GETTING RID OF EINSTEIN RELATIVITY
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: What is the Aether?
Next: Debunking Nimtz
From: Dr. Henri Wilson on 22 Oct 2007 17:34 On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 19:41:39 +0100, "George Dishman" <george(a)briar.demon.co.uk> wrote: > >"Clueless Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message >news:brinh3hqfqvicvbptqm13kldp4o2ea6gsq(a)4ax.com... >> On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 13:26:01 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" >> <paul.b.andersen(a)guesswhathia.no> wrote: >... >>>So the phase at the front of the ray - which moves with >>>the phase velocity of the ray - is varying. >>> >>>Thanks again. >>>Your amusing, nonsensical, revealing answer duly noted. >>> >>>And what is most hilarious is that Henri Wilson is so >>>confused that he doesn't even understand why his answer >>>is amusing, nonsensical and revealing! :-) >> >> Paul, let me explain. >> Photons are particles and not classical waves in a medium. > >So why did you draw a wave round your diagram >if they are not waves? Clueless as ever. It's not a wave. It's a graph of phase. >George > > Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T) www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
From: Dr. Henri Wilson on 22 Oct 2007 17:37 On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 14:29:18 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen(a)hiadeletethis.no> wrote: >Jerry wrote: >> On Oct 21, 6:26 am, "Paul B. Andersen" >> <paul.b.ander...(a)guesswhathia.no> wrote: >>> Dr. Henri Wilson skrev: >>>> On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 15:17:36 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" >>>> <paul.b.ander...(a)guesswhathia.no> wrote: >> >>>>> What is the phase at the front of each of your rays? >>>>> Does it vary as the rays move? >>>> At any instant, the phase at the front of each moving line >>>> is indicated by the teeth on the wheel....obviously.... >>>> I have included a pause/restart button so you can see. >>> So the phase at the front of the ray - which moves with >>> the phase velocity of the ray - is varying. >>> >>> Thanks again. >>> Your amusing, nonsensical, revealing answer duly noted. >>> >>> And what is most hilarious is that Henri Wilson is so >>> confused that he doesn't even understand why his answer >>> is amusing, nonsensical and revealing! :-) >> >> See >> >> Henri Wilson's Strange Version of Wave Mechanics >> http://mysite.verizon.net/cephalobus_alienus/toothwheel/toothwheel.htm >> >> Jerry > >Very good. :-) > >A source with constant phase (zero frequency) >is emitting a wave with zero phase velocity, >and the phase at its propagating front is changing >all the time. > >But Henri is so confused that he doesn't >even understand why his idea of a wave >is amusing, nonsensical and revealing! :-) Henri is indeed so 'confused' that he has produced a very simple explanation of Sagnac based entirely on BaTh. His 'confusion' produces the right answer, using the correct physical model. Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T) www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
From: Dr. Henri Wilson on 22 Oct 2007 17:43 On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 10:44:43 GMT, "Androcles" <Engineer(a)hogwarts.physics> wrote: > >"Dr. Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message >news:0buoh3pktnuomn7t97bf2vadgo5hl07p78(a)4ax.com... >: On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 10:13:49 GMT, "Androcles" <Engineer(a)hogwarts.physics> >: wrote: >: > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/inphase.gif >: >(All wheels locked by the red rod.) not on MY computer. >: > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/nophase.gif It's the same as the first one. >: >(The red rod would prevent turning so it is absent.) >: > >: >How do you explain this meccano, little sardine? >: >Well, it's puzzled you for a week now... you'll never >: >get it. I'll slow it down for you. >: >: What's the bloody red thing supposed to be? > >A locking rod, keeping all three wheels turning together, of course. >Did you think they weren't all turning? What is that supposed to achieve? The only relevant feature is that the 'wavelength' is absolute and the same on all wheels.. Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T) www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
From: Androcles on 22 Oct 2007 17:53 "Dr. Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message news:u14qh3pfnteulb72fn56s60lf5jr8jk1sf(a)4ax.com... : On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 20:32:24 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine : <ewill(a)sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote: : : >In sci.physics.relativity, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) : ><HW@> : > wrote : : >>>: wavelength is absolute in BaTh. : >>> : >>>That's ok, nobody cares about your stupid BaTh; it isn't physics, : >>> it's as crazy as relativity. : >> : >> BaTh works. : >> : > : >Does it? : > : >Androcles: Observed Frequency is constant. I didn't say that. Frequency is constant, independent of observers. : >Wilson: Observed Wavelength is constant. : >SR: Observed Lightspeed is constant. : > : >Galilean/nBaT: Observed Wavelength is constant. : > : >> : see: www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/ringgyro.htm : : What could be simpler? Dork Van de merde is simpler... the simplest there is.
From: Androcles on 22 Oct 2007 17:56
"Dr. Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message news:oi4qh3tq6n97gth9shb8vrs4off6h7nplu(a)4ax.com... : On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 20:36:51 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" : <paul.b.andersen(a)guesswhathia.no> wrote: : : >Androcles skrev: : >> : >> Look at Tusseladd's sketch (fig 1) at: : >> http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/pdf/four_mirror_sagnac.pdf : >> : >> On the right, between the half silvered mirror and the viewing screen, : >> are a red ray and a blue ray travelling in the same direction but with : >> different speeds, c+v and c-v. : > : >Same argument, same answer: : > : >No, but it is an interesting point, so let's have a look at it. : >The following is according to Ritz Emission Theory : >and Galilean relativity: : > : >The red ray will go right through the mirror without : >changing speed, and it will thus have the speed : >c_f ~= c + v/(c*sqrt(2)), measured in the inertial frame. : >The blue ray will have the speed c_b ~= c - v/(c*sqrt(2)) : >_before_ it is reflected off the half silvered mirror. : > : >The "law of reflection" is that the ray will be reflected : >off the mirror at the same speed as the incident speed : >_in the stationary frame of the mirror_. : : That cannot be assumed... : : >If we first transform the speed of the incoming ray : >to the mirror frame, we will find that the speed of : >the incoming ray is c. The speed of the reflected ray will : >thus also be c in the mirror frame. : >When we transform this back to the inertial frame, the speed : >of the blue, reflected ray will be ~= c + v/(c*sqrt(2)), : >just like the red ray. : > : >V ^ : > \ / c1 = c - v/(c*sqrt(2)) : > \c1 /c2 c2 = c + v/(c*sqrt(2)) : > \ / : > \ / : > \ / : > \/ ^ : >------------- | v moving mirror : > : > : >If the red and blue ray are in phase at the mirror, : >they will according to the emission theory still be : >in phase at the screen. : > : >If you bounce a ball off an approaching wall, : >it will come back to you faster than it went in. : >According to the emission theory, the same applies for light. : : http://www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/sagnac.jpg : : tells the full story.... : Simple isn't it? Almost as simple as Dork Van de merde and just as wrong. You forgot the -vt, shown here as alpha.R: http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Sagnac/ring.gif Don't feel bad, so did Tusseladd. Both of you are half-arsed. |