An Embarrassing Question for Relativists
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: What's your guys' take on Moving Dimensions Theory? Vs. String Theory / LQG?
Next: Oldest Object In Universe - Massive Star Exploding - Indicates Big Bang Not Its Origin
From: rotchm on 29 Oct 2009 10:34 > > >> >> However the CLOSING SPEED of light from S1 on O2 is c-v. > > >> >The closing speed of which two things and wrt which frame? You are > >> >unclear here. > >> >Anser that and you should find your answer/error. > > > > >Dont be a coward by brushing off the question to other discussions. > >Answer it. > > wrt any third observer... You still did not answer the question(s). You are missing the answer to : Closing speed of which two twings? And, your answer to wrt whom: Any third observer?... Lets see. Take a S2', an observer sitting side by side S2... the closing speed between S2 and of light wrt S2'of light is... c, not c-v. So, specify which two things you want to calculate the closing speed, wrt which frame (observer). Then we can indicate the answer to you.
From: Inertial on 29 Oct 2009 22:14 "Henry Wilson DSc." <HW@..> wrote in message news:g4ike55s19rhu9o430jgqu5u4s5shigj1j(a)4ax.com... > On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 07:34:18 -0700 (PDT), rotchm <rotchm(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> >>> >>> >> >> However the CLOSING SPEED of light from S1 on O2 is c-v. >>> >>> >> >The closing speed of which two things and wrt which frame? You are >>> >> >unclear here. >>> >> >Anser that and you should find your answer/error. >>> >>> >>> >>> >Dont be a coward by brushing off the question to other discussions. >>> >Answer it. >>> >>> wrt any third observer... >> >> >>You still did not answer the question(s). You are missing the answer >>to : Closing >>speed of which two twings? >> >>And, your answer to wrt whom: Any third observer?... Lets see. Take a >>S2', an observer sitting side by side S2... the closing speed between >>S2 and of light wrt S2'of light is... c, not c-v. >> >>So, specify which two things you want to calculate the closing speed, >>wrt which frame (observer). Then we can indicate the answer to you. > > > Look at the diagram I drew in the original message. YOU are the third > observer. OK > The light from S1 approaches O2 at c-v. As O2 is moving at v according to the third observer (stationary wrt the page) .. and assuming you are talking about closing speed, then Yeup > The light from S2 approaches O2 at c. Nope. That's where you are wrong about what SR says. > How by any stretch of the imagination can anyone claim that the two rays > are > traveling at the same speed? You simply have gotten what SR says wrong and then claimed that that makes SR wrong. It actually just makes you look like an idiot for starting the thread without understanding what SR says first.
From: Inertial on 29 Oct 2009 22:24 "Henry Wilson DSc." <HW@..> wrote in message news:brike599tjugaes12qclmpdgossm2fq5g2(a)4ax.com... > On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:09:10 -0700 (PDT), kenseto <kenseto(a)erinet.com> > wrote: > >>On Oct 28, 4:38 pm, HW@..(Henry Wilson DSc). wrote: >>> Consider two light sources and two observers as shown below. S1 is >>> connected to >>> O1 and S2 is connected to O2. O2 is moving at v relative to O1. >>> >>> O1----------------------------------------------------S1 >>> v<- O2---------------------------------------S2 >>> >>> According to SR, >>> >>> light from S1 moves at c towards O1. >>> >>> Light from S2 moves at c towards O2. >>> In other words, the CLOSING SPEED of light from S2 on O2 is c. >>> >>> However the CLOSING SPEED of light from S1 on O2 is c-v. >>> >>> So we have a situation in which two separate rays of light CLOSE ON O2 >>> at >>> different speeds. How can that happen? >> >>Henry the SRians argue that S1's light arrive at c as follows: >>c=(measure arriving frequency)(measured arriving wavelength) >>This arguement failed to realize that the light from S1 becomes a new >>light source in O2's frame and the frequency detector and the >>wavelength detector (the grating) in O2 will detect all light sources >>in the O2 frame to have a velocity of c.....for example sources such >>as sodium, mercury, H-Alpha in the O2 grating frame....etc all emit >>light with a speed of c. >>Closing speed got nothing to do with thwe arriving speed of light. >> >>However you do have a point as follows: >>1. Suppose that S1 is a sodium source with a universal wavelength of >>589 nm. >>2. during the transit of sodium light from S1 to O2 there is nothing >>that can change the wavelength of sodium light.....that means that the >>wavelength will remain at 589 nm. >>3. The detected arriving frequency is measured by the O2 detector. >>4. Therefore the arrival speed of light from S1 is calculated as >>follows: >>c'=(measured frequency)(universal wavelength of sodium 589 nm) >> >>Http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/2008irt.dtg.pdf >> >>Ken Seto > > Ken, obviously the answer is trivial if an aether exists but let's not > complicate the question with that kind of argument. The fact is, > relativists > cannot explain how two rays that are approaching an object at different > speeds > can have the SAME speed relative to that object. But they are NOT approaching at different speeds. So there is nothing to explain. Except for why you posted this thread to start with when you must have known that you were going to be wrong again. Isn't it getting a bit depressing being wrong all the time .. or is that what your delusions are there to protect you from?
