Re: MMX and FORs Revisited
From: kenseto (kenseto_at_erinet.com)
Date: 06/07/04
- Next message: OC: "Re: Ampere's law proves reality of magnetic field"
- Previous message: Perfectly Innocent: "Re: Are there any Professional Physicists here that can solve this Physics Equation?"
- In reply to: Peter Kinane: "MMX and FORs Revisited"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 09:19:44 -0400
"Peter Kinane" <pkinane@iol.ie> wrote in message
news:d8097fcc.0406061148.1ff553e0@posting.google.com...
> This is something of a back to basics thread taking a look at the
> rigour of definitions of "Frame of Reference" and perhaps the
> Michelson Morley Experiment.
>
> Source and quote:
> " http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2003/6/13/6330/21089
>
>
> Introduction to the Theory of Relativity Part I: History (Science)
>
> The speed of the light doesn't depend on how fast the light source is
> moving, just like the speed of a boat doesn't change the speed of the
> waves in water. But surely it must depend on how fast the observer is
> moving through the medium.
No. The measured speed of light is independent of the motion of the
source or the observer. The reason is that the speed of light is a
constant math ratio as follows:
Light path length of measuring rod (299,792,458m)/the absolute time
content for a clock second co-moving with the rod.
This new definition for light speed means that the observer's
clock second contains a different amount of absolute time in different
state of motion and that's why he measures the same speed of light
in different states of motion.
Ken Seto
- Next message: OC: "Re: Ampere's law proves reality of magnetic field"
- Previous message: Perfectly Innocent: "Re: Are there any Professional Physicists here that can solve this Physics Equation?"
- In reply to: Peter Kinane: "MMX and FORs Revisited"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
