Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles

hw@..(Henry Wilson, DSc) wrote:
Jonah Thomas <jethomas5@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
hw@..(Henry Wilson, DSc) wrote:

Here is the simple explanation of a four mirror Sagnac.
http://www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/sagnac.jpg

I see! And that's what Androcles was hinting at too! Very good! I'm
laughing, that's delightful.

But now I am having trouble with it. The wavelength should stay the
same, yes. But the frequency stays the same too.

This is where the relativist rabble goes wrong. In the NON-ROTATING
FRAME the frequencies of the rays are doppler shifted in opposite
directions. We are using that frame for our analysis. This is very
basic physics ...but clearly too hard for the relativist mentality.

OK, I'll try to stay with the nonrotating frame. I'm trying to
understand this, it's just easy for me to mess us.

The wavelength is the
same because you don't measure wavelength back toward the source when
it emitted the wave, you measure it in the direction of the
wavefront. So in a time interval t units long, one side emits n
cycles at speed c+v and the other side emits n cycles at speed c-v.
Both arrive at the sensors at the same time. During the time for one
wave to pass from the c+v side, one wave will pass from the c-v side
too, slower. I don't see that this gives us a phase shift or a
frequency difference or anything for an interferometer to pick up.

...because you are jumping from one frame to another. If you try to
use the rotating frame, there is an imaginary time factor, that I
tried to explain before.
In the rotating frame, the emission point of a particular element
MOVES BACKWARDS.

OK, let me try this again. I'll put ridiculous numbers on it that I hope
are easy to work with.

Let's say that our light is 10 Hertz and the path is 1 light-second
long.

And then we get it rotating at c/10. Now the light in the forward
direction travels at 1.1c while the light in the back direction travels
at 0.9c. But the apparatus itself is moving at 0.1c, so in the same time
that it previously took for the light to go from source to target it
still goes from source to target in both directions. But the light in
one direction travels 10% farther, while the light in the other
direction travels only 90% as far.

How many cycles have they gone? The same number, 10 cycles. The light is
10 hertz, so in 1 second they each send out 10 waves. But each wave on
one side is stretched an extra 10% while each wave on the other side is
just 90% as long. Then we let the waves interfere. They start out at the
same time. One of them is 10% longer than a lightwave from a stationary
source, but it also travels 10% faster. The other is 90% the length and
it travels at 90% of the speed. Won't these interfere just exactly like
they would if they both started at the same time and both were the same
length and both traveled at c?

I just don't see where the phase shift comes from. I'm missing it.

But if the light doesn't just travel around the circle at c+v the whole
way in one direction and c-v the whole way in the other direction, then
it can work fine. And you haven't said anything so far that indicates
your theory needs light to stay the same speed after it reflects off a
mirror.

I and George Dishman looked at the reflection problem very intensely
some years ago. It is not the issue.
The point missed by most people is that the emission and detection
point of a particular wave element are not the same. SR uses this
...so I can't understand why its followers want to complaiin when I
do.

I think I accounted for that. That's why in one direction you travel 10%
farther to reach the end and in the other direction you travel only 90%
as far. Because the detection point has moved 10% since the wave left
the emission point.

There is only a small difference between the SR and BaTh explanation.

SR says the rays both move at c and there is a difference in distance
and time traveled. BaTh says the travel times are the same, the
distances are different but wavelength is the same in both...and
therefore there are more waves in one ray than the other. They flow in
or out during a speed change.

That's the step I'm missing. It looks to me like the same number of
waves. Say you have one wave in each direction starting at time zero,
they should both reach the end at time 0.1 second. Exactly nine more
should reach the end by time 1 second, in both directions.

Alternatively, BaTh says the frequencies are doppler shifted
oppositely in the inertial frame and since then travel times are the
same, there is aohase difference when they reunite.

If they were traveling at the same speed when they reunited then I'd see
the doppler effect. But they're still traveling at different speeds and
so I imagine them unrolling in exact overlap. No, wait. They overlap
exactly as they cross the finish line, neck and neck at the start and
the shorter one goes through slower. But the interference pattern they
make past that point? The short, slow wave matched against the long fast
one? Is that what I was missing?


Just as they misinterpreted yours, I think you're misinterpreting
them. They can have the rays move at c but one of them has to travel
farther because of the movement of the mirrors etc.

No, they wriggle out of the problem by claiming that the separation
soeed of the light from the source is indeed c+v.

I don't want to talk about SR. It looks like it's real easy to make
mistakes with SR, and my intuition is no good there either. Emission
theory is so much simpler and easier, and I'm still having trouble with
it. I'll try to figure out the easy version first, and only take up SR
if emission theory fails.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
    ... The front of the wave is always the front ... travels. ... some differently moving observer that the speeds are different ... Frame jumping again, I see. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
    ... The front of the wave is always the front ... travels. ... some differently moving observer that the speeds are different ... Frame jumping again, I see. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
    ... They leave the source with the same wavelength and speed and frequency ... which frame is absolute rest, one frame is as good as another, the rules ... the average time the light travels around it. ... leave the ring for the detector the speeds change, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
    ... We are using that frame for our analysis. ... for one>>wave to pass from the c+v side, one wave will pass from the ... travels at 0.9c. ... What's the frequency at the detector? ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
    ... We are using that frame for our analysis. ... for one>>wave to pass from the c+v side, one wave will pass from the ... travels at 0.9c. ... What's the frequency at the detector? ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)