Re: Query about simultaneous events..

From: Androcles (androc1es_at_nospamblueyonder.co.uk)
Date: 09/07/04 

Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2004 12:31:19 GMT

"jahn" <suzysewnshow@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:2q55o3Fqmh93U1@uni-berlin.de...
|
| "Androcles" <androc1es@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
| news:hg7%c.2019$5W6.21179464@news-text.cableinet.net...
| >
| > "jahn" <suzysewnshow@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
| > news:2q42k9Fq8e83U1@uni-berlin.de...
| > |
| >
| > The program uses c + v relativity to
| > | calculate the light travel time to various extinction distances.|
| > http://www.ebicom.net/~rsf1/binaries.htm
| > | --------------
| > | Sue...
| > The referred program doesn't seem to be readily available. Mine is.
| > http://www.androc1es.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/virus_alert.htm
| My sincere admiration. My dedication won't achieve that level 'till I see
a
| fiber optic gyro or doppler radar show some respect for the "invariant
| speed of light". ;-)

I believe there is precedent for such a remark, attributed to Thomas,
in reference to an open tomb and the observation of nail marks in hands
and feet.
The difficulty I have in believing the tale has any validity is that the
story is hearsay; I fully support scepticism, taking it as a very healthy
approach to science. Were it not for Copernicus' scepticism of Ptolemy's
epicycles... well, you know the story.
I also feel that an ostrich with its head buried in the sand, alone with its
own thoughts and blind to any evidence that would contradict its ideas,
cannot be properly classified as a sceptic. 'Bigot' would be a far more
appropriate term. How do we distinguish a bigot from a sceptic?

Consider MMX if you will, and let us reason intelligently, employing
alternate evidence we both have no disagreement with.
We have five 'postulates' and two media to consider:

Category 1.
1a) the vector addition of velocities, c+v. (Ritz + row*)
1b) the composition of velocities, (c+v)/(1+v/c). (Einstein)

 *row: rest of the world... means majority and excludes the minority
 that follow a contrary belief. Includes such as Newton, Kepler, Galileo et
al. Our concern is with the undecided.

(no other claims are before us in this category, but you can introduce
another if you wish).

Category 2.
2a) the velocity of light in a medium is medium dependent (stipulated to by
all).
In the absence of a medium, we have
2b) the velocity of light is source independent. (Einstein+row*)
2c) the velocity of light is source dependent. (Ritz)

 *row: rest of the world... means majority and excludes the minority
 that follow a contrary belief. Here it includes Thorne, Wheeler, Misner et
al.

Category 3.
3a) aether is a medium for light and has the properties of permeability
and permittivity.
3b) air is a medium for light and shares the properties of aether, with
different values.

Now we take combinations and try to decide which is the logical conclusion.
2a, 3a. Inconsistent with MMX.
2a, 3b. Consistent with MMX.
2b, 3a. Irrelevant.
2b, 3b. Irrelevant.
2c, 3a. Irrelevant.
2c, 3b. Irrelevant.

Conclusion: there is no aether. Aetherialists can sputter all they want to,
the evidence is conclusive, aether has been eliminated. It was only a
supposition to begin with, and MMX holds its fame on this very conclusion.
Whence comes its properties of permeability and permittivity, then?
When the temperature of a gas is lowered, the volume decreases.
It reaches zero when the temperature is zero. But we no longer have
a gas, and the volume of the matter is not zero.
As a sphere turns about an axis, it has an axis.
When the motion is stopped, the axis vanishes along with it.
We cannot extrapolate to zero in physics.
Aether does not exist and has no properties.

I will assert that the fiber optic gyro and doppler radar have shown due
respect for the "invariant speed of light" -IN A MEDIUM!-but the
 invariance varies between the two, they use different media.
Your requirement is thus answered.

We still have yet to decide some other combinations, and to
do that we need further experiment. We must conduct MMX in
the absence of air, for MMX is consistent with light being
medium dependent.

2a. Irrelevant. We have no medium.
2b. Consistent. Source and observer are relatively at rest.
2c. Consistent. Source and observer are relatively at rest.

The result is inconclusive.
We need further data.

1a, 2b Inconsistent. (row1a+row2b = row)
1a, 2c Consistent. (Ritz + row - row = Ritz)
1b,2b Inconsistent. (-row1a + row2b= 0)
1b,2c. Consistent. (Einstein-row+row = Einstein)

Conclusion: the result is inconclusive, but the opinions of
of the rest of the world are eliminated.
We need further data.

We can go into the math and criticize Einstein (I've done that)
but let's go into the empirical data instead. You pointed to the light
curves you found by a program you located at:
 http://www.ebicom.net/~rsf1/binaries.htm.
Those curves are for a circular orbit. In general, the orbit
of a star is elliptical. The effect of an elliptical orbit will, in
general, and depending on the orientation of the ellipse relative
to the observer, cause those curves to be somewhat lop-sided.
I now point you to the empirical data to be found at
 http://www.britastro.org/vss/gifc/00918-ck.gif
and ask you to compare that with the prediction you found
previously, then draw an unbiased and unprejudiced conclusion,
if that is possible.

| If the weather turns sour and I get some spare time, Maybe I'll run it on
a
| spare machine but I don't have one set up just now.

| Kind regards,
| Sue...

Which is it, sceptic xor bigot? :-)
Androcles.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Aether is the empty space in which the Universe sits
    ... How can anything be propagated through the medium, ... >> These properties aren't just inconstistent with matter, ... > Theories of Aether and Electricity" ... >> relativity, in its current form, would be invalid. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Aether is the empty space in which the Universe sits
    ... How can anything be propagated through the medium, ... >> These properties aren't just inconstistent with matter, ... > Theories of Aether and Electricity" ... >> relativity, in its current form, would be invalid. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Again and again about the result of MMX
    ... |> Null result of the MMX in order to rescue Maxwell's ether theory. ... |> Maxwell's aether theory predicted a non null result. ... |> light will always be c in the system of co-ordinates of the observer ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Does SR transform to Ballistic theory1
    ... relativity is of course counter intuitive. ... SR therefore depends upon the second postulate which in effect says that the speed of light is constant w.r.t the observer observing it. ... Maxwell's electromagnetism was disproved firstly by the MMX and then by the ultraviolet catastrophe, by Planck's quantization and finally by Einstein's explanation of the photoelectric effect. ... Maxwell's theory makes two testable predictions re the aether. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The genius of the Absolute
    ... > they would only hold exactly in the rest frame of the aether. ... and which would reduce to Maxwell's laws ... The speed of light in diamond, water, air, any transparent medium is ... > a physicist in a time before the theory of relativity had been ...
    (sci.physics)