Problem Solved.
Henry Wilson DSc
of Maxwells' derivation of c. Accordingly, the intrinsic impedance of free
space is claimed to be the same everywhere and from this can be derived the
speed of light in any observer's frame.
The fact is, Maxwell merely derived a value for the UNIVERSAL CONSTANT known as
c. It has the dimensions of a speed, L/T, but its only known connection with
any physical speed is that it is defines the magnitude at which light leaves
its source.
Thus, Maxwell's approach says nothing at all about the general speed of light
passing through any region of space unless, maybe, that space is occupied by a
'dielectric medium' sufficiently dense to act as a speed reference for all
light within it.
Note: BaTh supports the concept of 'local aether-like regions'.
Henry Wilson...www.scisite.info/index.htm
Einstein...World's greatest SciFi writer..
Androcles
"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message
news:vuv3f5d565582dmaf...@4ax.com...
Go back to unless, maybe, sleep, Wilson.
eric gisse
> One of the main arguments in support of Einstein's P2 comes from
> consideration of Maxwells' derivation of c.
Many times over the years I've asked you about this, and you've never
displayed any understanding of why c required to be invariant by Maxwell's
equations.
> Accordingly, the intrinsic
> impedance of free space is claimed to be the same everywhere and from this
> can be derived the speed of light in any observer's frame.
>
> The fact is, Maxwell merely derived a value for the UNIVERSAL CONSTANT
> known as c. It has the dimensions of a speed, L/T, but its only known
> connection with any physical speed is that it is defines the magnitude at
> which light leaves its source.
>
> Thus, Maxwell's approach says nothing at all about the general speed of
> light passing through any region of space unless, maybe, that space is
> occupied by a 'dielectric medium' sufficiently dense to act as a speed
> reference for all light within it.
You do understand that Maxwell's equations are valid in VACUUM, right? You
know a VACCUM has nothing in it, right?
>
> Note: BaTh supports the concept of 'local aether-like regions'.
Which is funny not just because you obviously have no idea what you are
talking about, but because you have derided SR so many times for supposedly
being an 'aether theory'.
Henry Wilson DSc
wrote:
perhaps to dream...aye there's the rub
Henry Wilson DSc
wrote:
thanks for that intelligent comment.
Androcles
"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message
perchance Hamlet correctly.
To be, or not to be: that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them. To die: to sleep;
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache, and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to, 'tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep;
To sleep: perchance to dream: aye, there's the rub;
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come,
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause: there's the respect
That makes calamity of so long life;
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
The pangs of despised love, the law's delay,
The insolence of office, and the spurns
That patient merit of the unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin? who would fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscover'd country from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will,
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all,
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought,
And enterprises of great pith and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry
And lose the name of action.
glird
>
>< You do understand that Maxwell's equations are valid in VACUUM, right? You know a VACUUM has nothing in it, right? >
WRONG!!
A vacuum is a space filled with compressible easily movable matter
with no particles in it.
glird
Henry Wilson DSc
wrote:
Where does this bit come in?
"when one could take up arms against a sea of troubles and by opposing, end
them...."
I don't recall the following lines either
>To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
>But that the dread of something after death,
>The undiscover'd country from whose bourn
>No traveller returns, puzzles the will,
>And makes us rather bear those ills we have
>Than fly to others that we know not of?
>Thus conscience does make cowards of us all,
>And thus the native hue of resolution
>Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought,
>And enterprises of great pith and moment
>With this regard their currents turn awry
>And lose the name of action.
>
>
>
Henry Wilson DSc
Yes, he's always wrong....one wonders why he does it.
There is more in space than the matter we know.
It comes under the heading of 'fields'.
>glird
Androcles
"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message
Now, sir, young Fortinbras,
Of unimproved mettle hot and full,
Hath in the skirts of Norway here and there
Shark'd up a list of lawless resolutes,
See, Shakespeare foretold Tusseladd.
LORD POLONIUS
I hear him coming: let's withdraw, my lord.
Exeunt KING CLAUDIUS and POLONIUS
Enter HAMLET
HAMLET
To be, or not to be: that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them? To die: to sleep;
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to, 'tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep;
To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub;
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause: there's the respect
That makes calamity of so long life;
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
The pangs of despised love, the law's delay,
The insolence of office and the spurns
That patient merit of the unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin? who would fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscover'd country from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all;
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought,
And enterprises of great pith and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry,
And lose the name of action.--Soft you now!
The fair Ophelia! Nymph, in thy orisons
Be all my sins remember'd.
