GETTING RID OF EINSTEIN RELATIVITY
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: What is the Aether?
Next: Debunking Nimtz
From: Henri Wilson on 20 Jul 2007 00:27 On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 10:11:21 +1000, "Jeckyl" <noone(a)nowhere.com> wrote: >"Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message >news:uiqv93lms45a891mvn55m3rosqoghoq0ml(a)4ax.com... >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 00:03:52 +1000, "Jeckyl" <noone(a)nowhere.com> wrote: >The speed of light has been measured for moving sources. OW measurement is >tricky due to the syncing of clocks required to do it .. you need to make >assumptions about what it means for a pair of separated clocks to be in >sync. Why dopn't yo learn some physics? > >>>Or do you think other objects moving about cna change the speed light >>>travels in my frame? >> stop raving... > >Well.. that seems to be what you're suggesting. Its not my fault if you are >raving > >[>>> It meansalmost the whole of astronomy is wrong. >>>How? >> You will see the answer if you look in a mirror. > >What? You'll see an indoctrinated fool www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm The difference between a preacher and a used car salesman is that the latter at least has a product to sell.
From: Bob Cain on 20 Jul 2007 05:26 Henri Wilson wrote: > There has never been a direct measurement of OW light speed from a moving > source. That's a lie you keep repeating. Repetition does not comprise truth. Look at the measurement and results described here: http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/relatvty.htm Search for a paragraph starting with, "What is the evidence for the invariance of the speed of light?" It's only a little bit down the page. What have you to say that can refute that and the conclusions drawn from it? Bob -- "Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler." A. Einstein
From: George Dishman on 20 Jul 2007 17:15 "Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message news:0a72a35f3pvsj84q1djbecou3ull85fbso(a)4ax.com... > On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 02:26:47 -0700, Bob Cain <arcane(a)arcanemethods.com> > wrote: >>Henri Wilson wrote: >> >>> There has never been a direct measurement of OW light speed from a >>> moving >>> source. >> >>That's a lie you keep repeating. Repetition does not comprise truth. >>Look at >>the measurement and results described here: .... > We've been through this before. > > Nobody has measured the OW speed of light from a moving source ... More lies Henry, you know perfectly well Sagnac's experiment showed that the speed of light from the source when moving is exactly the same as when it is at rest. George
From: Henri Wilson on 21 Jul 2007 03:06 On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 22:15:09 +0100, "George Dishman" <george(a)briar.demon.co.uk> wrote: > >"Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message >news:0a72a35f3pvsj84q1djbecou3ull85fbso(a)4ax.com... >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 02:26:47 -0700, Bob Cain <arcane(a)arcanemethods.com> >> wrote: >>>Henri Wilson wrote: >>>That's a lie you keep repeating. Repetition does not comprise truth. >>>Look at >>>the measurement and results described here: >... >> We've been through this before. >> >> Nobody has measured the OW speed of light from a moving source ... > >More lies Henry, you know perfectly well Sagnac's >experiment showed that the speed of light from the >source when moving is exactly the same as when it >is at rest. Sagnac proves SR wrong. The light rays are assumed to initially move at c+v wrt the source. Don't argue about that George, it is obviously true. >George > www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm The difference between a preacher and a used car salesman is that the latter at least has a product to sell.
From: Jeckyl on 21 Jul 2007 09:46
"Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message news:81c3a3dp1kb5vnr79pithf3kef03fa4pkf(a)4ax.com... > On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 22:15:09 +0100, "George Dishman" > <george(a)briar.demon.co.uk> > wrote: > >> >>"Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message >>news:0a72a35f3pvsj84q1djbecou3ull85fbso(a)4ax.com... >>> On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 02:26:47 -0700, Bob Cain <arcane(a)arcanemethods.com> >>> wrote: >>>>Henri Wilson wrote: > >>>>That's a lie you keep repeating. Repetition does not comprise truth. >>>>Look at >>>>the measurement and results described here: >>... >>> We've been through this before. >>> >>> Nobody has measured the OW speed of light from a moving source ... >> >>More lies Henry, you know perfectly well Sagnac's >>experiment showed that the speed of light from the >>source when moving is exactly the same as when it >>is at rest. > > Sagnac proves SR wrong. The light rays are assumed to initially move at > c+v wrt > the source. No .. it does not .. it says nothing to refute SR at all. |