🚀 go-pugleaf

"Dr. Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message 
news:t3d5n391dh2d1u0puudooqie0ab1d1l05u@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 26 Dec 2007 11:29:03 -0600, Tom Roberts 
> <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
>
>>Pentcho Valev wrote:
>>> On Dec 24, 1:29 am, Tom Roberts <tjroberts...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
>>> sci.physics.relativity:
>
>>
>>
>>> If one sticks to the
>>> ballistic theory and assumes that, according to the observer at rest,
>>> the speed of the photons is c-v in the counter-rotating and c+v in the
>>> co-rotating direction all along, the following observation is
>>> relevant. The real path of the photons is a polygon inscribed in the
>>> rotating circular loop. It is easy to see that the sides of the
>>> polygon covered by c-v photons are LONGER than the sides of the
>>> polygon covered by c+v photons.
>>
>>You got it BACKWARDS. Given your assumptions (i.e. in this ballistic
>>theory, using the inertial frame of the center), it is the c+v light ray
>>that has a longer path, and the c-v ray that has a shorter path [#]. And
>>if you work it out algebraically you'll find the different speeds and
>>distances cancel and both rays take exactly the same time to go around
>>their polygons (the two polygons are not congruent); v cancels out and
>>that equal-time result holds independent of v, so this ballistic theory
>>predicts no fringe shift, and is thus refuted by the observations.
>
> Tom, the rays take the same time to reach the detector but their 
> frequencies
> are doppler shifted in opposite sense in the non-R frame.

Irrelevant, as the detector is NOT stationary in the non-rotating frame .. 
whne you doppler shift back to take the speed of the detectors into account, 
they have the ame wavelength .  Gees .. this has been explained to you 
countless times

> 'Nonsense' that produces the correct answer......
> Sagnac is fully explained by BaTh.

No