Re: SR's FLAW in a NUTSHELL.
- From: "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 16:47:49 +0100
Henri Wilson wrote:
On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 23:36:43 +0100, "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Henri Wilson wrote:
Part 1.
Consider the now familiar setup of an observer who is about to receive light pulses emitted simultaneously from two differently moving sources.
<-S1_____________________->p____________O ->S2
According to Maxwell and Einstein, O can measure the permeability and
permittivity of space and produce a numerical value for the constant 'c'. This
property of space is claimed to be the sole determinant of light speed... so
all light in O's frame must move at c wrt that frame. Thus, all pulses emitted
at a particular distance from O should take the same time to reach him,
irrespective of source speed. This concept is somewhat analogous to sound's fixed speed wrt the air inside an
aeroplane irrespective of how fast the plane is moving wrt the ground. Just as
the plane carries its own atmosphere, the observer carries his own 'personal
aether'.
On the surface, the Maxwell/Einstein theory sounds quite reasonable (even
though the plane's physical atmosphere is replaced by an intangible
'frame').....so we will accept it for the moment.
Next, we will introduce a second observer A, who is moving wrt O but just
happens to be adjacent to O when the two pulses arrive.
<-S1_______________________________(->p,O,<-A)
->S2
Again, SR says this observer A will measure the two constants and determine that all light in HIS frame will also travel at speed c.
Consider now, how a third independent observer B might interpret all this?
B can either directly measure the speeds of the pulses and the speeds of the other two observers (wrt his own frame) or he can simply deduce that the light pulses cannot possibly approach both O and A at the same speed ( since O and A are moving relatively when the pulses arrive).
Therefore B can pose the question as to how and why both O and A should obtain
the same value of c from Maxwell's equation when it is obvious that the pulses
are clearly approaching them at different speeds.
B can similarly question how observers with the two sources would calculate the
same value of c from Maxwell's equation when it is obvious to him (B) that the
the pulses are moving at different speed relative to each source.
His only conclusions must be that either Maxwell was wrong or O and A's measured values of the two constants must be somehow associated with their relative movement.
Before I continue, I would like the SRian community to verify that what I have said above is correct...and then answer this question:
What factors cause both O and A to calculate the same value for 'c', when it is obvious that the light pulses from S1 and S2 are NOT approaching them at the same speed?
Shouldn't the question rather be: "What factors cause Henri Wilson to fail to understand what he has been explained so many times?"
I don't know the answer. But plain stupidity is a possibility.
You said it...
Now would you try to provide an intelligent answer to a serious question.
Why should both observers arrive at the same value for c when it is obvious that the pulses are approaching them at differnet speeds?
Why should Henri Wilson fail to understand what he has been explained so many times?
Plain stupidity is a possibilty.
There I said it again.
Paul .
- Prev by Date: Re: SR and rates
- Next by Date: Re: A little challenge for relativists.
- Previous by thread: Re: SR's FLAW in a NUTSHELL.
- Next by thread: Re: SR's FLAW in a NUTSHELL.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
