The Emission Theory of Androcles
in [Relativity]
|
From: Androcles on 17 Sep 2009 05:16 "Henry Wilson, DSc" <hw@..> wrote in message news:met3b55eqs2h633tkk3l8or5h09irgapsb(a)4ax.com... > On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 23:32:16 -0700 (PDT), Jerry > <Cephalobus_alienus(a)comcast.net> wrote: > >>On Sep 16, 9:50 pm, hw@..(Henry Wilson, DSc) wrote: >> >>> A BLOODY RING GYRO MEASURES ABSOLUTE ROTATION ANGLES BY INTEGRATING >>> FRINGE >>> MOVEMENT DURING A CHANGE IN ROTATIONAL SPEED. THE FRINGE DISPLACEMENT >>> PERFORMS >>> THE INTEGRATION AUTOMATICALLY. >> >>Very poor choice of words. Fringe displacement is proportional >>to rotational speed, and ny integrating the fringe displacement >>over time, one may obtain the rotation angle. >> >>The term "fringe movement" implies the first derivative of fringe >>displacement, and "a change in rotational speed" of course means >>rotational acceleration. The integral of "fringe movement" is >>fringe displacement, which of course is proportional to >>rotational speed. >> >>By confusing your terminology while yelling, you leave the >>distinct impression that you are mixed up. >> >>Which of course you are... > > Great try Jerry. > I realise you didn't want to say straight out that 'inertial' is a > complette > idiot because she is on YOUR side. > But even YOU must admit that her claim, quote: " there's no speed changing > in > Sagnac. It rotates at a constant rate" truly epitomises the sad state of > the > relativist mentality. Great try, Wilson, but I agree with Jeery. You ARE mixed up. It's quite possible that Jeery has come to understand EmT and YOU are the only fly left in the ointment. Of course Tom&Jeery can easily reverse-engineer your pathetic rayphases in Java but I doubt it can do the same with http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Lightcurve.xls
From: Henry Wilson, DSc on 17 Sep 2009 05:33 On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 09:49:01 +0100, "Androcles" <Headmaster(a)Hogwarts.physics_o> wrote: > >"Henry Wilson, DSc" <hw@..> wrote in message >news:i0t3b5hfkq6t478u0k16v7h6r9ha9nn9g1(a)4ax.com... >> On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 04:04:52 +0100, "Androcles" >> <Headmaster(a)Hogwarts.physics_o> >> wrote: >>>a 0.125 x 32 rectangle? >>>They've got the same area, Wilson. One has a perimeter of 8, the >>>other has a perimeter of 64.25 >>> >>>If the facts don't match Wilson's theory, buy a VW camper >>>or Korean junkpile from him from him... >> >> .....sober up > >I'm not the one that's drunk, Wilson. You don't sell land >by the acre as well, do you? How much does an ozzie >cricket pitch cost? You know, the strips 22 yards long >between wickets without any ashes? > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ashes Hahahahahahaahha! you only won the ashes because you won the toss 4:1. But you can't win a ONE DAY MATCH.....hahahhahahaha!......... 5 in a row. hahhahaha! .. You're stuffed without Freddy.... It was a one man show Henry Wilson...www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm Einstein...World's greatest SciFi writer..
From: Henry Wilson, DSc on 17 Sep 2009 05:36 On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 04:51:27 -0400, Jonah Thomas <jethomas5(a)gmail.com> wrote: >"Inertial" <relatively(a)rest.com> wrote: >> "Henry Wilson, DSc" <hw@..> wrote >> > "Inertial" <relatively(a)rest.com> wrote: >> >>"Henry Wilson, DSc" <hw@..> wrote >> >> >> >>> Ok, I have now worked out why there is confusion about this. >> >>> >> >>> The fact is, the phase shift already exists at the detector before >> >a>> particular photon leaves. >> >> >> So the light has a phase shift at the detector before it gets to the >> detector. You must be joking. >> >> >>> The difference originated DURING previous CHANGES in rotation >> >>> speed..... >> >> >> >>There is no change in rotation speed > >Try to see where he's coming from. He's imagining shifts in rotation >speed to see what would happen. > >At a given rotation speed he wants a constant phse shift. If the phase >shift progressively increased that would give him a problem. > >Since this is a constant that gets tacked onto every photon, he wants to >figure that it's a correction that happens apart from the movement of >the individual photons, something that has already happened. > >I think he has an idea, and he hasn't worked out all the implications. >So when people say there's a contradiction he looks at one angle after >another for a way to resolve it. There's nothing wrong with that. He's >working things out, looking for the explanation. > >Here's a trick that helps me in that situation. I assume I'm wrong and >look at what happens the other way around. When I start finding >contradictions that way, I can look at how and why they happen and that >helps me see what it is that makes it work out right. And if I don't >find contradictions the other way around, then I can look for >contradictions in my original thinking. Flipflopping back and forth that >way makes it easier to get results, although I can't be sure ahead of >time which results I'll get. You should have learnt by now that inertial is a hopeless case. She claimed that a sagnac interferometer never changes its rotational speed. hahahahhahhah....can you see the funny side... Henry Wilson...www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm Einstein...World's greatest SciFi writer..
