Ballistic Theory, Progress report...Suitable for 5yo Kids
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: OWLS is not equal to c
Next: Mathematical Inconsistencies in Einstein's Derivation of the Lorentz Transformation
From: Henri Wilson on 23 Nov 2005 16:49 On 22 Nov 2005 21:27:55 -0800, jgreen(a)seol.net.au wrote: > >George Dishman wrote: >> "Henri Wilson" <HW@..> wrote in message >> news:2d67o1pq903b4eikhdbu2qik79ptjggotf(a)4ax.com... >> > On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 21:00:01 -0000, "George Dishman" >> > <george(a)briar.demon.co.uk> >> > wrote: >> >> No, I am saying Ritz predicts displacement is proportional >> to angular acceleration which is what you said above, >> "fringe movement proportional to da/dt" assuming you mean >> 'change of displacement' when you say 'movement'. >> >> If Jim used 'fringe displacement' it would clear up what >> he meant. >> >> George > >Verb or noun?Displacement indicating motion, or position (stationary >after motion)? >There is "displacement" occurring while the airframe rotates, and the >(new position) "displacement" (eg 2 o'clock). >It seems that your sagnac has additional electronic gadgetry which >defaults the 2 o'clock to 12 o'clock, once the new heading stabilises. > >Jim G >c'=c+v Yes Jim, we must get our definitions right or we talk at cross purposes. I suggest we use: OUTPUT: The final reading on some kind of instrument of current rotation angle from the calibrated zero. (static or dynamic) DISPLACEMENT or SHIFT: the distance between current fringe position and the zero position. (static) FRINGE MOVEMENT: the actual transient process when fringes are changing displacement. (dynamic) The fact is, fringes remain displaced but static during periods of constant rotation speeds. The amount of displacement is proportional to rotation speed. Movement occurs only during periods of acceleration. HW. www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm see: www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/variablestars.exe "Sometimes I feel like a complete failure. The most useful thing I have ever done is prove Einstein wrong".
From: Henri Wilson on 23 Nov 2005 16:51 On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 09:23:06 GMT, "Androcles" <Androcles(a)MyPlace.yep> wrote: > >"Henri Wilson" <HW@..> wrote in message >news:5rq7o11dkqc5c249torp74u0d85irn2bl4(a)4ax.com... >>>> In the real sagnac, grandpa is on the carousel. >>> >>> >>>Yeah, you are right... >>> >>> http://www.phys.canterbury.ac.nz/research/laser/graphics/zerodorblock1.jpg >>>A little dangerous though when it starts turning. >> >> HaHa! >What's the haha for? You think this is a joke? I thought it was. It looks pretty slippery to me. HW. www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm see: www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/variablestars.exe "Sometimes I feel like a complete failure. The most useful thing I have ever done is prove Einstein wrong".
From: Henri Wilson on 23 Nov 2005 17:36 On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 21:44:45 -0000, "George Dishman" <george(a)briar.demon.co.uk> wrote: > >"Henri Wilson" <HW@..> wrote in message >news:sli4o19bq13po9n86sold869obkic3gka0(a)4ax.com... >> No that is not right. If the acceleration is +ve, the fringes move one >> way. > >Not according to your diagram. It says the path length is >increased by vt+1/2at^2 and we know the vt part is cancelled >by the Ritzian speed change (c+kv) so the path length is >altered by 1/2at^2 which is constant, and the path length >determines the fringe displacement. > >> It >> matters not whether the magnitude of that acceleration is increasing or >> decreasing. >> You are claiming the fringe ''''movement'''' is a function of da/dt. >> I would like to see your proof. > >Let's stick with the term we agreed, I am saying fringe >displacement is proportional to dv/dt. My proof is your >diagram where dv/dt is called "a" and is in the "1/2at^2" >term. I have already spent months showing you the "vt" >part is cancelled by the speed change, or think of the >carousel analogy which shows it nicely, or do "the duck, >the car and the goose" diagram. All of them prove it. > George, I woke up with another bright idea. Please run my program: www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/sagnac1.exe See how the two paths don't meet at the same point. That is why the BaTh is getting the same travel times for different path lengths. What we have to look at are the fronts of the original beam that DO meet at the same point on the final screen. Think of the main beam as being broad with continuous 'dispersion'. The fact is, lines that eventually meet at the same point do not start out parallel. I will discuss this with you next time. It is becoming quite complicated. > >George > HW. www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm see: www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/variablestars.exe "Sometimes I feel like a complete failure. The most useful thing I have ever done is prove Einstein wrong".
