Sagnac Idiocy
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: USM
Next: The real twin paradox.
From: George Dishman on 22 Oct 2007 15:03 "Clueless Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message news:cjjnh3dpr8pgu3v7mi12kd6jesvvkcprpm(a)4ax.com... > On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 11:49:19 +0100, "George Dishman" > <george(a)briar.demon.co.uk> wrote: >>"Clueless Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message >>news:2o3lh3lgmqqnh0lk5p97vq409u91net1uv(a)4ax.com... >>> On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 11:31:20 +0100, "George Dishman" >>> <george(a)briar.demon.co.uk> wrote: >>>>"Clueless Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message >>>>news:s09ih3lvq4tg7t77qqp43ncr3n55p63o6r(a)4ax.com... > >>> You still cannot see that the emision point moves backwards around the >>> ring in >>> the rotating frame. There is really no point in trying to educate >>> someone >>> who >>> has a completely closed mind. >> >>There is no point in talking to a high school >>dropout whoc lies about having a degree because >>he cannot live with reality. >> >>The proof that Sagnac falsifies ballistic theory >>was in the inertial frame as to can plainly see >>in the quoted figure and algebra, Jerry's animation >>correctly shows the motion of the waves emitted and >>moves them at the correct speed while you cannot >>even show the waves moving, without proving yourself >>wrong. > > Jerry has shown that you can't make a ring gyro using sound in air if you > remove all the air. Jerry has shown you something the rest of us already knew, if you put air in a pipe round a carousel with a thin membrane somewhere so that the air must rotate with the carousel, then since the speed of sound in air is the same _relative_to_the_carousel in both directions, you get in-phase arrival at the detector for a sine wave. Although not shown, it is also obvious you get synchronous arrival of matching amplitude samples for any arbitrary wave. Even Androcles understands that. >>>>No it doesn't, the source is in the table. >>> >>> the emission point of a photon moves backwards around the ring. >> >>Move the waves at speed c+v from your emission >>point then and see what happens. That's what >>Jerry's applet does. Your animation is a fraud, >>you deliberately don't move the waves because >>it would prove you wrong. > > jerry has not modelled a ring gyro. Yes she has, she has modelled it perfectly as it is described by ballistic theory. > My theory and animation is fully backed by experiment. The only theory you have is the two equations I wrote for you, remember [2] and [3]? Those equations are perfectly modelled by Jerry's applet given that you say [3] happens over large distances. >>> Why don't you admit defeat George? >> >>Because you have already admitted defeat by >>publishing a deliberately fraudulent animation >>in which the waves don't move. It just shows >>the lengths you will go to to support your >>denial, but it is a waste of time, Jerry's >>applet shows ballistic theory correctly. > > George, the source emits photons, not squiggly lines. So remove the squiggly line from your diagram if it doesn't represent the photon, and if it does then make it move at the photon's speed. What you have at the moment doesn't represent any theory at all, just meaningless squiggles. George
From: Androcles on 22 Oct 2007 16:09 "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen(a)guesswhathia.no> wrote in message news:471CECA1.8040909(a)guesswhathia.no... [..] : : 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. You are crazier than Wilson, you can't count either. How many teeth have I drawn on these gears? http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/inphase.gif http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/nophase.gif [..]
From: Dr. Henri Wilson on 22 Oct 2007 18:35 On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 20:03:30 +0100, "George Dishman" <george(a)briar.demon.co.uk> wrote: > >"Clueless Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message >news:cjjnh3dpr8pgu3v7mi12kd6jesvvkcprpm(a)4ax.com... >> On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 11:49:19 +0100, "George Dishman" >> >> Jerry has shown that you can't make a ring gyro using sound in air if you >> remove all the air. > >Jerry has shown you something the rest of us >already knew, if you put air in a pipe round >a carousel with a thin membrane somewhere so >that the air must rotate with the carousel, >then since the speed of sound in air is the >same _relative_to_the_carousel in both >directions, you get in-phase arrival at the >detector for a sine wave. Although not shown, >it is also obvious you get synchronous arrival >of matching amplitude samples for any arbitrary >wave. > >Even Androcles understands that. It's the wrong model. Imagine two identical bicycle chains arranged in a circle, one on top of the other. They will represent the two rotating light rays. Each link is a wavecest. Mark two adjacent links to represent points on both rays leaving the source with similar phase. The two chains will move at c+v and c-v in opposite directions. The position of the detector where the marked links reunite can be represented by a line somewhere around the ring. Its position is determined by ring speed. .....as per: http://www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/ringgyro.htm It is easy to see that the links will generally not line up at that detection point indicating that the phase of the two rays will not be the same. This is not hard to understand...and of course, it produces the right answer..... >>>>>No it doesn't, the source is in the table. >>>> >>>> the emission point of a photon moves backwards around the ring. >>> >>>Move the waves at speed c+v from your emission >>>point then and see what happens. That's what >>>Jerry's applet does. Your animation is a fraud, >>>you deliberately don't move the waves because >>>it would prove you wrong. >> >> jerry has not modelled a ring gyro. > >Yes she has, she has modelled it perfectly as it >is described by ballistic theory. Not so George. You don't even understand BaTh. >> >> George, the source emits photons, not squiggly lines. > >So remove the squiggly line from your diagram >if it doesn't represent the photon, and if it >does then make it move at the photon's speed. >What you have at the moment doesn't represent >any theory at all, just meaningless squiggles. Just use bicycle chains. >George > Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T) www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
