Sagnac Revisited. Why Paul, Tom and Jerry are Hopelessly Wrong.
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Flame photometry, gas discharge and absurdities of modern science
Next: Quantum jump rejected for a mirror
From: Henry Wilson DSc on 29 Mar 2010 16:38 On Sun, 28 Mar 2010 15:01:53 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" <someone(a)somewhere.no> wrote: >On 19.03.2010 22:17, Henry Wilson DSc wrote: >> On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 16:01:56 +0100, "Paul B. Andersen" >> <paul.b.andersen(a)somewhere.no> wrote: >> >>> Have you ever seen an four mirror interferometer, Henry? >> >> Yes, I have made one. >> >>> When you look at it, doesn't it look square even >>> when it is rotating? >> >> It does. >> >>> Are the light beams not going from the half silvered >>> mirror back to same? >> >> No. The mirror has moved by the time it gets there. >> >>> Are the light beams not square? >> >> No. ,...except when it is not rotating, as you have shown in your artwork, >> >>> Are there any light beams outside of the square? >> >> Yes Paul....not in your artwork though becaue that represents a nonrotating >> apparatus. >> >>> Isn't it looking like this? >>> http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/images/Sagnac_Ritz.jpg >> >> Whe not rotationg only. >> >>> If not, can you please draw how you think an instant >>> image of a rotating interferometer should look like? >> >> It should be obvious. > >Quite. >When you look at a rotating interferometer, it is square, >but the light beams don't go between the mirrors, but are >bouncing off points where there are no mirror. Yes. That is a requirement of both the BaTh and SR analyses. >Could it be more obvious? :-) > >I think this will do, Henry. >You have reached the sky. You have drawn a very nice diagram of a nonrotating 4 mirror interferometer.......very clever...I'm sure it will appreciated by all norwegian students.....Hahhahhaaha! Henry Wilson... ........A person's IQ = his snipping ability.
From: Paul B. Andersen on 5 Apr 2010 14:27 On 29.03.2010 22:38, Henry Wilson DSc wrote: > On Sun, 28 Mar 2010 15:01:53 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen"<someone(a)somewhere.no> > wrote: > >> On 19.03.2010 22:17, Henry Wilson DSc wrote: >>> On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 16:01:56 +0100, "Paul B. Andersen" >>> <paul.b.andersen(a)somewhere.no> wrote: >>> >>>> Have you ever seen an four mirror interferometer, Henry? >>> >>> Yes, I have made one. >>> >>>> When you look at it, doesn't it look square even >>>> when it is rotating? >>> >>> It does. >>> >>>> Are the light beams not going from the half silvered >>>> mirror back to same? >>> >>> No. The mirror has moved by the time it gets there. >>> >>>> Are the light beams not square? >>> >>> No. ,...except when it is not rotating, as you have shown in your artwork, >>> >>>> Are there any light beams outside of the square? >>> >>> Yes Paul....not in your artwork though becaue that represents a nonrotating >>> apparatus. >>> >>>> Isn't it looking like this? >>>> http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/images/Sagnac_Ritz.jpg >>> >>> Whe not rotationg only. >>> >>>> If not, can you please draw how you think an instant >>>> image of a rotating interferometer should look like? >>> >>> It should be obvious. >> >> Quite. >> When you look at a rotating interferometer, it is square, >> but the light beams don't go between the mirrors, but are >> bouncing off points where there are no mirror. > > Yes. That is a requirement of both the BaTh and SR analyses. > >> Could it be more obvious? :-) >> >> I think this will do, Henry. >> You have reached the sky. > > You have drawn a very nice diagram of a nonrotating 4 mirror > interferometer.......very clever...I'm sure it will appreciated by all > norwegian students.....Hahhahhaaha! Your stupidities have now ceased to amaze. -- Paul http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/
From: Paul B. Andersen on 5 Apr 2010 14:33 On 29.03.2010 23:47, Henry Wilson DSc wrote: > > But ring laser gyros are quite amazing. Indeed. And they falsifies Ritz emission theory. It is quite obvious that the speed of light in a ring laser is c in the non-rotating frame, that's why the standing wave doesn't rotate with the ring. But the sources are moving with the ring. -- Paul http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/
From: Henry Wilson DSc on 5 Apr 2010 17:53 On Mon, 05 Apr 2010 20:33:53 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" <someone(a)somewhere.no> wrote: >On 29.03.2010 23:47, Henry Wilson DSc wrote: >> >> But ring laser gyros are quite amazing. > >Indeed. >And they falsifies Ritz emission theory. > >It is quite obvious that the speed of light in >a ring laser is c in the non-rotating frame, >that's why the standing wave doesn't rotate with >the ring. But the sources are moving with the ring. Photons are not simple oscillators. In the nonR frame, the path lengths of the two rays are different and therefore contain different numbers of 'wavelengths'. This ballistic model, which is fully backed by experiment, provides a wealth of information about the true nature of light. Henry Wilson... ........A person's IQ = his snipping ability.
From: Henry Wilson DSc on 5 Apr 2010 17:57
On Mon, 05 Apr 2010 20:27:47 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" <someone(a)somewhere.no> wrote: >On 29.03.2010 22:38, Henry Wilson DSc wrote: >> On Sun, 28 Mar 2010 15:01:53 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen"<someone(a)somewhere.no> >> wrote: >> >> >> You have drawn a very nice diagram of a nonrotating 4 mirror >> interferometer.......very clever...I'm sure it will appreciated by all >> norwegian students.....Hahhahhaaha! > >Your stupidities have now ceased to amaze. When are you going to draw the rotating version of the interferometer? You know! The one in which the detector and source are displaced by vt. Even SR relies on it. See: http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s2-07/2-07.htm According to you, SR does not predict any fringe displacement. Henry Wilson... ........A person's IQ = his snipping ability. |