Re: johnreed take 9
From: Lady Chatterly (randamajor_at_catcher.in.the.rye)
Date: 02/10/05
- Next message: George Hammond: "Re: GOD=G_uv FOR IQ's OVER 150"
- Previous message: The Ghost In The Machine: "Re: 1c+1c Closing Velocity...,answer to Henri Wilson"
- In reply to: randamajor_at_yahoo.com: "johnreed take 9"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 3:33:32 GMT
In article <1107995441.919402.166770@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
randamajor@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>The thought experiments involving two observers measuring the speed of
>light from different locations were used to show the dilation of time
>and space when holding lightspeed constant for both observers. The
>experiments were not only impossible to perform but contained an
>elemental error. Both observers were measuring the trail of a
>lightpulse as it traveled through space. This is not a physical
>possibility as we do not see light. We see illuminated objects. The
>entire offering was to show that the Lorentz equation measured the
>degree of dilation and/or contraction.
>
>Such a bizarre thought experiment is not possible, nor is it even
>required to account for the observers constant measure of lightspeed.
>To the extent we measure lightspeed at all, and certainly within the
>confines of the thought experiments, one would use detectors to measure
>the speed of light. One persons detector is the same as anothers in
>that both will detect either EMR frequency or EMR wavelength or both.
>Since we have a continuous spectrum for light, the measure of which
>will always be a function of frequency or wavelength, a detector
>designed to measure a certain frequency or multiple frequencies, will
>always measure lightspeed as a function of frequency or wavelength,
>even though the detectors motion may change the particular frequency
>measured.
Wow.
>The entire notion of time dilation in the sense proposed by Einstein is
>conceptually misleading. For example, the extended life of the muon is
>due to energy conservation and has no reference to a literal space-time
>dimension.
If muslims are against the ps3.
>The wavelike nature of light propagation caused physicists to invoke
>the luminiferous ether to account for its propagation, since waves
>require a medium to travel through. Beyond the local or perceived
>requirement for a medium, the propagation of energy in a wavelike
>manner is efficient. So, rather than require a medium for light
>propagation perhaps all we need do is seek a means that is efficient,
>absent a medium. Indeed, EMR propagation is most efficient in a vacuum.
Nothing.
>The key element for light propagation is a source of emission. The
>actual wave propagation of light energy has heretofore been viewed in
>somewhat of a Newtonian manner. Once emitted, light is thought to
>continue its motion just as though it possessed momentum.
Darkness reigns at the foot of the lighthouse.
>I say that light is pushed from its source and once the source
>terminates emission the EMR ceases its linear travel. Moreover the
>source of light must exist for the human eye to register its image.
To err is human; to mimic, requires a bot.
-- Lady Chatterly "Someone needs to learn Our Good Lady about the St. Foamy moratorium!" -- Art Deco
- Next message: George Hammond: "Re: GOD=G_uv FOR IQ's OVER 150"
- Previous message: The Ghost In The Machine: "Re: 1c+1c Closing Velocity...,answer to Henri Wilson"
- In reply to: randamajor_at_yahoo.com: "johnreed take 9"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
