🚀 go-pugleaf

On Nov 14, 10:05 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Nov 14, 6:29 pm,dlzc<dl...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 14, 7:55 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > ...
>
> > > So while Master John Norton calls the attention to
> > > the fact that THE MICHELSON-MORLEY EXPERIMENT IS
> > > FULLY COMPATIBLE WITH AN EMISSION THEORY OF LIGHT
> > > THAT CONTRADICTS THE LIGHT POSTULATE, you introduce
> > > dragged aether as a red herring.
>
> > Master John Norton apparently did not tell you that,
> > since the light was emitted in the frame the
> > apparatus was located in, could not tell if the light
> > was issued from the anuses of pink elephants, and was
> > conducted along narrow sewer pipes as frozen turds,
> > prior to entering the apparatus as light.
>
> Zombie after all. Master John Norton say:
>
> http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00001743/02/Norton.pdf
> John Norton: "Einstein regarded the Michelson-Morley
> experiment as evidence for the principle of relativity,
> whereas later writers almost universally use it as
> support for the light postulate of special relativity...
> ...THE MICHELSON-MORLEY EXPERIMENT IS FULLY COMPATIBLE
> WITH AN EMISSION THEORY OF LIGHT THAT CONTRADICTS THE LIGHT
> POSTULATE."

The statement is essentially correct.  Because the light was emitted
in the frame of the MMX.

> Why zombie wrong? Master John Norton explain: "...later
> writers almost universally use it as support for the
> light postulate of special relativity...". Later writers
> teach zombie. Now zombie wrong. Tomorrow
> zombie wrong. Forever zombie wrong. Later writers guilty.

The MMX is compatible with Maxwell, Androcles' (and others') ballistic
emission, Lorentz aether, and dragged aether.  Until you move the
light source, or try a different experiment, you cannot differentiate
between any of those with MMX.  All you can disprove with the MMX
experiment is that the Earth is moving "separately" through a rigid
aether.  Disproved with MMX.

As to why you are always wrong, and always tell less than the full
truth, and always name call rather than conduct civil argument, who
can say?  As you state, clearly for yourself:
> Now zombie wrong. Tomorrow zombie wrong. Forever zombie wrong.

David A. Smith