|
|
"Henri Wilson" <HW@..> wrote in message
news:l8kl32lr5808cnmdadhj62i80bi433uegh@xxxxxxxxxx
| On 10 Apr 2006 04:43:29 -0700, "Jerry" <Cephalobus_alienus@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
|
| >Hexenmeister wrote:
| >> "Jerry" <Cephalobus_alienus@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1144621473.698167.70400@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
|
|
|
| >>
| >> < snip >
| >>
| >> You haven't answered my question, so I snipped.
| >> Do you or don't you agree there is no such animal as "wavelength"
| >> of light ?
| >> Androcles.
| >
| >If light has a frequency, and if light has a velocity, then
| >light has a wavelength.
|
| ..but what physical structure of light gives rise to this 'frequency and
| wavelength?
|
| >
| >Do you deny the concept of wavelength in sound?
| >
| >Whether or not you agree to the term "c" or prefer 299,792.5 km/s,
| >you earlier agreed that light is emitted (reflected) from mirrors
| >at constant velocity with respect to the mirror. Therefore, in your
| >version of emission theory, Hero's law of the equality of incident
| >and reflected angles is invalid when the incoming light has velocity
| >differing from 299,792.5 km/s, since the reflected light must have
| >constant velocity with respect to the mirror of 299,792.5 km/s.
| >
| >This results in predictions that are contrary to known fact.
| >You are condemned by your own words, Androcles. Your
| >version of emission theory predicts that reflecting telescope
| >images of distant galaxies will be out of focus relative to
| >images of nearby stars.
|
| Is that why the HST didn't work till they software corrected for c+v?
| PS: You wont read about it anywhere so don't bother to look...
You are dreaming again. Ain't know way a -up in optics
can be put down to software. What does NOT work is the GR "correction"
to the GPS. Altitude is ing hopeless.
http://gpsinformation.net/main/altitude.htm
"Altitude error is always considerably worse than the horizontal (position
error). "
http://gpsinformation.net/main/etrexsum.htm
"Readouts include maximum and average Ascent and Descent distances and rates.
The altitude profile can also indicate pressure changes over time. The GPS
reads a different altitude than the NMEA output -which reads both higher and
lower than the GPS display over even short periods. "
Hardly surprising given the relativistic up to the clock when the satellite
is overhead,
when it SHOULD be at its most accurate.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/GPS/sundials.htm
Androcles
| >Jerry
|
|
| HW.
| www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
|
|
|
|