Re: Errors being made by SR experts.

On Aug 4, 10:49 am, "Gerald L. O'Barr" <glob...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Gerald L. O'Barr" <glob...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
. . . .
PD wrote:
It is NOT c-v or c+v. It just isn't.
The REAL velocity of that photon in
the other frame is
(c+v)/(1+v*c/c^2) = (c+v)/(1+v/c)
= c(1+v/c)/(1+v/c) = c.
See? It's quite obvious.
I don't know where you got the idea
that the REAL velocity of the
photon in that second frame MUST BE
c-v or c+v. That is just plain
wrong.

PD,
You have just come in to these posts too late.
What is being measured here is not what some
one in their own frame might measure for the
relative speed of light past their own tools,
but what the relative speed of light is when
it is measured going past someone elses frame.

You don't measure light going past someone else's frame. That would be
the point. Any procedure to do so makes an implicit assumption about
how velocities combine, as I've told you in the past. That assumption
used is the one that is incorrect.


Please stop making all these silly mistakes.
What is the velocity of light going past a
train that has velocity of v? When Einstein
measured the velocity of light going past
a train moving with a velocity of v along
the tracks, then SR observers in the track
frame will measure exactly that light is
going past the train with a relative
velocity of c +/- v.

No, Einstein did no such thing, and the fact that you repeat it simply
hammers in your superficial understanding of relativity. First of all,
Einstein made no measurement -- he offered a gedanken, which is a
"suppose this, then what would you conclude?" kind of thing that
involves no measurement. Secondly, he was explaining what a ground
observer might *deduce* is the speed of light going past the train.
This *deduced* speed is called a "closing speed" and is NEVER a
*measured* speed. The fact that the *deduced* speed varies from what
is actually *measured* was what Einstein used to point out that the
rules for deducing that speed must be wrong.

Now if you want to
disagree with Einstein, be my guest, but
in this case, Einstein was correct.

I don't want to disagree with Einstein. Your understanding of what he
said, however, is dim.

And so am I!

Thanks for reading.
Gerald L. O'Barr <globarr...@xxxxxxxxx>- Hide- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Light speed invariance
    ... But Dirk forgets that Einstein died suspecting his work was ... |> composition with a velocity less than that of light. ... | using the observed TWLS measurement. ... objective, not rationalize subjectivity. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Basics series proposed
    ... The synchronization procedure that Einstein proposes ... then x' is fixed in the k- frame as much as the symbols 0,1,2,3... ...
    (sci.physics.particle)
  • Re: Basics series proposed
    ... The synchronization procedure that Einstein proposes ... then x' is fixed in the k- frame as much as the symbols 0,1,2,3... ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Basics series proposed
    ... The synchronization procedure that Einstein proposes ... then x' is fixed in the k- frame as much as the symbols 0,1,2,3... ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Is the speed of light really constant ?
    ... I was thinking that after an observer changes velocity relative to ... When you change your assumption about the frame in which lightpseed ... velocity "u" from this third frame. ... time labels and nominal distance labels to distant events ... ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Loading