sci.astro
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Ballistic Theory and the Sagnac Experiment

Subject: Re: Ballistic Theory and the Sagnac Experiment
From: ""
Date: 28 Mar 2006 19:46:22 -0800
Newsgroups: sci.astro, sci.physics.relativity, sci.physics
Henri Wilson wrote:
> On 27 Mar 2006 18:58:04 -0800, "jgreenfield@xxxxxxxxxxx" <jgreen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >Henri Wilson wrote:
> >> On 26 Mar 2006 23:58:04 -0800, "George Dishman" <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >Henri Wilson wrote:
> >> >...
> >> >> Wilson does not agree with Einstein.
> >> >>
> >> >> Wilson agrees with Ritz..... who effectively said that in any one 
> >> >> frame, TWLS =
> >> >> OWLS = c.
> >> >
> >> >Careful Henry, not "in any one frame", only "in the rest
> >> >frame of the source" and only if the other equipment
> >> >is also at rest. Bounce the light off a moving mirror for
> >> >example and the reflected one-way speed will probably
> >> >be affected but with those qualifications you are right.
> >>
> >> I have made it quite clear before that by 'any one frame' I mean 
> >> everything in
> >> the experiment is in the one frame. That naturally implies source, mirror 
> >> and
> >> detector are mutually at rest.
> >>
> >> Even Androcles should be able to understand that.
> >>
> >> Incidentally, this is only true in flat gravity. If for instance the 
> >> experiment
> >> were carries out vertically, average OWLS would still equals average TWLS 
> >> but
> >> would have a value less than the constant c.
> >>
> >> The 'hushed-up' Venus radar experiment verified this.
> >
> >Wasn't to do with gravity H.
>
> Not so fast Jim.
>
> >The earth's spin added / subtracted to the signal time of travel
> >(less time with radar approaching venus, and opposite.
>
> Well, this is interesting Jim. What are you assuming to be the speed of the
> reflected beam?

I assume that the incident approach speed (to venus) would be the same
as the reflected,
but I am not sure.
What I AM sure of, is that radars in Russia and USA, when making
simultaneous distance measurements of venus, came up with differring
results (having allowed for the earth's geometry etc). This could ONLY
be due to (say) USA pulse having a +v due to the earth's spin, and
Russia -v
Shapiro, possibly under pressure to do so from the US govt, withheld
this data.


> Is it c wrt Venus... or does the planet behave like a mirror and reflect the
> beam at double the incident speed to (c + 2v) wrt Earth, where v is Venus's
> speed towards earth?
>
> Gravity could make a considerable difference. Light slows while escaping Earth
> then speeds up as it approaches Venus. It does the opposite on the return 
> trip.
> If the travel times for each leg are significantly different - and they could
> be - then so might be the effect due to gravity. I doubt if this would be
> anything like 500 kms though.

It wouldn't vary with location (USA and Russia)
...hard to prove gravity from a single location? All you have is an
average for the round trip.
>
> >Simultaneous measurements of distance to venus varied by (500kms?)
> >placing the planet at two locations at once
>
> >http://surf.de.uu.net/bookland/sci/farce/farce_6
>
> That wont open. Check the address, please Jim.

Does for me!  The Farce of Physics: Light Lunacy

Jim G
c'=c+v


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