Science > Physics > "The Impossibility of Measuring the Velocity of Light"
| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Woleb" |
| Date: |
15 Jan 2006 10:19:51 AM |
| Object: |
"The Impossibility of Measuring the Velocity of Light" |
"The Impossibility of Measuring the Velocity of Light"
The idea that the velocity of light is the same no matter in
what reference frame it is measured is fundamental to the modern sceince of
physics. The premise started with the confusion resulting from failure of
the
Michaelson-Morely experiment to reveal an absolute velocity reference for
space
and shortly led to both the unique solution Lorentz Transformation-Aether
Theory
and the general case solution (no Aether) equivalent - the Special Theory of
Relativity. Since the conclusion that the velocity of light was constant in
all
reference frames is based on observation, the necessity of understanding the
methodology of measuring the velocity of light should be apparent to all who
would deal with relativistic phenomena.
Velocity is defined as distance travelled (length) per unit
time. If one wishes to measure the velocity of any entity, be it light or
bullets, one needs in principle, a yardstick to measure the distance
travelled
and a clock to measure the time required for the entity to travel that
distance.
It behooves us then to examine the nature of the instruments which might be
used
in making the required observations.
In principle, all measurements of length require the
equivalent of a yardstick. (It is not suitable, for example, to define
length in
terms a number of wavelengths of light for our purpose since that would
result
in measuring the velocity of light in terms of itself, an obvious
absurdity.)
That yardstick is constructed, in effect, of an array of atomic nuclei
separated
from each other ahd held in place by electromagnetic fields ("virtual
photons"
are one explanation of the operation of those field.) The atomic nuclei
contains
99.95% of the mass(energy) of the atom and are on the order of 10^-15 meters
in
diameter. The atoms in the array are separated by about 10^-10 meters. To
provide some perspective, a scale representation would show that if the
nuclei
were enlarged to the size of a billiard ball, the nominal distance between
nuclei would be about 3.1 miles. Obviously the length of the yardstick is
determined almost entirely by the characteristics of the electromagnetic
forces
acting between its nuclei. Similarly, time is measured by counting the
"ticks"
of a clock or their equivalent. The time between clock "ticks" is measured
by
the period of some type of resonant system. Such a system could be composed
of
the coiled "hairspring" of a watch and a blanace wheel or it could be
composed
of the elasticity of the bond between two atoms and the mass of those atoms.
In
all cases, the period of the resonant system is determined by the spring
constant acting in the resonant system and the significant mass of that
system.
In other words, with regard to relativistic effects, what is true of one
type of
clock is true for all types of clocks!
Let us then consider what would happen if the velocity of
light in free space were to change. Since the atomic nuclei of the yardstick
control their separation by electromagnetic means, the nuclei would sense
that
their separation was now "wrong" and they would move to correct the error.
thus
causing the yardstick to change its length. The stiffness of the clocks
"hairspring" is also determined electromagnetic means and the mass of the
"balance wheel" is determined by the energy represented by that mass and the
velocity of light in accordance with M=E/C^2! The result would be that the
postulated change in the velocity of light should change the calibration of
the
clock. If the Principle of Relativity is applicable, as indeed it must be if
the
Laws of Physics are to be the same in all velocity and elevation reference
frames, then the length of our yardsticks and the speed of our clocks must
change as a result of the postulated change in the free space velocity of
light.
Moreover, that change must be such that a measurement of the velocity of
light
would be produce the same value regardless of the reference frame (velocity,
elevation)in which it was measured. This would occur because the units of
measurement by which the velocity of light is measured would change to
conceal
any actual change in that velocity. Any measurement of the velocity of light
that we may care to make is actually a measurement of the velocity of light
in
terms of the velocity of light. Such a measurement is clearly meaningless.
The
quantity we accept as the velocity of light probably results from the
dimensionaless Fine Structure Constant which reveals the velocity of light
in
terms of the dielectric constant of space.
To add perspective to the discussion. It is axiomatic that
every process which involves obeying physical laws (including the
"constantcy"
of the velocity of light and the length of our "yardsticks" must contain the
following steps.
1:- It must measure the magnitude of the quantity in question.
2:- It must compare the measured quantity with its nominal value.
3:- It must apply the necessary "force" to reduce any error towards
zero.
This is not an invention of the writer. It is a requirement of any
stable process.
The framers of relativity theory missed the boat in not
digging deeply enough. It is not enough to accept the Principle of
Relativity.
The question they should have asked is why does the Principle of Relativity
hold. Such a question leads to the very obvious answer that it holds because
matter uses the velocity of light to control its parameters. One need only
to
add the proviso that information cannot propagate faster than the velocity
of
light and the mysteries of SR vanish (providing one is not too lazy to
follow
the reasoning through to its conclusion). In the case of gravity, the
effects of
a change in the velocity of light between reference frames which differ in
elevation is immediately obvious, it is called gravity. Gravity results
because
proximity to energy causes an increase in the "absolute" permeabilty of the
Aether. All of the known gravitational effects cah be shown to follow from
this
change. Space is not "curved". http://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm.
The source material for this posting may be found in
http://einsteinhoax.com/hoax.htm ("The Einstein Hoax" {1997});
http://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm; ("Gravity" {1987}); and
http://einsteinhoax.com/relcor.htm ("Corrections to Special Relativity"
{1997}). EVERYTHING WHICH WE ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH
EVERYTHING ELSE WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL
OBSERVATIONS, AND IT MUST BE MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT
ALWAYS MEET THIS REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF
WORKMANSHIP FROM THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS.
All of the Newsposts made by this site may be viewed at
http://einsteinhoax.com/postinglog.htm.
Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not monitored on
a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the same courtesy
as they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of our parts,
please do not raise objections that are not related to material that you
have read at the Website. This posting is merely a summary.
E-mail:-
The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 5
years. In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF THE
MATERIAL PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by
individuals who have mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without
questioning it. If anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be
objectively answered, the material at the Website will be withdrawn.
Challenges to date have revealed only the responder's inadequacy with one
exception for which a correction was provided.
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: "The Impossibility of Measuring the Velocity of Light" |
15 Jan 2006 01:02:38 PM |
|
|
If you're out to run the system out of space, just post the entire
contents of Wikipedia next time.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