From: jgreen on 24 Nov 2005 03:01 Henri Wilson wrote: > On 22 Nov 2005 21:27:55 -0800, jgreen(a)seol.net.au wrote: > > > > >George Dishman wrote: > >> "Henri Wilson" <HW@..> wrote in message > >> news:2d67o1pq903b4eikhdbu2qik79ptjggotf(a)4ax.com... > >> > On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 21:00:01 -0000, "George Dishman" > >> > <george(a)briar.demon.co.uk> > >> > wrote: > > >> > >> No, I am saying Ritz predicts displacement is proportional > >> to angular acceleration which is what you said above, > >> "fringe movement proportional to da/dt" assuming you mean > >> 'change of displacement' when you say 'movement'. > >> > >> If Jim used 'fringe displacement' it would clear up what > >> he meant. > >> > >> George > > > >Verb or noun?Displacement indicating motion, or position (stationary > >after motion)? > >There is "displacement" occurring while the airframe rotates, and the > >(new position) "displacement" (eg 2 o'clock). > >It seems that your sagnac has additional electronic gadgetry which > >defaults the 2 o'clock to 12 o'clock, once the new heading stabilises. > > > >Jim G > >c'=c+v > > Yes Jim, we must get our definitions right or we talk at cross purposes. > > I suggest we use: > OUTPUT: The final reading on some kind of instrument of current rotation angle > from the calibrated zero. (static or dynamic) > DISPLACEMENT or SHIFT: the distance between current fringe position and the > zero position. (static) > FRINGE MOVEMENT: the actual transient process when fringes are changing > displacement. (dynamic) > > The fact is, fringes remain displaced but static during periods of constant > rotation speeds. The amount of displacement is proportional to rotation speed. > Movement occurs only during periods of acceleration. Sounds overly complicated to me. The addition of the rotational velocity of an airframe to c is VERY small. The rotation of the sagnac (650rpm whatever), which is enhanced by the mirroring, magnifies this difference, resulting in a situation where the position where the beams interdict becomes discernible. Sagnac WORKS! It is the interpretation of WHY it works is the issue. Jim G c'=c+v > > HW. > www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm > see: www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/variablestars.exe > > "Sometimes I feel like a complete failure. > The most useful thing I have ever done is prove Einstein wrong".
From: George Dishman on 24 Nov 2005 04:15
"Henri Wilson" <HW@..> wrote in message news:bjs7o191qvl13872uhaun8nrc61nfploht(a)4ax.com... > On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 02:12:45 GMT, "Androcles" <Androcles(a)MyPlace.yep> > wrote: >>If grandpa gets on that ride, he's not going to see any fringe shift. Henri, _that_ is what I have been trying to explain to you for the past many months. Perhaps "Androcles" can explain it better, he seems to share your ideas on light propagation. He doesn't read my posts BTW. The following might be useful for you in explaining the nature of the experiment to him. There seems little point discussing it if he thinks the detector and/or source is off the turntable. >>Well, see, you have to ..never mind, I SAID it was suitable for 8yo kids, >>not dumb Wabos who think Grandpa is going to ride that carousel. http://www.kvh.com/pdf/DSP-4000_6.04.pdf Grandpa is in the little box with no holes for light to enter or leave. The carousel is the bit on the top of the tank that turns. >>Wabo thinks Grandpa is going to ride that fuckin' carousel, Wabo is >>fuckin' >>crazy. I don't know why Wabo changes my experiment to suit himself and >>then >>says I'm wrong, except Wabo IS crazy. >> >>I say Grandpa watches the carousel, Wabo says in the real world Grandpa >>rides the carousel. >> >>Picture of grandpa riding the carousel: How it works - see page two http://www.kvh.com/pdf/ECoreTech.pdf The blocks marked "laser" and "detector" are actually a single integrated component. A photodiode is built on the rear of telecomms laser diodes so they can be run at the lowest current needed to produce the light output in order to maximise their life. In the iFOG the phase modulator produces an AC component on the photodiode output which is measured by the synchronous demodulator to give the rate-of-turn output while the DC part is used to stabilise the laser intensity. Obvious point: if the laser and detector are a single component, then if one is "on the carousel", so is the other. Just for reference, more detail and equations: http://www.physik.fu-berlin.de/~bauer/habil_online/node11.html George |