Re: Mach's principle and aether

On Mar 15, 11:37 pm, "Sue..." <suzysewns...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 15, 9:00 pm, "bsr3...@xxxxxxxxxxx" <bsr3...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[...]







I was responding to your statement, "When my clock is slower than
yours but your clock is slower than mine ABSURD seems a better
description than APPROXIMATE."

Tom explained why that is the case and you did not seem to understand
what he was saying, so I tried to elaborate on what he said.  If you
have a question state it.

No... Tom used the phrase"

   "for an appropriate physical situation"

without further elaboration, he explained nothing.

There was a whole paragraph following that statment that any
reasonable person would consider to be further elaboration.  

If it were a whole volume it would still be BS.

Reasonable people expect a light path mentioned if there
is one, rather than vague weasel-words about "measurement procedures"
or "for an appropriate physical situation".

Well there you go. No light path was needed so there was no need to
mention it. Two clocks were together, and later one of them was with
a third clock.

And there
was a follow up post that attempted to further explain what you do not
understand.  It is starting to look like you have chosen to not
understand.  That would mean you have joined the ranks of the
cranks.

[your snip restored for your further consideration]

Tom is asking us to  reject the principle of relativity.
Will we also have to accept the implications of Phlogiston
and Caloric and to prove we are not cranks?

If that is the case then quote his statement that makes you think so.

http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/jk1/lectures/node7.html

"The Dual Nature of Light as Reflected in the Nobel Archives"http://nobelprize.org/physics/articles/ekspong/index.html

Sue...





Bruce- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Decisions
    ... wish that they could turn back the clock and not ake the same choice? ... Do elaborate:o) ... Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ...
    (uk.local.kent)
  • Re: IRT: A New Theory of Relativity
    ... Please remember the following on IRT: ... The light path length in A's frame for a 299,792,458 meters long rod is 1 ... light second as measured using A's clock. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: IRT: A New Theory of Relativity
    ... Please remember the following on IRT: ... The light path length in A's frame for a 299,792,458 meters long rod is 1 ... light second as measured using A's clock. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: A New Definition for "TIME"
    ... The LT of length contraction is a re-statement of light path expansion. ... >> dependent on the state of absolute motion of the stick. ... The atomic clock interval reading for this ... The laws of physics based on a clock second and light path ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: A New Definition for "TIME"
    ... > The LT of length contraction is a re-statement of light path expansion. ... > state of absolute motion. ... The atomic clock interval reading for this ... > and the light path length of a measuring rod has the same ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Quantcast