This soliloquy, probably the most famous speech in the English language,
is spoken by Hamlet in Act III, scene i (58-90). His most logical and
powerful examination of the theme of the moral legitimacy of suicide in an
unbearably painful world, it touches on several of the other important
themes of the play. Hamlet poses the problem of whether to commit suicide as
a logical question: "To be, or not to be," that is, to live or not to live.
He then weighs the moral ramifications of living and dying. Is it nobler to
suffer life, "[t]he slings and arrows of outrageous fortune," passively or
to actively seek to end one's suffering? He compares death to sleep and
thinks of the end to suffering, pain, and uncertainty it might bring, "[t]he
heartache, and the thousand natural shocks / That flesh is heir to." Based
on this metaphor, he decides that suicide is a desirable course of action,
"a consummation / Devoutly to be wished." But, as the religious word
"devoutly" signifies, there is more to the question, namely, what will
happen in the afterlife. Hamlet immediately realizes as much, and he
reconfigures his metaphor of sleep to include the possibility of dreaming;
he says that the dreams that may come in the sleep of death are daunting,
that they "must give us pause."
He then decides that the uncertainty of the afterlife, which is intimately
related to the theme of the difficulty of attaining truth in a spiritually
ambiguous world, is essentially what prevents all of humanity from
committing suicide to end the pain of life. He outlines a long list of the
miseries of experience, ranging from lovesickness to hard work to political
oppression, and asks who would choose to bear those miseries if he could
bring himself peace with a knife, "[w]hen he himself might his quietus make
/ With a bare bodkin?" He answers himself again, saying no one would choose
to live, except that "the dread of something after death" makes people
submit to the suffering of their lives rather than go to another state of
existence which might be even more miserable. The dread of the afterlife,
Hamlet concludes, leads to excessive moral sensitivity that makes action
impossible: "conscience does make cowards of us all . . . thus the native
hue of resolution / Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought."
In this way, this speech connects many of the play's main themes,
including the idea of suicide and death, the difficulty of knowing the truth
in a spiritually ambiguous universe, and the connection between thought and
action. In addition to its crucial thematic content, this speech is
important for what it reveals about the quality of Hamlet's mind. His deeply
passionate nature is complemented by a relentlessly logical intellect, which
works furiously to find a solution to his misery. He has turned to religion
and found it inadequate to help him either kill himself or resolve to kill
Claudius. Here, he turns to a logical philosophical inquiry and finds it
equally frustrating.
http://www.sparknotes.com/shakespeare/hamlet/quotes.html#explanation5
Paul B. Andersen
> One of the main arguments in support of Einstein's P2 comes from consideration
> of Maxwells' derivation of c. Accordingly, the intrinsic impedance of free
> space is claimed to be the same everywhere and from this can be derived the
> speed of light in any observer's frame.
>
> The fact is, Maxwell merely derived a value for the UNIVERSAL CONSTANT known as
> c. It has the dimensions of a speed, L/T, but its only known connection with
> any physical speed is that it is defines the magnitude at which light leaves
> its source.
The fact is that Maxwell merely derived that his equations predicted the existence
of a wave which in vacuum should propagate at the speed c regardless of the speed of
the source. One very obvious known connection with a physical speed is that it is
the speed of light in vacuum.
--
Paul
Androcles
"Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b....@somewhere.no> wrote in message
news:4AF41C35...@somewhere.no...
> Henry Wilson DSc wrote:
>> One of the main arguments in support of Einstein's P2 comes from
>> consideration
>> of Maxwells' derivation of c. Accordingly, the intrinsic impedance of
>> free
>> space is claimed to be the same everywhere and from this can be derived
>> the
>> speed of light in any observer's frame.
>>
>> The fact is, Maxwell merely derived a value for the UNIVERSAL CONSTANT
>> known as
>> c. It has the dimensions of a speed, L/T, but its only known connection
>> with
>> any physical speed is that it is defines the magnitude at which light
>> leaves
>> its source.
>
> The fact is that Maxwell merely derived that his equations predicted the
> existence
> of a wave which in vacuum should propagate at the speed c regardless of
> the speed of
> the source.
The fact is that Maxwell merely derived that his equations predicted the
existence
of a wave which in ectoplasm should propagate at the speed c regardless of
the
speed of the source.
You have no idea what a fact is, Tusseladd.
> One very obvious known connection with a physical speed is that it is
> the speed of light in vacuum.
One very obvious known connection with a physical speed is that it is
the speed of light relative to the source since all speeds are relative to
something. Even Maxwell knew that, his speed of light was relative
to aether.
Only an idiot would make it relative to the observer, but then, you are.
