| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Pentcho Valev" |
| Date: |
17 Mar 2006 01:05:37 AM |
| Object: |
Einstein's Hypnotists in Search of Perfection |
http://www.physorg.com/news11829.html :
"Instead of assuming that all observers measure the same speed for
light, it is better to start with a plausible assumption that light
operates independently of its source. If you do this, you set up
something that is easier to believe."
Pentcho Valev
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein's Hypnotists in Search of Perfection |
17 Mar 2006 04:05:04 AM |
|
|
Mr/Ms Valev:
Squat on a fucking cucumber, *****.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Salmon Egg" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein's Hypnotists in Search of Perfection |
17 Mar 2006 02:23:07 PM |
|
|
On 3/16/06 11:05 PM, in article
1142579137.600084.84960@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com, "Pentcho Valev"
<pvalev@yahoo.com> wrote:
http://www.physorg.com/news11829.html :
"Instead of assuming that all observers measure the same speed for
light, it is better to start with a plausible assumption that light
operates independently of its source. If you do this, you set up
something that is easier to believe."
Pentcho Valev
Actually, both are true and one is equivalent to the other.
Bill
-- Ferme le Bush
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hexenmeister" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein's Hypnotists in Search of Perfection |
17 Mar 2006 04:02:46 PM |
|
|
"Salmon Egg" <salmonegg@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:C0405AAA.1DC8B%salmonegg@sbcglobal.net...
| On 3/16/06 11:05 PM, in article
| 1142579137.600084.84960@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com, "Pentcho Valev"
| <pvalev@yahoo.com> wrote:
|
| > http://www.physorg.com/news11829.html :
| >
| > "Instead of assuming that all observers measure the same speed for
| > light, it is better to start with a plausible assumption that light
| > operates independently of its source. If you do this, you set up
| > something that is easier to believe."
| >
| > Pentcho Valev
| >
| Actually, both are true and one is equivalent to the other.
Actually, both are equivalent to neither and both are false.
Actually, I can prove it.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Smart/Smart.htm
Actually, you are a moron.
Androcles.
|
| Bill
| -- Ferme le Bush
|
|
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Ghost In The Machine" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein's Hypnotists in Search of Perfection |
18 Mar 2006 10:09:33 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 23:05:37 -0800, Pentcho Valev wrote:
http://www.physorg.com/news11829.html :
"Instead of assuming that all observers measure the same speed for light,
it is better to start with a plausible assumption that light operates
independently of its source. If you do this, you set up something that is
easier to believe."
Pentcho Valev
There are at least three hypotheses one can consider.
[1] Lightspeed is c relative to nothing, as everything is moving relative
to the absolute coordinate system/rigid luminiferous aether, and
lightspeed is c relative to that aether.
[2] Light is like hockey pucks: c relative to its source but c+v
relative to another observer.
[3] Lightspeed is c everywhere, regardless of observer-source motion.
The most reasonable hypothesis based on (naive) human experience is [2].
After all, if one is on a skateboard moving at 5 m/s, and throws a ball
forward at 10 m/s, stands to reason that the result, relative to the
ground, is a ball moving at 15 m/s, right? That's what is taught to most
budding physicists; also, various experiments involving hockey pucks tend
to support [2] (if one neglects friction).
However, it turns out most experimental data is consistent with variants
of [3]. This is not for lack of trying, either; we've done quite a few
things, from accelerating protons in gigantic rings that should have them
go much faster than light to bouncing radar waves off Venus to monitoring
incoming muons (and their energy levels) to setting up rather
sophisticated resonance experiments to simply observing various
known-binary stars, to engineering a switch in NST-2 that was turned on,
and then left on, for the rest of its life (AFAIK it's still up there).
Mathematically, it is easy to show that the Lorentz is compatible with
lightspeed invariance. However, this proves absolutely nothing beyond SR
being mathematically consistent. SR can never be proven to be reality,
only disproven (though at this stage a fair amount of data would have to
be gathered to do so, certainly more than I've seen thus far.)
Admittedly, I'm not familiar enough with Maxwell's equations to be able to
show that either SR or Newtonian systems are consistent therewith. I
*can* state that there is a subtle mistranslation of Einstein's work; the
work refers to light *velocity*, not light *speed*. The implications are
subtle but troubling; a mirror in particular does not make for constant
light velocity, as it tends to redirect light in the opposite direction.
