Prev: Quantum Gravity 357.91: Croatia Shows That Probability of Vacuum Energy Density is More Important than its Vacuum Expectation Value (VEV) of the Hamiltonian Density, in line with Probable Causation/Influence (PI)
Next: Hubble Views Saturn's Northern/Southern Lights
From: Sam Wormley on 15 Feb 2010 00:27
On 2/14/10 11:23 PM, mpc755 wrote:
> How do you measure your speed relative to the ether?
>

What ether?
From: mpc755 on 15 Feb 2010 00:32
On Feb 15, 12:18 am, "Peter Webb"
<webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
>  As I have said at least three times now,
> you cannot determine the speed of the aether.
> ____________________________________
>
> You said light moves at a constant velocity relative to the ether. So why
> can't you measure the speed of light, see how much it differs from c, and
> the difference is your speed relative to the ether? Why doesn't that
> procedure determine the speed of the ether?


How do you measure the speed of light and how do you determine it is
different from 'c'? Are you using a mirror or synchronized clocks?

What you are incapable of understanding is everything is under the
effects of the aether. As I said in one of my original posts which it
would help you understand the point I am making. The atomic clocks the
Observers on the train are using are offset because of their state
with respect to the aether.

So, I will ask you again. How is the light to be measured?
From: mpc755 on 15 Feb 2010 00:34
On Feb 15, 12:27 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/14/10 11:23 PM, mpc755 wrote:
>
> > How do you measure your speed relative to the ether?
>
>    What ether?

The aether which is the reason for the observed behaviors in every
double slit experiment ever performed.

A C-60 molecule is in the slit(s). Detectors are placed at the exits
to the slits while the C-60 molecule is in the slit(s). Every time the
C-60 molecule exits the slit(s) it is detected exiting a single slit.

When the detectors are placed and removed from the exits to the slits
the C-60 molecule is able to create an interference pattern.

How is this possible without the C-60 molecule having an associated
aether displacement wave?
From: Peter Webb on 15 Feb 2010 00:35

"mpc755" <mpc755(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e03b248e-5f49-4e80-9c4c-d542dd7e269e(a)k5g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 15, 12:18 am, "Peter Webb"
<webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
> As I have said at least three times now,
> you cannot determine the speed of the aether.
> ____________________________________
>
> You said light moves at a constant velocity relative to the ether. So why
> can't you measure the speed of light, see how much it differs from c, and
> the difference is your speed relative to the ether? Why doesn't that
> procedure determine the speed of the ether?

How do you measure your speed relative to the ether?

As I have said at least four times now, you can't measure the speed of
the aether. If you can't measure the speed of the aether you can't
measure your speed relative to the aether.

Do you want to ask this same question again so I can answer it for a
fifth time?

______________________________________
I just described how you *can* measure your speed relative to the ether. You
measure the speed of light, see how much it differs from c, and the
difference is your speed relative to the ether. That is because according to
you, light moves at a constant speed relative to the ether. So if you
measure the speed of light, and subtract if from c, that must give you your
speed relative to the ether.

So say you measure that light is moving at 2 x 10^8 m/s relative to you. We
know it is moving at 3 x 10^8 m/s relative to the ether, therefore you are
moving at 3 x 10^8 m/s - 2 x 10^8 m/s = 1 x 10^8 m/s relative to the ether.

Why doesn't that procedure determine your speed relative to the ether?

From: mpc755 on 15 Feb 2010 00:40
On Feb 15, 12:35 am, "Peter Webb"
<webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
> "mpc755" <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:e03b248e-5f49-4e80-9c4c-d542dd7e269e(a)k5g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 15, 12:18 am, "Peter Webb"
>
> <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
> > As I have said at least three times now,
> > you cannot determine the speed of the aether.
> > ____________________________________
>
> > You said light moves at a constant velocity relative to the ether. So why
> > can't you measure the speed of light, see how much it differs from c, and
> > the difference is your speed relative to the ether? Why doesn't that
> > procedure determine the speed of the ether?
>
> How do you measure your speed relative to the ether?
>
> As I have said at least four times now, you can't measure the speed of
> the aether. If you can't measure the speed of the aether you can't
> measure your speed relative to the aether.
>
> Do you want to ask this same question again so I can answer it for a
> fifth time?
>
> ______________________________________
> I just described how you *can* measure your speed relative to the ether. You
> measure the speed of light, see how much it differs from c, and the
> difference is your speed relative to the ether.

How do you measure the speed of light so it is not 'c'?


> That is because according to
> you, light moves at a constant speed relative to the ether. So if you
> measure the speed of light, and subtract if from c, that must give you your
> speed relative to the ether.
>

Again, this is yet another point I am making that you are incapable of
understanding. Go back to one of my original posts on this thread and
re-read what I discussed about the atomic clocks on the train where
the train is moving through the aether at rest with respect to the
embankment and the time on the clocks and what the Observers conclude
about the simultaneity of the lightning strikes.

Since everything is relative to the aether the Observers on the train,
even thought they are moving relative to the aether, are not going to
be able to detect the aether and they are going to conclude light
travels at 'c' because their clocks are already offset by the aether
pressure they exist in.


> So say you measure that light is moving at 2 x 10^8 m/s relative to you.

And what I am telling you is since everything is relative to the
aether you are not going to find that measurement.

Again, I spent a good deal of time on my first couple of posts having
to do with synchronized clocks on the train. Go back an re-read that
post and, I doubt it, but you may realize why your assumption that the
Observers on the train are going to be able to detect the light at
other that 'c' is incorrect.


> We
> know it is moving at 3 x 10^8 m/s relative to the ether, therefore you are
> moving at 3 x 10^8 m/s - 2 x 10^8 m/s = 1 x 10^8 m/s relative to the ether.
>
> Why doesn't that procedure determine your speed relative to the ether?

First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Prev: Quantum Gravity 357.91: Croatia Shows That Probability of Vacuum Energy Density is More Important than its Vacuum Expectation Value (VEV) of the Hamiltonian Density, in line with Probable Causation/Influence (PI)
Next: Hubble Views Saturn's Northern/Southern Lights