Wonderful!
in [Physics]
|
From: mpc755 on 17 Dec 2009 10:21 On Dec 17, 10:14 am, moro...(a)world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote: > mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> writes: > >I have a better gadenken. A modified version of your gadenken. > >The 1 light year long train is full of water. > >The laser is fired at the back of the train in the water. > >The Observer at the front of the train has his face pushed up against > >a plate glass which separates them from the water. > >Right when the light exits the glass and is about to reach the > >Observer on the train, an Observer on the embankment stands right next > >to the Observer on the train. > >Now, obviously the train is moving 1/4 the speed of light, so the > >Observer on the embankment is in trouble, but right before the train > >hits the Observer on the embankment the light from the laser reaches > >both Observers. > >The light has traveled the same distance through the water to both > >Observers. > > The light has travelled 1.25 light years in 1 year in the frame of the > embankment. No matter how you twist and turn things, you have light > travelling faster than the speed of light in some frames by 'hitching a > ride' on something fast, even if it doesn't in the frame of the train. > The train is full of water. The laser is fired at the back of the train. The front of the train is glass. There is an Observer on the train in front of the glass. There is an Observer on the embankment. The light travels through the water on the train, through the glass, exits the glass and reaches the Observer on the train and the Observer on the embankment simultaneously. How far does the light travel to each Observer?
From: mpc755 on 17 Dec 2009 10:25 On Dec 17, 10:21 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 17, 10:14 am, moro...(a)world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) > wrote: > > > > > mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> writes: > > >I have a better gadenken. A modified version of your gadenken. > > >The 1 light year long train is full of water. > > >The laser is fired at the back of the train in the water. > > >The Observer at the front of the train has his face pushed up against > > >a plate glass which separates them from the water. > > >Right when the light exits the glass and is about to reach the > > >Observer on the train, an Observer on the embankment stands right next > > >to the Observer on the train. > > >Now, obviously the train is moving 1/4 the speed of light, so the > > >Observer on the embankment is in trouble, but right before the train > > >hits the Observer on the embankment the light from the laser reaches > > >both Observers. > > >The light has traveled the same distance through the water to both > > >Observers. > > > The light has travelled 1.25 light years in 1 year in the frame of the > > embankment. No matter how you twist and turn things, you have light > > travelling faster than the speed of light in some frames by 'hitching a > > ride' on something fast, even if it doesn't in the frame of the train. > > The train is full of water. The laser is fired at the back of the > train. The front of the train is glass. There is an Observer on the > train in front of the glass. There is an Observer on the embankment. > The light travels through the water on the train, through the glass, > exits the glass and reaches the Observer on the train and the Observer > on the embankment simultaneously. How far does the light travel to > each Observer? I'm not saying the speed of light is ever faster than 'c'. What I am saying is measuring to where the laser was in three dimensional space relative to the embankment is meaningless in terms of where the light traveled from. The light is travel relative to the water on the train. The light travels the same distance to both Observers. I knew you would not be able to understand this.
From: mpc755 on 17 Dec 2009 10:32 On Dec 17, 10:14 am, moro...(a)world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote: > mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> writes: > >I have a better gadenken. A modified version of your gadenken. > >The 1 light year long train is full of water. > >The laser is fired at the back of the train in the water. > >The Observer at the front of the train has his face pushed up against > >a plate glass which separates them from the water. > >Right when the light exits the glass and is about to reach the > >Observer on the train, an Observer on the embankment stands right next > >to the Observer on the train. > >Now, obviously the train is moving 1/4 the speed of light, so the > >Observer on the embankment is in trouble, but right before the train > >hits the Observer on the embankment the light from the laser reaches > >both Observers. > >The light has traveled the same distance through the water to both > >Observers. > > The light has travelled 1.25 light years in 1 year in the frame of the > embankment. No matter how you twist and turn things, you have light > travelling faster than the speed of light in some frames by 'hitching a > ride' on something fast, even if it doesn't in the frame of the train. > > Since experimental evidence shows that it never happens for light signals > to travel faster than the speed of light in any frame, your aether theory > is automatically wrong. For it to be correct, it has to correctly predict > known observations. > > I could come up with a super grand unified theory linking gravity to the > other forces, but if it predicts lead weights on the floor will go flying > in the air, it is automatically wrong. Period. Same with any theory that > has light moving faster than the speed of light (in any frame, even if not > in all frames). > > Consider what happens if there is a beam splitter on board the train that > sends half the beam down the train as before, and half the beam along the > track parallel to the train. You have the contradiction of the light > beam at two different speeds. Einstein's train gedanken is modified so the water is at rest relative to the embankment. Lightning strikes occur in the water at A/A' and B/ B'. When determining how far the light travels to the Observer at M', does the Observer at M' measure to A' and B' or to A and B?
From: Michael Moroney on 17 Dec 2009 10:38 mpc755 <mpc755(a)gmail.com> writes: >The train is full of water. The laser is fired at the back of the >train. The front of the train is glass. There is an Observer on the >train in front of the glass. There is an Observer on the embankment. >The light travels through the water on the train, through the glass, >exits the glass and reaches the Observer on the train and the Observer >on the embankment simultaneously. How far does the light travel to >each Observer? 1 light year as far as the guy on the train is concerned, 1.25 light years as far as the guy on the embankment is concerned. And therein lies the problem.
From: Michael Moroney on 17 Dec 2009 10:42
mpc755 <mpc755(a)gmail.com> writes: >I knew you would not be able to understand this. I understand fine. It is you who doesn't understand that your theory doesn't make predictions consistent with existing measurements, and therefore is automatically wrong. |