Vade Retro Satanas. For crazy Criticisms, Even crazier Replies.
Reply to the various criticisms.
Certain criticisms, more or less justified, were given
of the ideas expressed in the pages dedicated to the Crab Nebula.
We can group them in three types which we will here analyze.
An excessive JPG compression.
The Digital Processing creates artifacts in the images. It
is thus likely that the "bridges between stars" and the observed
jets are nothing more than artifacts.
We have already widely
answered this contention in the following sections :
Description of DP.
Validation and Limits of the
The whole included in
a PDF document. (French)
We shall therefore
not go back over it.
The images of stars are diffuse in photographic
emulsions and in CCD sensors. They are therefore hazy and not precise. In
the diffusion zone of two close objects we can have, by addition, a
greater luminosity or some colour. Which can appear as a bridge,
especially after digital processing.
This is a very strong
So we proceeded to checks,
especially in the Crab nebula images. We processed all pairs of stars
having an angular distance of the same order as that between the pulsar
and the star to which it seems connected. Mostly we found absolutely no
such light scatter. Sometimes we found deformed spots which seemed to
correspond well to the diffusion mentioned in the criticism, but
rarely by a bridge in the form of a well structured strand. On the
other hand, we have numerous photos which, after DP, show filamentous
bridges of matter connecting stars separated by long distances. (See
both examples opposite).
In these cases there is no
public knowledge, since at least a quarter of a century, that there
is no gravitational link between the Crab pulsar and the star (Trimble 28)
appearing beside it on the picture, as testified by
the existence of a great relative movement between the two stars,
totally incompatible with the hypothesis of a very long period binary
It is an argument which seems
But which shows that the author of this criticism did
not see or understand that
there would be the effect of
a large-scale optical lens in this region of the Crab nebula.
This lens effect biases the measures of distances and
therefore of speeds.
Refer to :
- The Snag of the Crab.
- Effect of
Refringence in the Crab.
Let us add that we have never
evoked the hypothesis of a long period binary system, but on the
contrary we evoked the hypothesis of a small dimension binary system,
for which the conventional laws of gravitation are impeded by a
hydrodynamics mechanism (Coanda Effect).
S. Wyckoff and C.A. Murray
estimated, between 1899 and 1976, the tangential relative speed of the
pulsar at 123 km/s. They used seven photographic plates.
But if we take into account the
lens effect, the speed is less than 1 m/s.
Not having access to these plates, we cannot
verify this work. Thus we have to admit its validity, considering the
information at their disposal at that time.
If we admit this movement, then there is a very simple explanation of
The shape and dimension of the gas bubble would change over time, thus
inducing modifications of its optical characteristics, and in particular
its magnifying power.
A very important physical
peculiarity of the Crab nebula is that the totality of the matter
contained in it (pulsar and surrounding gas) is insufficient to explain
how the star parent was able to explode to a supernova. So, Trimble 28
could be, partially or totally, this missing mass!
Images taken with a 30 years interval.
However there is on Internet a
document which should allow us to make some rough measures, and to allow
us to draw some useful conclusions.
This motion picture comprises two images taken over 30 years' time.
Observing in this motion picture Trimble 28 and the pulsar,
the pulsar seems indeed to move towards the right. (It is necessary to
have a trained eye).
thus be able to measure, without much difficulty, this movement.
Zoom in the previous motion picture.
To do this we zoomed on this
region of the nebula.
to our surprise, there is a
The movement which we had seen in the large-scale motion picture is only due to a
partially covering on its left the pulsar in one of the
images of the motion picture
This effect, thus revealed, allows us to eliminate surely any
significant movement of the pulsar and forbids us to make however any
measurement. Under these conditions, we cannot assert anything
concerning the publication of
S. Wyckoff and C.A. Murray.
The movement of the pulsar
which we had believed to see, is only an unfortunate combination of an ordinary
optical illusion due to the human nervous system, which sometimes tends
to try to pull the wool over our eyes, and an artifact situated where it
should never have been.
In conclusion, over 30 years,
in spite of appearances, there is no significant relative movement
between Trimble 28 and the Pulsar. This does not exclude a
detectable movement over a longer period.
The cause of this
artifact could be due to the way the motion picture was made.
The authors would have used the images in the JPG format, thus
compressing them more or less.
To produce this motion picture, they would then have converted to the
The JPG compression would probably be the source of this artifact.
But is it an artefact
If we look into the document
S. Wyckoff and C.A. Murray, we find only one
reproduction (Fig. 2) of the seven patches having served to their
This image seemed of little interest because its bad
qualitty. It is only at a recente date that we interested there. We
extracted and made on this picture a 90░ clockwise rotation and finally we
have inverted it to obtain a positive image.
And finally we compared it to the individual images of
the motion picture (Zoom).
This first image extracted from the
motion picture has much resemblances with the published image in the
S. Wyckoff and C.A. Murray (above). Thus we can,
rightly, to suppose that it is the same images. The dark clouds occupy the
same position towards the Pulsar. Let us note the presence of a dark cloud
on the left of the pulsar.
This second extracted images, she
too, from the motion picture (Zoom), is not published in the document of
S. Wyckoff and C.A. Murray. It corresponds to the evolution,
after thirty years, of the immediat environment of the pulsar and its
eventuel displacement towards Trimble 28.
And at this
moment an advised observer notes, that what we thought to be an artefact,
is in reality a partial eclipse of the pulsar
by the dark cloud which during thirty years, displaced itself towards the
In this case, the measurements which was
made would be in fact the biased measurement of the moving speed of a dark
But is this image indeed
one of the six not published plates as we are entitled to suppose it?
The nature of this dark cloud is
unknown for us. But if we admit, with all the astronomers, that a star is
punctual, then normally the dark cloud would have only reduce the
luminosity of the pulsar and not make an eclipse! (Partial eclipse
in this particular case).
We could, indeed on, retort us that the
pulsar is observed through a gas diffusing its light. It is possible, but it
would come out for a long time with the numerous spectrographies made.
But if it is an eclipse of the pulsar indeed,
then we are there in presence of a resolute image of the Crab pulsar.
Conclusion: So our opponent, by wanting
to make too perfectly, would so have brought a supplementary proof in favour
of our hypotheses.
Proper motion of the Crab pulsar - S. Wyckoff and C.A. Murray.
And still more.
Creation date : 12/17/06
IC 443, The Crack Snag :