Speed of Light: A universal Constant?
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Joan-Claude van Dirk Helps to Trivialize Special Relativity
Next: GOD=G_uv Measure your IQ in 30 seconds
From: newedana on 30 Apr 2005 07:45 >Yes! the speed of light c is universal constant. Because the medium of light is vacant space itsef, and element particle building material system is nothing to do with the light transmission. >>We had a bad fixed prejudice, action only through a medium and medium equals the mass. This traditional fixed idea seriously distorted the science of understanding the light and its propagation characters. Light is exactly the same as sound wave in propagating character. However, in standard high school texts they deny this fact, light is entirely different from sound wave. It is due to a strong influence of particle physicists who believe light is corpuscular photons. Sound wave once released from its source propagates through the air phase with its own speed that is nothing to do with the speed of its source. If the source moves at some speeds there occurs the Doppler effect. Light is exactly the same as acoustic waves, in terms of its propagating character. Light pulse once emitted from its source propagates through empty space at its own speed, and this speed is nothing to do with the speed of its source. Thus there occurs the Doppler effect when the source moves at some speeds. One cannot hear the steamwhistle influenced by the Doppler effect if one is in the same train. It is because the elongated wavelength of steamwhistle due to Doppler effect turns out to be restored to its initial dimensions when he receives it in the same train, because he runs with the same speed as the train does. Light is exactly the same. If light source and the detector are on the same coordinate system, or on the earth, one can measure always the absolute speed of light, without any relation with the orbiting speed of the earth. Elongated or condensed wavelength of light due to Doppler effect becomes restored when the detector receives it. Because the detector has to receive the wave signal as it advances or in reverse case retreats with the same speed as the source, Albert Einstein didn't know this simple plain truth. Since his photon travels with its momentum given by its source, as though a shut bullet travels in the space with its momentum given by its rifles. Obviously the speed of bullet involves the speed of rifle. So he set forth the famous postulation for his special theory of relativity; If a number of observer are moving at uniform velocity in respect to each other and to a source of light, and if each observer measures the speed of the light emerging from the source, they will all obtain the same value. The same value in his word means the absolute speed of light from which the speed of source is excluded. In order to explain the failed experiment of Michelson-Morley, the speed of source v had to be removed, but he didn't know how to remove it from additive formula, c=c'+ v, so he made his postulation c=c' when v approach the speed c. Thus he proposed the general principle of projectile mechanics involving the travelling mechanism of light, expressed with a stupid equation: v=(v'+u)/(1+v'u/c^2), by borrowing the idea of Lorentz's space contraction. And he announced that the speed of light is constant anywhere in the cosmic space, because the light has the fastest speed of all possible speeds in the nature, based on his also stupid equation, m=m'(1-v^2/c^2)^-1/2. Mass increases its absolute value as its speed increases, so if the speed of mass approaches the speed of light its acceleration can no more contribute to its speed increment. However this is a fraudulent story if we believe that the vacant space itself is only the medium of light propagation. Because the vacant space is absolutely uniform anywhere in this cosmic space, so the speed of light has to have a naturally constant speed. Then how can we explain the light refraction taking place between different materials with different optical density? I could learn this phenomenon in Dr.Yoon's textbook(www.yoonsatom.net) The light section in his book clearly explains the refraction phenomenon with a simple equation built without any postulation, involving no speed factor, but containing wavelength of incident light, mass density factor, as well as incident angle of incoming light. He asserts that light refraction can take place because the atomic nuclei in mass system subdivides the incoming light wave into numerous micro beams which develope into spherical waves, so the constructive interference between them build a refractive light with a different running direction. He also shows a number of schematical experiments of light refraction, utilizing a large number of concentric half circles representing sequential wave phases, drawn on two transparent films, and superimposing them. And he claims the empty space itself is the only medium of light propagation, and element particles building material system has nothing to do with this light propagation. Although this assertion conflicts critically against the traditional concept, it is quite correct. People today has been taught that electrons building the material system serves to transmit the light passing through material system. Feynman had also the same idea, so he debates critically the Feynman's equation representing refractive index, built based on his QED theory, saying that it is a typical example of cheating people with a fantastic mathematical trick. As one knows as a plain truth, electric and magnetic force can act through this empty vacant space without any aid of mass particles. He emphasis in his book we have to abandon our old prejudice, action only through a medium and medium equals the mass. Particle physicists believe that the electric and magnetic force acting through this vacant space is due to exchange of their energy grains traveling with their momentum, and disregard the true mechanism of how these forces can act without medium. This incorrect belief, mass system interferes the speed of light is inherited from our science pioneer such as Fizeau who tried to investigate in 1845, how does the speed of light change due to moving speed of its medium, such as water. He mis-evaluated the light interference occurred between two light beams, one running along the flowing water and the other against that, as speed difference between them. But it is quite incorrect! Imagine two rockets. One approaches the earth and the other departs from the earth with the same speed. If they emit lights with the same wavelength to a detector on the earth, the detector would receive two signals interfering with one another, exactly the same pattern as that Fizeau obtained in his experiment. Have these two lights different speed? Absolutely no. They are exactly the same. This is the reevaluation of Fizeau's experiment by Dr.Yoon, and he says if vacuum empty space itself is only the medium of light, there cannot exist such a moving coordinate system in this universe as far as concerned to transmission of light, which is the base of Einstein's two relativity theory. newedana says based on Dr.Yoon's new physics.
