| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Physics - Relativity Forum » (c+v+c-v)/2 = c...
Page 1 of 1
|
| Author |
Message |
| Peri of Pera... |
 Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:45 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
(c+v+c-v)/2 = c
The speed of light c is considered to be a constant since at least
Maxwell. However, Michelson and Morley, in the mathematics underlying
their interferometer experiment (MMX) to find evidence of the ether,
used expressions like c+v and c-v to describe the time taken by light
from the beam splitter of the equipment to the mirror at the far end
of the parallel arm and back again. Their idea was that the formula (c
+v+c-v)/2=c not only applied overall but also that the components of
this formula could be applied separately to the upwind and downwind
paths. Nothing wrong with that except that M&M made an error in their
calculations.
M&M write in the American Journal of Science 203/XXIV November 1887:
“Let
V = velocity of light
v = velocity of the earth in its orbit
D = distance ac
T = time light occupies to pass from a to c (beam splitter to mirror)
T’ = time light occupies to return from c to a (mirror to beam
splitter)
Then
T = D/V-v, T’ = D/V+v. The whole time of going and coming
is T+T’ = 2D*V/VV-vv and the distance travelled in this time
is 2D(1+vv/VV), neglecting terms of the fourth order”.
The distance D or ac (beam splitter to mirror) was 11m, V=300000000m/
sec and v=30000m/sec. Using Michelson’s formula 2D(1+vv/VV) we have:
22m(1+ 0.00000001) = 22.00000022m. This represents a distance of
11.001100110011m for ac and 10.998900109989m for ca. M&M calculated ac
correctly but made a mistake in calculating ca because they used 11m
as the base instead of 11.001100110011m, the new distance ac. The
correct distance ca is 11.00000011m giving a total for 2D of
22.001100220011m, a difference of 0.001100000011m compared with the
original result of M&M.
While this is significant, it is not the cause of the null result of
MMX which is due to other factors which I will not disclose at this
time. But when I do, the Lorentz transformations and the doctrines of
contraction and time dilation will be PROVEN to be fallacies.
Peter Riedt |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Dono... |
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:47 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jun 28, 7:45 pm, Peri of Pera <rie... at (no spam) yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
Quote:
While this is significant, it is not the cause of the null result of
MMX which is due to other factors which I will not disclose at this
time. But when I do, the Lorentz transformations and the doctrines of
contraction and time dilation will be PROVEN to be fallacies.
Peter Riedt
Mental illness must run deep in your family, most likely due to
extensive in-breeding. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Peri of Pera... |
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 5:09 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jun 29, 10:47 am, Dono <sa... at (no spam) comcast.net> wrote:
Quote: On Jun 28, 7:45 pm, Peri of Pera <rie... at (no spam) yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
While this is significant, it is not the cause of the null result of
MMX which is due to other factors which I will not disclose at this
time. But when I do, the Lorentz transformations and the doctrines of
contraction and time dilation will be PROVEN to be fallacies.
Peter Riedt
Mental illness must run deep in your family, most likely due to
extensive in-breeding.
Dono,
what do you intend to achieve with vilification? You must be desparate
to seek survival of your beliefs by such means.
Peter Riedt |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Peri of Pera... |
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 6:26 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jun 29, 11:55 am, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" <dl... at (no spam) cox.net>
wrote:
Quote: Dear Peri of Pera:
"Peri of Pera" <rie... at (no spam) yahoo.co.uk> wrote in messagenews:5ab2fe7f-71a8-4e71-b702-258f72f8edc9 at (no spam) a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
(c+v+c-v)/2 = c
The speed of light c is considered to be a
constant since at least Maxwell. However,
Michelson and Morley, in the mathematics
underlying their interferometer experiment
(MMX) to find evidence of the ether,
... a particular kind of aether, one that the Earth propagates
through differently than light ...
Whatever
Quote: used expressions like c+v and c-v to
describe the time taken by light from the
beam splitter of the equipment to the
mirror at the far end of the parallel arm
and back again.
This only describes one arm. The other arm is simply (c + c)/2 > c
Irrelavant in the context of my post
Quote: Their idea was that the formula (c+v+c-v)/2=c
not only applied overall but also that the
components of this formula could be
applied separately to the upwind and
downwind paths.
You forget "crosswind".
Irrelevant in the context of my post
Quote:
Nothing wrong with that except that M&M
made an error in their calculations.
...
