🚀 go-pugleaf

On May 1, 3:47 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Bravo Honest Roberts! The problem is that your "refutation" is
> somewhat rash - it is based on implicit assumptions concerning
> MICROSCOPIC events that you (by no means the cleverest Einsteinian)
> cannot even formulate, let alone justify. Ask your cleverer brothers
> and they may explain to you that the ESSENTIAL difference between
> Newton's emission theory of light and Divine Albert's Divine Theory is
> that the former claims the speed of photons depends on the speed of
> the MACROSCOPIC source whereas the latter sees no such dependence.
> Having this ESSENTIAL difference in mind, Honest Roberts, you can
> start learning the implications of the emission theory:

Emission theory demands that the atomic equivalent of rifles,
slingshots, bows, air guns and punkin chunkers ALL shoot out
bullets, rocks, arrows, BBs and pumpkins at the same constant,
universal speed c, despite the fact that the firing mechanisms of
these different projectile shooters are all entirely different.

What is so special about c such that tungsten filaments, lasers,
radio antennas, gamma emitters, and arc lamps all emit photons
of the same speed?

What is so special about c that neutrinos generated by
supernova core collapse travel at very nearly the same speed as
photons?

In special relativity, the constancy of c can be considered a
simple consequence of spacetime geometry. It is a direct
consequence of PoR.

In emission theory, the constancy of c is magic.

Jerry