From: Androcles on 22 Oct 2007 19:12 "Dr. Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message news:g28qh3t3pi8ena496ivl8s8dq6a2etti14(a)4ax.com... : On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 20:03:30 +0100, "George Dishman" <george(a)briar.demon.co.uk> : wrote: : : > : >"Clueless Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message : >news:cjjnh3dpr8pgu3v7mi12kd6jesvvkcprpm(a)4ax.com... : >> On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 11:49:19 +0100, "George Dishman" : : >> : >> Jerry has shown that you can't make a ring gyro using sound in air if you : >> remove all the air. : > : >Jerry has shown you something the rest of us : >already knew, if you put air in a pipe round : >a carousel with a thin membrane somewhere so : >that the air must rotate with the carousel, : >then since the speed of sound in air is the : >same _relative_to_the_carousel in both : >directions, you get in-phase arrival at the : >detector for a sine wave. Although not shown, : >it is also obvious you get synchronous arrival : >of matching amplitude samples for any arbitrary : >wave. : > : >Even Androcles understands that. : : It's the wrong model. : : Imagine two identical bicycle chains arranged in a circle, one on top of the : other. They will represent the two rotating light rays. Each link is a : wavecest. : Mark two adjacent links to represent points on both rays leaving the source : with similar phase. The two chains will move at c+v and c-v in opposite : directions. HAHAHA! They won't engage the cogs then, so what drives them? I had a bicycle when I was a kid and you were ewe shagging, I never saw the chain move at c+v though, at best it would be v. : This is not hard to understand...and of course, it produces the right : answer..... The right wrong answer. Wilson cannot count to 26 and hasn't heard of stretched chains.
From: George Dishman on 22 Oct 2007 19:28
"Dr. Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message news:g28qh3t3pi8ena496ivl8s8dq6a2etti14(a)4ax.com... > On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 20:03:30 +0100, "George Dishman" > <george(a)briar.demon.co.uk> > wrote: > >> >>"Clueless Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message >>news:cjjnh3dpr8pgu3v7mi12kd6jesvvkcprpm(a)4ax.com... >>> On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 11:49:19 +0100, "George Dishman" > >>> >>> Jerry has shown that you can't make a ring gyro using sound in air if >>> you >>> remove all the air. >> >>Jerry has shown you something the rest of us >>already knew, if you put air in a pipe round >>a carousel with a thin membrane somewhere so >>that the air must rotate with the carousel, >>then since the speed of sound in air is the >>same _relative_to_the_carousel in both >>directions, you get in-phase arrival at the >>detector for a sine wave. Although not shown, >>it is also obvious you get synchronous arrival >>of matching amplitude samples for any arbitrary >>wave. >> >>Even Androcles understands that. > > It's the wrong model. It is the model that follows from the equations of ballistic theory. In general, every wave moves as if it was travelling through a hypothetical aether which moves inertially and at which the source was at rest at the time of emission. You can't turn it into an aether theory because you get multiple separate aethers at any point, one per source, but the connection is obvious. > Imagine two identical bicycle chains arranged in a circle, one on top of > the > other. They will represent the two rotating light rays. Each link is a > wavecest. OK, and pairs of links pass each other at the source. > Mark two adjacent links to represent points on both rays leaving the > source > with similar phase. The two chains will move at c+v and c-v in opposite > directions. Yes. Make the sine wave in your diagram move and that's what you get, it is also what Jerry's applet shows. > The position of the detector where the marked links reunite can be > represented > by a line somewhere around the ring. Its position is determined by ring > speed. > ....as per: http://www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/ringgyro.htm > > It is easy to see that the links will generally not line up at that > detection > point indicating that the phase of the two rays will not be the same. Sorry, Henry, they do match up. Your imagination is not up to the job. Jerry has animated exactly what you describe. > This is not hard to understand...and of course, it produces the right > answer..... Sorry, it says the links _are_ in phase at the detector. Change your program to find out. >>>>>>No it doesn't, the source is in the table. >>>>> >>>>> the emission point of a photon moves backwards around the ring. >>>> >>>>Move the waves at speed c+v from your emission >>>>point then and see what happens. That's what >>>>Jerry's applet does. Your animation is a fraud, >>>>you deliberately don't move the waves because >>>>it would prove you wrong. >>> >>> jerry has not modelled a ring gyro. >> >>Yes she has, she has modelled it perfectly as it >>is described by ballistic theory. > > Not so George. You don't even understand BaTh. She has drawn your bicycle chains precisely. >>> George, the source emits photons, not squiggly lines. >> >>So remove the squiggly line from your diagram >>if it doesn't represent the photon, and if it >>does then make it move at the photon's speed. >>What you have at the moment doesn't represent >>any theory at all, just meaningless squiggles. > > Just use bicycle chains. Jerry's applet shows one red and one blue bicycle chain. Make your move and you will get the same. George |