"The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in
message news:ru9e23-p0e.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
| In sci.physics, Kadaitcha Man
| <nospam@*****-off-and-die.com>
| wrote
| on Mon, 17 Oct 2005 17:37:20 +0545
| <08d254859dda407aa8b5b9e33791de03@rec.arts.free-hanging.baloobas>:
| > Androcles, <Androcles@ MyPlace.org>, the blubbery, mucocutaneous fop
sot,
| > and maker of measures for weighing the herring and kipper catches,
| > whimpered:
| >> "The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in
| >> message news:7lnb23-c8t.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
| >>> In sci.physics, Androcles
| >>> <Androcles@MyPlace.org>
| >>> wrote
| >>> on Mon, 17 Oct 2005 02:10:42 GMT
| >>> <CKD4f.36648$U9.9788@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk>:
| >>>>
| >>>> "jimk" <jimk@scientist.com> wrote in message
| >>>> news:1129506017.355129.252710@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
| >>>>>
| >>>>> The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
| >>>>>
| >>>>>>
| >>>>>> Careful. You've introduced *two* concepts of speed here.
| >>>>>>
| >>>>>> [1] Speed of object relative to physical ruler (physical
| >>>>>> lightspeed) [2] Speed of light relative to light-defined path
| >>>>>> (light-defined lightspeed), which is constant.
| >>>>>>
| >>>>>> Presumably [1] is the interesting one.
| >>>>>
| >>>>> The length of a physical ruler is governed by the spacing of
atoms,
| >>>>> which is governed by electromagnetic force - i.e. light.
Therefore
| >>>>> [1] and [2] are the same, and kenseto's assertion of the
| >>>>> circularity of the definition holds for both.
| >>>>> Regards,
| >>>>> JimK
| >>>>
| >>>> While it is true that the speed of light is invariant by
| >>>> definition, the length
| >>>> of a ruler has nothing to do with it.
| >>>> The definition begins with:
| >>>> [quote]
| >>>> we establish by definition that the "time" required by a turtle
to
| >>>> travel
| >>>> from A to B equals the "time" it requires to travel from B to A.
| >>>> [end quote]
| >>>> Ref: http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
| >>>> Oops!... Did I say 'a turtle'? Sorry...'light'.
| >>>> Same math, though.
| >>>> The length of a ruler is then adjusted to agree with light being
| >>>> "measured" as c by everyone, where you ride with the ruler or
| >>>> watch it go by.
| >>>> Androcles.
| >>>>
| >>>
| >>> The speed of light is not constant if improperly defined.
| >>
| >> Rephrased,
| >> IF improperly defined THEN the speed of light is not constant.
| >> Does this imply
| >> IF properly defined THEN the speed of light is constant?
| >> If properly defined then the speed of a turtle is constant?
| >>
| >> Properly define the speed of light, please. Be prepared for
dispute.
| >
| > Better you should state your assumptions about the laws of physics
first.
| >
|
| AFAICT, his assumptions are as follows.
|
| [1] All SRians are fuckwits.

That's a fact, not an assumption.

(Note that not all Androclean
| fuckwits are SRian; he and H. Wilson don't like
| each other

Not true. Wilson is a halfwit, but I do not dislike him. You are
in fact a dimwit, way above the phuckwit status of moortel. I'm
really exaggerating when I call you a phuckwit.
I don't dislike you either.



and he's lit into kenseto occasionally
| as well.

Seto is marginally above moortel, but still a fuckwit.

| Near as I can tell he's ignoring tj
| ("Liquid Piston/Super Rich Yacht Boy"), dedanoe ("Law Of
| Lever"), Eleaticus ("Einstein Hoax"), and Louis Savain
| (Traveler). No data on Androcles vs. McElwaine, which is
| probably just as well.)

True, killfiled.


| [2] The speed of light from a moving object of velocity v (relative
| to the axis of viewing) is c'=c+v.

Correct. The vector addition of velocities is straight from Newton
and Galileo.

|
| [3] Time is absolute and unaffected by motion or gravity.

Correct, straight from Newton.


|
| [4] Superluminal motion is possible and routinely observed (e.g.,
| atmospheric muons).

Yep. x in the Earth's FoR divided by t in the Earth's FoR exceeds c for
a
cosmic muon.
In the frame of the muon, dx/dt = d(xi)/d(tau), the velocity of the
Earth exceeds c.
The Earth is superluminal in the muon's FoR.

|
| [5] Einstein was flat dead wrong when it came to certain principles,
| such as two-way lightspeed measurement.
Correct, he was. Speed can be two way, velocity is one way.
Einstein did not know the difference between speed and velocity.



| [6] Androcles knows algebra and likes poetic expressions; you might,
| if you really want to, look up such things as:
|
| - how a mosquito moves relative to a ladder

Yep. To large to repeat here, though.

| - the turtle as a metaphor for light, and how it outraces
everything

Yep.
[quote]
we establish by definition that the "time" required by a turtle to
travel
from A to B equals the "time" it requires to travel from B to A.
[end quote]
Ref: http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/

[quote]
For velocities greater than that of a turtle our deliberations become
meaningless; we shall, however, find in what follows, that the velocity
of a turtle in our theory plays the part, physically, of an infinitely
great velocity.
[quote]
Ref: http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
Nothing can go faster than a turtle.
Oops!... Did I say 'a turtle'? Sorry...'light'.
Same phuckwit math, though.

