Re: Michelson-Morley: Much ado about nil
- From: "jambaugh" <ego@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 6 Oct 2006 09:55:04 -0700
I actually just realized a very much simpler refutation of your
position.
Your argument is equivalent to the following:
:::I lay on my back and watch a star pass over head. [I'm in a
rotating frame]
:::From my perspective the star (a distance of 1lightyear away) is
moving
::: at a velocity of r*omega = 2pi lightyears / day = 2295 c.
::: Since I see the star traveling faster than c
::: I have disproved Einstein's special theory of relativity.
::: ... I AM A PHYSICS GOD!!!!!
::: What??? The academic community won't shower me with accolades?
::: Well that's because they are all fuckwads worshiping at the holy
alter of Einstein...
::: and not because I've misinterpreted Einstein's theory!
Again you are trying to equivocate the addition of angular velocities
with the addition of linear velocities. To be fully equivalent add to
the above that you "see" light leaving the star in opposite directions
traveling at speeds of (2295+1)c and (2295-1)c both going westward.
Regardless,
James Baugh
.
- References:
- Michelson-Morley: Much ado about nil
- From: cafeinst
- Re: Michelson-Morley: Much ado about nil
- From: rambus2005
- Re: Michelson-Morley: Much ado about nil
- From: jamesahart79
- Re: Michelson-Morley: Much ado about nil
- From: Barry
- Re: Michelson-Morley: Much ado about nil
- From: cafeinst
- Re: Michelson-Morley: Much ado about nil
- From: jambaugh
- Michelson-Morley: Much ado about nil
- Prev by Date: Re: Is Einstein’s E=mc2, CONCEPTUALLY applicable for energy emitted Chemical Reactions.
- Next by Date: Re: Is Einstein’s E=mc2, CONCEPTUALLY applicable for energy emitted Chemical Reactions.
- Previous by thread: Re: Michelson-Morley: Much ado about nil
- Next by thread: Re: Michelson-Morley: Much ado about nil
- Index(es):