A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious.
in [Relativity]
|
From: Peter Webb on 18 Feb 2010 21:24 > > > ____________________________ > > > So you refuse to answer (again). Shows how much confidence you have in > > > your > > > own theories. > > > I have a great deal of confidence in my theory but why am I going to > > waste my time having to go back through my posts and replace 'train' > > with 'tabletop', or replace 'train' with 'Earth'? > > > __________________________________ > > Nobody is asking you to. I am asking you a very simple question about > > your > > theory. Say the earth is moving at speed v relative to the ether. The > > speed > > of light in the direction the earth is travelling is measured in a > > laboratory on earth. What is its measured speed? > > > If you think the clocks being moved on a moving tabletop or the clocks > > being moved on the flat bed cars of a moving train makes a difference > > then this 'conversation' is pointless. > > > _________________________________ > > There are in fact 4 possibilities: > > > a) c > > b) c+v > > c) c-v > > d) something else. > > > You could just answer 'a', 'b', 'c' or 'd'. That is only typing a single > > character; that's not too much work for you, is it? > > d) Something else. In order to understand the something else read my > posts discussing the simultaneity of lightning strikes as determined > by Observers on the train and on the embankment. > > _______________________________ > If the earth is travelling at v relative to the ether, and we measure the > speed of light of earth in the direction we are travelling, what value do > we > get? Its some equation linking c and v, right? What is it? You will find the answer to your question if you read my posts where I discuss a train moving at 'v' with respect to the aether. ______________________________ No. No you have not posted an answer. It is a really simple question. Here it is again: Earth moving at v relative to the ether. We measure the speed of light on earth in the direction we are travelling through the ether. What speed do we measure on earth for light? c? c+v? some other equation linking c and v? Instead of saying that you have already answered it (which you haven't), why not just tell us the answer?
From: mpc755 on 18 Feb 2010 21:27 On Feb 18, 9:24 pm, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote: > > > > ____________________________ > > > > So you refuse to answer (again). Shows how much confidence you have in > > > > your > > > > own theories. > > > > I have a great deal of confidence in my theory but why am I going to > > > waste my time having to go back through my posts and replace 'train' > > > with 'tabletop', or replace 'train' with 'Earth'? > > > > __________________________________ > > > Nobody is asking you to. I am asking you a very simple question about > > > your > > > theory. Say the earth is moving at speed v relative to the ether. The > > > speed > > > of light in the direction the earth is travelling is measured in a > > > laboratory on earth. What is its measured speed? > > > > If you think the clocks being moved on a moving tabletop or the clocks > > > being moved on the flat bed cars of a moving train makes a difference > > > then this 'conversation' is pointless. > > > > _________________________________ > > > There are in fact 4 possibilities: > > > > a) c > > > b) c+v > > > c) c-v > > > d) something else. > > > > You could just answer 'a', 'b', 'c' or 'd'. That is only typing a single > > > character; that's not too much work for you, is it? > > > d) Something else. In order to understand the something else read my > > posts discussing the simultaneity of lightning strikes as determined > > by Observers on the train and on the embankment. > > > _______________________________ > > If the earth is travelling at v relative to the ether, and we measure the > > speed of light of earth in the direction we are travelling, what value do > > we > > get? Its some equation linking c and v, right? What is it? > > You will find the answer to your question if you read my posts where I > discuss a train moving at 'v' with respect to the aether. > > ______________________________ > No. No you have not posted an answer. It is a really simple question. Here > it is again: Earth moving at v relative to the ether. We measure the speed > of light on earth in the direction we are travelling through the ether. What > speed do we measure on earth for light? c? c+v? some other equation linking > c and v? Instead of saying that you have already answered it (which you > haven't), why not just tell us the answer? In order to understand the answer you have to read my response where the train is moving at speed 'v' with respect to the aether.
From: Inertial on 18 Feb 2010 21:35 "mpalenik" <markpalenik(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:658d4954-888b-4a63-8ddf-c85a85bd9a7b(a)a5g2000yqi.googlegroups.com... > On Feb 18, 4:12 pm, Ste <ste_ro...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> On 18 Feb, 16:35, mpalenik <markpale...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Feb 18, 9:43 am, Ste <ste_ro...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> > > I'm confused Mark. >> >> > > My position is that someone must hold a priori that alternate >> > > dimensions are a real possibility, in order to hold that any theory >> > > that employs alternate dimensions is credible. Some here do hold that >> > > alternate dimensions are a real possibility, so of course they hold >> > > theories that employ them as credible. >> >> > > I don't hold that alternate dimensions are a real possibility, so of >> > > course I don't accept that theories that employ them are credible. >> >> > The problem is, you act like everybody in this group went into physics >> > classes knowing and believing everything that was taught in the >> > physics classes. >> >> No, I'm basically saying that the only people who came *out* of those >> classes, and went into theoretical or experimental physics, are the >> people who by the end believed any of that nonsense. > > > So, you don't think educated people could possibly understand > something you don't. Interesting. I think what he is really saying is that the one's who went thru a physics course and understood SR etc are the ones who passed and 'believe' it. Those who failed the course and didn't understand SR, or never even took a course, do not come onto these forums saying they believe it (or they come onto these forums claiming SR is wrong). I know which sort of people I am more likely to believe.
