A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious. [Physics]

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: Peter Webb on 16 Feb 2010 20:02

"mpc755" <mpc755(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f45910fe-89b2-4a09-9dcb-fcaf4686df7a(a)w12g2000vbj.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 16, 7:37 pm, "Peter Webb"
<webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
> "mpc755" <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:538f8caf-7a7b-4a35-b7e6-35ca5635b97f(a)15g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 16, 2:16 am, "Peter Webb"
>
>
>
> <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
> > "mpc755" <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:17353969-96de-46d5-b54c-74e655e2d34f(a)b7g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
> > On Feb 16, 12:59 am, "Peter Webb"
>
> > <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
> > > "mpc755" <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > >news:48499780-10ed-4377-b4cf-0bde5b5d298f(a)28g2000vbf.googlegroups.com...
> > > On Feb 15, 1:06 am, "Peter Webb"
>
> > > <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
> > > > "mpc755" <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > > >news:21c1d72e-9898-436a-ba4e-05a849fc4efc(a)g8g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
> > > > 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'?
>
> > > > _________________________________
> > > > Anyway you like. Aren't you claiming that the speed of light is a
> > > > constant
> > > > relative to the speed of the ether, and not constant relative to the
> > > > observer? So you can measure the speed of light in some way, to make
> > > > this
> > > > claim at all, right? So why not measure it, see how much it departs
> > > > from
> > > > c,
> > > > and then the difference is the speed of the ether.
>
> > > > Why won't that work?
>
> > > I am asking you to state how it is you want to measure the speed of
> > > light? Are you using mirrors?
>
> > > ____________________
> > > No. I am using a metre ruler and two clocks, one at each end. I
> > > synchronise
> > > the clocks, separate them by a metre, and note the difference between
> > > arrival and departure time. The difference between this and c is my
> > > speed
> > > relative to the ether. Why won't this work?
>
> > You separate the clocks by a metre on a train moving relative to the
> > aether. <snip about 200 lines involving trains, embankments and whole
> > lot
> > of
> > other stuff unrelated to my question>
>
> > ____________________________________
> > No. There is no train in my question.
>
> Yes, there is a train in your question even though you do not realize
> it. You can move the clocks anyway you like to the ends of the table,
> but as you move the clocks they are going to 'tick' based upon the
> aether pressure in which they exist. Your tabletop could be in a
> spaceship whipping through the aether and in that case the clock moved
> the the front of the table will be move against the 'flow' of the
> aether and 'tick' slower as it is being moved and the clock being
> pushed to the back of the table will be moved with the 'flow' of the
> aether and 'tick' faster as it is being moved.
>
> __________________________________
> 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.

From: mpc755 on 16 Feb 2010 21:19

On Feb 16, 8:02 pm, "Peter Webb"
<webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
> "mpc755" <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:f45910fe-89b2-4a09-9dcb-fcaf4686df7a(a)w12g2000vbj.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 16, 7:37 pm, "Peter Webb"
>
>
>
> <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
> > "mpc755" <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:538f8caf-7a7b-4a35-b7e6-35ca5635b97f(a)15g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
> > On Feb 16, 2:16 am, "Peter Webb"
>
> > <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
> > > "mpc755" <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > >news:17353969-96de-46d5-b54c-74e655e2d34f(a)b7g2000yqd.googlegroups.com....
> > > On Feb 16, 12:59 am, "Peter Webb"
>
> > > <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
> > > > "mpc755" <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > > >news:48499780-10ed-4377-b4cf-0bde5b5d298f(a)28g2000vbf.googlegroups.com...
> > > > On Feb 15, 1:06 am, "Peter Webb"
>
> > > > <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
> > > > > "mpc755" <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > > > >news:21c1d72e-9898-436a-ba4e-05a849fc4efc(a)g8g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
> > > > > 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'?
>
> > > > > _________________________________
> > > > > Anyway you like. Aren't you claiming that the speed of light is a
> > > > > constant
> > > > > relative to the speed of the ether, and not constant relative to the
> > > > > observer? So you can measure the speed of light in some way, to make
> > > > > this
> > > > > claim at all, right? So why not measure it, see how much it departs
> > > > > from
> > > > > c,
> > > > > and then the difference is the speed of the ether.
>
> > > > > Why won't that work?
>
> > > > I am asking you to state how it is you want to measure the speed of
> > > > light? Are you using mirrors?
>
> > > > ____________________
> > > > No. I am using a metre ruler and two clocks, one at each end. I
> > > > synchronise
> > > > the clocks, separate them by a metre, and note the difference between
> > > > arrival and departure time. The difference between this and c is my
> > > > speed
> > > > relative to the ether. Why won't this work?
>
> > > You separate the clocks by a metre on a train moving relative to the
> > > aether. <snip about 200 lines involving trains, embankments and whole
> > > lot
> > > of
> > > other stuff unrelated to my question>
>
> > > ____________________________________
> > > No. There is no train in my question.
>
> > Yes, there is a train in your question even though you do not realize
> > it. You can move the clocks anyway you like to the ends of the table,
> > but as you move the clocks they are going to 'tick' based upon the
> > aether pressure in which they exist. Your tabletop could be in a
> > spaceship whipping through the aether and in that case the clock moved
> > the the front of the table will be move against the 'flow' of the
> > aether and 'tick' slower as it is being moved and the clock being
> > pushed to the back of the table will be moved with the 'flow' of the
> > aether and 'tick' faster as it is being moved.
>
> > __________________________________
> > 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.

From: mpc755 on 16 Feb 2010 21:21

From: Peter Webb on 16 Feb 2010 21:26

> > __________________________________
> > 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?

From: mpc755 on 16 Feb 2010 21:36

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'.