----- Original Message -----
From: "OG" <owen@gwynnefamily.org.uk>
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2005 1:55 PM
Subject: Re: Light Speed Test versus Special Relativity
"Stan Byers" <sbyers11@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:74KdnV810aNsKNzfRVn-1A@comcast.com...
Hello Owen and Group,
Thanks for the message. Your question highlights the important part
that SR
does not notice.
It is impossible to have the same relative speed with light when you
are
moving in the same direction,... as you have when you are at rest in
relation to the source. If you are parked beside the road and a train
is
passing parallel going west at 100 miles per hour(mph),...and then you
start
driving west at twenty mph, SR says that the train will still be
passing you
at 100 mph.
What a stupid comment.
Now you and I both know that you could not teach such a concept to
grade
school children.
For trains, no.
But we're not talkinag about trains, we're talking about light. Light is
totally different, because light is the 'mediator of synchronicity'.
Think of the Io eclipse events as an audible clock ticking. When the
Earth
has no relative speed in relation to Jupiter there is an "at rest
rate".
When the Earth retreats from Jupiter the Doppler effect reduces the
rate. SR
says the relative speed of sound remains the same after you start
retreating. Now if the speed of sound stayed the same,... the moving
Earth
would hear the "at rest rate" while it was retreating.
No it doesn't. You already know that the distance is increasing, think
about it
That is exactly why
SR is impossible. It SR were true there would be no 1003 sec delay as
observed by Roemer. As long as the 1003 sec delay exists since 1676
AD,...SR is impossible.
Guess what, you are wrong, think about it.
If two things have different speeds in the same direction relative to
Jupiter it is impossible for the relative speed to be equal to the
fastest
speed. This same statement it true for rotation on a common axis.
"OG" <owen@gwynnefamily.org.uk> wrote in message
news:3abv7mF6ae48oU1@individual.net...
"Stan Byers" <sbyers11@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:DYKdnVNi2Jg7zqHfRVn-3A@comcast.com...
Gentlemen of physical science.
This notice is posted with a request for reviews. All comments,
corrections
and alternate views are welcome. Reviews may be posted on this
group
or
emailed. Reviews will not be posted on the web site or news groups
without
the reviewing author's prior permission. The links for the graphs
are
listed below and the graphs are currently available on the website.
Io's period change graphs via Excel spreadsheet.
Earth retreating from Jupiter
http://home.netcom.com/~sbyers11/IoAppro.gif
Earth approaching Jupiter
http://home.netcom.com/~sbyers11/IoEcipChange4.gif
This entire article is available on the website. Newsgroup readers
may
review the
complete article at the link
http://home.netcom.com/~sbyers11/litespd_vs_sr.htm
Shortly after the reviews have been received this content will be
incorporated with the other pages on the site.
Citations or links to arguments correcting or refuting this
interpretation of Roemer's data will be appreciated.
A link or quote of rational arguments will be added to the web
page.
Your site includes the following key paragraph
QUOTE
If the speed of the train of light and events from Jupiter was not
reduced in relation to the retreating Earth, succeeding observations
of
eclipse events would remain in synchronism with the observations of
the
near point. How could a station 2.6549 million miles further from
Jupiter observe an eclipse event at the same time that it is
observed at
the near point
END QUOTE
That is a pretty big IF. . .
Please explain precisely WHY successive observations would remain in
synch if speed of light was not reduced.
They would move out of synch simply because of the increased
distance.
Yes, that is exactly right. and the Earth's distance per unit time is
producing the distance.
Therefore the relative speed has changed. Just like the train,... C-v.
What is this, ""proof by assertion"?
SR says the speed of light stays the same after you start retreating.
If the speed stays the same the light's frequency stays the same.
If the frequency stays the same the period between wave crests stay
the
same.
What on earth makes you say this?
If the period for the light wave stays the same the period for the
events
carried by the light stay the same.
If the period of events (eclipse) stay the same, there will be no 1003
second delay.
You forget that in the interval between tics there is in increase in
distance.
As I said. . . .
What the hell would the increase in distance from the source have to do with
how long it takes the light to reach us? Once the light left the source the
source shouldn't matter in the equation at all. If, at the instant the
light leaves the source, the earth is X distance away then if light is going
to be measured at c it CANNOT matter what motion the earth makes after the
light left the source. If there is a difference, then the light is not
traveling c in relation to earth it is traveling c-(earth's velocity away
from source).
It is, of course, no coincidence that the change in eclipse period
is
proportional to the relative speed of the Earth and Jupiter, since
the
relative speed times 152,916seconds gives the increase in distance.
Technically, I think you would be correct if the speed of light was
infinite, but in real life you are not correct.
Thomas
.
