Wonderful!
in [Physics]
|
From: mpc755 on 19 Dec 2009 20:33 On Dec 19, 4:31 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > On Dec 19, 3:12 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:> On Dec 19, 2:57 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > Yes, mpc, it does throw out the tg and Yes, a unified theory does emerge. But not the way you think. > > > In the 1970s an experiment was performed which, to me, was the second one since M&M that imposed a radical change in our metaphysical principles. It was the Pan American experiment which flew two cesium clocks around the earth in opposite directions and then compared their times to a third identical clock that had remained at rest on earth. > > > Contrary to my expectation that nothing would happen to clocks at rest inside a closed chamber in which THE LOCAL MEDIUM (air) WAS AT > > REST, the clock flown in the same direction as Earth's surface moves > ran slowest, the one flown in the opposite direction ran fastest, and > the third one's rate was somewhere in between. I therefore had to > change my metaphysics for the first time since I wrote it up in 1965.> > Here, mpc, is what I had to change: It was evident from the Pan Am result that the effect of a closed chamber's motion through an outside > > medium PENETRATES THE WALLS and everything inside of the chamber. > Although I should have known that -- because a compressible material > out of which the walls AND the air and everything else is made would > automatically be compressed by the resistance of the displaced > material through which it flew -- I had elected to let the effects > stop at the surface of any solid wall. THAT, believe it or not, was > the first time I had to change my metaphysics, even though mine > disagrees with present dogma at every step of the very long way. > > So, mpc, how do YOU explain the Pan Am experiment? > glird >> > > > > ><If you apply the Michelson-Morley Experiment apparatus which was built because {the speed of} light traveling with and against the 'flow' of aether would be different than {that of} the light traveling North and South. This is what is occurring for the atoms oscillations relative to the aether, which means the aether is penetrating the plain which leaves the question how is momentum able to be maintained if the aether is moving through matter? > > > Please clarify your answer to my question by explaining HOW it > explains the Pan Am results. > Btw, there were NO measurements taken wrt beams traveling > perpendicular to the line of flight of the planes or to the one at > rest on the ground. Furthermore -- and one of the reasons for these > discussions -- there was and is no aether flowing through the solid > walls of the planes nor any other solid (or liquid) body. > > glird The Pan Am flights are flying in both directions against the aether which is entrained by the Earth. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson%E2%80%93Morley_experiment "If the Earth is traveling through an ether medium, a beam reflecting back and forth parallel to the flow of ether would take longer than a beam reflecting perpendicular to the ether because the time gained from traveling downwind is less than that lost traveling upwind." When the atomic clock on the Pan Am flight east to west it is flying against the entrained aether and when it is flying west to east it is flying with the entrained aether. The downwind and upwind effect is going to be greater when flying against the entrained aether. This means the effects of aether, even though being displaced by the plane, must still be going through the plane. The reason momentum can be conserved even with aether flowing through matter is the same as the reason momentum is conserved by the Earth. Matter displaces the aether. The displaced aether pushes back. The interaction of a moving object with the aether is frictionless, or the friction is negligible. This occurs for the nuclei of atoms just as it does for the Earth itself.
From: mpc755 on 19 Dec 2009 20:49 On Dec 19, 7:31 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 12/19/09 1:33 PM, mpc755 wrote: > > > > > Why is everyone who is adamant in the correctness of SR in so much of > > a state of denial as to be unwilling to answer the following question? > > Easy answer: Excellent agreement with observations. > > Physics FAQ: What is the experimental basis of Special Relativity? > http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html You're saying Einstein's train gedanken performed in water at rest with respect to the embankment, the light from the lightning strike at A/A' and B/B' travels from A' and B' to M'? Incorrect. Einstein's train gedanken performed in water at rest with respect to the embankment, the light travels from A and B to M' 'Einstein on Fizeau's Experiment"' http://www.bun.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~suchii/EonFizeau.html "In accordance with the principle of relativity we shall certainly have to take for granted that the propagation of light always takes place with the same velocity w with respect to the liquid, whether the latter is in motion with reference to other bodies or not." Where in the article you posted does it specifically refute the conclusion the light travels from A and B to M' when the water is at rest with respect to the embankment?
From: mpc755 on 19 Dec 2009 20:53 On Dec 19, 4:31 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > On Dec 19, 3:12 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:> On Dec 19, 2:57 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > Yes, mpc, it does throw out the tg and Yes, a unified theory does emerge. But not the way you think. > > > In the 1970s an experiment was performed which, to me, was the second one since M&M that imposed a radical change in our metaphysical principles. It was the Pan American experiment which flew two cesium clocks around the earth in opposite directions and then compared their times to a third identical clock that had remained at rest on earth. > > > Contrary to my expectation that nothing would happen to clocks at rest inside a closed chamber in which THE LOCAL MEDIUM (air) WAS AT > > REST, the clock flown in the same direction as Earth's surface moves > ran slowest, the one flown in the opposite direction ran fastest, and > the third one's rate was somewhere in between. I therefore had to > change my metaphysics for the first time since I wrote it up in 1965.> > Here, mpc, is what I had to change: It was evident from the Pan Am result that the effect of a closed chamber's motion through an outside > > medium PENETRATES THE WALLS and everything inside of the chamber. > Although I should have known that -- because a compressible material > out of which the walls AND the air and everything else is made would > automatically be compressed by the resistance of the displaced > material through which it flew -- I had elected to let the effects > stop at the surface of any solid wall. THAT, believe it or not, was > the first time I had to change my metaphysics, even though mine > disagrees with present dogma at every step of the very long way. > > So, mpc, how do YOU explain the Pan Am experiment? > glird >> > > > > ><If you apply the Michelson-Morley Experiment apparatus which was built because {the speed of} light traveling with and against the 'flow' of aether would be different than {that of} the light traveling North and South. This is what is occurring for the atoms oscillations relative to the aether, which means the aether is penetrating the plain which leaves the question how is momentum able to be maintained if the aether is moving through matter? > > > Please clarify your answer to my question by explaining HOW it > explains the Pan Am results. > Btw, there were NO measurements taken wrt beams traveling > perpendicular to the line of flight of the planes or to the one at > rest on the ground. Furthermore -- and one of the reasons for these > discussions -- there was and is no aether flowing through the solid > walls of the planes nor any other solid (or liquid) body. > > glird The Pan Am flights are flying in both directions against the aether which is entrained by the Earth. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson%E2%80%93Morley_experiment "If the Earth is traveling through an ether medium, a beam reflecting back and forth parallel to the flow of ether would take longer than a beam reflecting perpendicular to the ether because the time gained from traveling downwind is less than that lost traveling upwind." When the atomic clock on the Pan Am flight east to west it is flying against the entrained aether and when it is flying west to east it is flying with the entrained aether. The downwind and upwind effect is going to have a greater effect on the atom's oscillations when flying against the entrained aether. This means the effects of aether, even though being displaced by the plane, must still be going through the plane. The reason momentum can be conserved even with aether flowing through matter is the same as the reason momentum is conserved by the Earth. Matter displaces the aether. The displaced aether pushes back. The interaction of a moving object with the aether is frictionless, or the friction is negligible. This occurs for the nuclei of atoms just as it does for the Earth itself.
