, you are assuming
>> >> that a photon strikes its target at c+v, just like you do in your radar gun
>> >> manifestos, and are projecting your mistaken belief on the radio astronomers?
>> >Read the paper! It gives references.
>> You just can't copy them here? I have to slog through a manifesto?
>I quote:
>---- start quote ---
>The movement of the Earth due to its orbit around the Sun introduces a
>Doppler Effect which modifies the signal frequency measured at the telescope
>compared to its value in the ISM [Inter-Stellar Medium]. The delay between
>reception of the high and low frequencies is also subject to the Doppler
>Effect due to the Earth's motion. The Earth is "catching up" or "moving away"
>from the signal, and so the time between reception of the high and low
>frequencies is reduced or delayed. The value of the Dispersion Measure varies
>throughout the year due to the Earth's orbit around the Sun as a function of
>the projected velocity onto the line of site to the pulsar.
>----- end quote ----
Nothing to do with any variable speed of light or c+v. Just the Doppler Effect and
>On Monday, July 29, 2019 at 5:38:08 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> Ed Lake writes:
>> >> Measured? Reference? Or are you simply assuming a constant wavelength of the
>> >> pulse, and just don't understand the Doppler Effect? Oh wait, you are assuming
>> >> that a photon strikes its target at c+v, just like you do in your radar gun
>> >> manifestos, and are projecting your mistaken belief on the radio astronomers?
>> >Read the paper! It gives references.
>> You just can't copy them here? I have to slog through a manifesto?
>I quote:
>---- start quote ---
>The movement of the Earth due to its orbit around the Sun introduces a
>Doppler Effect which modifies the signal frequency measured at the telescope
>compared to its value in the ISM [Inter-Stellar Medium]. The delay between
>reception of the high and low frequencies is also subject to the Doppler
>Effect due to the Earth's motion. The Earth is "catching up" or "moving away"
>from the signal, and so the time between reception of the high and low
>frequencies is reduced or delayed. The value of the Dispersion Measure varies
>throughout the year due to the Earth's orbit around the Sun as a function of
>the projected velocity onto the line of site to the pulsar.
>----- end quote ----
dispersion, a frequency dependent component apparently having to do with extinction
effect of longer wavelengths.
>Source: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275030606_EMBRACENancay_an_ultra_wide_field_of_view_prototype_for_the_SKA
>They also provide a graph showing how the pulse arrival rates differ during
>the course of a year.
>My paper also includes other references to articles written by other
>astronomers saying the same things.
>(snip repetitious crap)
>> Besides, why would Einstein say in his second postulate that light is always
>> received at c?
>CAN'T YOU READ????? Einstein's Second Postulate does NOT use the word
>"receive"!!! It is only about what is EMITTED. Here it is:
>"light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which
>is independent of the state of motion of the EMITTING body."
"stationary" system of co-ordinates with the determined velocity c, whether the
ray be emitted by a stationary or by a moving body.'
(translation at https://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/)
Here he specifies a frame, the observer's frame, which he calls the "stationary"
system of co-ordinates.
So what part of the words "determined" "velocity" "c" don't you understand?
What part of "whether the ray be emitted by a stationary or by a moving body"
don't you understand?
I will summarize: If the source is stationary in what Einstein called the stationary
frame, the light is measured as being the determined velocity c.
If the source is moving in what Einstein called the stationary frame, the light is
measured as being the determined velocity c.
No way to get c+v from this second principle of relativity.
The introduction of the second postulate which you quote states the same thing.
"light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c"
So if the emitting body is stationary, the light is propagated at c.
If the emitting body is moving, the light is propagated at c.
Independent of the state of motion of the emitting body.
So the introduction of the second postulate agrees with the statement of the second
postulate itself in Section 2.
What part of "always" don't you understand? Or don't you understand some of
the other words? "Propagated"? "Definite"? "Is"?
>The IDIOTIC MATHEMATICIANS twist and distort what Einstein wrote to include
>what they BELIEVE an observer would see. They CLAIM it is what Einstein
>MEANT. They refused to accept that Einstein meant what he wrote.
just physics, not math.
You need to do something about what appears to me to be paranoia on your part.
Excessive conspiracy beliefs by some evil "mathematicians" as well as other
conspiracies to blindly insert relativity where (you think) it doesn't belong.
This paranoia is not good!
David (Kronos Prime) Fuller
Jul 30, 2019, 1:18:26 PM7/30/19
to
Eduardo Del Lago escrito
“CAN'T YOU READ????? Einstein's Second Postulate does NOT use the word "receive"!!! It is only about what is EMITTED. Here it is:
"light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the EMITTING body."
The IDIOTIC MATHEMATICIANS twist and distort what Einstein wrote”
Arrogant Donkey Eduardo can’t understand e^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2
Yes light (a photon) travels at a blue shifted or red shifted c
But still at c when measured because (m = E/c^2) & (p = E/c)
You Eduardo have a befuddled inadequate trash ridden Brain.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/E6q79nTJQ12q8Z686
“CAN'T YOU READ????? Einstein's Second Postulate does NOT use the word "receive"!!! It is only about what is EMITTED. Here it is:
"light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the EMITTING body."
Arrogant Donkey Eduardo can’t understand e^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2
Yes light (a photon) travels at a blue shifted or red shifted c
But still at c when measured because (m = E/c^2) & (p = E/c)
You Eduardo have a befuddled inadequate trash ridden Brain.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/E6q79nTJQ12q8Z686
Paparios
Jul 30, 2019, 2:39:06 PM7/30/19
to
"The arguments on sci.physics.relativity intensified overnight, but it was
nearly all just personal attacks. Even the comment that I thought yesterday was
"positive" was stated to have been "negative." It demonstrates that we do not
speak the same language."
This is total fun!!
RichD
Jul 31, 2019, 10:21:42 PM7/31/19
to
On July 28, Ed Lake wrote:
> I'd be interesting in people's thoughts ...
... and Mrs. Malaprop turns green with envy, even beyond the
fictional grave...
Ed, you're a suppository of wisdom -
--
Rich
> I'd be interesting in people's thoughts ...
... and Mrs. Malaprop turns green with envy, even beyond the
fictional grave...
Ed, you're a suppository of wisdom -
--
Rich
0 new messages