From: bz on 30 Apr 2005 08:02 dubious(a)radioactivex.lebesque-al.net (Bilge) wrote in news:slrnd76t28.7k.dubious(a)radioactivex.lebesque-al.net: > bz: > >dubious(a)radioactivex.lebesque-al.net (Bilge) wrote in > >news:slrnd7676m.7k.dubious(a)radioactivex.lebesque-al.net: > > > >> bz: > >> >"G" <gehan(a)dialog.lk> wrote in news:1114769646.014073.265000 > >> >@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com: > >> > > >> >> BZ > >> >> > >> >> I agree with your statement on doppler shifts. Why don't you do > >> >> the > >> >> experiment and > >> >> c ? > >> > > >> >I need to interest some people in getting the equipment together and > >> >running the experiment. > >> > >> The direct measurement of the source independence has been done to > >> much better precision that you could hope to acheive in any > >> experiment using terrestrial light sources at any physically > >> attainable velocity, or conceivable flight pat length, even if you > >> could somehow obtain the best equipment in existence. > > > >Yes, but the 'time of flight' light speed (TOFLS) of the photons hasn't > >been monitored, per se in this context AFAIK. That left 'wiggle room' > >for saying 'the photons were going faster and slower'. > > Actually, it doesn't leave any ``wiggle room.'' Recall that at points > in the orbit one pulsar is receeding from the earth at 13 km/sec while > the other is moving toward the earth at 13 km/sec. > > >TOFLS doesn't leave that wiggle room. What do you think of my proposed > >experiment? > > Since someone along the way posted a reply outside the context of > the thread, the thread is not intact, so I can't search backwards > through the parent articles to find the post which describes the > experiment in its entirety. I'll look at it if you post the message-id > (not a url pointing to google), but I'm not going to reconstruct the > all of the sub-threads, sub-sub-threads, etc., and start from the > parent article to find it. > The best, most curent description is in news:Xns9647C3E5721EEWQAHBGMXSZHVspammote(a)130.39.198.139: My idea has been evolving since I first proposed using a police lidar and a spinning fan and looking at the doppler shift along with the actual velocity of the reflected photons. Now, a laser beam is conducted from a laser at the center of a spinning disk to the edge by an optical fiber (protect laser from high G.), launch laser beam tangential to edge of disk (possible multiple beam). Time beam as it passes between two detectors. Detectors separated by 'significant distance'. Spin disk at various rpm in both clockwise and ccw directions. look for variation in time of flight of the photons. I figure we can get more than 600 mph in both directions. We should see more than plus and minus 1 pico second difference in TOFLS (time of flight light speed) IF BaT works and our path length is 1 km. If we don't see a difference, BaT is invalidated. .... > for sarcasm or humor at his expense. Frankly, I find what ``Traveler'' > posts to be more polite, since at least he doesn't make any pretense > about having no interest in being enlightened. Traveler is in my killfile. Uncle Al at least has some interesting things to say and can be polite to people. .... > Optimism is one thing. Wishing for miracles is another. If stupidity > was a communicable disease, henri would have wiped out a continent > and be considered a fair target for a nuclear warhead as a means of > halting the epidemic. :) .... > >So far, no sign of a virus, but if he gets 'lucky' and his machine is > >infected, his programs will be too. Perhaps someday he will get lucky. > > How would he know? if he gets lucky enough, he will know. I clean machines for students/professors that have been lucky. :) -- bz please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an infinite set. bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap
From: bz on 30 Apr 2005 16:39 "newedana" <simplesong1004(a)hanmail.net> wrote in news:1114861528.943010.229920(a)f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com: >>Yes! the speed of light c is universal constant. Because the medium of > light is vacant space itsef, and element particle building material > system is nothing to do with the light transmission. > >>>We had a bad fixed prejudice, action only through a medium and medium > equals the mass. This traditional fixed idea seriously distorted the > science of understanding the light and its propagation characters. ..... sorry, butIfindthatreadingyourwritingswhicharetotallywithoutparagraphsisalmostasha rdasreadingthissentence. [translation] sorry, but I find that reading your writings which are totally without paragraphs is almost as hard as reading a sentence without spaces. Could you PLEASE start dividing things into bite size pieces? > Einstein's two relativity theory. newedana says based on Dr.Yoon's new > physics. > -- bz please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an infinite set. bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap
