Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
- From: bz <bz+spr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 12:46:25 +0000 (UTC)
G <gehan_ameresekere@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:1184469800.966055.163380@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
Ah but this is the point. In the double star experiment this isOK. But if the source is moving, then is it not as if it was
momentaritly stationary, emitted the light directly upwards , and
then moved on?
NO. Do the headlights on your car become momentarily stationary every
time they emit a photon? Last time my headlights became stationary
while the car was in motion, it took a body shop and a lot of money to
repair the damages.
If the source is moving, it is moving. It is NOT stopping.
exactly what is assumed.
I am afraid I am unfamiliar with any experiment that assumes that a moving
source stops every time it emits a photon. Citation please.
Any such experimental assumption would be contrary to experimental
evidence:
Every laser source on earth is in motion with respect to an infinite number
of intertial frames of reference, including one centered on the center of
the earth, the center of the sun and the center of our galaxy.
Yet every beam of laser light continues to travel in a straight line as
seen from the laser's iFoR.
If the laser were required to cease moving [in any iFoR but the lasers
iFoR] in order to emit a photon then the laws of physics as we know them
would need to be violated many ways.
Since the laws of physics, as we know them, are formulated on observations
that NEVER see a source 'stop moving' in order to emit a photon, that
should strongly suggest to you that any experiment that makes such an
assumption makes as much sense as an experiment that assumes that you can
go to the end of a rainbow and find a pot of gold.
As far as I know, any viable experiment will begin with assuming that the
laws of physics, as we know them, work.
--
bz
please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an
infinite set.
bz+spr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
- From: G
- Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
- From: bz
- Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
- From: G
- Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
- From: bz
- Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
- From: G
- Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
- Prev by Date: Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
- Next by Date: Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
- Previous by thread: Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
- Next by thread: Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|