Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited

<kenseto@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:5f7947f4-34c6-4a4b-85a2-4e106803a021@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jun 17, 12:04 pm, G <gehan.ameresek...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jun 17, 6:01 pm, "kens...@xxxxxxxxxx" <kens...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:





> On Jun 16, 9:23 am, "Whoever" <no...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > <kens...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

> >news:58b41ffa-d497-4aa6-a6ef-aee7f0a1b2dc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> > > On Jun 15, 8:33 pm, "Whoever" <no...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >> "Henry Wilson, DSc" <hw@..> wrote in
> > >> messagenews:isjd351ova94klg0l8agkc9qcb958tsmjs@xxxxxxxxxx

> > >> > On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 17:42:54 +1000, "Whoever" > > >> > <no...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >> > wrote:

> > >> >>"G" <gehan.ameresek...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > >> >>news:6f7c6359-d9fd-4349-b660-5986a524af39@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >> >>> By the way, Einstein made mistakes

> > >> >>>http://discovermagazine.com/2008/sep/01-einstein.s-23-biggest-mistakes

> > >> >>Yes .. Einstein was human and his theories changed and evolved. > > >> >>Big
> > >> >>deal.

> > >> > Einstein was a plagiarist and a hoaxer.

> > >> Doesn't really matter even if he was. What matters is the SR and > > >> GR
> > >> models
> > >> that he helped develop

> > >> > His theory is just a disguised version of LET.

> > >> Its LET with the need for any mysterious physical shrinkage of > > >> objects
> > >> and
> > >> distnaces, and slowing of processes with by their movement in an
> > >> undetectable ether with properties that are inconsistent with > > >> known
> > >> substances. SR does not require that

> > > Sigh....of course the ether unique and has unique properties that > > > no
> > > known substance has.

> > If it existed. Which by the nature of the properties it would have > > to have,
> > we cannot show. How convenient :)

> > > You are wrong....SR does require the special properties of the > > > ether.

> > It requires no ether, nor does it say there cannot be one.. SR works > > quite
> > happily with corpuscular/balistic theories, or wave/ether based > > theories. SR
> > postulates that the speed of light is the same for observations in > > all
> > inertial (non accelerating) frames. It really doesn't give a hoot > > about how
> > the light gets from point A to point B .. as long as the speed is the > > same
> > for everyone.

> Then why does physicists refused to measure the one-way speed of light
> directly??

> > > For example: An SR observer claims that all the clocks in the > > > universe
> > > moving wrt him are running slow and all the rod moving wrt him are
> > > contracted.....these are the exclusive properties of an observer at
> > > rest in the ether frame.

> > Not at all. In SR it is a property of every inertial (non > > accelerating)
> > frame.

> That's the point: Every SR observer claims that he is in a state of
> absolute rest and that's why he claims the unique properties of the
> absolute rest frame. BTW that's why SR is incomplete.....No object in
> the universe is in a state of absolute rest.

> Ken Seto

> > In ether theories, like LET, it is the property of a unique frame. > > But SR is
> > not LET. You're obviously confused about these two theories.- Hide > > quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -

Maybe you have an experiment in mind to measure the one way speed of
light directly?

Yes.
1. Two touching and synchroneous clocks are moved very slowly in the
opposite directions at the same time with the same velocity and stop
these clocks at equal distance from the atarting point simultaneously.
These procedures can be accomplished by using opposite conveying
screws that are opertated by a common motor.
2. These two clocks will remain synchronized....according to SR and
LET.
3. Use these two spatially separated and synchronized clocks to
determine the one-way speed of light.

And then you get the same c in both directions. I'm pretty certain this type of experiment would have been done befoer.

IRT predicts that the value for the one-way speed of light is distance
dependent.

But it is a load of inconsistent rubbish


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Errors being made by SR experts.
    ... the ether will never be seen. ... So if photons in a photon clock slow down, ... all clocks formed of matter? ... the moving frame ..they will see out tools as shorter ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Logical inconsistency in Lorentzs theory
    ... As has been discussed at length recently here, Lorentz ether theory is ... equitably and independently of the ticking rates of clocks. ... a physical contraction along the line of motion wrt the ether, ... the railcar frame. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Einsteins Train Gedanken Re-visited
    ... undetectable ether with properties that are inconsistent with ... absolute rest and that's why he claims the unique properties of the ... these clocks at equal distance from the atarting point simultaneously. ... And then you get the same c in both directions. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Einsteins Train Gedanken Re-visited
    ... you can guarantee the clocks are in sync (without first assuming some theory ... about how time is affected by distance and motion etc or without assuming ... rest in the ether frame. ... absolute rest and that's why he claims the unique properties of the ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: What should a theory give us?
    ... and clocks running physically slower. ... but relative to the ether. ... Read: "in the stationary frame". ... synchronised in the FoR and then moved apart, the difference in absolute ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Quantcast