The speed of light is NOT constant - Page 6 - diyAudio
 The speed of light is NOT constant
 User Name Stay logged in? Password
 Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Gallery Wiki Blogs Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Search

 The Lounge A place to talk about almost anything but politics and religion.

 Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you. Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
 13th September 2011, 01:05 AM #51 Wizard of Kelts diyAudio Moderator Emeritus   Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Connecticut, The Nutmeg State Same here, Leadbelly. Haven't had much time to post here lately, hope to change that soon. Good to see you too. __________________ "A friend will help you move. A really good friend will help you move a body." -Anonymous
diyAudio Member

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: away
Quote:
 Originally Posted by 7n7is Herbert Dingle pointed out that the so called relative motion between a conductor and magnet that Einstein used as an example of relative motion in his famous 1905 article isn't really relative motion. If you move the conductor in a magnetic field you get an instantaneous change in current. If you move the magnet, the changing magnetic field (electromagnetic wave) has to travel at the speed of light to reach the conductor before there is a change in current in the conductor.
Which means what?? Moving the conductor is local to the conductor, so the "instantaneous" is of course obvious, and local, no violation.

Moving the magnet is not local to the wire, so again, the delay due to C is obvious.

The magnet does not have to see the wire move in order for the wire to generate a voltage.

The magfield is already at the wire..

If that is what Dingle stated, he needs to go back to the thought experiment and fix it.

Cheers, John

diyAudio Member

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Sheffield
Quote:
 Originally Posted by kelticwizard Chris-I think you mean envision rather than comprehend. You can work with the mathematics, but actually forming a mental picture of light taking time to travel from a nearby object to your eye instead of being instantaneous is something you can't deal with.
Yes, that's the one. Thanks for clearing that up.

 20th September 2011, 04:39 PM #54 Banned   Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: VA Here's an interesting website. It translates sehr gut mit google translate. Google Translate
 20th September 2011, 04:47 PM #55 On Hiatus     Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Chicagoland Blog Entries: 2 Didn't take you long to get to the Jew haters. There's plenty more, I'm sure you can dig them up as well, the crank sites love 'em. Deutsche Physik - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia __________________ "You tell me whar a man gits his corn pone, en I'll tell you what his 'pinions is."
 20th September 2011, 05:16 PM #57 Banned   Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: VA Thim, H.W.; Microelectron. Inst., Johannes Kepler Univ., Linz, Austria This paper appears in: Instrumentation and Measurement, IEEE Transactions on Issue Date: Oct. 2003 Volume: 52 Issue:5 On page(s): 1660 - 1664 ISSN: 0018-9456 References Cited: 25 Cited by : 2 INSPEC Accession Number: 7778275 Digital Object Identifier: 10.1109/TIM.2003.817916 Date of Current Version: 27 October 2003 Sponsored by: IEEE Instrumentation and Measurement Society Abstract An experiment is described showing that a 33-GHz microwave signal received by rotating antennas is not exhibiting the frequency shift ("transverse Doppler effect") predicted by the relativistic Doppler formula. The sensitivity of the apparatus used has been tested to be sufficient for detecting frequency shifts as small as 10-3 Hz which corresponds to the value of (v/c)2 = 5.10-14 used in the transverse Doppler shift experiment reported here. From the observed absence of the transverse Doppler shift it is concluded that either the time dilation predicted by the standard theory of special relativity does not exist in reality or, if it does, is a phenomenon which does not depend on relative velocities but may be a function of absolute velocities in the fundamental frame of the isotropic microwave background radiation. IEEE Xplore - Absence of the relativistic transverse Doppler shift at microwave frequencies
 20th September 2011, 06:02 PM #58 On Hiatus     Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Chicagoland Blog Entries: 2 I guess you couldn't be bothered to see if that paper was actually correct. See: Sfarti, IEEE Trans Inst and Meas 59:2, 494 (2010). Ooops. __________________ "You tell me whar a man gits his corn pone, en I'll tell you what his 'pinions is."
 20th September 2011, 08:30 PM #59 Banned   Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: VA Sfarti can't be trusted. He's a relativity gangster.
Banned

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: VA
Quote:
 Originally Posted by SY Didn't take you long to get to the Jew haters. There's plenty more, I'm sure you can dig them up as well, the crank sites love 'em. Deutsche Physik - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I guess we never landed a man on the moon, either, since Werner von Braun was a Nazi and his science is invalid.

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is OffTrackbacks are Off Pingbacks are Off Refbacks are Off Forum Rules

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post mikeks The Lounge 402 21st February 2005 03:27 PM PRBS Pass Labs 6 24th March 2002 12:49 PM

 New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:03 PM.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.