GETTING RID OF EINSTEIN RELATIVITY
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: What is the Aether?
Next: Debunking Nimtz
From: Dr. Henri Wilson on 21 Oct 2007 17:41 On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 04:15:42 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen(a)guesswhathia.no> wrote: >Dr. Henri Wilson skrev: >> On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 15:13:27 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" >> <paul.b.andersen(a)guesswhathia.no> wrote: >> >> The phase on arrival is just path length divided by absolute wavelength. >> >> the two path lengths are shown at: >> http://www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/ringgyro.htm > >Mindless babble to evade the question. >What moves with the phase velocity is by definition the planes of equal phase. >So if the 'tip of lines' meet the detector simultaneously, the phase difference >must necessarily be zero. In BaTh, wavelength is absolute. It is the same in both rays. According to BaTh, one ray moves at c+v and the other at c-v IN THE LAB FRAME. According to BaTh, both rays travel for the same time, therefore their path lengths are different. Phase at the tip is given by pathlength/lambda. The circle of teeth is a graph of that phase. Do you have graphs in Norway yet, paul? > >Paul Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T) www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
From: Dr. Henri Wilson on 21 Oct 2007 17:44 On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 09:02:33 GMT, "Androcles" <Engineer(a)hogwarts.physics> wrote: > >"Dr. Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message >news:elclh3pg8rj180prv9bs0rilk4savk5mfj(a)4ax.com... >: On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 23:25:17 GMT, "Androcles" <Engineer(a)hogwarts.physics> >: >These three wheels are all in phase all the time: >: > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/inphase.gif >: >These three are NEVER in phase: >: > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/nophase.gif >: > >: >Explain that, Wilson. >: >: What is there to explain? > >Why one set is in phase and the other isn't. Nice little toy you have there... ....reminds me of the meccano sets we had as kids... .....some became enginers as a result. Some became physicists. >: If you want to represent a ring gyro... > >I don't right now, I want you to explain phase and tick fairies. > >These three wheels are all in phase all the time: > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/inphase.gif >These three are NEVER in phase: > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/nophase.gif > >Explain that, Wilson. I wont keep repeating my answer to this monotonous nonsense. > Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T) www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
From: Dr. Henri Wilson on 21 Oct 2007 17:56 On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 11:26:18 +0100, "George Dishman" <george(a)briar.demon.co.uk> wrote: > >"Clueless Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message >news:j5vkh352fclcpn5foofltrc9aba5n0na6j(a)4ax.com... >> On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 11:08:45 +0100, "George Dishman" >>>Henry, the phase in your program doesn't "arrive" >>>anywhere, the wiggly line doesn't move. >> >> It isn't supposed to. It merely shows a snapshot of wavecrest positions >> FOR >> BOTH RAYS at the instant when the two rays are emitted IN PHASE. > >At the instant they are emitted, it is OK. >At the instant they are detected it is wrong >because the waves have moved between the two >snapshots. If you move the wave at the right >speed you will find that the waves are in phase >at the detector and at the source but not at >the marker which is static in the lab frame. The program moves the waves at c+v and c-v, where v is th ring speed. That's why their travel times are the same and they meet at the detector at the same instant. the equations are at: www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/ringgyro.htm >Leaving the wave unmoving and showing a progress >bar gets it wrong. Sorry George, the theory is fully backed by experiment.... >> It makes no >> difference if the wheel spins. The positions of the teeth are the same. > >The _spacings_ remain the same but every tooth >moves. We are only interested in the phase difference at the detector. That is given by (pathlength difference)/lambda. >> I am quite aware of what phase is. > >I don't think so. You are treating light in the same way as you would sound in air. >> The phase of the part of the wave that was originally emitted IN PHASE at >> the >> start point is clearly shown at the detection point. >> >> The waves are generally NOT in phase when they reunite. > >Move the waves at the speed required by ballistic >theory as Jerry has correctly shown and they _are_ >in phase. Jerry's program is wrong. The latest version is particularly useless. >>>It takes no time at all, you obviously don't >>>understand the concept of phase as being the >>>argument of the sine function and clearly >>>you have never used an oscilloscope on a >>>transmission line or anything like it. >> >> I have spent years looking at waves on CROs George. > >Another of your fantasies Henry? > >> I obviously know a lot more about the subject than you do. > >Obviously not if you think you think they don't move. George, tell me this. Why do water waves move in one particular direction, when the water molecules themselves move only vertically. To put that another way, "What determines the direction of energy transfer?" >George > Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T) www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
From: Dr. Henri Wilson on 21 Oct 2007 18:04 On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 11:36:49 +0100, "George Dishman" <george(a)briar.demon.co.uk> wrote: > >"Clueless Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message >news:tk0lh3l045j914i2bru14hvch37vst9abc(a)4ax.com... >> On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 13:59:53 -0700, Jerry <Cephalobus_alienus(a)comcast.net> >> wrote: >... >>>Scroll down a bit for the new applet, or click on the following: >>>http://mysite.verizon.net/cephalobus_alienus/sagnac/BallisticSagnac.htm#transients >> >> Still wrong. >.. >> Your colleagues still cannot grasp the difference between 'the 'static >> emission >> point' and the 'moving source'. > >That's because the emission "point" moves with the >source, your model is for a dragged aether which is >statinary in the lab. That theory actually survives >Sagnac's, ballistic theory doesn't. I wont keep repeating my answer to this monotonous nonsense. >George > Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T) www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
From: Dr. Henri Wilson on 21 Oct 2007 18:03
On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 09:12:33 GMT, "Androcles" <Engineer(a)hogwarts.physics> wrote: > >"Dr. Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message >news:utclh3lpnipbhahhic0coshi83jm7be6fs(a)4ax.com... >: On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 23:44:51 GMT, "Androcles" <Engineer(a)hogwarts.physics> >: wrote: >: >: > >: >"Dr. Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message >: > >: >Give up, Wilson, the tick fairy cannot help you. >: >: No tick fairies needed. They are all employed by relativists anyway. > >How do you explain this, then? > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/inphase.gif > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/nophase.gif I had a meccano set when I was a kid too. I have also fixed lots of car garboxes. Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T) www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm |