From: kenseto on
SR says that the speed of light is a universal constant.

Questions:
Why a clock second used to define the speed of light is not an interval of
universal time??
Why does SR say that a clock second in one frame does not correspond to a
clock second in another frame when the speed of light is a universal
constant??

Ken Seto




From: Sam Wormley on
kenseto wrote:
> SR says that the speed of light is a universal constant.
>

Empirical data says that the speed of light is the same for all
observers, Seto. And thanks for registering at crank dot net, Seto.
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Ken+H.+Seto%22+site%3Awww.crank.net

From: jahn on

"kenseto" <kenseto(a)erinet.com> wrote in message news:xGi%d.1948$cC6.590(a)fe2.columbus.rr.com...
> SR says that the speed of light is a universal constant.
>
> Questions:
> Why a clock second used to define the speed of light is not an interval of
> universal time??
> Why does SR say that a clock second in one frame does not correspond to a
> clock second in another frame when the speed of light is a universal
> constant??
>
> Ken Seto
>
>
>
>
Although Oliver Heaviside is credited with the concept of electrical
reactance, his work with Maxwell's equations did not reflect
the imaginary time axis implied in a dipole structure.

The use of imaginary time on the path was simply Einstein's
way of gettting around the oversight.

Sue...



From: Stan Byers on
Hello Ken Seto,

Your question reveals another aspect of the problems with Special
Relativity. I had to read it twice to realize the logic and meaning. You
may want to explain the discrepancy in more detail to alert others to the
importance of the question.

I have posted another article "Light Speed versus Special Relativity" on the
newsgroup, sci.astro.research,...and on the web site
http://home.netcom.com/~sbyers11/litespd_vs_sr.htm . Comments and red ink
are welcome.

Cheers, Stan Byers

"kenseto" <kenseto(a)erinet.com> wrote in message
news:xGi%d.1948$cC6.590(a)fe2.columbus.rr.com...
> SR says that the speed of light is a universal constant.
>
> Questions:
> Why a clock second used to define the speed of light is not an interval of
> universal time??
> Why does SR say that a clock second in one frame does not correspond to a
> clock second in another frame when the speed of light is a universal
> constant??
>
> Ken Seto
>
>
>
>


From: David Cross on
"kenseto" <kenseto(a)erinet.com> wrote in message
news:xGi%d.1948$cC6.590(a)fe2.columbus.rr.com...
> SR says that the speed of light is a universal constant.
>
> Questions:
> Why a clock second used to define the speed of light is not an interval of
> universal time??
> Why does SR say that a clock second in one frame does not correspond to a
> clock second in another frame when the speed of light is a universal
> constant??

Because the invariance of the speed of light requires that space and time not
be invariant. So even if I'm moving at 0.99*c, I will still measure the speed
of light from a pulse you send to me as being 2.998 * 10^8 meters per second.
It will certainly be Doppler shifted, though.

I fail to see the problem over which you apparently are tearing your hair out.

--
David Cross
dcross1 AT shaw DOT ca