Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.


"Henri Wilson" <HW@..> wrote in message
news:ksn5b2pin8u5q4ep5n303p8mpubftea9ci@xxxxxxxxxx
On Mon, 10 Jul 2006 13:59:33 GMT, "kenseto" <kenseto@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


"Henri Wilson" <HW@..> wrote in message
news:3q23b29phj6drjibr45pdh22bspq5s6dac@xxxxxxxxxx
On Sun, 09 Jul 2006 13:48:25 GMT, "kenseto" <kenseto@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


"Henri Wilson" <HW@..> wrote in message
news:d5g0b2ttj5083lrqk70ah4gea2lbcu2cti@xxxxxxxxxx
On Sat, 08 Jul 2006 00:40:47 GMT, "kenseto" <kenseto@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:


arguement that says that OWLS is c. Don't you realize how insecure
you
sound??

Ken, they are so clueless they don't even understand that OWLS can
have
any
value. It is not a constant.

All we know is that OWLS = c wrt its source...but we don't know why.

We don't know that. This is your assumption.

Ken, if a completely remote source emits a photon, what reference does
that
photon have for speed.

It is wrt the source but you don't know OWLS has the value of c wrt the
source. You made the assertion that OWLS is c wrt the source and then
declared that that is the true value of OWLS wrt the source. The fact
that
OWLS has never been measured makes your assertion a bunch of baloney.

Ken, the fact that TWLS experiments always give the same value for c
proves
that light leaves its source at c and is ballistic.

Please list the TWLS experiments done so far as specified by
Einstein...TWLS=2AB/(t'A-tA). Bet you can't.


However, in any TWLS experiment where the source and mirror are
mutually
at
rest, TWLS = OWLS =c (in flat gravity, of course).

This is another one of your assumption.

It is a direct result of light being c wrt everything in the source
frame.

But OWLS never been measured and TWLS been measured once that I know of
by
Michealson and the result is not c.

OWLS has never been directly measured from a moving source.
OWLS has been measured many times in single frame experiments, either OW
or
round trip.

You are an idiot....direct OWLS has never been done.

Ken Seto


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Relative Movement vs. Moving through Space
    ... >wrt each other) is not c. ... If OWLS measured this way is c then it ... Both OWLS and TWLS are c between objects mutually at rest. ... >> relative to the mirror. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Relative Movement vs. Moving through Space
    ... >wrt each other) is not c. ... If OWLS measured this way is c then it ... Both OWLS and TWLS are c between objects mutually at rest. ... >> relative to the mirror. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.
    ... they are so clueless they don't even understand that OWLS ... It is wrt the source but you don't know OWLS has the value of c wrt ... the fact that TWLS experiments always give the same value for c ... It merely requires two pre-synched clocks and a sharp light pulse. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: This is What Einstein Actually Did.
    ... they are so clueless they don't even understand that OWLS can have ... It is wrt the source but you don't know OWLS has the value of c wrt the ... OWLS has never been measured makes your assertion a bunch of baloney. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Relative Movement vs. Moving through Space
    ... >>Hey idiot you said that OWLS is c if the receiver and the source are at ... > If they are not at rest, the OWLS wrt the observer is c+v. ... Hey moron ...you can't measure OWLS if the source and the receiver are not ...
    (sci.physics)
Quantcast