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: bz on 26 Jun 2005 20:53 "Arthur Dent" <jp006t2227(a)blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in news:1119829768.103136.201980(a)g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: > > > bz wrote: > >> "As it is" IS what an observer in that For sees. >> What other meaning can there be for 'as it is'? > > A straight stick poking out of water is a straight stick, "as it is". > We see it bent, but what we see in our FoR is not "as it is". > How's that for another meaning? > Sanity check, please. That may be a good way of looking at lorentz contraction. The stick doesn't change length or bend but to an observer in a different environment, it looks different. And it may give Henri a different view of his vertical laser beam and the street lights. -- 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: Arthur Dent on 26 Jun 2005 22:02 bz wrote: > "Arthur Dent" <jp006t2227(a)blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in > news:1119829768.103136.201980(a)g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: > > > > > > > bz wrote: > > > >> "As it is" IS what an observer in that For sees. > >> What other meaning can there be for 'as it is'? > > > > A straight stick poking out of water is a straight stick, "as it is". > > We see it bent, but what we see in our FoR is not "as it is". > > How's that for another meaning? > > Sanity check, please. > > That may be a good way of looking at lorentz contraction. The stick doesn't > change length or bend but to an observer in a different environment, it > looks different. Yeah, it might. And then again, the speed of light is c/n in water, n being the refractive index, and that is the cause of the ILLUSION. Following you suggestion, length contraction is an illusion too, but the illusion is one of the mind. Since nobody has ever SEEN Lorentz contraction, you might say its all in your dreams. > > And it may give Henri a different view of his vertical laser beam and the > street lights. I can't help Henri on that one. He's arguing against the vector addition of velocities and that is something only a relativist should do. You on the other hand are arguing FOR the vector addition of velocities, so that would indicate you accept c+v, c and v being vector quantities. AD.
From: YBM on 26 Jun 2005 22:08 Arthur Dent a ýcrit : > I can't help Henri on that one. He's arguing against the vector > addition of velocities and that is something only a relativist should > do. > You on the other hand are arguing FOR the vector addition of > velocities, so > that would indicate you accept c+v, c and v being vector quantities. Androcles/Arthur Dent, you don't even know what a vector is : http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/IdiotVectors.html BTW, you're almost right againt Henri. As any crackpot usually is against any other one (see seto vs wilson here). It is not so a strange phenomena since all of you are goofing on distinct issues.
From: Arthur Dent on 26 Jun 2005 22:23 bz wrote: > Henri, you inspired the following idea! We have a test for BaT! This is the test for BaT. It's quite independent of anyone's opinion. You have a near circular orbit for Algol, according to the "known" data. Light from one side of the orbit, according to Einstein, takes the same time, t1 = d/c, to get here as light from the oposite side, t2 = d/c, d being the distance to the star, and t1 = t2. According to BaT, there are two times involved, t1 = d/(c-v) and t2 = d/(c+v) When the star is moving directly away from us it will show maximum red shift. When it is directly approaching, it will show maximum blue shift. If Einstein's c constant is correct the maximum red and blue shifts will be still be 1/2 the period of the orbit apart when the light gets here. If the Galilean addition of velocities is correct, the blue shifted light will travel faster (c+v) and arrive early; the red shifted light will travel slower (c-v) and arrive late. The arrival times will NOT be half the period of the orbit apart. So look at the velocity curve of Algol, case solved. AD.
From: bz on 26 Jun 2005 23:01
"Arthur Dent" <jp006t2227(a)blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in news:1119837295.763924.158100(a)o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com: > > > bz wrote: >> "Arthur Dent" <jp006t2227(a)blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in >> news:1119829768.103136.201980(a)g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: >> >> > >> > >> > bz wrote: >> > >> >> "As it is" IS what an observer in that For sees. >> >> What other meaning can there be for 'as it is'? >> > >> > A straight stick poking out of water is a straight stick, "as it is". >> > We see it bent, but what we see in our FoR is not "as it is". >> > How's that for another meaning? >> > Sanity check, please. >> >> That may be a good way of looking at lorentz contraction. The stick >> doesn't change length or bend but to an observer in a different >> environment, it looks different. > > Yeah, it might. And then again, the speed of light is c/n in water, n > being the refractive index, and that is the cause of the ILLUSION. > Following you suggestion, length contraction is an illusion too, but > the illusion is one of the mind. Since nobody has ever SEEN Lorentz > contraction, you might say its all in your dreams. > > >> >> And it may give Henri a different view of his vertical laser beam and >> the street lights. > > > I can't help Henri on that one. He's arguing against the vector > addition of velocities and that is something only a relativist should > do. Why should relativists argue against vector addition of velocities? > You on the other hand are arguing FOR the vector addition of > velocities, so The vector addition of velocities is part of newtonian mechanics. It should be valid and accepted under SR and BaT. > that would indicate you accept c+v, c and v being vector quantities. Well there are some limits. -- 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 |