🚀 go-pugleaf

On May 18, 6:34 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On May 18, 1:03 pm, "Sue..." <suzysewns...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in
> sci.physics:
>
> > On May 18, 5:16 am, Sanny <softtank...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > ========
>
> > > Einstine said motion is relative [I agree]
>
> > > Einstine said Speed of Light is same to all observers [Am I a fool]
>
> > No... A fool has to be funny. You are just ignorant
> > and illiterate.
>
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/node108.html
>
> Relevant Sue, there is a statement in the relevant reference you have
> given that you may wish to explain:
>
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/node108.html
> "According to electromagnetic theory, the speed of propagation of a
> light wave through a vacuum is c=1/(epsilon_0*mu_0)^(1/2)=2.99729*10^8
> meters per second."
>
> Is this speed independent of the speed of the observer, Relevant Sue?

It is independent of both emitter and absorber
by path reciprocity.

What is the Interstellar Medium?
http://espg.sr.unh.edu/ism/what1.html

Propagation in a dielectric medium
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/node98.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Sitter_double_star_experiment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_space


For particle-light theorists that lack
statistical basis (QED):

"The basis for the Compton-Debije theory is
thus found, this time not as a hypothesis
but as a consequence of the atomic theory,
" is a conclusion by Oseen, which justifies
his judgement of the former being obsolete.
These wave mechanical treatments, furthermore,
also gave formulae for the intensity vs scattering
angle (i.e. differential cross section) in much
better agreement with measurements than the
classical wave theory prediction.

Oseen summarised by saying that the revolution
during the last 18 months had been independent
of Compton's discovery and that the new direction
for the revolution had moved opposite to the one
expected after Compton's discovery. The new theory
is a wave theory in a higher degree than any
previous theory. Using the new theory it has
been possible to give a qualitatively and quantitatively
correct account of the Compton effect. >>


The Committee emphasised that the Compton effect
is nevertheless important, since it once more
and very clearly and convincingly demonstrates
that the classical theories are not applicable
in the realm of atomic physics and that it
offers a valuable and welcome possibility to
test the new ideas. >>
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/articles/ekspong/

http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Ewald-OseenExtinctionTheorem.html

> What exactly does the (Maxwell's?) electromagnetic theory say?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_integral#Some_practical_applications

=================================================

<< According to Eqs. (509) and (510), if we want
to work out the potentials at position ${\bf r}$
and time $t$ then we have to perform integrals of
the charge density and current density over all
space (just like in the steady-state situation).
However, when we calculate the contribution of
charges and currents at position ${\bf r}'$ to
these integrals we do not use the values at
time $t$, instead we use the values at some
earlier time $t-\vert{\bf r} - {\bf r}'\vert/c$.
What is this earlier time? It is simply the latest
time at which a light signal emitted from position
${\bf r}'$ would be received at position ${\bf r}$
before time $t$. >>
Retarded Potentials
Green's functions
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/node49.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_delta_function


Sue...


>
> Pentcho Valev
> pva...@yahoo.com