Phuckwit Einstein thinks the velocity of light is infinite.

| [7] AQL 1493 shows a characteristic "U" shape in its light-timecurve
| which proves that c'=c+v as well; a "U" shape occurs in
| certain orbital simulation motions.

Yep. Vladimir Sekerin and Henri Wilson agree.
Vladimir Sekerin is a fullwit and sane.
http://www.ebicom.net/~rsf1/sekerin.htm (fig 3)



|
| [8] The motion of gas molecules do not affect Newtonian lightspeed.
The dimwit Ghost thinks stars have molecules.

Little does he realize stars have a cooler outer shell of gas through
which the light must pass, giving rise to an absorption spectrum
and like water, changes the light's speed to c. It is the motion of
this shell that gives US the observation c' = c+v.

| Make of it what either of you will.

Good idea. I like to know which are the phuckwits and which
are the educable dimwits. Kadaitcha Man is of course a fuckwit,
duly plonked.

| As for the proper definition of lightspeed, Androcles has
| it more or less right. Take a known distance x, divide
| it by the time of transit t of a lightbeam; the time of
| transit is computed by two carefully synchronized clocks.

Which differs from Einstein's method, [x + (-x)]/t = 0,
or in his own words,
"In agreement with experience we further assume the quantity

2AB/(t'A-tA) = c"

A and B being the endpoints of the distance x.

Einstein was quite good at dividing by zero, or even by v,
as in t = x'/(c-v)
But then, he was a phuckwit.
Ref: http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/

Androcles.

The Ghost In The Machine, <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net>, the
smegma-encrusted, fearful genetic disorder, and person in charge of public
toilets in parks at night, proscribed:

In sci.physics, Kadaitcha Man
<nospam@*****-off-and-die.com>
wrote
on Mon, 17 Oct 2005 17:37:20 +0545
<08d254859dda407aa8b5b9e33791de03@rec.arts.free-hanging.baloobas>:

Androcles, <Androcles@ MyPlace.org>, the blubbery, mucocutaneous fop
sot, and maker of measures for weighing the herring and kipper
catches, whimpered:

"The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in
message news:7lnb23-c8t.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...

In sci.physics, Androcles
<Androcles@MyPlace.org>
wrote
on Mon, 17 Oct 2005 02:10:42 GMT
<CKD4f.36648$U9.9788@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk>:

"jimk" <jimk@scientist.com> wrote in message
news:1129506017.355129.252710@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

The Ghost In The Machine wrote:

Careful. You've introduced *two* concepts of speed here.

[1] Speed of object relative to physical ruler (physical
lightspeed) [2] Speed of light relative to light-defined path
(light-defined lightspeed), which is constant.

Presumably [1] is the interesting one.

The length of a physical ruler is governed by the spacing of
atoms, which is governed by electromagnetic force - i.e. light.
Therefore [1] and [2] are the same, and kenseto's assertion of
the circularity of the definition holds for both.
Regards,
JimK

While it is true that the speed of light is invariant by
definition, the length
of a ruler has nothing to do with it.
The definition begins with:
[quote]
we establish by definition that the "time" required by a turtle to
travel
from A to B equals the "time" it requires to travel from B to A.
[end quote]
Ref: http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
Oops!... Did I say 'a turtle'? Sorry...'light'.
Same math, though.
The length of a ruler is then adjusted to agree with light being
"measured" as c by everyone, where you ride with the ruler or
watch it go by.
Androcles.

The speed of light is not constant if improperly defined.

Rephrased,
IF improperly defined THEN the speed of light is not constant.
Does this imply
IF properly defined THEN the speed of light is constant?
If properly defined then the speed of a turtle is constant?

Properly define the speed of light, please. Be prepared for dispute.

Better you should state your assumptions about the laws of physics
first.

AFAICT, his assumptions are as follows.

[1] All SRians are fuckwits. (Note that not all Androclean
fuckwits are SRian; he and H. Wilson don't like
each other and he's lit into kenseto occasionally
as well. Near as I can tell he's ignoring tj
("Liquid Piston/Super Rich Yacht Boy"), dedanoe ("Law Of
Lever"), Eleaticus ("Einstein Hoax"), and Louis Savain
(Traveler). No data on Androcles vs. McElwaine, which is
probably just as well.)

[2] The speed of light from a moving object of velocity v (relative
to the axis of viewing) is c'=c+v.

[3] Time is absolute and unaffected by motion or gravity.

Dodgy assumptions will do that all the time, independently of motion or
gravity.

[4] Superluminal motion is possible and routinely observed (e.g.,
atmospheric muons).

[5] Einstein was flat dead wrong when it came to certain principles,
such as two-way lightspeed measurement.

[6] Androcles knows algebra and likes poetic expressions; you might,
if you really want to, look up such things as:

- how a mosquito moves relative to a ladder
- the turtle as a metaphor for light, and how it outraces
everything

Including mosquitos moving relative to ladders?

[7] AQL 1493 shows a characteristic "U" shape in its light-timecurve
which proves that c'=c+v as well; a "U" shape occurs in
certain orbital simulation motions.

[8] The motion of gas molecules do not affect Newtonian lightspeed.

Make of it what either of you will.

As for the proper definition of lightspeed, Androcles has
it more or less right. Take a known distance x, divide
it by the time of transit t of a lightbeam; the time of
transit is computed by two carefully synchronized clocks.

It would be difficult to keep a wooden rule steady on the
back of a tortoise in motion.