🚀 go-pugleaf

"Don Stockbauer" <donstockbauer@hotmail.com> wrote in message 
news:7494a77f-df92-454a-9c2f-1c26274a15ed@n20g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
: On Dec 20, 10:14 am, "Androcles" <Engin...@hogwarts.physics_a> wrote:
: > "Pentcho Valev" <pva...@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.
:
: I love infinite discussion loops.

Nobody gives a fuck what you love, one-liner moron.