Re: New impoved facts part 1v03


"Dr ***" <paulpsremove@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1112799850.31278.0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "Harry" <harald.vanlintel@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:4253e71f$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Correction:
> "Harry" <harald.vanlintel@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:4253da51$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > "Dr ***" <paulpsremove@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:1112789990.20067.0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>SNIP
> > > > > Of Time, Vacuum, Velocity, Gravity and the Speed of light.
> Simplified
SNIP
> > > > > A vacuum is defined as a medium with a permitivity of
8.854*10E-12
> > > > > F mE-1 or e0 and permeability of 4pi * 10E -7 H mE-1 or u0 with
the
> > > > > field state being ~ sea level.
> > > > >
> > > > > The following are simple provable or logically deducible facts
> > > > >
> > > > > a) The speed of light (SOL) is measured constant in vacuum and
also
> > > > > in any given medium. Its speed in vacuum is given the designator
c.
> > > > > b) From a) we can also state that the velocity of the vacuum
> > > > > is zero with respect to(wrt) the light under measurement at the
> place of
> > > > > measurement and is assigned the letters vv otherwise our
measurment
> > > > > of the SOL may have an offset which may need to be calculated in,
> > > > > in some cases.

> > > I could not believe that you seriously would present an in this
> > > context obvious logical error as "improved fact".
> > > The error: you assumed that what is measured must correspond to
reality
> > > as depicted from your model, unaffected by the phenomena.
> >
> > > d
> > > Uh! Thats a nice piece of fantasy if ever I read one :-)
> > > Forget about the phenomena for a moment I am just for a moment
referring
> > > to the process of measurement, any measurement.
> > > Any measurement has at least two components its base and its value do
> > > you have a problem with this?

> h
SNIP
> The way PD put it was better although also
> not good enough. Reworked:

> The local return speed of light through a vacuum is measured to be c
> relative to any inertial reference system.

> (And now, what is your vv?)

> d
> Ok I'll go with that,

Great!
BTW, I forgot to add at the end: "that is used for the measurement" (it's
not measured to be c wrt external reference systems that are in motion
relative to it).

> and in this case vv = velocity of reference system or
> vacuum. but now I will have to include the frequency as in a particular
case
> and method the return path will have a different velocity and frequency.

That's still not clear to me. Velocity is by definition relative (even when
it is called "absolute").
For example, my car has a max. speed of 170 km/h and that is an "absolute"
measure, as the road functions as "absolute" reference.
Simlarly, "the speed of sound" is "absolute" as without further indication
it's with reference to the medium and not to the observer, while the speed
of sound outside a riding train wrt the train is called "relative" speed.
Thus,
"vv = velocity of reference system relative to the vacuum" would be a
possibility,
but "vv = velocity of the vacuum relative to the vacuum" makes no sense!

> > h
> > > As a matter of fact: in the only self-consistent model of this type
that
> > > I know of, the measurements *are* affected by the phenomena.
> > > On top of that, even a) is incorrect: if that medium isn't vacuum, the
> > > SOL is measured to be a function of the speed of the medium as well.
> >
> > No reply?
> d
> Yes, I just wanted to clear the two component measurement with you and yes
> the medium effects the phenomena that's why the SOL in vacuum is c and not
> some other figure. If I was trying to state the SOL in treacle I would
have
> said so and as far as I know the SOL in treacle is not c but it may very
> well be a constant for ants.:-)

What I referred to is the Fizeau effect. Do you know it?

> There is one slight problem in that I am fairly convinced that I can
design
> a method of measurement that will show the SOL to be a variable wrt the
> inertial frame although not wrt to the vacuum. So how do you write that ?

I'm not sure what you mean... possibly you mean something like formerly
Miller and now Cahill.
Then you hope to be able to detect a variable SOL wrt to the lab inside a
medium that is in rest in the lab ?
That's tough, and even if you do, the cause may be different from what you
think/hope (I heard some things).

Cheers,
Harald


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: New impoved facts part 1v03
    ... >>> to the process of measurement, ... > The local return speed of light through a vacuum is measured to be c ... > relative to any inertial reference system. ... This can cause confusion particularly when the SOL is concerned as and has ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: New impoved facts part 1v03
    ... Correction: ... >> the process of measurement, ... The local return speed of light through a vacuum is measured to be c ... the medium effects the phenomena that's why the SOL in vacuum is c and not ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: New impoved facts part 1v03
    ... >> The local return speed of light through a vacuum is measured to be c ... How can SR communicate across frames if the SOL is not a constant without ... accept that the relative velocity of the vacuum between frames needs to be ... > Yes I am familiar with the method of measurement of the SOL by Fizeau but ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: New impoved facts part 1v03
    ... >> Of Time, Vacuum, Velocity, Gravity and the Speed of light. ... >> is zero with respect tothe light under measurement at the place of ... >> the SOL may have an offset which may need to be calculated in, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Why was length defined in terms of the speed of light (c) and not vice versa?
    ... THE SPEED OF LIGHT IN A VACUUM HAS NEVER BEEN MEASURED. ... and that it measurement is of so ... And what is this free space term? ... Well In classical physics, free ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Quantcast