From: mpc755 on 19 Dec 2009 21:25 On Dec 19, 4:31 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > On Dec 19, 3:12 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:> On Dec 19, 2:57 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > Yes, mpc, it does throw out the tg and Yes, a unified theory does emerge. But not the way you think. > > > In the 1970s an experiment was performed which, to me, was the second one since M&M that imposed a radical change in our metaphysical principles. It was the Pan American experiment which flew two cesium clocks around the earth in opposite directions and then compared their times to a third identical clock that had remained at rest on earth. > > > Contrary to my expectation that nothing would happen to clocks at rest inside a closed chamber in which THE LOCAL MEDIUM (air) WAS AT > > REST, the clock flown in the same direction as Earth's surface moves > ran slowest, the one flown in the opposite direction ran fastest, and > the third one's rate was somewhere in between. I therefore had to > change my metaphysics for the first time since I wrote it up in 1965.> > Here, mpc, is what I had to change: It was evident from the Pan Am result that the effect of a closed chamber's motion through an outside > > medium PENETRATES THE WALLS and everything inside of the chamber. > Although I should have known that -- because a compressible material > out of which the walls AND the air and everything else is made would > automatically be compressed by the resistance of the displaced > material through which it flew -- I had elected to let the effects > stop at the surface of any solid wall. THAT, believe it or not, was > the first time I had to change my metaphysics, even though mine > disagrees with present dogma at every step of the very long way. > > So, mpc, how do YOU explain the Pan Am experiment? > glird >> > > > > ><If you apply the Michelson-Morley Experiment apparatus which was built because {the speed of} light traveling with and against the 'flow' of aether would be different than {that of} the light traveling North and South. This is what is occurring for the atoms oscillations relative to the aether, which means the aether is penetrating the plain which leaves the question how is momentum able to be maintained if the aether is moving through matter? > > > Please clarify your answer to my question by explaining HOW it > explains the Pan Am results. > Btw, there were NO measurements taken wrt beams traveling > perpendicular to the line of flight of the planes or to the one at > rest on the ground. Furthermore -- and one of the reasons for these > discussions -- there was and is no aether flowing through the solid > walls of the planes nor any other solid (or liquid) body. > > glird The Pan Am flights are flying in both directions through the aether which is entrained by the Earth. The flight flying east to west is flying against the entrained aether and the flight flying west to east is flying with the entrained aether, but both flights are flying through the aether. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson%E2%80%93Morley_experiment "If the Earth is traveling through an ether medium, a beam reflecting back and forth parallel to the flow of ether would take longer than a beam reflecting perpendicular to the ether because the time gained from traveling downwind is less than that lost traveling upwind." When the atomic clock on the Pan Am flight east to west it is flying against the entrained aether and when it is flying west to east it is flying with the entrained aether. The downwind and upwind effect is going to have a greater effect on the atom's oscillations when flying against the entrained aether. This means the effects of aether, even though being displaced by the plane, must still be going through the plane. The reason momentum can be conserved even with aether flowing through matter is the same as the reason momentum is conserved by the Earth. Matter displaces the aether. The displaced aether pushes back. The interaction of a moving object with the aether is frictionless, or the friction is negligible. This occurs for nuclei of atoms just as it does for the Earth itself.
From: Sam Wormley on 19 Dec 2009 21:29
On 12/19/09 7:49 PM, mpc755 wrote: > On Dec 19, 7:31 pm, Sam Wormley<sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> On 12/19/09 1:33 PM, mpc755 wrote: >> >> >> >>> Why is everyone who is adamant in the correctness of SR in so much of >>> a state of denial as to be unwilling to answer the following question? >> >> Easy answer: Excellent agreement with observations. >> >> Physics FAQ: What is the experimental basis of Special Relativity? >> http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html > > You're saying Einstein's train gedanken performed in water at rest... > What I'm saying is: there has never been a prediction of special relativity that's been contradicted by an observation. The same hold true for general relativity. I think you should go back to the Mechanical Universe video... and note that they get it right! The Mechanical Universe series. http://www.learner.org/resources/series42.html 42. The Lorentz Transformation If the speed of light is to be the same for all observers, then the length of a meter stick, or the rate of a ticking clock, depends on who measures it. |