Henry Wilson DSc
wrote:
yes, they were just as bad then.
I could once recite it myself but couldn't recall those two lines....no matter.
> This soliloquy, probably the most famous speech in the English language,
>is spoken by Hamlet in Act III, scene i (58-90).
Sure was.....it puts a few question marks on religion too...
Henry Wilson DSc
WRT the source, yes. Nothing more.
Maxwell measured the values of e and mu and rightly produced a value for the
universal constant c. He then assumed that space was filled with 'the same
stuff that the fields used in his experiments was made of'. He was partly right
and his equations are very nearly correct in the vicinity of large masses.
Not so in remote space however....which is why astronomy is in terrible trouble
right now.
Androcles
"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message
Bwhahahahahaha! Was that before or after he flew Michael Faraday's kite
that he borrowed from Ben Franklin?
Henry Wilson DSc
wrote:
When say Maxwell measured them I didn't mean he actually did it himself.
Androcles
"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message
Ah... so you don't say what you mean and you don't mean what you say.
You are a fuckin' idiot, D.umb Sc.umbag, and I don't mean what you say.
Just what DO you mean when you say Maxwell measured what he didn't
measure?
Henry Wilson DSc
wrote:
What exactly are you arguing about?
Androcles
"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message
Your dumb claim that Maxwell measured e and mu.
First of all it's epsilon_0, not 'e', and secondly it's like the
'h' in 'egg'; it doesn't exist, therefore it cannot be measured.
Matter can have permittivity, empty space cannot. The fuckin'
aether has been dead for 125 years and dumbfucks like you are
still talking about its properties. This is 21st century, Wilson,
not the 19th.
Henry Wilson DSc
wrote:
>
>"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message
>news:ncnbf5hju242oedob...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 06:41:02 -0000, "Androcles"
>> <Headm...@Hogwarts.physics_p>
>>>>>Bwhahahahahaha! Was that before or after he flew Michael Faraday's kite
>>>>>that he borrowed from Ben Franklin?
>>>>
>>>> When say Maxwell measured them I didn't mean he actually did it himself.
>>>
>>>Ah... so you don't say what you mean and you don't mean what you say.
>>>You are a fuckin' idiot, D.umb Sc.umbag, and I don't mean what you say.
>>>
>>>Just what DO you mean when you say Maxwell measured what he didn't
>>>measure?
>>
>> What exactly are you arguing about?
>
>Your dumb claim that Maxwell measured e and mu.
>First of all it's epsilon_0, not 'e', and secondly it's like the
>'h' in 'egg'; it doesn't exist, therefore it cannot be measured.
I told YOU that. Don't you read my posts?
What is measured are the properties of the fields used in the experiiment.
>Matter can have permittivity, empty space cannot. The fuckin'
>aether has been dead for 125 years and dumbfucks like you are
>still talking about its properties. This is 21st century, Wilson,
>not the 19th.
You're out of date enough to remember the latter.
Androcles
"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message
> On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 21:04:48 -0000, "Androcles"
> <Headm...@Hogwarts.physics_p>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message
>>news:ncnbf5hju242oedob...@4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 06:41:02 -0000, "Androcles"
>>> <Headm...@Hogwarts.physics_p>
>
>>>>>>Bwhahahahahaha! Was that before or after he flew Michael Faraday's
>>>>>>kite
>>>>>>that he borrowed from Ben Franklin?
>>>>>
>>>>> When say Maxwell measured them I didn't mean he actually did it
>>>>> himself.
>>>>
>>>>Ah... so you don't say what you mean and you don't mean what you say.
>>>>You are a fuckin' idiot, D.umb Sc.umbag, and I don't mean what you say.
>>>>
>>>>Just what DO you mean when you say Maxwell measured what he didn't
>>>>measure?
>>>
>>> What exactly are you arguing about?
>>
>>Your dumb claim that Maxwell measured e and mu.
>>First of all it's epsilon_0, not 'e', and secondly it's like the
>>'h' in 'egg'; it doesn't exist, therefore it cannot be measured.
>
> I told YOU that. Don't you read my posts?
Not when YOU say Maxwell measured them YOU didn't mean
he actually did it himself, I don't. What EXACTLY are you
BABBLING about?
>
> What is measured are the properties of the fields used in the experiiment.
WHAT FUCKIN' EXPERIIMENT? Nobody has yet invented a
fuckin' permittivity meter for someone to measure the permittivity
of aether for Maxwel to use.
>
>>Matter can have permittivity, empty space cannot. The fuckin'
>>aether has been dead for 125 years and dumbfucks like you are
>>still talking about its properties. This is 21st century, Wilson,
>>not the 19th.
