🚀 go-pugleaf

"Pentcho Valev" <pvalev@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:e4d6d3a0-d2f1-487a-acbb-19017d35b8b4@c4g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
: In discussing the Sagnac effect, both relativists and anti-relativists
: make the following mistake:
:
: http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s2-07/2-07.htm
: "Quantitatively, if we let w denote the angular speed of the loop,
: then the circumferential tangent speed of the end point is v = wR, and
: the sum of the speeds of the wave front and the receiver at the "end"
: point is c-v in the co-rotating direction and c+v in the counter-
: rotating direction.....This analysis is perfectly valid in both the
: classical and the relativistic contexts."
:
: The values c-v and c+v above are "perfectly valid" only in the
: relativistic context. If by "classical" the author means "Newtonian",
: the analysis is by no means "perfectly valid". According to an
: observer at rest, in the classical context, the speed of light is c+v
: in the co-rotating direction and c-v in the counter-rotating direction
: so the correct text would be:
:
: "Quantitatively, if we let w denote the angular speed of the loop,
: then the circumferential tangent speed of the end point is v = wR, and
: the sum of the speeds of the wave front and the receiver at the "end"
: point is c in the co-rotating direction and c in the counter-rotating
: direction."

   http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Sagnac/SagnacIdiocy.htm

What troll kooks like Schwartz, Poe, McCullough, Roberts, Draper, Lawrence,
Andersen, Nieminen, ewill, Olson, Tom & Jeery  et. al. fail to realise is
the existence of isomorphism

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isomorphism

between Sagnac's real experiment and Einstein's hallucination experiment,
shown here:
 http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/TwoSpeedRack.gif

Einstein sends light along the rack and back again, the rack
moving at velocity v in his pipe dream.

Sagnac sends the light around the gear wheel for real.
If you analyse one you should get the same result as the other, but
you cannot use SR to derive SR, that is  petitio principii, circularity.
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

c+v is essential to the derivation of the cuckoo malformations, the
part where Einstein screws up is:
'we establish by definition that the "time" required by
light to travel from A to B equals the "time" it requires
to travel from B to A' because I SAY SO. -- Rabbi Albert Einstein

What he is claiming is that his "definition" is true for all frames of
reference. The absurdity that the velocity of light is the same
in all frames of reference is a consequence of that claim.