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: BURT on 18 Feb 2010 14:42

On Feb 18, 11:35 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 18, 2:17 pm, mpalenik <markpale...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 18, 2:01 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 18, 1:55 pm, mpalenik <markpale...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 18, 1:42 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Feb 18, 1:38 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Feb 18, 12:35 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > And how do you determine which answer is more correct, other than just
> > > > > > > > blank assertion?
>
> > > > > > > Because I do not have to invent a new type of object or believe the
> > > > > > > future determines the past and I have quotes such as this one from
> > > > > > > Albert Einstein, "According to the general theory of relativity space
> > > > > > > without ether is unthinkable"
>
> > > > > > Ah. OK, you've had your attention for today. Back to the straps and
> > > > > > electrodes for you.
>
> > > > > And the other poster still refuses to respond because they know the
> > > > > future determining the past is absurd nonsense.
>
> > > > > A moving C-60 molecule has an associated aether displacement wave..
>
> > > > I have told you many many times about the bunnies that pick carrots
> > > > from the enchanted forest but you simply refuse to listen. It's
> > > > getting ridiculous.
>
> > > You realize every time you respond and do not answer the question as
> > > to your belief in the future determining the past you are undermining
> > > the other poster.
>
> > In the end, when the bunnies rule the earth, none of this will matter,
> > anyway.
>
> Does a C-60 molecule enter one slit or multiple slits depending upon
> there being detectors placed at the exits to the slits in the future.
>
> Obviously, since you refuse to answer this question you know to
> believe in such nonsense is absurd.
>
> The moving C-60 molecule has an associated aether displacement wave.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Sometimes the waves can go away for subatomic particles but not so for
atoms.

From: PD on 18 Feb 2010 14:51

On Feb 18, 1:35 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 18, 2:17 pm, mpalenik <markpale...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 18, 2:01 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 18, 1:55 pm, mpalenik <markpale...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 18, 1:42 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Feb 18, 1:38 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Feb 18, 12:35 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > And how do you determine which answer is more correct, other than just
> > > > > > > > blank assertion?
>
> > > > > > > Because I do not have to invent a new type of object or believe the
> > > > > > > future determines the past and I have quotes such as this one from
> > > > > > > Albert Einstein, "According to the general theory of relativity space
> > > > > > > without ether is unthinkable"
>
> > > > > > Ah. OK, you've had your attention for today. Back to the straps and
> > > > > > electrodes for you.
>
> > > > > And the other poster still refuses to respond because they know the
> > > > > future determining the past is absurd nonsense.
>
> > > > > A moving C-60 molecule has an associated aether displacement wave..
>
> > > > I have told you many many times about the bunnies that pick carrots
> > > > from the enchanted forest but you simply refuse to listen. It's
> > > > getting ridiculous.
>
> > > You realize every time you respond and do not answer the question as
> > > to your belief in the future determining the past you are undermining
> > > the other poster.
>
> > In the end, when the bunnies rule the earth, none of this will matter,
> > anyway.
>
> Does a C-60 molecule enter one slit or multiple slits depending upon
> there being detectors placed at the exits to the slits in the future.
>
> Obviously, since you refuse to answer this question you know to
> believe in such nonsense is absurd.

You scare the fish when you turn the trolling motor on high. Did no
one teach you how to fish?

>
> The moving C-60 molecule has an associated aether displacement wave.

From: mpalenik on 18 Feb 2010 14:55

On Feb 18, 2:35 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 18, 2:17 pm, mpalenik <markpale...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 18, 2:01 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 18, 1:55 pm, mpalenik <markpale...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 18, 1:42 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Feb 18, 1:38 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Feb 18, 12:35 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > And how do you determine which answer is more correct, other than just
> > > > > > > > blank assertion?
>
> > > > > > > Because I do not have to invent a new type of object or believe the
> > > > > > > future determines the past and I have quotes such as this one from
> > > > > > > Albert Einstein, "According to the general theory of relativity space
> > > > > > > without ether is unthinkable"
>
> > > > > > Ah. OK, you've had your attention for today. Back to the straps and
> > > > > > electrodes for you.
>
> > > > > And the other poster still refuses to respond because they know the
> > > > > future determining the past is absurd nonsense.
>
> > > > > A moving C-60 molecule has an associated aether displacement wave..
>
> > > > I have told you many many times about the bunnies that pick carrots
> > > > from the enchanted forest but you simply refuse to listen. It's
> > > > getting ridiculous.
>
> > > You realize every time you respond and do not answer the question as
> > > to your belief in the future determining the past you are undermining
> > > the other poster.
>
> > In the end, when the bunnies rule the earth, none of this will matter,
> > anyway.
>
> Does a C-60 molecule enter one slit or multiple slits depending upon
> there being detectors placed at the exits to the slits in the future.
>

The bunnies chose how many slits it enters at their whim. Why is that
so hard to understand?