From: Peter Webb on 18 Feb 2010 21:41 "mpc755" <mpc755(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:6d9c432d-b709-4ce8-a10f-1657957c4fa6(a)t1g2000vbq.googlegroups.com... On Feb 18, 9:22 pm, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote: > "mpc755" <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:c9a01beb-0012-4d90-a24e-56f7896d14db(a)y7g2000vbb.googlegroups.com... > On Feb 18, 7:45 pm, "Peter Webb" > > > > <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote: > > "mpc755" <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > >news:b232b4d3-422f-4f00-b485-d7a6f6ab5cd7(a)c22g2000vbb.googlegroups.com... > > On Feb 18, 2:30 am, "Peter Webb" > > > <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote: > > > "mpc755" <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > > >news:8e724cb5-1db0-47c2-aa3d-5ed7150295ea(a)f15g2000yqe.googlegroups.com... > > > On Feb 18, 12:40 am, "Peter Webb" > > > > <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote: > > > > "mpc755" <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > > > >news:c7b417f4-cdc4-414a-a24c-3f2e7fc4c67d(a)t42g2000vbt.googlegroups.com... > > > > On Feb 16, 11:55 pm, "Peter Webb" > > > > > <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote: > > > > > "mpc755" <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > > > > >news:3c8112b0-e86e-4fdb-a9f6-6c390200aa01(a)b2g2000yqi.googlegroups.com... > > > > > On Feb 16, 9:26 pm, "Peter Webb" > > > > > > <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote: > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > > > > > > > My tabletop is not in a spaceship, and there is no train on > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > spaceship. > > > > > > > > > Here is my question. Lets just take the first half this > > > > > > > > time: > > > > > > > > > 1. We place two atomic clocks on a tabletop at the centre of > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > 1 > > > > > > > > metre > > > > > > > > ruler. We separate them very slowly so they are at either > > > > > > > > end > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > one > > > > > > > > metre ruler. We record the time taken (according to the > > > > > > > > clocks) > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > light > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > travel 1 metre in a vacuum. Will the speed of light measured > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > manner > > > > > > > > be c or some other value? > > > > > > > > Is the aether at rest with respect to the table top? > > > > > > > > _________________________________ > > > > > > > No. The tabletop is moving at speed of v relative to the > > > > > > > ether. > > > > > > > The the tabletop is the train. > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > > > > > No, a tabletop is a tabletop. Its not a train. And you haven't > > > > > > answered > > > > > > my > > > > > > question. Will the speed of light measured in this manner be c > > > > > > or > > > > > > some > > > > > > other > > > > > > value? It is a pretty simple question. Why won't you answer it? > > > > > > I have answered it several times. If you want to understand how > > > > > the > > > > > clocks on the tabletop behave read my posts and replaced 'train' > > > > > with > > > > > 'tabletop'. > > > > > > _______________________________________ > > > > > Or, you could simply answer my question. Its pretty simple. Will > > > > > the > > > > > speed > > > > > be measured as c, or some different value. > > > > > > I will make it easy for you: > > > > > > If the earth is moving at velocity v with respect to the ether, > > > > > and > > > > > we > > > > > perform the very simple experiment above, then will the measured > > > > > speed > > > > > of > > > > > light in a vacuum be measured as c in a laboratory on earth? > > > > > > Well? > > > > > Replace 'earth' with 'train' and read my responses if you want to > > > > know > > > > the answer. > > > > > ____________________________ > > > > So you refuse to answer (again). Shows how much confidence you have > > > > in > > > > your > > > > own theories. > > > > I have a great deal of confidence in my theory but why am I going to > > > waste my time having to go back through my posts and replace 'train' > > > with 'tabletop', or replace 'train' with 'Earth'? > > > > __________________________________ > > > Nobody is asking you to. I am asking you a very simple question about > > > your > > > theory. Say the earth is moving at speed v relative to the ether. The > > > speed > > > of light in the direction the earth is travelling is measured in a > > > laboratory on earth. What is its measured speed? > > > > If you think the clocks being moved on a moving tabletop or the clocks > > > being moved on the flat bed cars of a moving train makes a difference > > > then this 'conversation' is pointless. > > > > _________________________________ > > > There are in fact 4 possibilities: > > > > a) c > > > b) c+v > > > c) c-v > > > d) something else. > > > > You could just answer 'a', 'b', 'c' or 'd'. That is only typing a > > > single > > > character; that's not too much work for you, is it? > > > If you want to understand how the Observers on an object moving at 'v' > > with