Compelling evidence for in vacuo light speed anisotrophy
in [Relativity]
|
From: Jerry on 11 Apr 2008 15:18 On Apr 11, 1:59 pm, Surfer <n...(a)spam.please.net> wrote: > On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 07:42:55 -0700 (PDT), Dono <sa...(a)comcast.net> > wrote: > > >His "equation 7" is nothing but ballistic theory as applied to the > >Ives-Stilwell experiment... > > There is a significant difference. The Ives-Stilwell experiment > attempted to measure the doppler shift of photons emitted from fast > moving hydrogen atoms. > However, the hydrogen atoms would experience time dilation which would > affect the frequency of the emitted photons. > > Now if the speed of light varies with direction, then time dilation > will also vary with direction, and if these effects cancel the > variable speed of light would be completely hidden. Since when is time dilation a prediction of emission theory? > In contrast, when radar doppler shift is used to measure the speed of > space craft, the radar signal is simply reflected from the spacecraft, > so is immune to spacecraft time dilation effects. > > That difference could explain why anisotropy in the speed of light is > so clearly observed in the spacecraft case. What a hodgepodge of inconsistent concepts!!! Jerry
From: Dono on 11 Apr 2008 18:21 On Apr 11, 12:18 pm, Jerry <Cephalobus_alie...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > On Apr 11, 1:59 pm, Surfer <n...(a)spam.please.net> wrote: > > > On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 07:42:55 -0700 (PDT), Dono <sa...(a)comcast.net> > > wrote: > > > >His "equation 7" is nothing but ballistic theory as applied to the > > >Ives-Stilwell experiment... > > > There is a significant difference. The Ives-Stilwell experiment > > attempted to measure the doppler shift of photons emitted from fast > > moving hydrogen atoms. > > However, the hydrogen atoms would experience time dilation which would > > affect the frequency of the emitted photons. > > > Now if the speed of light varies with direction, then time dilation > > will also vary with direction, and if these effects cancel the > > variable speed of light would be completely hidden. > > Since when is time dilation a prediction of emission theory? > > > In contrast, when radar doppler shift is used to measure the speed of > > space craft, the radar signal is simply reflected from the spacecraft, > > so is immune to spacecraft time dilation effects. > > > That difference could explain why anisotropy in the speed of light is > > so clearly observed in the spacecraft case. > > What a hodgepodge of inconsistent concepts!!! > > Jerry :-) :-) He/she is fishing , trying to help dear Rag Cahill debug his "paper" :-)
From: Surfer on 12 Apr 2008 01:18 On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 12:18:48 -0700 (PDT), Jerry <Cephalobus_alienus(a)comcast.net> wrote: >On Apr 11, 1:59�pm, Surfer <n...(a)spam.please.net> wrote: >> On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 07:42:55 -0700 (PDT), Dono <sa...(a)comcast.net> >> wrote: >> >> >His "equation 7" is nothing but ballistic theory as applied to the >> >Ives-Stilwell experiment... >> >> There is a significant difference. The Ives-Stilwell experiment >> attempted to measure the doppler shift of photons emitted from fast >> moving hydrogen atoms. >> However, the hydrogen atoms would experience time dilation which would >> affect the frequency of the emitted photons. >> >> Now if the speed of light varies with direction, then time dilation >> will also vary with direction, and if these effects cancel the >> variable speed of light would be completely hidden. > >Since when is time dilation a prediction of emission theory? > I was discussing experiment. Not theory. Time dilation is an experimentally observed phenomenon. >> In contrast, when radar doppler shift is used to measure the speed of >> space craft, the radar signal is simply reflected from the spacecraft, >> so is immune to spacecraft time dilation effects. >> >> That difference could explain why anisotropy in the speed of light is >> so clearly observed in the spacecraft case. > >What a hodgepodge of inconsistent concepts!!! > >Jerry
From: Jerry on 12 Apr 2008 01:25 On Apr 12, 12:18 am, Surfer <n...(a)spam.please.net> wrote: > On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 12:18:48 -0700 (PDT), Jerry > > > > > > <Cephalobus_alie...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > >On Apr 11, 1:59 pm, Surfer <n...(a)spam.please.net> wrote: > >> On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 07:42:55 -0700 (PDT), Dono <sa...(a)comcast.net> > >> wrote: > > >> >His "equation 7" is nothing but ballistic theory as applied to the > >> >Ives-Stilwell experiment... > > >> There is a significant difference. The Ives-Stilwell experiment > >> attempted to measure the doppler shift of photons emitted from fast > >> moving hydrogen atoms. > >> However, the hydrogen atoms would experience time dilation which would > >> affect the frequency of the emitted photons. > > >> Now if the speed of light varies with direction, then time dilation > >> will also vary with direction, and if these effects cancel the > >> variable speed of light would be completely hidden. > > >Since when is time dilation a prediction of emission theory? > > I was discussing experiment. Not theory. > Time dilation is an experimentally observed phenomenon. So is the constancy of the speed of light. Jerry
From: Dono on 12 Apr 2008 01:31
On Apr 11, 10:18 pm, Surfer <n...(a)spam.please.net> wrote: > On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 12:18:48 -0700 (PDT), Jerry > > > > <Cephalobus_alie...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > >On Apr 11, 1:59 pm, Surfer <n...(a)spam.please.net> wrote: > >> On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 07:42:55 -0700 (PDT), Dono <sa...(a)comcast.net> > >> wrote: > > >> >His "equation 7" is nothing but ballistic theory as applied to the > >> >Ives-Stilwell experiment... > > >> There is a significant difference. The Ives-Stilwell experiment > >> attempted to measure the doppler shift of photons emitted from fast > >> moving hydrogen atoms. > >> However, the hydrogen atoms would experience time dilation which would > >> affect the frequency of the emitted photons. > > >> Now if the speed of light varies with direction, then time dilation > >> will also vary with direction, and if these effects cancel the > >> variable speed of light would be completely hidden. > > >Since when is time dilation a prediction of emission theory? > > I was discussing experiment. Not theory. > Time dilation is an experimentally observed phenomenon. > ....that is, provided you understand the relativistic Doppler effect and its manifestations. Which neither you, nor Rag understand :-) |