Re: I Owe Einstein an Apology. Sorry Albert!

From: kenseto (kenseto_at_erinet.com)
Date: 12/09/04 

Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 15:45:35 GMT

"The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.athghost7038suus.net> wrote in
message news:nc4l82-7dl.ln1@sirius.athghost7038suus.net...
> In sci.physics.relativity, kenseto
> <kenseto@erinet.com>
> wrote
> on Wed, 08 Dec 2004 16:53:31 GMT
> <fkGtd.33033$CG4.7746@fe2.columbus.rr.com>:
> >
> > "The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.athghost7038suus.net> wrote in
> > message news:vsgj82-22h.ln1@sirius.athghost7038suus.net...
> >> In sci.physics.relativity, kenseto
> >> <kenseto@erinet.com>
> >> wrote
> >> on Wed, 08 Dec 2004 13:54:42 GMT
> >> <CIDtd.56801$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 "speed trap" should work.
>
> -->> A B
> \ /
> +-------C-------+
>
> A and B are stationary with respect to the lab. The light source
> generates photons which go through A, then through B. Assuming
> A and B are equidistant from C, there shouldn't be much of a problem.
>
> This is a TWLS measurement, but with an odd twist, as the light
> paths are A-C and A-C-B-C instead of the more conventional
> A and A-B-A.

Ah...now you are saying that this is not an OWLS measurement but a TWLS
measurement.. BTW, why do you need point A for this measurement? Why can't A
be at C and thus the light goes from C to B and from B to C?

Ken Seto