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: sue jahn on 23 Jun 2005 08:00 "Arthur Dent" <jp006t2227(a)blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:1119528000.930044.278510(a)g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > Ya keep on tellin' us about antennae and citing web pages that have > experiments associated with them, > and the theory behind them, BUT... the air around the antennae has > ALWAYS been part of the experiment. > Then when someone suggests that things might be a little different if > the air was taken away, you invent an > all pervading gas throughout the entire universe and cite a web page to > support that. Some of us can think outside the box. But can you make light without moving a charge? Which will of course, move another and another and another... .... something called Coulomb's law. Now... you show us the switch where you are turning that law on and off at your pleasure, and we'll have it reverse engineered in Bangalore, mass produced in Bejing and we'll be on the 19th hole at St. Andrews. Sue... > AD. >
From: bz on 23 Jun 2005 08:23 "sue jahn" <susysewnshow(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote in news:42baa147$0$18641$14726298(a)news.sunsite.dk: > > "bz" <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote in message > news:Xns967E39A905234WQAHBGMXSZHVspammote(a)130.39.198.139... >> "sue jahn" <susysewnshow(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote in >> news:42ba7168$0$18636$14726298(a)news.sunsite.dk: >> >> > >> > "bz" <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote in message >> > news:Xns967DCB094520WQAHBGMXSZHVspammote(a)130.39.198.139... >> >> H@..(Henri Wilson) wrote in >> >> news:gprjb1ll6nepkofq8cqkbpf6hfmjc4cp5c(a)4ax.com: >> >> >> >> > On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 01:45:14 +0000 (UTC), bz >> >> > <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >>H@..(Henri Wilson) wrote in >> >> >>news:c85hb1pbcn3b1prl24iecftpetgd09gb65(a)4ax.com: >> >> >> >> .... >> >> >>Actually it is the exact reverse, The earth is NOT special. Every >> >> >>place in the universe is equally special. >> >> > >> >> > that's a strange statement from an SRian. >> >> >> >> I keep telling you that I don't have faith in any particular theory. >> >> >> >> > You also believe that all starlight is emitted at c wrt little >> >> > planet Earth. >> >> >> >> SR says that all light moves at c WRT every mass in the universe, >> >> including our little insignificant ball of left-over star-vomit. >> > ...because AE had never heard of the term "effective aperture" >> >> >> >> > the two claims are incompatible. >> >> In another article sue said: >> > Frequently AE refers to a passive *observer* when he really should >> > model the near-field effects of an EM coupling structure which is >> > not passive but actually modify the E and H plane components of >> > an incident wave. >> > << A surprising result is that even though the infinitesimal dipole >> > is minute, its effective aperture is comparable to antennas many >> > times its size! >> >> an infinitesimal dipole MUST be very minute! >> Any effective apeture will be infinitely larger. :) > > I might agree. The *infinitesimal* part was some google serendipty. > I tho't it worth a closer look. Glad you did. > When you reach a point of diminishing returns in adding > "just one more element" to a Yagi you get some sense for > what the writer is saying. A yogi once contemplated a yagi on a ship. He was a navel yagi yogi. Adding more elements reaches a point of negative returns when the additional losses exceed the gains. This usually happens before the element length becomes negative. The calculations are elementry. >> >>> >> > http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Dipole-antenna >> > >> > So give the good professor a c minus in electromagnetism and >> > hear out his argument that Maxwell's Equations is *generally* >> > compatable with a constant speed of light. >> >> You have to realize that, in 1905, the 'state of the art' radio >> transmitters used spark gaps to create Hertzian waves. There were no >> microwave ovens or cell phones. >> >> > IOW... Rene' Descartes was not on the creator's payroll. >> >> I hope it doesn't throw you, but methinks you have Descartes before >> Dehorse. :) > LOL >> .... >> >> > ...because mass in not always proportional to "effective aperture" >> > but it is usually close. Big things have big cross sections. In >> > astronomy big = 10 * (small) LOL >> >> .... >> >> >> > SR cannot be tested directly because there is no known way to >> >> > measure OWLS from a moving source. >> >> >> >> OWLS/TWLS, it doesn't matter unless you believe in aether. >> > Is a sea of leptons considered aether ? >> >> No! Leaping leptons, Batman! To take arms against a sea of leptons and >> by opposing, send them? > > Better I had said charges but there are still some that won't accept > that they come in 0.511MeV chunks. ;-) Their claims don't have a quantum to stand upon. >> Only