Re: Experimental disproof of the theory of Relativity

From: Ballisticus (B_at_..(Ballisticus))
Date: 06/21/04 

Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 23:14:29 GMT

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 04:23:14 GMT, Tom Roberts <tjroberts@lucent.com> wrote:

>Bill Rowe wrote:
>> In article <k1acd093depf36ka89rpoqo809omgtqdjv@4ax.com>,
>> B@..(Ballisticus) wrote:
>>>there is no experiment that shows OWLS is the same in all frames.
>> There is experimental evidence to show the round trip speed of light is
>> c in vacuum no matter what direction is chosen. There is no experimental
>> evidence to indicate the one way speed is any different than c.
>
>It's stronger than that.
>
>OWLS can only be measured after one DEFINES what "simultaneous" means,
>so one can synchronize the two clocks necessary for an OWLS measurement.
>But one can DEFINE it however one likes, and obtain different values for
>OWLS.
>
>In other words: TWLS by itself has meaning; OWLS only has meaning
>relative to a specified synchronization procedure. TWLS is independent
>of human choices (except for units), OWLS depends upon an arbitrary
>human choice for clock synchronization (in addition to the same choice
>of units).

OWLS cannot be measured using one clock BUT.... OWLS form differently moving
sources CAN be COMPARED using only one clock and a remote optical gate.

Such an experiment is now possible, eg, on the moon.

If it can be shown that OWLS varies with source velocity, then the second
postulate is proved wrong.

I think it can be assumed that light moves at c relative to its source.
Maxwell's theory provides compelling evidence of that. So does the apparent
constancy of TWLS.

>
>
>> A valid reproducible experiment showing a violation of either of
>> Einstein's postulate would be quite interesting to say the least. But no
>> such experiment has been done to date. Nor does it seem likely any such
>> experiment will be done.
>
>Einstein's second postulate is really two things for the price of one: a
>definition of clock synchronization, and a statement about source motion
>independence. You guys are confusing the two. You are by no means the
>first to do so -- but if you read his original paper you'll see that his
>second postulate explicitly contains both.

It is you who is confused Tom.
The clock synch definition merely allowed OWLS to equal TWLS and be constant IF
THE APPARATUS WAS MOVING WRT AN AETHER.

Einstein made L/(c+v)=L/(c-v) by simply altering a clock reading.

Do you really believe that is legitimate?

Einstein clearly believed in an aether but found a way of making it redundant.

The clock synching says nothing about OWLS since mirror and observer are at
rest wrt each other.

>
>Einstein's DEFINITION of simultaneity (clock synchronization) cannot be
>refuted. His postulate of source motion independence could be, but
>hasn't been refuted to date.

Simultaneity is absolute...and can be shown to be so.
Just because you cannot see what is happening NOW a LY away doesn't mean that
nothing is happening there RIGHT NOW.

Geez! How bloody stoopid can you get?

>
>There have been LOTS of tests of source motion independence, see the FAQ
>for references.

None of them is worth the paper it is written on.

Tell us Tom, how and why should light from remote and differently moving
sources end up traveling at the same speed across space?

What determines that speed?

>
>
>Tom Roberts tjroberts@lucent.com

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Das 3. Postulat der Relativitätstheorie (Clock Hypothesis)
    ... "The Clock Hypothesis states that the tick rate of a clock when ... its acceleration, doesn't that mean the Equivalence Principle ... result of acceleration: changing speeds! ... "So the clock postulate says that the rate of an accelerated clock doesn't ...
    (de.sci.physik)
  • Re: What happened between Newton and Einstein?
    ... From this postulate was directly derived the Lorentz ... The Lorentz transforms in turn implied that a clock ... or absolute motion through space, ... is the only possible cause of the age differences ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: I Owe Einstein an Apology. Sorry Albert!
    ... >> Yes it is a TWLS but there is no need for detector A. ... C must be a clock and a detector. ... >> OWLS is isotropic but not equal to c. ... absolute motion of A and B). ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Doppler shift vs second postulate (redux)
    ... The clue is in the name - 'postulate'. ... Convention: The inch equals 3 barleycorn laid end-to-end ... In order to have some sort of clock "synchronization," ... happens in one inertial reference frame. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: What happened between Newton and Einstein?
    ... From this postulate was directly derived the Lorentz ... a greater time elapsed between two events than a clock ... or absolute motion through space, ... I don't see how absolute motion is the *only* possible ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)