🚀 go-pugleaf

On Dec 10, 12:57 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Dec 9, 7:36 pm, PD (Paul Draper) wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 9, 12:54 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > The following text is consistent with Einstein's relativity theory but
> > > inconsistent with both Maxwell's electromagnetic theory and Newton's
> > > emission theory of light:
>
> > >http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/big_bang/ind...
> > > John Norton: "Here's a light wave and an observer. If the observer
> > > were to hurry towards the source of the light, the observer would now
> > > pass wavecrests more frequently than the resting observer. That would
> > > mean that moving observer would find the frequency of the light to
> > > have increased (AND CORRESPONDINGLY FOR THE WAVELENGTH - THE DISTANCE
> > > BETWEEN CRESTS - TO HAVE DECREASED)."
>
> > And this is directly confirmed in experiment.
> > However, it is consistent with Maxwell's electromagnetic theory; you
> > got that wrong.
>
> The problem, Clever Draper, is whether Maxwell's electromagnetic
> theory predicts that the speed of light is unaffected/affected by the
> movements of the observer. Consider this, Clever Draper:
>
> http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00002149/01/Norton.pdf
> John Norton: "The difficulty Einstein faced is that Maxwells
> electrodynamics cannot be an emission theory. One of the most
> important consequences of the theory is that light in a vacuum always
> propagates at the same speed, c=186,000 miles per second, WITH RESPECT
> TO THE ETHER. Its velocity of propagation is unaffected by the
> velocity of the emitter."

Well, that's what Maxwell thought, though that turned out not to be
implied by his equations at all. Maxwell himself later dropped the
extra baggage of the ether, coming to realize what Faraday also
believed, that the fields had a life of their own without need for a
substrate. Einstein also dropped the extra baggage of the ether, but
coming to that conclusion from a different direction -- it was imposed
by the principle of relativity.

Either way, the ether is not fundamental to electrodynamics, and
Maxwell's equations of electrodynamics survive just fine without the
ether.

>
> Would John Norton have been right if he had written:
>
> John Norton's text modified: "The difficulty Einstein faced is that
> Maxwells electrodynamics cannot be an emission theory. One of the most
> important consequences of the theory is that light in a vacuum always
> propagates at the same speed, c=186,000 miles per second, WITH RESPECT
> TO BOTH THE ETHER AND THE OBSERVER. Its velocity of propagation is
> unaffected by the velocities of BOTH THE EMITTER AND THE OBSERVER."
>
> Again: Clever Draper, is the speed of light unaffected/affected by the
> movements of the observer according to Maxwell's electromagnetic
> theory?
>
> Pentcho Valev
> pva...@yahoo.com