if the leptons permiate all space and provide the medium for >> propagation of all EM waves. Do you so claim? > > No doubt in my mind that I can use a charged hair comb to wiggle > a pith-ball on the moon. I am quite confident of this because I will > be using a force a trillion trillion trillion times greater that that > which couples the moon to the ocean's tide. > That is a pithy comment! So YOU're the one? They thought it was solar photons raising dust from the moon as the terminator sweeps across its face. [quote http://www.ltpresearch.org/MANUAL/chap3.html] "The Apollo 17 Lunar Ejecta and Meteorites (LEAM) experiment (Berg et al., 1973) found increased particle counts during the passage of the terminator over the instrument (Berg et al., 1974)and the experimenters noted that "...all of the events recorded by the sensors during the terminator passage are essentially surface micro particles carrying a high electrostatic charge." Other experimenters observed that "the particles event rate increases whenever the terminator passes over the instrument. This increase starts some 40 hours before sunrise and ends 30 hours after it" (Rhee et al., 1977). Such charged, levitating soil particles, moving across the lunar surface, could create visibility problems during passage through the terminator, and the particles would also readily adhere to surfaces, creating coatings...Another hypothesis to explain lunar transient phenomena is that they are associated with electrodynamics effects generated during rock fracturing" (Zito, 1989). [unquote] >> ... >> >> > GR has been tested with te Pound-Rebka experiment. It matches the >> >> > BaT perfectly. Light increases speed when falling down a gravity >> >> > well, just like anything else. >> >> >> >> Pound-Rebka matches SR/GR. >> >> > Nope... >> >> How does it invalidate SR/GR? > I didn't use the word invalidate, you did. :o) My precision was lacking when I invoked SR/GR. I 'c' I must invoke EEP! EEP! EEP! EEP! > The staunch fire, brimstone and untenured proponents like to keep > the target on the move but here is one prevalent POV. And the prevalent POV takes the most fire, contrary to the paranoid beliefs of some of those opposed to the prevalent POV. > A more powerful and far-reaching equivalence principle is known as the > Einstein equivalence principle (EEP). It states that: > > WEP is valid. Read 'em and WEP! :) > The outcome of any local non-gravitational experiment is independent of > the velocity of the freely-falling reference frame in which it is > performed. The outcome of any local non-gravitational experiment is > independent of where and when in the universe it is performed. The > second piece of EEP is called local Lorentz invariance (LLI), and the > third piece is called local position invariance (LPI). > > For example, a measurement of the electric force between two charged > bodies is a local non-gravitational experiment; a measurement of the > gravitational force between two bodies (Cavendish experiment) is not. > > The Einstein equivalence principle is the heart and soul of > gravitational theory, for it is possible to argue convincingly that if > EEP is valid, then gravitation must be a ``curved spacetime'' > phenomenon, in other words, the effects of gravity must be equivalent > to the effects of living in a curved spacetime. As a consequence of this > argument, the only theories of gravity that can embody EEP are those > that satisfy the postulates of ``metric theories of gravity'', which > are: > > Spacetime is endowed with a symmetric metric. > The trajectories of freely falling bodies are geodesics of that metric. > In local freely falling reference frames, the non-gravitational laws of > physics are those written in the language of special relativity. > The argument that leads to this conclusion simply notes that, if EEP is > valid, then in local freely falling frames, the laws governing > experiments must be independent of the velocity of the frame (local > Lorentz invariance), with constant values for the various atomic > constants (in order to be independent of location). The only laws we > know of that fulfill this are those that are compatible with special > relativity, such as Maxwell's equations of electromagnetism. > Furthermore, in local freely falling frames, test bodies appear to be > unaccelerated, in other words they move on straight lines; but such > ``locally straight'' lines simply correspond to ``geodesics'' in a > curved spacetime (TEGP 2.3 [147]). I thought you were feeding me a line but you were trying to throw me a curve! :) I couldn't agree with you more. > --Clifford M. Will > http://relativity.