However, at this point it's probably not all that relevant to current
theory.
To this day I'm not sure we know precisely how mirrors work; a mirror,
after all, is a bunch of fermions (atoms), and usually metal (the glass is
only a bonding substrate). How does the light change direction as it hits
metal? I for one don't know -- and I actually did take one quarter of
solid state theory in college. (The math got very hairy.)
A final note: if one affixes a mirror to a moving object, then projects a
beam of light thereto, one has to be careful as to how one applies the
Lorentz; the simplest thing to measure from that reflected lightbeam would
probably be the frequency, but it turns out the wavelength is also
affected. In the Newtonian world the wavelength does not change; a simple
experiment therefore is to split a light beam, bounce part of that beam
off a spinning mirror device, then recombine the result with the second
part of the beam in an interferometer. (The main problem is ensuring the
spinning mirror is stable enough, but if it's good enough for a disk head,
it should be good enough for a light beam. :-) )
Followups.
--
#191,
It's still legal to go .sigless.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein's Hypnotists in Search of Perfection |
17 Mar 2006 08:36:05 AM |
|
|
Pentcho Valev wrote:
http://www.physorg.com/news11829.html :
"Instead of assuming that all observers measure the same speed for
light, it is better to start with a plausible assumption that light
operates independently of its source. If you do this, you set up
something that is easier to believe."
Pentcho Valev
Generally speaking, the most plauisble assumption to start with is an
empirically determined principle, such as the Light Principle. Either
all observers measure a fixed value for the speed of light in a vaccum
from within an inertial frame or they don't. If they do, you can claim
that as a solid empirical principle of physics and worry about
"explaining" it later as a separate concern.
What you quoted is a perfect example of the distinction made between
the formal point of view of the principle theoriest vs the constructive
theoriest.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hexenmeister" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein's Hypnotists in Search of Perfection |
17 Mar 2006 08:44:16 AM |
|
|
<surrealistic-dream@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142606165.394187.114920@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
| Pentcho Valev wrote:
| > http://www.physorg.com/news11829.html :
| >
| > "Instead of assuming that all observers measure the same speed for
| > light, it is better to start with a plausible assumption that light
| > operates independently of its source. If you do this, you set up
| > something that is easier to believe."
| >
| > Pentcho Valev
|
| Generally speaking, the most plauisble assumption to start with is an
| empirically determined principle, such as the Light Principle. Either
| all observers measure a fixed value for the speed of light in a vaccum
| from within an inertial frame or they don't.
They don't.
If they do, you can claim
| that as a solid empirical principle of physics and worry about
| "explaining" it later as a separate concern.
There is no "if". They don't.
| What you quoted is a perfect example of the distinction made between
| the formal point of view of the principle theoriest vs the constructive
| theoriest.
What you stated is a perfect example of *****.
Relative motion:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Wilson/SpinWilson.htm
Wavelength:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Catalina/Drive.htm
Doppler:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Doppler/Doppler.htm
Big Bang:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Genesis/Genesis.htm
Maxwell's equations:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/AC/AC.htm
Special Relativity:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Synchronize/Synchronize.htm
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Smart/Smart.htm
General Relativity:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/PerigeeAdvance.JPG
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/GPS/sundials.htm
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Clockgain.JPG
Energy:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/E^2/EnergySquare.htm
Twin Paradox:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Baez/people_v_Baez.htm
Astronomy:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/RR_C7/RelativityRevealed.htm
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Wilson/Wilson.htm
Kooks:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/STM/Scoundrels.htm
Experiments:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Sagnac.JPG
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Smart/Smart.htm
Androcles.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sue..." |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein's Hypnotists in Search of Perfection |
17 Mar 2006 04:59:11 AM |
|
|
Pentcho Valev wrote:
http://www.physorg.com/news11829.html :
"Instead of assuming that all observers measure the same speed for
light, it is better to start with a plausible assumption that light
operates independently of its source. If you do this, you set up
something that is easier to believe."
Pentcho Valev
You'll break all the FOG interferometers in the world if you that.
An *effective* emitter or absorber must be Coulomb coupled
out of the region it occupies or there is no radiation.
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0506053
So there is a dependency at both ends of a path.
This plot applies:
http://www.conformity.com/0102reflectionsfig3.gif
http://www.conformity.com/0102reflections.html
....whether it describes an emitter or an absorber.
Sue...
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
