A Lesson In Sagnac and Rotating frames, For Paul, Tom and Jerry.
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Atoms are round hard things that don't go flat
Next: Lunar Laser-Ranging Detection of Light-Speed Anisotropy
From: Inertial on 14 Feb 2010 21:55 "Henry Wilson DSc" <..@..> wrote in message news:16dhn5lkm4inbqq8n44md9sim60rc60a8a(a)4ax.com... > On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 13:32:23 +1100, "Inertial" <relatively(a)rest.com> > wrote: > >> >>"Henry Wilson DSc" <..@..> wrote in message >>news:0fbhn59irun7u51r5r9u2dnbtv4ehbi11d(a)4ax.com... >>> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 11:50:45 +1100, "Inertial" <relatively(a)rest.com> >>> wrote: > >>>> >>>>> annihilates the >>>>> Roberts, Jerry, Andersen 'rotating frame' argument as well as your >>>>> own. >>>> >>>>Nope .. you've just proven your own argument wrong. Well done. >>> >>> Use your brain... >> >>I did .. and you just refuted your own theory. Saying 'it predicts >>something that doesn't happen and somehow instead what is observed does >>happen anyway and my theory cannot explain why' means your theory is >>refuted. > > Don't kid yourself. I'm not > By counting the pulses arriving from the two directions, I can calculate > the > earth's rotation speed. Nope. as the tube has a fixed length, the same number must arrive per second as are sent per second. Otherwise either pulses are disappearing along the way, or being created from nowhere. You theory relies on pulse fairies. > I don't need an interferometer. A clock will do just as > well. > > Sagnac fully supports BaTh. Nope .. your supposed 'BaTh' is pure impossible nonsense.
From: Jerry on 14 Feb 2010 23:42 On Feb 14, 3:13 am, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > When are you going to apologize for posting forged degrees? That's not going to work, Eric. You see, Ralph really believes that his degree is legitimate. An advanced degree, such as a PhD or DSc, is conferred upon a person by a committee of the degree candidate's peers in the subject of entry, who agree that the candidate's accomplishments, [1] as manifest in a tangible work of art (such as a dissertation, composition, work of craft etc. as appropriate for the subject) [2] and, as may or may not be necessary depending on the subject, defended in an appropriate venue (such as a dissertation defense), [3] are such that he/she is worthy of welcome to the community of peers. Ralph has a body of work (i.e. his online writings and computer programs) which in his mind, he has successfully defended against all criticism. Since there is nobody in the world whom Ralph respects as a peer, he has no choice but to set himself as head of the degree-conferring organization. Deluded? You bet. Jerry
From: Inertial on 15 Feb 2010 00:11 "Jerry" <Cephalobus_alienus(a)comcast.net> wrote in message news:36b92b5b-cd53-43c7-9d6b-7823359ed205(a)c16g2000yqd.googlegroups.com... > On Feb 14, 3:13 am, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> When are you going to apologize for posting forged degrees? > > That's not going to work, Eric. > > You see, Ralph really believes that his degree is legitimate. An > advanced degree, such as a PhD or DSc, is conferred upon a person > by a committee of the degree candidate's peers in the subject of > entry, who agree that the candidate's accomplishments, [1] as > manifest in a tangible work of art (such as a dissertation, > composition, work of craft etc. as appropriate for the subject) > [2] and, as may or may not be necessary depending on the subject, > defended in an appropriate venue (such as a dissertation defense), > [3] are such that he/she is worthy of welcome to the community of > peers. > > Ralph has a body of work (i.e. his online writings and computer > programs) which in his mind, he has successfully defended against > all criticism. Since there is nobody in the world whom Ralph > respects as a peer, he has no choice but to set himself as head > of the degree-conferring organization. > > Deluded? You bet. BAHAHAHA. Clever :) (you, that is, not Henry)