From: mpalenik on 18 Feb 2010 15:02

On Feb 18, 3:01 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> In article <6a95ed37-df77-47ea-9afc-5c5f0230b071
> @q29g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, markpale...(a)gmail.com says...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 18, 2:35 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Feb 18, 2:17 pm, mpalenik <markpale...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 18, 2:01 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Feb 18, 1:55 pm, mpalenik <markpale...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Feb 18, 1:42 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Feb 18, 1:38 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > On Feb 18, 12:35 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > And how do you determine which answer is more correct, other than just
> > > > > > > > > > blank assertion?
>
> > > > > > > > > Because I do not have to invent a new type of object or believe the
> > > > > > > > > future determines the past and I have quotes such as this one from
> > > > > > > > > Albert Einstein, "According to the general theory of relativity space
> > > > > > > > > without ether is unthinkable"
>
> > > > > > > > Ah. OK, you've had your attention for today. Back to the straps and
> > > > > > > > electrodes for you.
>
> > > > > > > And the other poster still refuses to respond because they know the
> > > > > > > future determining the past is absurd nonsense.
>
> > > > > > > A moving C-60 molecule has an associated aether displacement wave.
>
> > > > > > I have told you many many times about the bunnies that pick carrots
> > > > > > from the enchanted forest but you simply refuse to listen. It's
> > > > > > getting ridiculous.
>
> > > > > You realize every time you respond and do not answer the question as
> > > > > to your belief in the future determining the past you are undermining
> > > > > the other poster.
>
> > > > In the end, when the bunnies rule the earth, none of this will matter,
> > > > anyway.
>
> > > Does a C-60 molecule enter one slit or multiple slits depending upon
> > > there being detectors placed at the exits to the slits in the future.
>
> > The bunnies chose how many slits it enters at their whim. Why is that
> > so hard to understand?
>
> Ok, for the Copenhageners we have the following 'understandings' of what
> is physically occuring in nature in a double slit experiment:
>
> - The future determines the past. The C-60 molecule will enter one slit
> or multiple slits depending upon there being detectors at the exits to
> the slits in the future, or not.
>
> - Bunnies choose how many slits it enters.
>
> Both answers are equally 'rational'.

So, you admit that I'm right about the bunnies, then.

From: clivevrob on 18 Feb 2010 15:24

On Feb 13, 1:29 pm, Ste <ste_ro...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> I've been absolutely racking my brain (to the point of getting a
> headache) for the last few days about this issue, and it's clear that
> the speed of light (where light is either considered in the form of a
> ballistic photon, or a wave-cycle) cannot, physically, be constant in
> all relative frames, and at the same time be constant when travelling
> between two objects in two different frames. It's a physical and
> logical impossibility.
>
> It's also clear that velocities cannot be additive (in the form of
> speed of bullet+speed of gun), and nor can they be subtractive
> relative to a background medium (in the form of speed of propagation
> in medium-speed of source).
>
> Take an illustration:
>
> A C
> B
>
> Where A and B are atoms that pass infinitely close to each other. In
> the illustration, A and B are separated from C by a distance L. A and
> C are stationary relative to each other. B is moving, and approaching
> C at a speed S. A pulse is emitted from both A and B simultaneously
> towards C, at the point when A and B are equidistant from C.
>
> Now, clearly, if velocities were additive, then light from B would
> reach C much quicker than light from A. We don't see that, so we can
> dismiss that immediately.
>
> Next, if velocities were subtractive, like sound, well that seems like
> a compelling explanation for what we see, which is that light from
> both A and B travel towards C at the same speed. But the presence of
> an absolute medium seems to fall down when one considers that, to be
> consistent with observation, the speed of propagation orthogonal to
> the direction of travel must be the same as the speed in the direction
> of travel.
>
> A speed (i.e. a mesure of distance traversed within a period of time)
> cannot possibly be measured constant in all directions within a frame,
> *and* constant between frames, where the frames themselves are moving
> at a speed relative to each other. So how the hell does one reconcile
> this physically?

One reconciles things using special relativity. The composition law
for velocities u and v is given by
u + v
w = ---------
1 + uv/c2

where c2 is the speed of light squared.

For v,u << c, then, almost exactly, w = u + v (Galilean velocity
composition)
If u = c, then w = c
If u and v both equal c, w = c