Adrian Mark Armstrong
Nov9-04, 02:53 PM
<jabberwocky><div class="vbmenu_control"><a href="jabberwocky:;" onClick="newWindow=window.open('','usenetCode','toolbar=no, location=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,status=no ,width=650,height=400'); newWindow.document.write('<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Usenet ASCII</TITLE></HEAD><BODY topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 BGCOLOR=#F1F1F1><table border=0 width=625><td bgcolor=midnightblue><font color=#F1F1F1>This Usenet message\'s original ASCII form: </font></td></tr><tr><td width=449><br><br><font face=courier><UL><PRE>"Eleaticus" <Thnktank@concentric.net> wrote in message\nnews:physics-faq/criticism/einstein-absurdities_1099286648@rtfm.mit.edu...\n\n\n> Subject: 3. The light direction absurdity.\n>\n> Having derived his differential equation and subse-\n> uent tau function based on light moving in both\n> directions, he then substitutes - for t - an expression\n> for time that is valid only for one light direction.\n> This creates a transform formula that could be valid only\n> for one direction. Substituting the opposite direction\n> expression is just as invalid, and results in a diff-\n> erent transform for x to x\'.\n\n\nDoes not matter. Light is in fact at absolute rest, therefore its apparent\ndirection to some travelling-at-speed observer is irrelevant.\nApparently-opposite sources of light moving in opposite directions are an\nillusion based on the observer\'s inability to slow himself down sufficiently\nto allow himself to approach the light rather than be deviated away from it.\n\n</UL></PRE></font></td></tr></table></BODY><HTML>');"> <IMG SRC=/images/buttons/ip.gif BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER ALT="View this Usenet post in original ASCII form"> View this Usenet post in original ASCII form </a></div><P></jabberwocky>"Eleaticus" <Thnktank@concentric.net> wrote in message
news:physics-faq/criticism/einstein-absurdities_1099286648@rtfm.mit.edu...
> Subject: 3. The light direction absurdity.
>
> Having derived his differential equation and subse-
> uent \tau function based on light moving in both
> directions, he then substitutes - for t - an expression
> for time that is valid only for one light direction.
> This creates a transform formula that could be valid only
> for one direction. Substituting the opposite direction
> expression is just as invalid, and results in a diff-
> erent transform for x to x'.
Does not matter. Light is in fact at absolute rest, therefore its apparent
direction to some travelling-at-speed observer is irrelevant.
Apparently-opposite sources of light moving in opposite directions are an
illusion based on the observer's inability to slow himself down sufficiently
to allow himself to approach the light rather than be deviated away from it.
news:physics-faq/criticism/einstein-absurdities_1099286648@rtfm.mit.edu...
> Subject: 3. The light direction absurdity.
>
> Having derived his differential equation and subse-
> uent \tau function based on light moving in both
> directions, he then substitutes - for t - an expression
> for time that is valid only for one light direction.
> This creates a transform formula that could be valid only
> for one direction. Substituting the opposite direction
> expression is just as invalid, and results in a diff-
> erent transform for x to x'.
Does not matter. Light is in fact at absolute rest, therefore its apparent
direction to some travelling-at-speed observer is irrelevant.
Apparently-opposite sources of light moving in opposite directions are an
illusion based on the observer's inability to slow himself down sufficiently
to allow himself to approach the light rather than be deviated away from it.