Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles

"Jonah Thomas" <jethomas5@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:20090918084121.5d078640.jethomas5@xxxxxxxxxxxx
"Inertial" <relatively@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Jonah Thomas" <jethomas5@xxxxxxxxx> wrote

> Because the detector moves away from one light beam and moves toward
> the other one. We all agree on that, right?

The light is moving toward the detector in both cases.

The closing rate between the leading edge of the light ray/photon/wave
is the same for both rays.

For a circular case (eg fibre optic) the dectector is 2piR away from
the leading edge of both rays. Over the time, both rays get close to
the detector at the same rate, and arrive at the same time (when the
distance is then zero).

The detector is moving away from the initial source position as
recorded in the inertial frame in one direction, and close to it in
the other.

But relative to the leading edge of the light (in ballistic analysis)
the rays and detector are moving twoard each other at the same rate

Yes. I found my mistake.

> If you figure that when the light
> left the emitter it started at zero and the electric field then
> climbed to positive one and then fell to zero, why would the same
> spot on the wave later be anything but zero trending positive?
>
> Still, that is an assumption. And when I drew the picture your way,
> with the wave reaching the detector in phase and then I drew it
> backward to the sources with constant wavelength and speed 0.9 and
> 1.1 and distance 11 and 13, it was out of phase at the source.

Its not out of phase at the source (S), its out of phase at 's', which
is not the source, but just a place the source passed by.

I wasn't using 's', I double-counted the distance offset. The result was
similar.

Oh well. It was fun while it lasted.

I tried to find a way for Wilson's idea to be right, and I gave it my
best shot.

Good for you. It is always worth considering other positions and seeing whether they are logically consistent and physically possible and experimentally observerd


This result fits my original interpretation. The change in speed for the
light in the different directions is just enough to make up for the
rotation. And without having to deal with the rotation the result is
completely symmetrical. It's hard to find anything to work with.

Mmm.. of course, the answer is simple, that ballistic theory (with each ray having a constant speed around the ring) gives no phase shift because the rays arrive at the same time. If speed somehow varies over the duration by the right ammounts, then you can get different arrival times, and a phase shift.

They leave the emitter in phase and arrive at the detector in phase
and it takes the same time for them to do so.

The only way for them NOT to arrive in phase is if something happened
to the rays in transit

It would have to happen differently to the waves that have the different
absolute speeds and different directions. I can sort of imagine ways
that could happen, but none that follow direction from an emission
theory. They'd be ad hoc things added onto the theory to let it fit
Sagnac.

All in all, I think Wilson would be better off to go with the Ritz
emission theory. It treats reflections different, but Wilson's work with
double stars probably doesn't involve any reflections so he wouldn't
lose much there. And the Ritz theory works with Sagnac with some tiny
differences that likely have still not been tested.

Ritz (as you have described it) makes no sense when you think about it, and is refuted experimentally.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: c+v and Sagnac
    ... inertial frame, its separation speed relative to light is not going to be c ... It is the particular object that has 'million of different speeds', a different velocity in every distinct frame of reference. ... on the non-zero instantaneous velocity of the detector. ... So how the rays arrive at the detector are not at all important to Sagnac? ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Speed of Light: A universal Constant?
    ... >> distance with time between the source and the detector. ... >> light) arriving from a moving source is different than that if the ... > If a laser beam is reflected from a moving target, ... > detector, they will still be traveling at different speeds, they will take ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
    ... And as far as the moving detector is concerned, ... Henry seems to think that how the waves arrive at the detector doesn't matter for sagnac .. ... The wavelength is the same, ... speeds are different because the source and target are both moving. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
    ... The light is moving toward the detector in both cases. ... the leading edge of both rays. ... distance is then zero). ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The Emission Theory of Androcles
    ... The light is moving toward the detector in both cases. ... the leading edge of both rays. ... distance is then zero). ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)