Re: The H&K Flying Circus


"Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:dsi9g2$3dh$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Henri Wilson wrote:
On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 23:20:06 +0100, "Paul B. Andersen"
<paul.b.andersen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


Henri Wilson wrote:

On Wed, 01 Feb 2006 14:50:37 +0100, "Paul B. Andersen"
<paul.b.andersen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



Henri Wilson wrote:


On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 23:24:18 +0100, "Paul B. Andersen"
<paul.b.andersen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:




Henri Wilson wrote:



On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 23:05:32 +0100, "Paul B. Andersen"
<paul.b.andersen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:





Henri Wilson wrote:




Androcles is correct for once.
Sagnac is NOT understood.

The classical explanation - which is also SR's - is the same as
that which
would apply to a sound based sagnac interferometer in still air.

Right.
The speed of light is isotropic c in an inertial frame.
The speed of sound is isotropic c in the air frame.

So you do understand the Sagnac experiment.
Then you also understand why the emission theory
predicts no Sagnac effect.


Paul, you are behind the times.

Does that mean that you no longer understand
the Sagnac experiment?
The laws of nature have yet again changed?


I understand it better than anyojne. I have discovered the real reason
for the
fringe shift.

It fully supports the BaTh.

Quite.
The REAL reason is of course that interferometers
are governed by previously unknown laws of nature
newly discovered by Henry Wilson.

As this great genius has taught us, the laws of
nature are different for different phenomena.


Unlike Einstein worshippers, I still believe there are scientific
questions to
be answered.

Like how an interferometer works?


I have discovered the real reason for the sagnac fringe shift.
It fully supports the BaTh.

Of course you have. Of course it does.
Interferometers are governed by hitherto unknown laws of nature,
newly discovered by you.
Since you assert the BaT CANNOT be wrong (how could it be?),
nature MUST obey and change it's laws accordingly.

Err.. I think you mean "Tusselad cannot be wrong, nature MUST obey
and change it's laws accordingly."
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Genesis/Genesis.htm




We know that the SR explanation is identical to that which would apply to
a
'sound sagnac' in still air. In other words SR relies on aether theory to
explain sagnac.

Quite.
The speed of light is c in the ether frame.

What aether frame?

The speed of light is c in all inertial frames.

What inertial frame?

The latter relies on the former.
Another world shattering Wilsonian discovery.

Yawn...
"The spectral class [of stars] is determined by the relative positions
and intensities of the absorption lines, and these are unaffected by a
Doppler shift." -- Shithead.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/STM/Scoundrels.htm#Tusselad

Another world shattering Tusselad discovery.

Androcles.



.

Loading