respect to the aether determine the speed of light based upon > > 'synchronized' clocks, read my posts discussing the simultaneity of > > lightning strikes as determined by Observers on a train. > > > ________________________________ > > Why won't you naswer the question? > > I have answered your question. Why won't you read the answer? > > > > > Simply answering the question above is not going to get us anywhere. > > > ___________________________ > > Of course it will. You will be making a verificable claim about your > > theory, > > so we can verify if it is correct. > > > You have to understand what is physically occurring in nature to the > > atomic clocks and the light with respect to the aether in order to > > understand how it is the Observers on the train 'measure' the speed of > > light. > > > __________________________________ > > Earth moving at v relative to the ether. We measure the speed of light > > on > > earth in the direction we are travelling through the ether. What speed > > do > > we > > measure on earth for light? > > > Simple question. Why won't you answer? > > I have answered your question. Why won't you read the answer? > > ______________________________ > No you have not. It is a really simple question. Here it is again: Earth > moving at v relative to the ether. We measure the speed of light on earth > in > the direction we are travelling through the ether. What speed do we > measure > on earth for light? Instead of saying that you have already answered it > (which you haven't), why not just tell us the answer? Because to understand the answer you need to read my posts having to do with a train moving at speed 'v' with respect to the aether. Why not read the answer already posted? ___________________________________ You haven't answered my question. It is a really simple question. Here it is again: Earth moving at v relative to the ether. We measure the speed of light on earth in the direction we are travelling through the ether. What speed do we measure on earth for light? Instead of saying that you have already answered it (which you haven't), why not just tell us the answer?
From: Peter Webb on 18 Feb 2010 21:43
"mpc755" <mpc755(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:e47afad4-5e9d-4f5d-9a61-d3a3ed0d9f12(a)c22g2000vbb.googlegroups.com... On Feb 18, 9:24 pm, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote: > > > > ____________________________ > > > > So you refuse to answer (again). Shows how much confidence you have > > > > in > > > > your > > > > own theories. > > > > I have a great deal of confidence in my theory but why am I going to > > > waste my time having to go back through my posts and replace 'train' > > > with 'tabletop', or replace 'train' with 'Earth'? > > > > __________________________________ > > > Nobody is asking you to. I am asking you a very simple question about > > > your > > > theory. Say the earth is moving at speed v relative to the ether. The > > > speed > > > of light in the direction the earth is travelling is measured in a > > > laboratory on earth. What is its measured speed? > > > > If you think the clocks being moved on a moving tabletop or the clocks > > > being moved on the flat bed cars of a moving train makes a difference > > > then this 'conversation' is pointless. > > > > _________________________________ > > > There are in fact 4 possibilities: > > > > a) c > > > b) c+v > > > c) c-v > > > d) something else. > > > > You could just answer 'a', 'b', 'c' or 'd'. That is only typing a > > > single > > > character; that's not too much work for you, is it? > > > d) Something else. In order to understand the something else read my > > posts discussing the simultaneity of lightning strikes as determined > > by Observers on the train and on the embankment. > > > _______________________________ > > If the earth is travelling at v relative to the ether, and we measure > > the > > speed of light of earth in the direction we are travelling, what value > > do > > we > > get? Its some equation linking c and v, right? What is it? > > You will find the answer to your question if you read my posts where I > discuss a train moving at 'v' with respect to the aether. > > ______________________________ > No. No you have not posted an answer. It is a really simple question. Here > it is again: Earth moving at v relative to the ether. We measure the speed > of light on earth in the direction we are travelling through the ether. > What > speed do we measure on earth for light? c? c+v? some other equation > linking > c and v? Instead of saying that you have already answered it (which you > haven't), why not just tell us the answer? In order to understand the answer you have to read my response where the train is moving at speed 'v' with respect to the aether. __________________________________ OK, I read it. Nowhere does it say what speed will be measured for light in an inertial reference frame moving at velocity v with respect to the ether. If you think it does, why not just tell us the answer? It is a really simple question. Here it is again: Earth moving at v relative to the ether. We measure the speed of light on earth in the direction we are travelling through the ether. What speed do we measure on earth for light? |