Re: Why TWLS=OWLS=c in any ONE Frame.
- From: The Ghost In The Machine <ewill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 18:00:43 GMT
In sci.physics.relativity, HW@..(Henri Wilson)
<HW@>
wrote
on Sun, 29 Jan 2006 05:10:58 GMT
<vajot15e81r2r36vo305nd8fdj7tg0mhh6@xxxxxxx>:
> On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 03:00:19 GMT, The Ghost In The Machine
> <ewill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>In sci.physics.relativity, HW@..(Henri Wilson)
>><HW@>
>> wrote
>>on Sun, 29 Jan 2006 00:48:54 GMT
>><3v3ot1ple8nn8mdb1mg948lju9t3tjr340@xxxxxxx>:
>>>
>>>
>>> A____________L______________B
>>>
>>> A and B are two observers equipped with light sources and clocks,
>>> at each end of a long rigid rod of length L. Because the clocks
>>> are at mutually at rest, the clock rates can be absolutely synched.
>>
>>
>>[OWLS/TWLS snipped for brevity]
>>
>>> Poor old Einy didn't know what he actually achieved!!!!
>>
>>No one is disputing lightspeed relative to its source. The
>>question is: if B is moving, what does he measure the
>>lightspeed from A to be?
>
> Ghost, sometimes I am very concerned about your ability to
> comprehend what you read. Are you trying to catch Androcles
> in the dementia competition?
>
> Didn't you see the part about A and B being connected by a rigid rod?
I did. That's a bit pointless, actually (nobody's
disagreeing there); I'm more interested in the measurement
of light's velocity when B is moving.
So I detached it. Is this a problem?
>
>>[.sigsnip]
>
>
> HW.
> www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
>
>
--
#191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
It's still legal to go .sigless.
.
- References:
- Re: Why TWLS=OWLS=c in any ONE Frame.
- From: The Ghost In The Machine
- Re: Why TWLS=OWLS=c in any ONE Frame.
- Prev by Date: Re: What is LET?
- Next by Date: Re: What is LET?
- Previous by thread: Re: Why TWLS=OWLS=c in any ONE Frame.
- Next by thread: Re: Why TWLS=OWLS=c in any ONE Frame.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
