sci.astro
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Ballistic Theory and the Sagnac Experiment

Subject: Re: Ballistic Theory and the Sagnac Experiment
From: "George Dishman"
Date: 7 Mar 2006 05:33:24 -0800
Newsgroups: sci.astro, sci.physics.relativity, sci.physics
Henri Wilson wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Mar 2006 22:11:39 -0000, "George Dishman" <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Henri Wilson" <HW@..> wrote in message
>
> >> Maxwell's equations use the measured values of two constants to obtain a
> >> value
> >> for the universal constant c.
> >
> >And that constant appears in the propagating
> >wave solution of the equations as the speed
> >of the wave:
> >
> >http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/einsteinlight/jw/module3_Maxwell.htm#light
>
> Speed relative to the frame of the measuring apparatus ...

Yes. That's all you need say.

> ... as measured BY the
> measuring apparatus which is contracted in the absolute aether according to 
> the
> LTs.
>
> This is not related to the relative speed of light emitted in other frames.

Yes it is, it applies to ALL light, according to
the equations because ...

> >Note that two sources are dealt with by
> >superposition since the derivative of a sum
> >is the sum of the derivatives.

...
> >I can see you don't know how to solve second
> >order linear differential equations and I can
> >see that Einstein's postulate follows from
> >Maxwell's Equations.
>
> Forget the equations, just look at the physics. ...

Don't be silly, we are discussing what whether
you can use Maxwell's Equations in a Ritzian
model so how can we "Forget the equations"?

BTW, you still don't seem to understand that
the equations ARE the physics.

> >>>>>No, your philosophy. You assume abolute
> >>>>>simultaneity and couch any attempts at
> >>>>>science within that. It means you end up
> >>>>>with ad-hoc phenomena like speed extinction
> >>>>>and photon drag to explain experiments.
> >>>>
> >>>> 'Now' here is NOW everywhere. That is bloody obvious.
> >>>
> >>>That is your philosophical stance, nothing
> >>>more, and certainly not science.
> >>
> >> NOW for me, is NOW for me everywhere.
> >
> >Yes, it is the set of events that occur
> >at the same time as the event you label
> >"NOW, HERE" but at different locations.
> >
> >> Why the hell should it be anything other than NOW for anyone else,
> >> anywhere?
> >
> >Because NOW for you is a surface orthogonal
> >to your worldline while NOW for anyone else
> >is a surface orthogonal to theirs. If they
> >are moving relative to you, your worldlines
> >are not parallel so neither are the surfaces
> >you call "NOW, EVERYWHERE".
>
> Only if one accepts the circular logic of SR.

It is not circular at all Henry, it is derived from
Maxwell's Equations which give one speed
regardless of the motion of the source.

<big snip of uncommented material>

> >>>Have you included the effects of speed unification
> >>>and added the predicted spectrum yet? It's not much
> >>>use without those.
> >>
> >> The velocity curve is provided. From that the predicted spectrum is easy
> >> to
> >> obtain.
> >
> >Good, I'll expect you to include it then. It
> >should be something like this
> >
> >http://www.georgedishman.f2s.com/Henri/Ritz_Doppler_3.png
> >
> >
> >depending on your choice of values.
>
> Have look at www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/variables.exe
> Tell me if it works OK on your computer.

Probably be later this evening.

George


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>