Re: If lightspeed were constant to all frames
- From: PD <TheDraperFamily@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 09:56:47 -0700 (PDT)
On Aug 18, 9:34 am, kenseto <kens...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The new light source is not sodium although its pattern can be used to
determine the original source.
I especially like the above line, paraphrased for completeness:
"The new light source with wavelength at 605 nm is not sodium,
although its pattern can be used to determine that the original source
is sodium at 589 nm."
Seto's been told, though he surely does not remember (because today is
Monday) that there is often nothing but a *hole* between the original
source and the diffraction grating that measures the wavelength.
Therefore, Seto is saying that the new light source with wavelength at
605 nm is not sodium, although its pattern can be used to determine
that the source is sodium. Therefore what is not sodium is found to be
sodium.
PD
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: If lightspeed were constant to all frames
- From: kenseto
- Re: If lightspeed were constant to all frames
- References:
- If lightspeed were constant to all frames
- From: Spaceman
- Re: If lightspeed were constant to all frames
- From: kenseto
- Re: If lightspeed were constant to all frames
- From: Spaceman
- Re: If lightspeed were constant to all frames
- From: kenseto
- Re: If lightspeed were constant to all frames
- From: PD
- Re: If lightspeed were constant to all frames
- From: kenseto
- If lightspeed were constant to all frames
- Prev by Date: Re: A Flower for Einstein
- Next by Date: Re: If lightspeed were constant to all frames
- Previous by thread: Re: If lightspeed were constant to all frames
- Next by thread: Re: If lightspeed were constant to all frames
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|