Re: Planet-X, Why "Look Around"
In Article <3C49B8FE.8050904@telocity.com> Open Minded wrote:
>> Just as electrons are not a single particle, but composed
>> of some 387 particles, light is likewise not composed
>> of a single particle, as hundreds of particles are
>> involved in the phenomenon called light. This should
>> be obvious to man, as light spreads into the colors of
>> the rainbow, and as his scientists describe the behavior
>> of red light as Red Shift, where no such behavior is
>> ascribed to other colors in the light spectrum.
>
> Whoa ... we also talk of "blue shift" ... red shift/blue shift
> simply refer to shifts to longer/shorter wavelegths and do
> not ascribe special characteristics to red or blue light.
Red light is the one most NOTED. There are a lot of particles in the
light spectrum that man cant see. Were not discussing those, here,
either. We see few colors. The point it, the light from Planet X is
predominantly in the red spectrum, and bends more readily than the
predominant light from starlight, sunlight, your flashlight, etc.
In Article Bill Nelson wrote:
>>> will cease the practice of giving special coordinates
>>> from this date forward, as the viewing public is going
>>> ZetaTalk
>
>> It is funny that "special coordinates" are necessary, when
>> that is not the case for Pluto (closer than this reputed object)
>> or any other distant object such as Proxima Centari (much
>> further than this reputed object).
>
> The question then becomes, if it is not necessary for objects
> both much closer and much further away than the reputed
> Px, then what physical law dictates that such is necessary
> for Px alone?
Because what you SEE is the predominant light coming from stars,
sunlight, your flashlight, etc. and what you MISS is dim bulbs
predominantly in the red spectrum. Youd not know Planet X was where it
is had the Zetas not given the RA and Dec to look around and had Open
Minded not taken a 20 minute CCD and had the Zetas not pointed out the
spot where he had captured Planet X and had various folks not done
contrast and brightness enhancements to show that THERE was a new blob
NOT on the Palomar 45 minute CCD
(http://www.zetatalk.com/usenet/use90375.htm).
Pluto is reflecting sunlight, Planet X is not, yet.
In Article <3c4cfa70$0$10110$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au> Webster Smogpule wrote:
> Jeff Root wrote:
>> Next time the Sun is out at mid-day, put a finger up at
>> arm's length, to cover it. You will see that you can just
>> barely cover it, and so much light will come from the
>> sky near the Sun that it will still look very bright.
>>
>> Next time Sun is out at sunrise or sunset, put a finger
>> up at arm's length, to cover it. You will see that you
>> can cover it completely, and the sky around it will not
>> be so bright.
>>
>> Why are you able to cover the Sun with a finger at
>> sunrise or sunset better than you can at mid-day?
>
> Aha! You conveniently forget the famous
> expanding-finger-at-sunset syndrome.
> I *always* get "fat finger" at sunset.
Give me a break. At mid-day the Sun is an intense bright spec. At
sunrise and sunset the Sun gets HUGE. It comes up squashed, then
fattens out, then as it rises it gets smaller. Point is, why does it
change, or squash and flatten, or whatever, unless RED LIGHT BENDS big
time.
In Article <d7e36c6c.0201151412.780e1ae2@posting.google.com> Matt wrote:
> How about some facts (from a University Physics instructor
> with a PhD in Physic s):
>
> "The refraction of sunlight off moisture and density
> fluctuations in the atmosphere is what makes the sky
> blue and the sunset red[1]. When the sun is near the
> horizon, light from overhead is mainly a result of
> the large refraction of the blue end of the spectrum,
> while light coming from the direction of the sun is
> very little refracted and thus appears red."
> http://sprott.physics.wisc.edu/demobook/chapter6.htm
So hes saying that the big sun at sunrise and sunset is the REAL size
of the Sun? Humm. So much for PhDs. No wonder they have to hide out
in Universities.