While this is significant, it is not the cause
of the null result of MMX which is due to
other factors which I will not disclose at this
time. But when I do, the Lorentz
transformations and the doctrines of
contraction and time dilation will be PROVEN
to be fallacies.
They are just all aquiver, awaiting your masterful hand...
Irrelevant comment
Quote:
When you are done, explain why a binary pulsar eclisped by
Jupiter showed no anisotropy in light speed. Timing was done to
1 part in 10^9 of a second.
Diversion from MMX to Jupiter - maybe so but irrelevant. BTW, I
believe c is isotropic.
David,
good to hear from you again.
Peter Riedt |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)... |
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 10:55 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Dear Peri of Pera:
"Peri of Pera" <riedt1 at (no spam) yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:5ab2fe7f-71a8-4e71-b702-258f72f8edc9 at (no spam) a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Quote: (c+v+c-v)/2 = c
The speed of light c is considered to be a
constant since at least Maxwell. However,
Michelson and Morley, in the mathematics
underlying their interferometer experiment
(MMX) to find evidence of the ether,
.... a particular kind of aether, one that the Earth propagates
through differently than light ...
Quote: used expressions like c+v and c-v to
describe the time taken by light from the
beam splitter of the equipment to the
mirror at the far end of the parallel arm
and back again.
This only describes one arm. The other arm is simply (c + c)/2 =
c
Quote: Their idea was that the formula (c+v+c-v)/2=c
not only applied overall but also that the
components of this formula could be
applied separately to the upwind and
downwind paths.
You forget "crosswind".
Quote: Nothing wrong with that except that M&M
made an error in their calculations.
....
Quote: While this is significant, it is not the cause
of the null result of MMX which is due to
other factors which I will not disclose at this
time. But when I do, the Lorentz
transformations and the doctrines of
contraction and time dilation will be PROVEN
to be fallacies.
They are just all aquiver, awaiting your masterful hand...
When you are done, explain why a binary pulsar eclisped by
Jupiter showed no anisotropy in light speed. Timing was done to
1 part in 10^9 of a second.
David A. Smith |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)... |
| Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 12:07 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Dear Peri of Pera:
"Peri of Pera" <riedt1 at (no spam) yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:603d306c-d0e6-4f60-b4da-d1b3714aa449 at (no spam) 2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 29, 11:55 am, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)"
<dl... at (no spam) cox.net>
wrote:
Quote: Dear Peri of Pera:
"Peri of Pera" <rie... at (no spam) yahoo.co.uk> wrote in
messagenews:5ab2fe7f-71a8-4e71-b702-258f72f8edc9 at (no spam) a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
(c+v+c-v)/2 = c
The speed of light c is considered to be a
constant since at least Maxwell. However,
Michelson and Morley, in the mathematics
underlying their interferometer experiment
(MMX) to find evidence of the ether,
... a particular kind of aether, one that the
Earth propagates through differently than light ...
Whatever
used expressions like c+v and c-v to
describe the time taken by light from the
beam splitter of the equipment to the
mirror at the far end of the parallel arm
and back again.
This only describes one arm. The other
arm is simply (c + c)/2 = c
Irrelavant in the context of my post
Actually, no. You have short-circuited the MMX experiment to
some sort of comic figure.
Quote: Their idea was that the formula (c+v+c-v)/2=c
not only applied overall but also that the
components of this formula could be
applied separately to the upwind and
downwind paths.
You forget "crosswind".
Irrelevant in the context of my post
"Damn the facts, full speed ahead!"
Quote: Nothing wrong with that except that M&M
made an error in their calculations.
...
While this is significant, it is not the cause
of the null result of MMX which is due to
other factors which I will not disclose at this
time. But when I do, the Lorentz
transformations and the doctrines of
contraction and time dilation will be PROVEN
to be fallacies.
They are just all aquiver, awaiting your
masterful hand...
Irrelevant comment
You paragraph was equally irrelvant. Do the thing, don't primp
and pose.
Quote: When you are done, explain why a binary
pulsar eclisped by Jupiter showed no
anisotropy in light speed. Timing was done to
1 part in 10^9 of a second.
Diversion from MMX to Jupiter - maybe so
but irrelevant. BTW, I believe c is isotropic.
Yes, me too. But it is good to allow the door to be open, and
let Natrue close it.
Quote: good to hear from you again.
Aye. Same here.
Now drop the shoe...
David A. Smith |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Fri Dec 05, 2008 10:17 am
|
|