Re: SR says, "The Earth is the Centre Of The Universe".

Henri Wilson wrote:
On Wed, 05 Apr 2006 11:35:37 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen"
<paul.b.andersen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


Henri Wilson wrote:

On Tue, 04 Apr 2006 14:16:50 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen"
<paul.b.andersen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



Of course, Henri.
Since there aren't any frames of reference in your demo,
it obviously proves that the speed of light cannot be the same
in all the frames of reference that are not there!


My demo does not require a value for the speed of light. It is of no
importance. The point it emphasizes is that all the pulses moving in any one
direction travel at the SAME speed, whatever that may be relative to anything
you wish to choose.

Get it now?

This is a straightforward illustration of SR's second postulate.

OK, OK, OK.
This will do!
I know you are to dumb to understand why this is hilarious.
You are naive beyond belief, Henri.


Oh? Please elaborate.


But you are to dumb to see why this is hilarious, of course.

..which I can say because I repeatedly have pointed out
the error in your reasoning, to no avail.




I don't regard this as one of your better posts, Paul.

May well be, but you ARE to dumb to understand why
your logic is hilarious, are you not?


I will say the same about you. What properties of space could possibly cause the unification of the speed of
all light from differently moving sources?




If you weren't, you wouldn't repeat it over and over.
I predict you will keep repeating it.




It has an air of desperation about it.

Quite. :-)
Look at your own responses in this posting, Henri.

They are either stupidly wrong:
| "You cannot even be certain that HD80715 IS a binary.
| The two spectra could be coming from a willusion of the same star."
..or void of meaning:
| "Paul, willusions don't arrive with a printout of their source details."
and they don't address what they are responses to.

_That's_ desperation, Henri.


I'm afraid you are becoming a very difficult student Paul. Nothing seems to be
getting through.

But you did get through the confirmation of your
failure to see why your logic is hilarious.
Deafening load and blindingly clear!


Do you deny that my demo illustrates SR's claim that light speed is independent
of source speed?

Since you are repeating yourself, I can do the same:

I don't disagree with your simulation.
Why the hell don't you read what I said?
Your simulation illustrates the first part
of my statement above, namely:
| Henri's reasoning goes like this:
| Since the speed of light in a particular inertial frame of reference
| according to SR is c, and the speed of light according to
| an "absolute ether theory" where the ether is stationary
| in said frame of reference also is c, ..


It does nothing of the sort Paul.
My simulation demonstrates the principle of source independency of light speed.
It doesn't mention 'c' and it doesn't rely on any 'stationary aether frame'.


This was never disputed, Henri.
And why you find it necessary with a "simulation"
to illustrate this obvious triviality, beats me.

The hilarious part is the conclusion you draw from this,
namely:
| .. it follows that SR is an "absolute ether theory".

And you have _still_ not the faintest idea
of why your reasoning is hilarious.


You are definitely not fit to be placed in charge of a students. You are
proving to be everything Androcles says about you...even worse. You haven't a
clue about source dependency.


You have now repeated the confirmation of your
stupidity ad nauseam.


Like your 'wise' colleagues Geese and PD, you are shocked when you see what SR
actually claims.

Thanks for confirming my words.
Again!

Paul
.

Relevant Pages