From: Henri Wilson on 30 Apr 2005 18:49 On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 06:00:05 GMT, The Ghost In The Machine <ewill(a)sirius.athghost7038suus.net> wrote: >In sci.physics, bz ><bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> > wrote >on Fri, 29 Apr 2005 00:44:08 +0000 (UTC) ><Xns9646C8C567C5WQAHBGMXSZHVspammote(a)130.39.198.139>: >> H@..(Henri Wilson) wrote in >> news:ebq27114h0j7ooce3h3vo1d6se1o4dspmn(a)4ax.com: >> >>> On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 21:11:51 +0000 (UTC), bz >>> <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote: >>> >>>>H@..(Henri Wilson) wrote in >>>>news:b8h2719k4fhf6m6shbrsd7hqsbag8p3gh4(a)4ax.com: >>>> >>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Which is exactly what I am trying to demonatrate to the BaT people. >>>>>> >>>>>>They think that c'=c+v >>>>>>They think that the speed of light is dependent on the velocity of the >>>>>>source. >>>>> >>>>> No they don't. >>>>> >>>>> They say: >>>>> 1) 'speed of light' is a meaningless expression on its own. >>>> >>>>we disagree. >>> >>> The 'speed' of anything is a meaningless expression anywhere, anytime. >> >> Tell that to the policeman when he writes you a ticket. > >Pedant Point: > >The policeman has the luxury of an absolute reference >frame (the roadway) and enough slop in the measurement >(5 * 10^-15 is the gamma corrective factor at 30 m/s = 67 >mph) so that he can new the relatively simpler Newtonian >computations. > >An interstellar cop trying to overtake a rogue light beam >might not be quite so lucky... :-) > >> >> Speed is the magnitude of velocity, it is not meaningless. >> One may specify direction to give more information, but >> speed is a useful term to use when the direction does >> not matter. >> >> Speed of light is a commonly used and accepted term in physics. > >But we're getting sloppy about it. :-) Of course, with SR and GR, >we can get very sloppy; light is c relative to everything >(at least, during the traveling-through-a-vacuum-are-we-there-yet? >part; once it hits some cesium atoms, though, it might slow >to a dead crawl :-) ). > >Even with BaT one can still characterize lightspeed as a constant, >but only with respect to the origination of the light. 'c' is a universal constant. It also happens to be the speed of light wrt its source. Don't ask me why. I guess Maxwell's equations provide some kind of reason when one accepts that his constants are measured in the source frame. .. HW. www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm Sometimes I feel like a complete failure. The most useful thing I have ever done is prove Einstein wrong.
From: Henri Wilson on 30 Apr 2005 19:00
On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 08:43:39 +0000 (UTC), bz <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote: >dubious(a)radioactivex.lebesque-al.net (Bilge) wrote in >news:slrnd7676m.7k.dubious(a)radioactivex.lebesque-al.net: > >> bz: > >Yes, but the 'time of flight' light speed (TOFLS) of the photons hasn't >been monitored, per se in this context AFAIK. That left 'wiggle room' for >saying 'the photons were going faster and slower'. > >TOFLS doesn't leave that wiggle room. What do you think of my proposed >experiment? > >> >> There's been a test performed using the light from a binary pulsar >> system >> (PSR J0437-4715, stratten. et al). The pulsars orbit about a common >> center of mass such that the pilsars are moving away from or toward the >> earth with the maximum variation of their velocities at +/-13 km/sec. >> The pulsars are located a distance of about 140 parsecs. They measure >> the speed to constant with an uncertainty of 2 cm/year. > >I understand and agree. > >> Henri is a >> crackpot who makes stuff up just to read his own bullsh*t. Bilgey is a poor unfortunate indoctrinated old fool who has dedicated his life to a belief system that is now being brought down by both logic and solid evidence. As you know, bz, any devout believer will try to defend his faith to the death. > >I try to treat everyone who is reasonably polite toward me with respect. >If they start calling me stupid or other names, I warn them once and then >killfile them. He has been reasonably polite, so far. Sometimes it is hard to be polite on this NG. > >> He's tried to >> claim classical physcs is wrong based upon his idea that changing from >> center of mass coordinates to a different coordinate system violates >> conservation of energy. He's utterly hopeless. > >Where there is life there is hope. :) Plenty of life here bz. > >> If he thinks he's >> about to be pinned down, he'll invent a new theory in an hour and >> then write a simulation he expects you to download as an executable >> and run because he thinks it's impossible for his programs to >> be or become infected with viruses. > >I have run a couple of those in a 'sandbox' virtual machine under vmwear. >I don't care if they are infected with viruses. >So far, no sign of a virus, but if he gets 'lucky' and his machine is >infected, his programs will be too. Perhaps someday he will get lucky. In case you don't know bz, Bilgey's main claim to fame is that he once took part in a trial experiment for a new kind of anti-dementia pill. As you can see, the pill didn't work. HW. www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm Sometimes I feel like a complete failure. The most useful thing I have ever done is prove Einstein wrong. |