From: Henry Wilson, DSc on 17 Sep 2009 05:49 On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 10:16:11 +0100, "Androcles" <Headmaster(a)Hogwarts.physics_o> wrote: > >"Henry Wilson, DSc" <hw@..> wrote in message >news:met3b55eqs2h633tkk3l8or5h09irgapsb(a)4ax.com... >> On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 23:32:16 -0700 (PDT), Jerry >> <Cephalobus_alienus(a)comcast.net> wrote: >> >>>On Sep 16, 9:50 pm, hw@..(Henry Wilson, DSc) wrote: >>> >>>> A BLOODY RING GYRO MEASURES ABSOLUTE ROTATION ANGLES BY INTEGRATING >>>> FRINGE >>>> MOVEMENT DURING A CHANGE IN ROTATIONAL SPEED. THE FRINGE DISPLACEMENT >>>> PERFORMS >>>> THE INTEGRATION AUTOMATICALLY. >>> >>>Very poor choice of words. Fringe displacement is proportional >>>to rotational speed, and ny integrating the fringe displacement >>>over time, one may obtain the rotation angle. >>> >>>The term "fringe movement" implies the first derivative of fringe >>>displacement, and "a change in rotational speed" of course means >>>rotational acceleration. The integral of "fringe movement" is >>>fringe displacement, which of course is proportional to >>>rotational speed. >>> >>>By confusing your terminology while yelling, you leave the >>>distinct impression that you are mixed up. >>> >>>Which of course you are... >> >> Great try Jerry. >> I realise you didn't want to say straight out that 'inertial' is a >> complette >> idiot because she is on YOUR side. >> But even YOU must admit that her claim, quote: " there's no speed changing >> in >> Sagnac. It rotates at a constant rate" truly epitomises the sad state of >> the >> relativist mentality. > >Great try, Wilson, but I agree with Jeery. You ARE mixed up. It's >quite possible that Jeery has come to understand EmT and YOU >are the only fly left in the ointment. Are you agreeing with 'inertial' that a sagnac interferometer never changes its rotational speed? ,.....That wouldn't surprise me...Old Crank apparently does too. >Of course Tom&Jeery can easily >reverse-engineer your pathetic rayphases in Java but I doubt it can do >the same with > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Lightcurve.xls I can do that....only better... Henry Wilson...www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm Einstein...World's greatest SciFi writer..
From: Jerry on 17 Sep 2009 06:19
On Sep 17, 3:44 am, hw@..(Henry Wilson, DSc) wrote: > On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 23:32:16 -0700 (PDT), Jerry > <Cephalobus_alie...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > >On Sep 16, 9:50 pm, hw@..(Henry Wilson, DSc) wrote: > > >> A BLOODY RING GYRO MEASURES ABSOLUTE ROTATION ANGLES BY INTEGRATING FRINGE > >> MOVEMENT DURING A CHANGE IN ROTATIONAL SPEED. THE FRINGE DISPLACEMENT PERFORMS > >> THE INTEGRATION AUTOMATICALLY. > > >Very poor choice of words. Fringe displacement is proportional > >to rotational speed, and ny integrating the fringe displacement > >over time, one may obtain the rotation angle. > > >The term "fringe movement" implies the first derivative of fringe > >displacement, and "a change in rotational speed" of course means > >rotational acceleration. The integral of "fringe movement" is > >fringe displacement, which of course is proportional to > >rotational speed. > > >By confusing your terminology while yelling, you leave the > >distinct impression that you are mixed up. > > >Which of course you are... > > Great try Jerry. > I realise you didn't want to say straight out that 'inertial' is a complette > idiot because she is on YOUR side. > But even YOU must admit that her claim, quote: " there's no speed changing in > Sagnac. It rotates at a constant rate" truly epitomises the sad state of the > relativist mentality. Henri, Inertial was discussing the Sagnac EXPERIMENT, when, completely unannounced, you suddenly started referring to the capabilities of modern IFOGs. In his original experiment, Sagnac typically spun his apparatus at 1- to 2+ times per second, recording displacements of several hundredths of a fringe. http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k31103.pleinepage.f1410 This is a far cry from modern fibre optic gyros and ring gyros used in inertial guidance systems, which are capable of detecting rotational rates down to 0.00001 degree per hour. Sagnac's original apparatus could not possibly have been used for monitoring one's heading in an inertial guidance system. So yes, it is not he, but YOU who is either being massively dishonest in changing the premises of the discussion, or is simply confused. Which is it? Jerry |