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrr-2001-4&page=node3.html > >> >> Henri is misinterpreting the Pound-Rebka experiment. The top 'clock' >> runs faster than the bottom clock due to less 'G' field seen by the top >> clock. > Yes... Unless it is a massless SUMO type clock you just interpret it as > an accelerometer reading. > > Sue's broken record: > http://bigben.stanford.edu/sumo/status.htm > http://tf.nist.gov/timefreq/cesium/parcs.htm ... <--- recursive elipsis > :o) > >> >> This can be tested by using other 'clocks' in similar experiments. All >> clocks should show the SAME shift, whereas falling photon doppler >> shifts should be proportional to the frequency. [I really need to look >> at formulae or the numbers to make sure these will not give the same >> numbers, but I doubt they will]. >> >> > GPS launch presets do not agree with the LPI interpretation of PR and >> > Vessot. >> > >> > http://scitation.aip.org/getabs/servlet/GetabsServlet?prog=normal&id=A >> > JPI AS000068000002000115000001&idtype=cvips&gifs=yes&jsessionid >> > =3051831093837402530 >> >> Downloaded. Now to read, but it looks like they may provide the answer >> for us. > > I sure hope so because it too late in the week to be considering > causality violations. Sooner or later we have to see a blueshifted clock > make a tick before it occurs ... Eh ? That would certainly make me blue. It would tick some people off two. Or is that two week? Too two much. Which reminds me of "smurfy's law"....whatever happens will tend to make you turn blue. [original with me, as far as I know] >> > IOW... Gravity reduces the frequency of an oscillating mass. >> > Gravity does not blueshift "falling fotons"... an absurb causality >> > violation anyway. >> >> Henri's impedence is high. >> It will take a lot of energy to overcome the BaTer's faith barrier. > ...or a few hours study of Maxwell and Weber. I can't do it for him. > > Sue... > >> >> > Sue... -- 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: sue jahn on 23 Jun 2005 08:46 "bz" <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote in message news:Xns967E4B33B5228WQAHBGMXSZHVspammote(a)130.39.198.139... > "sue jahn" <susysewnshow(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote in > news:42baa147$0$18641$14726298(a)news.sunsite.dk: > > > > > "bz" <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote in message > > news:Xns967E39A905234WQAHBGMXSZHVspammote(a)130.39.198.139... > >> "sue jahn" <susysewnshow(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote in > >> news:42ba7168$0$18636$14726298(a)news.sunsite.dk: > >> [snip] :o) > >> > Sue... > > > > > > -- > bz > > please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an > infinite set. Ignorance we are accustomed to. A credible threat to our favorites in stand up comedy would indeed be something new. IOW ...was there any physics up there ^ IOW.... keep your day job. :o) Education is the ability to listen to almost anything without losing your temper or your self-confidence. - Robert Frost Sue... > > bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap
From: bz on 23 Jun 2005 09:38 "sue jahn" <susysewnshow(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote in news:42bab200$0$18650$14726298(a)news.sunsite.dk: > > "bz" <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote in message > news:Xns967E4B33B5228WQAHBGMXSZHVspammote(a)130.39.198.139... >> "sue jahn" <susysewnshow(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote in >> news:42baa147$0$18641$14726298(a)news.sunsite.dk: ..... > Ignorance we are accustomed to. A credible threat to our favorites > in stand up comedy would indeed be something new. > IOW ...was there any physics up there ^ yes. Quite a bit. Criticize what I said, if you like, but most was in agreement with what you had said, so if you didn't like it, you have no one to blame but your self. :) > IOW.... keep your day job. :o) I intend to. > Education is the ability to listen to almost anything without > losing your temper or your self-confidence. -- 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: sue jahn on 23 Jun 2005 10:07
"bz" <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote in message news:Xns967E57E7EB3A0WQAHBGMXSZHVspammote(a)130.39.198.139... > "sue jahn" <susysewnshow(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote in > news:42bab200$0$18650$14726298(a)news.sunsite.dk: > > > > > "bz" <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote in message > > news:Xns967E4B33B5228WQAHBGMXSZHVspammote(a)130.39.198.139... > >> "sue jahn" <susysewnshow(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote in > >> news:42baa147$0$18641$14726298(a)news.sunsite.dk: > .... > > Ignorance we are accustomed to. A credible threat to our favorites > > in stand up comedy would indeed be something new. > > IOW ...was there any physics up there ^ > > yes. Quite a bit. > > Criticize what I said, if you like, but most was in agreement with what you > had said, so if you didn't like it, you have no one to blame but your self. > > :) > > > IOW.... keep your day job. :o) > > I intend to. I HAD to criticize something. The jokes were an easier target. :o) Sue... > > > Education is the ability to listen to almost anything without > > losing your temper or your self-confidence. > > > > > > > -- > 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 |