Re: 1c+1c Closing Velocity of Light and Matter

From: The Ghost In The Machine (ewill_at_sirius.athghost7038suus.net)
Date: 01/13/05 

Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 05:01:48 GMT

In sci.physics, H@..(Henri Wilson)
<H@>
 wrote
on Wed, 12 Jan 2005 21:07:56 GMT
<9p3bu0t7g2k9qrsd995erutki3sn4lqq7r@4ax.com>:
> On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 16:22:46 GMT, The Ghost In The Machine
> <ewill@sirius.athghost7038suus.net> wrote:
>
>>In sci.physics, H@..(Henri Wilson)
>><H@>
>> wrote
>>on Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:34:39 GMT
>><cam9u01t749dkeor91ae38pfnrifjnlha3@4ax.com>:
>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Or, if you prefer, it
>>>>>>takes time d/(c-v), but IIRC you prefer constant momentum as
>>>>>>opposed to rigid-aether.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here you go again, Ghost, unnecessarily complicating things.
>>>>
>>>>MMX initially assumed a rigid aether, with lightspeed constant
>>>>thereto and the experiment moving therein.
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Either way, the computed MTWLS is not c.
>>>>>
>>>>> Correct.
>>>>
>>>>So why has no one seen a non-c in vacuo light measurement?
>>>
>>> Because you know as well as I do how hard it is to measure
>>> one way light speed. The means to do so are only just available.
>>
>>Hard? It's impossible, as far as I can tell (the usual central clock
>>leads not to an OWLS, but a TWLS measurement). Of course a number
>>of derived results (MMX among them) might help in interpreting OWLS,
>>given a certain method of TWLS measurement.
>
> It isn't impossible with modern facilites. ..but it is very hard.
>
>
> It is certainly possible to compare two light speeds from
> differently moving sources. My moon EM relay device will do it.

And return 0, if SR is correct.

I would suggest the following. A small pair of satellites
is fired off a rocket that ultimately approaches the
moon. The first satellite detaches, bounces on the moon
(presumably one can set up a mechanism here similar to the
Mars rovers), stops, deploys. This would ideally be on the
"leeward" or "back" side of the Moon (relative, that is,
to its orbital path -- not to Earth).

The second satellite orbits the moon for a time, but at
a certain point after the first satellite is determined
to be operating correctly, the second satellite fires off
the rest of its reactant, accelerating away from Earth in
such a fashion as to allow both it and the first device
to be observed using Earth radiotelescopes. All this
time the second satellite is sending fixed timesignals,
presumably through an onboard cesium-ion oscillator.
The first device would pick up these signals and relay
them using a known delay, on a different frequency (to
avoid confusion).

This sounds like a reasonably doable experiment. Got a
few hundred mil? :-)

>
>>
>>>
>>> Also, hardly anything in the univere is traveling at anywhere
>>> near c relative to anything else.
>>
>>Relativistic effects are seen in the fixed stars as the Earth
>>moves in its orbit. I forget the name but the effect is
>>rather like tiny ellipses.
>
> they are not relativistic. I think you are talking about aberration.
>
>
>>>>>
>>>>> Highly suspect at best.
>>>>
>>>>I can't say. I'm not a scientist.
>>>
>>> What are you then, Ghost?
>>> How can you be interested in relativity if you aren't a scientist?
>>
>>How can one be interested in stamp collection if one isn't
>>employed by the Post Office?
>
> Well throw away all your books are take notice of what I'm telling you.
> Einsteinian relativity is wrong.

Of course it is. That's why pi mesons from an accelerator
send gamma rays at c.

Oh, wait...

>
>>>>>>Yes, source-invariance will do that to a measurement.
>>>>>>So will SR-all-invariance.
>>>>>
>>>>> SR does it by definition.
>>>>
>>>>Aye, that it does.
>>>
>>> and NO proof.
>>
>>Aye, there is no proof. Lots of indirect evidence, but no proof.
>
> Not even 'believeable' indirect eidence Ghost.

Well, you don't have to believe it. :-)

>
>
>>>>>>"chaotic gas diffusion process"? Where did *that* come in?
>>>>>
>>>>> well, Ghost, Paul andersen seems to think that stars become
>>>>> darker and brighter because of some kind of periodic mechanism.
>>>>
>>>>Some stars do. Look up "Cepheid variables". I'll admit to
>>>>not being all that knowledgeable thereof, other than that
>>>>they exist and are "calibrated", allowing fairly accurate
>>>>measurement of the distance of distant galaxies.
>>>
>>> Cepheids have typical brightness variation curves predicted
>>> by the ballistic theory.
>>
>>The ballistic theory does not include Cepheid variable convection.
>>Even SR cannot make that claim.
>
> The ballistic theory predicts the typical curves of cepheids.
> Single orbiting stars with eccentricities about 1-2.
> ('single' means their companion is dark.)
>
>>
>>> You see, Ghost, the whole of astrophysics will be re-written
>>> when they get it into their heads that light moves at c+v,
>>> where v is our velocity relative to the source.
>>
>>Ah, a momentous discovery! I'm privileged to be here as you
>>announce it.
>>
>>Erm, precisely how do supernovae work and how fast does the
>>exploding shell expand, again?
>
> One cannot be sure because of extinction effects.

Ballpark figures are sufficient.

[.sigsnip] 

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
It's still legal to go .sigless.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: 1c+1c Closing Velocity of Light and Matter
    ... My moon EM relay device will do it. ... to its orbital path -- not to Earth). ... The second satellite orbits the moon for a time, ... > Einsteinian relativity is wrong. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: I dont get it
    ... that they don't agree with the conceptual part of relativity (or what, ... | We have light travelling at velocity c in all inertial frames, ... the Earth and Moon are together and a year is a unit ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) and GPS function.
    ... > effort to apply 1905 Relativity in that environment. ... > GPS clock orbiting the Earth in 1977). ... > calculation using the Moon center of mass inertial frame. ... as it is not an "inertial" frame at all in the ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The Measurement of Contraction
    ... |>> The theory of relativity is presented as one that cannot be understood ... Intuition says believe what you see and intuition says velocities add. ... If you use GR to calculate the time on Earth vs the time on the Moon ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: 1c+1c Closing Velocity of Light and Matter
    ... The first satellite detaches, bounces on the moon ... the second satellite fires off ... >> to be observed using Earth radiotelescopes. ... >they pass, they emit simultaneous signals, as checked by their onboard ...
    (sci.physics)