🚀 go-pugleaf

On Apr 17, 11:00 pm, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On the one hand, the constancy of the speed of light is gloriously
> confirmed by the Michelson-Morley experiment and is so "woven into the
> very fabric of physics" that "to "vary" the speed of light is not even
> a swear word: it is simply not present in the vocabulary of physics".
> On the other hand, the Michelson-Morley experiment confirms
> variability of the speed of light as predicted by Newton's emission
> theory of light and therefore Einsteiniana simply does not need
> Einstein's 1905 false light postulate: even if "light in vacuum does
> not travel at the invariant speed of the Lorentz transform",
> Einstein's special relativity "would be unaffected". Both informations
> make believers sing "Divine Einstein" and go into convulsions:

  A simple, testable proof of the constancy of the speed of light:

  Interactions between bonded atoms in matter are electromagnetic;
photons are exchanged by electrons' charges.

  Consider a steel rod. Whack it on the end with a hammer. The atoms
in the end of the rod, when approached by the face of the hammer, feel
repulsion from the hammer's atoms' electrons.

  The next layer of atoms deep in the rod feel repulsion from the
approaching plane of atoms as the electric field between the two
layers of atoms' electrons distorts (they exchange photons) and move
out of the way. They will move at some infinitesimal fraction of c
away from the approaching surface layer.

  The next layer deep will feel repulsion, etc. This is the origin of
the "speed of sound" in solids.

  If the speed of the distortion of the interlayer electric fiend
(virtual photons) as seen by a "receiver" layer is dependent on the
approach velocity of a "source layer, then the photons from the
approaching layer will be seen by the receiver as moving at the
infamous c+v. Hence the third layer down will move
*sooner* than it would if the speed of light were not source-velocity
dependent; it will receive the impulse to move before it would have if
the speed of light were constant and the fourth layer, ad minutiaem.
The speed of the photons carrying the repulsive impulse will
*increase* along the length of the rod. If the rod is long enough,
eventually the compression wave will exceed the velocity of light in
free space.

  Now consider two rods, one longer than the other; they are otherwise
identical.

  If the speed of light is dependent on the velocity of its source,
then when both long and short rods are struck simultaneously, the
signal can propagate to the end of the longer rod
before it reaches the short rod's end.

  This is not seen.

  The photon-mediated "speed of sound" in objects is not dependent on
length.


  Mark L. Fergerson