From: Inertial on 29 Oct 2009 22:26 "Henry Wilson DSc." <HW@..> wrote in message news:81jke5dved8naupaunfsdico8rfjv23i47(a)4ax.com... > On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 12:02:58 -0700 (PDT), PD <thedraperfamily(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >>On Oct 28, 3:38 pm, HW@..(Henry Wilson DSc). wrote: >>> Consider two light sources and two observers as shown below. S1 is >>> connected to >>> O1 and S2 is connected to O2. O2 is moving at v relative to O1. >>> >>> O1----------------------------------------------------S1 >>> v<- O2---------------------------------------S2 >>> >>> According to SR, >>> >>> light from S1 moves at c towards O1. >>> >>> Light from S2 moves at c towards O2. >>> In other words, the CLOSING SPEED of light from S2 on O2 is c. >> >>Not in this frame. The CLOSING SPEED of light from S2 on O2 is c-v. >>However, in the frame where S2 and O2 are at rest and S1 and O1 are >>moving, then the closing speed of S2 on O2 is c. > > This is an interesting new slant. We now have a disagreement between the > members of the relativist fraternity. Nope .. no disagreement at all. We all agree you are wrong. > My question has split them into two camps. Nope. We're all saying the same thing. But you don't understand physics enough to see that.
From: Inertial on 30 Oct 2009 00:35
"Henry Wilson DSc." <HW@..> wrote in message news:q3qke51rf4qefhb620kvijcgai1gejfg68(a)4ax.com... > On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:14:53 +1100, "Inertial" <relatively(a)rest.com> > wrote: > >>"Henry Wilson DSc." <HW@..> wrote in message >>news:g4ike55s19rhu9o430jgqu5u4s5shigj1j(a)4ax.com... >>> On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 07:34:18 -0700 (PDT), rotchm <rotchm(a)gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >> >> However the CLOSING SPEED of light from S1 on O2 is c-v. >>>>> >>>>> >> >The closing speed of which two things and wrt which frame? You are >>>>> >> >unclear here. >>>>> >> >Anser that and you should find your answer/error. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >Dont be a coward by brushing off the question to other discussions. >>>>> >Answer it. >>>>> >>>>> wrt any third observer... >>>> >>>> >>>>You still did not answer the question(s). You are missing the answer >>>>to : Closing >>>>speed of which two twings? >>>> >>>>And, your answer to wrt whom: Any third observer?... Lets see. Take a >>>>S2', an observer sitting side by side S2... the closing speed between >>>>S2 and of light wrt S2'of light is... c, not c-v. >>>> >>>>So, specify which two things you want to calculate the closing speed, >>>>wrt which frame (observer). Then we can indicate the answer to you. >>> >>> >>> Look at the diagram I drew in the original message. YOU are the third >>> observer. >> >>OK >> >>> The light from S1 approaches O2 at c-v. >> >>As O2 is moving at v according to the third observer (stationary wrt the >>page) .. and assuming you are talking about closing speed, then Yeup >> >>> The light from S2 approaches O2 at c. >> >>Nope. That's where you are wrong about what SR says. >> >>> How by any stretch of the imagination can anyone claim that the two rays >>> are >>> traveling at the same speed? >> >>You simply have gotten what SR says wrong and then claimed that that makes >>SR wrong. It actually just makes you look like an idiot for starting the >>thread without understanding what SR says first. > > What does SR say.... I've told you > that light from a source doesn't move at c in the source > frame? No.. it says it does.. In every frame. You've claimed SR doesn't say that, and so are wrong > It sounds as though you are trying to change the rules with every > statement. No . I've been totally consistent throughout. You've been the one changing rules. Your lies have been discovered once again. You're really not very good at this. |