Re: Experimental Evidence for Special Relativity
- From: doug <xx@xxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 16:49:20 -0800
Dr. Henri Wilson wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 09:52:01 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen"
<paul.b.andersen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dr. Henri Wilson wrote:
On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 20:50:03 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen"
<paul.b.andersen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/pdf/aberration.pdf
This is a very interesting article.
You state, quote:
"We will take for granted that the “Law of Reflection” applies in K, that is, a
light beam incident upon a mirror will be reflected at an angle equal to the
incident angle.
According to the Special Theory of Relativity, hereafter called SR, the speed
of both the incident light and the reflected light is c, where c is an
invariant constant of nature.
According to Ritz Emission Theory, hereafter called RT, the speed of the
reflected light is the same as the speed of the incident light in K.
"
end of quote
Then, after some very impressive math you reach the conclusion for both
theories that, (quote):
"A light beam incident upon a moving mirror will be reflected at an angle equal
to the
incident angle.
The speed of a light beam reflected off a moving mirror will be the same as the
speed of
the incident beam.
"
end of quote.
Hilarious, no?
Quite.
A posting by Henri Wilson:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/7eba4e0a815e2c83
http://tinyurl.com/3zgpqd
from where I quote:
<<
I have provided the real reason for the Sagnac shift.
Light does NOT reflect from a moving mirror at the incident angle of speed.
Wrong again. Hilarious indeed.
It is a possibility.
That discussion was part of one I had with George Dishman, who unfortunately no
longer contributes here. George was one relativist who was capable of sensible
discusion. I have since found the real ...and quite simple and rather obvious...BaTh
explanation of sagnac.
Simple... but wrong.
.
BTW, "the very impressive math" is a basic transformation of the velocity
angles from the rest frame of the mirror to a moving frame, according to both
the Galilean and the Lorentz transform.
No big deal, but the conclusions are inevitable.
Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm.
Einstein: the greatest hoaxer since 'virgin' mary
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Experimental Evidence for Special Relativity
- From: Eric Gisse
- Re: Experimental Evidence for Special Relativity
- References:
- Re: Experimental Evidence for Special Relativity
- From: Paul B. Andersen
- Re: Experimental Evidence for Special Relativity
- From: John Kennaugh
- Re: Experimental Evidence for Special Relativity
- From: Paul B. Andersen
- Re: Experimental Evidence for Special Relativity
- From: John Kennaugh
- Re: Experimental Evidence for Special Relativity
- From: Paul B. Andersen
- Re: Experimental Evidence for Special Relativity
- From: Paul B. Andersen
- Re: Experimental Evidence for Special Relativity
- Prev by Date: Re: Experimental Evidence for Special Relativity
- Next by Date: Re: Ok, so how do YOU get the world to acknowledge YOUR theories?
- Previous by thread: Re: Experimental Evidence for Special Relativity
- Next by thread: Re: Experimental Evidence for Special Relativity
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
