Re: Speed of Light is Constant in Tired Light Models, Decelerated Light is a new model


"Michael Helland" <mobydikc@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:01f665a6-32b3-408e-a062-f7723be9334f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On May 8, 4:52 pm, "OG" <o...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Michael Helland" <mobyd...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:d3323d85-a3f3-4e04-b431-169ced94fb57@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



On May 8, 3:12 pm, "OG" <o...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Michael Helland" <mobyd...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:be39eed5-73d7-4c20-8b7c-35d7ac85fc49@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On May 6, 4:08 pm, "OG" <o...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Michael Helland" <mobyd...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:480fde48-5665-44c4-8266-b448d4542cb3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On May 2, 6:49 pm, Eric Gisse <jowr...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On May 2, 5:23 pm, Michael Helland <mobyd...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On May 2, 4:28 pm, "OG" <o...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Sam Wormley" <sworml...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:EJMSj.92984$TT4.16809@xxxxxxxxxxxx

OG wrote:
"Sam Wormley" <sworml...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:wlsSj.91494$TT4.50522@xxxxxxxxxxxx
OG wrote:

So some light is travelling slower than other light...

No the speed of light is the same for all inertial
observers.

I'm just restating a onsequence of his flawed theory so
that
we
can draw
out the inconsistencies

What inconsistencies?

Dunno yet; he's not told us enough so far*!
Personally, I'm looking for inconsistencies with 'real
life',
but
unless we
know know more about physics in the 'world of M_Helland' we
won't
know where
his 'physics' gets close enough to reality that he will
start
to
think
critically about his theory.

As I've shown, c = fw

As you have ASSERTED...

Either c is constant, and when f drops, w expands to
compensate.

Or w is constant, and when f drops c drops too.

No matter which way you calculate c and w, f should be
consistent
with
observations.

Only if you are incredibly naive and refuse to actually think
very
hard.

I've thought hard about it.

This implies that I'm suggesting properties of an EM wave that
don't
fit on the traditional EM spectrum.

You continue to refuse to elevate the discourse past "well it
expands to compensate...". Remember the Tolman surface
brightness
test? I'm sure you do since you carefully ignore every mention
of
it
now.

Tired Light fails the surface brightness test, because the galaxy
is
not receding, and the light doesn't slow down.

However, when the light slows down (w is constant and c
decreases)
you
wind up with all the exact same frequencies as when space expands
(c
is constant and w increases).

Decelerating light predicts all the same values as expansion,
because

How the hell would you know? You know bugger all about physics,
and
you've
ignored the point that lenses don't differentiate between your
proposed
'deccelerated' light and normal light when bringing it to focus.

I apologize for not responding satisfactorily.

I thought I responded to it.

The rule says that new light travels at c, and its velocity drops as
the millions and billions of years go by.

When light enters a lens, it hits electrons, and new photons are
emitted with the same energy.

But it is new light, so its traveling at c.

Once the light hits something and is re-emitted, it travels at c.
According to the rule.

The light in the lens matches that prediction.

And the refractive index is the ratio of the speed of light before and
after
the light hits the glass. Agreed?

The speed of light before doesn't matter. It would c and the speed of
light in the medium.

Wrong - the speed of light 'before' DOES matter. That's why I mentioned
it.


The speed of the photons in the medium is c.

So you keep on saying - but what about the speed of light before it hits the
glass ? The refraction depends on the speed of light before and after
passing into the medium.

They do spend time inside atoms between absorption and emission, so it
takes longer to get from point a to b.

That's what is observed, and that's consistent with the rule where all
photons are emitted at c.

You have not answered my point - which is about the impact on refractive
index were light to be travelling at anything other than 'c' before hitting
the glass.


.

Quantcast