Re: Simple Sagnac
- From: sal <pragmatist@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2005 09:44:02 -0400
Hey, Sock, who's your puppeteer?
On Wed, 03 Aug 2005 21:59:15 -0700, bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> sal wrote:
>> On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 21:32:21 -0700, bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > Leaving out the + or - wrt is what caused your time to come out the
>> > same in both directions.
>>
>> No, it's not. It's assuming the signal moves at C/N relative to the
>> cable (rather than C relative to the fixed frame), combined with vector
>> addition of velocities, which leads to the time coming out the same in
>> both directions.
>
> Ah, so you found your error, And I assume you will correct it on your web
> site :)
Ah, so you intentionally misunderstand.
That was the reason that a purely Newtonian argument with fixed signal
speed relative to the cable which leads to no Sagnac ... it wasn't any
"mistake" on my web page, nor any mistake in relativity.
Whoever your puppeteer is, you're boring.
**plonk**
--
Nospam becomes physicsinsights to fix the email
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Simple Sagnac
- From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Simple Sagnac
- References:
- Re: Simple Sagnac
- From: Bilge
- Re: Simple Sagnac
- From: Dirk Van de moortel
- Re: Simple Sagnac
- From: sal
- Re: Simple Sagnac
- From: sal
- Re: Simple Sagnac
- From: Daniel Cook
- Re: Simple Sagnac
- From: sal
- Re: Simple Sagnac
- From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Simple Sagnac
- From: sal
- Re: Simple Sagnac
- From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Simple Sagnac
- Prev by Date: Re: Little guy on the train
- Next by Date: Re: GPS 'GR Correction' Myth.
- Previous by thread: Re: Simple Sagnac
- Next by thread: Re: Simple Sagnac
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|