From: Henry Wilson DSc on 15 Feb 2010 00:44 On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 13:52:59 +1100, "Inertial" <relatively(a)rest.com> wrote: > >"Henry Wilson DSc" <..@..> wrote in message >news:0fbhn59irun7u51r5r9u2dnbtv4ehbi11d(a)4ax.com... >> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 11:50:45 +1100, "Inertial" <relatively(a)rest.com> >> wrote: >> The path lengths are different. >> The distance between pulses is 1 metre in all >> frames. The number of pulses in each path differs by 124. When a pulse is >> split >> into two and sent down both fibres, it takes the same time to get to the >> detector in both directions. Both halves arrive together. >> So 124 more pulses have arrived from one direction than the other. >> IN OTHER WORDS, the pulse arrival rate is different from both paths. > >So the following is equivalent to what you have here: > >You have two paths from (say) A to B. > >You have n objects leaving A over a period of 1 second down one path and >taking time T to get to B. The first object arrives at time T, the last at >time T+1. > >You have another n objects leaving A over a period of 1 second down the >other path and taking the same time T to get to B. The first object arrives >at time T, the last at time T+1. THIS IS WRONG. HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE FOR SOMETHING TO SINK INTO YOUR BRAIN. You have n+m objects in one path and n-m objects in the other. One path moves faster than the other so the nth object in each path reunites with its counterpart simultaneously at the detector. While it is traveling, n+m objects reach the detector one way and n-m the other way. >Yet by your logic, you would claim that more would arrive per second at B >from one path than the other. Do you know what a bicycle chain looks like? The faster you move it the more links pass a particular point. >That is just pure impossible nonsense. What you are saying is pure nonsense , yes. >You also claim that even though in any given time you emit the same number >of pulses in both directions, and that they are all in the tube for the same >time, that there are more pulses in the tube going in one direction than >their are in the other. Where do the extra pulses come from? They enter or leave each path during a speed change...That is when the fringes are seen to MOVE. >That is also just pure impossible nonsense. What you are saying is pure nonsense, yes. >At any given time the tube has the same length in both directions .. the >length is the circumference of the tube, it does not change. And as you say >that the pulses are the same distance apart, there must be the same number >of them in the tube at a time. Only when it is not rotating. and p = q. You have to consider the distance C moves while a pulse is in transit. That is the reason for the path length difference. I might remind you that your own SR says exactly that too. >But you claim that at any given time there >are more pulses in the tube going in one direction than that other. > >That is also just pure impossible nonsense. > >You really have just totally refuted your 'thoery'. It is all based on pure >impossible nonsense. You will probably feel very embarrased when and if the penny drops but I doubt if you have the intelligence to make that happen. Henry Wilson... ........provider of free physics lessons
From: Henry Wilson DSc on 15 Feb 2010 00:46
On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 20:42:10 -0800 (PST), Jerry <Cephalobus_alienus(a)comcast.net> wrote: >On Feb 14, 3:13�am, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> When are you going to apologize for posting forged degrees? > >That's not going to work, Eric. > >You see, Henry really believes that his degree is legitimate. An >advanced degree, such as a PhD or DSc, is conferred upon a person >by a committee of the degree candidate's peers in the subject of >entry, who agree that the candidate's accomplishments, [1] as >manifest in a tangible work of art (such as a dissertation, >composition, work of craft etc. as appropriate for the subject) >[2] and, as may or may not be necessary depending on the subject, >defended in an appropriate venue (such as a dissertation defense), >[3] are such that he/she is worthy of welcome to the community of >peers. > >Henry has a body of work (i.e. his online writings and computer >programs) which in his mind, he has successfully defended against >all criticism. Since there is nobody in the world whom Henry >respects as a peer, he has no choice but to set himself as head >of the degree-conferring organization. > >Deluded? You bet. Note, I made a glaring error in my original message. I have admitted the same and corrected it. Sagnac fully supports BaTh. >Jerry Henry Wilson... ........provider of free physics lessons |