Gnosiological Peculiarities in the
Contemporary Science and Regularity in its Development,
Translator's notes for Figure 3.
(1) The computed apparent radial velocity curves lag the brightness curves by 90 degrees in 3a, 3b, and 3c. (This is not obvious for 3b and 3c.) This phasing offset, at first glance, seems fatal to Sekerin's hypothesis.
(2) Recomputed brightness variation curves, furnished by Sekerin's
colleague, M.S. Serbulenko, are shown for the second cycle. (Faster-later
light overtaking slower-earlier light produces the unorthodox
time reversals in arrival times in the brightness and apparent velocity
curves in 3b and 3c.)
See A Ritzian Interpretation of Variable Stars http://www.datasync.com/~rsf1/binaries.htm for a resolution of the 90 degree phasing error. Copies of three of Serbulenko's light and apparent radial velocity curves are also reproduced and discussed.
The effect of the change in brightness should be found in spectral-binary
stars which have certain peculiarities. The components of spectral-binary
stars are compared with each other with respect to brightness. Because if
one of them is much brighter than the other, then we do not observe the
dimmer component by its light. Thus the change in brightness for these
stars is expressed more faintly, that is, the decrease in brightness of one
star is compensated by in increase in brightness of the other. However,
such compensation has not been shown by a change in the brightness of
spectral lines of each component of spectral-binary stars.
The possibility of explaining the changes in brightness of some variable stars by use of a speed additions law, and also the explanation of the changes in intensity of the spectra of spectroscopic-double stars by the same law appears to be highly tempting. This is because the simple correspondence between observed brightness and speed of a moving star in orbit allows us to determine the distance to these objects. At the same time, one must note that reference to observation as a confirmation of a basic postulate of physics is clearly not sufficient as a proof. In such situations one must turn to a decisive experiment.
 G.S. Landsberg, Optics, Moscow (1976) 452.
See Bryan Wallace's Farce of Physics : Relativity Revolution http://users.navi.net/~rsc/physics/wallace/farce.txt which deals with Sekerin's paper and the 1989 Leningrad conference on The Problem of Space and Time in Modern Physics.
According to Perry G. Phillips, Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith 40.1:19-23 (3/1988), Peter Bergmann (who studied under Einstein at Princeton) argued that the Ritz hypothesis would produce multiple star images in visual binaries. Peter G. Bergmann, Introduction to the Theory of Relativity, Prentice-Hall, New York (1942). The author of this page is getting a copy of Bergmann's book to see whether or not he addressed the angular resolution problem that Sekerin identified, expressions (4) and (5) above. According to Phillips, de Sitter's Binary Star argument(s) against Ritz appeared in Phokotaische Zeitschrift, 14 (1913) pp. 429 and 1267. The journal was actually: Physikalische Zeitschrift. [Added 06 Sep 2003. Revised on 10 May 2004 and 29 Aug 2011.]
[Later in the day 06 Sep 2003.] Bergmann (pp. 19-20, Ref. immediately above) does not address the visual binary star angular resolution problem. He refers to the corpuscular (also known as ballistic) hypothesis in the past tense, but does not mention de Sitter or Ritz.
15 May 2004
W. de Sitter, Ein astronomischer Beweis für die
Konstanz der Lichtgeschwindigkeit, Physik. Zeitschr. 14,
29 Aug 2011