Re: I Owe Einstein an Apology. Sorry Albert!

From: kenseto (kenseto_at_erinet.com)
Date: 12/08/04 

Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 16:53:31 GMT

"The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.athghost7038suus.net> wrote in
message news:vsgj82-22h.ln1@sirius.athghost7038suus.net...
> In sci.physics.relativity, kenseto
> <kenseto@erinet.com>
> wrote
> on Wed, 08 Dec 2004 13:54:42 GMT
> <CIDtd.56801$MG3.51146@fe2.columbus.rr.com>:
> >
> > "The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.athghost7038suus.net> wrote in
> > message news:gnfi82-g48.ln1@sirius.athghost7038suus.net...
> >> In sci.physics.relativity, JP
> >> <jp@nospam.com>
> >> wrote
> >> on Sun, 05 Dec 2004 18:15:11 +0000
> >> <pan.2004.12.05.18.15.09.916871@nospam.com>:
> >> > On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 18:01:19 +0000, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> In sci.physics.relativity, Henri Wilson
> >> >> <H@.>
> >> >> wrote
> >> >> on Sun, 05 Dec 2004 03:13:07 GMT
> >> >> <e2v4r0h49fjfb0fa1u0li7h2nn706j798f@4ax.com>:
> >> >>> On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 23:40:06 GMT, "Bill Hobba"
<bhobba@rubbish.net.au>
> > wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>"Henri Wilson" <H@..> wrote in message
> >> >>
> >> >> [crunch]
> >> >>
> >> >>>>Henri - comprehension is vital. You have shown none. My meaning
is
> > obvious
> >> >>>>to anyone with a brain ie was the purpose of the other syncing
methods
> > also
> >> >>>>to obviate the need for an aether?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> But in your SRian stupidity, you are completely missing the point
that
> >> >>> E-synching is ABSOLUTE synching. That is becasue light speed is
source
> >> >>> dependent.
> >> >>
> >> >> Somebody really should tell the decaying pi-mesons that. Apparently
> >> >> they've not yet got the message.
> >> >>
> >> >> http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PR/v135/i4B/pB1071_1
> >> >>
> >> >> [crunch]
> >> >
> >> > I'd love to see the full text of that article.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I wouldn't mind too much myself -- but I'm cheap. :-)
> >> The general idea, however, looks straightforward enough, and
> >> only one clock would be required -- the one doing the
> >> actual lightspeed measurement.
> >
> > You can't measure OWLS with just one clock. You can measure TWLS with
just
> > one cl***.
>
> The OWLS in this case is from a moving source (the decaying mesons).
> The c'=c+v theory predicts a massively different result. Gamma
> rays from the moving mesons can simply be thrown through a straightline
> pipe and two detectors (one at each end) and the time difference
> measured.

How do you get the time difference without two clocks??

>A clock is in the middle of the two detectors.
>
> Looks fairly straightforward to me.

How is that one clock in the middle will determine the time for light to
traverse 1/2 the distance of the pipe??
>
> 299792458/9192631770 = 3.26 cm, so it wouldn't have to be that long.
> (The numerator is lightspeed in m/s. The denominator is the number
> of transitions of a Cs133 atom per second in an atomic clock.)

So you are assuming light speed to determine light speed??

Ken Seto