Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.

On Jun 18, 1:06 am, "Jeckyl" <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Dono" <s...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1182132660.553812.93550@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



On Jun 17, 3:42 pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Dono" <s...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1182089702.790269.19700@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Jun 17, 12:49 am, "Jeckyl" <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Dono" <s...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1182007856.666774.243200@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Jun 16, 8:24 am, G <gehan_ameresek...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 16 Jun, 18:58, Dono <s...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jun 16, 3:06 am, "Jeckyl" <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Dono" <s...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1181931091.779894.165470@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Jun 15, 9:42 am, "Jeckyl" <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Dono" <s...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1181924805.681606.64340@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Jun 15, 9:18 am, "Jeckyl" <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Dono" <s...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1181922056.464625.220320@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Actually , you got it wrong, Harry.
And it is such a simple problem. "G" is indeed correct,
how
would the
light go diagonally in the track frame? Moreover, why
would
the light
ray get inclined forward in the direction of the train
motion?

Its very simple .. it HAS to be inclined forward in the
track
frame in
order
to be vertical in the train frame.

Well, you may be in for a surprise, it is inclined
backwards,
not
forwards in the track frame. Harry here will be more than
happy
to
explain that to you (once he understands my explanation to
him)

Nonsense.

1. Upward light trip as viewed from the track

Train Motion --->
^
^Center of Ceiling Mirror

^ Light Strike on Ceiling Mirror
(off-center)
^
^
^
^Light Emittor on the Train Floor

2. Downward light trip as viewed from the track

Train Motion --->

^ Light Strike on Ceiling Mirror
(off-center)
* ^
* ^
* ^
*LightStrike on the Train Floo

Have fun! Hope you learned something new.

No .. I already knew you had no idea what you're talking about.

Its perfectly simple .. if the light is travelling vertically
in
the
train,
then from the frame of the track it is inclined in the
direction
of
the
travel of the train .. it has to be. There is no other
possibility-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

"It has to be" has no room in science.Bye.

Light emitted in my frame of reference is glued to my frame of
reference in terms of velocity
Just because the source of light is on the train and "inside" the
train does it mean it is in a different frame
of reference? What if it was an open train? what if it was a light
source moving along the tracks ( commonly called an UFO)
My frame ( frame of the tracks) behaves as if it was filled with
stationary ether ( relative to me and the tracks)

What if it was a laser pointer travelling over the tracks ? what if
it
was horizontal? Would we find the laser travelling a greater
distance because it is moving? Will the ray of light emitted from
the
laser travel a greater distance ?

Is it starting to unravel yet, folks?

Unravel what?
If the laser were set horizontally the calculations are even
simpler.
Assume that the length of the train car is 2*L and the train car
speed
is v

1. Forward going beam

c*t_forward=L+v*t_forward

t_forward=L/(c-v)

2. Backward going beam:

c*t_backward+v*t_backward=L

t_backward=L/(c+v)

I assume you are talking completely about the FoR of the track.. In
which
case the L here would not be the rest length of the train, but the
contracted length as per Lorentz transforms.

Did I say that L was the rest length of the train?

You didn't really do a very good job of defining it at all. You also
didn't
say in which direction the laser was pointing .. we had to assume you
meant
in the x axis (direction of travel of the train).

You need to learn how to read.

I can .. you need to learn how to write .. you said something that was
COMPLETELY wrong,

No, idiot, you are still unble to understand it, too complicated for
your brain.


and then had another example that was porroly explained.


It was a much simpler problem, you couldn't get that one either.


Next time, before you shoot your mouth, ask questions, I will explain
to you.

Next time .. keep your mouth shut to avoid embarrassing yourself.

You are still an idiot after all the mathematical explanations. Too
bad.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The relativity of simultaneity
    ... which the train is moving) will reach the passenger before flash A. ... Closing velocities as perceived by the track observer ... light from different directions in the M' frame is isotropic. ... the two light rays arriving to him simultaneously by definition of the ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The relativity of simultaneity
    ... which the train is moving) will reach the passenger before flash A. ... Closing velocities as perceived by the track observer ... light from different directions in the M' frame is isotropic. ... the two light rays arriving to him simultaneously by definition of the ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Contraction has been abolished by Special Relativity
    ... If the front of the train is x'=1, and the rear of the train ... reference of the track, then supposedly you have a little short train ... simultaneity says that in the frame of reference of the train, ... before the second mark is made as seen by an observer on the train. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The relativity of simultaneity
    ... which the train is moving) will reach the passenger before flash A. ... light from different directions in the M' frame is isotropic. ... this mean is that the SR concept of relativity of simultaneity (RoS) ... the two light rays arriving to him simultaneously by definition of the ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
    ... light go diagonally in the track frame? ... to be vertical in the train frame. ... Would we find the laser travelling a greater ... Will the ray of light emitted from ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)