>
> You're out of date enough to remember the latter.
I'm not the one claiming I didn't mean Maxwell measured the properties
of the fields used in the experiiment with a fuckin' permittivity meter,
you ranting lunatic.
Henry Wilson DSc
wrote:
>
>"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message
>news:19qcf51b1h39fs4sf...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 21:04:48 -0000, "Androcles"
>>>
>>>Your dumb claim that Maxwell measured e and mu.
>>>First of all it's epsilon_0, not 'e', and secondly it's like the
>>>'h' in 'egg'; it doesn't exist, therefore it cannot be measured.
>>
>> I told YOU that. Don't you read my posts?
>
>Not when YOU say Maxwell measured them YOU didn't mean
>he actually did it himself, I don't. What EXACTLY are you
>BABBLING about?
Being an engineer, you wouldn't know anything about the finer points of
physics.
Maxwell reckoned that'c' was the ratio of e.m.u. to e.s.u. units
To determine that value of c, measurements had to be made to determine e and
mu. This was done on Earth and therefore reveals nothing about empty space..
>
>>
>> What is measured are the properties of the fields used in the experiiment.
>
>WHAT FUCKIN' EXPERIIMENT? Nobody has yet invented a
>fuckin' permittivity meter for someone to measure the permittivity
>of aether for Maxwel to use.
Please don't swear on the internet.
>>>Matter can have permittivity, empty space cannot. The fuckin'
>>>aether has been dead for 125 years and dumbfucks like you are
>>>still talking about its properties. This is 21st century, Wilson,
>>>not the 19th.
>>
>> You're out of date enough to remember the latter.
>
>I'm not the one claiming I didn't mean Maxwell measured the properties
>of the fields used in the experiiment with a fuckin' permittivity meter,
> you ranting lunatic.
....time for your morning dram...
Androcles
"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message
> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 07:48:10 -0000, "Androcles"
> <Headm...@Hogwarts.physics_p>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message
>>news:19qcf51b1h39fs4sf...@4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 21:04:48 -0000, "Androcles"
>>>>
>>>>Your dumb claim that Maxwell measured e and mu.
>>>>First of all it's epsilon_0, not 'e', and secondly it's like the
>>>>'h' in 'egg'; it doesn't exist, therefore it cannot be measured.
>>>
>>> I told YOU that. Don't you read my posts?
>>
>>Not when YOU say Maxwell measured them YOU didn't mean
>>he actually did it himself, I don't. What EXACTLY are you
>>BABBLING about?
>
> Being an engineer, you wouldn't know anything about the finer points of
> physics.
Being a moron, you wouldn't know anything about the finer points of
bullshit, you just spew the obvious kind.
> Maxwell reckoned that'c' was the ratio of e.m.u. to e.s.u. units
> To determine that value of c, measurements had to be made to determine e
> and
> mu. This was done on Earth and therefore reveals nothing about empty
> space..
Who by?
>>>
>>> What is measured are the properties of the fields used in the
>>> experiiment.
>>
>>WHAT FUCKIN' EXPERIIMENT? Nobody has yet invented a
>>fuckin' permittivity meter for someone to measure the permittivity
>>of aether for Maxwel to use.
>
> Please don't swear on the internet.
Please don't lie on the internet.
WHAT FUCKIN' EXPERIIMENT, DUMBFUCK?
>
>>>>Matter can have permittivity, empty space cannot. The fuckin'
>>>>aether has been dead for 125 years and dumbfucks like you are
>>>>still talking about its properties. This is 21st century, Wilson,
>>>>not the 19th.
>>>
>>> You're out of date enough to remember the latter.
>>
>>I'm not the one claiming I didn't mean Maxwell measured the properties
>>of the fields used in the experiiment with a fuckin' permittivity meter,
>> you ranting lunatic.
>
> ....time for your morning dram...
time you quit bullshitting.
Henry Wilson DSc
wrote:
>
>"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message
>news:2uvcf5plk5p1qfnsf...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 07:48:10 -0000, "Androcles"
>> <Headm...@Hogwarts.physics_p>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Being an engineer, you wouldn't know anything about the finer points of
>> physics.
>
>
>Being a moron, you wouldn't know anything about the finer points of
>bullshit, you just spew the obvious kind.
>
>> Maxwell reckoned that'c' was the ratio of e.m.u. to e.s.u. units
>> To determine that value of c, measurements had to be made to determine e
>> and
>> mu. This was done on Earth and therefore reveals nothing about empty
>> space..
>
>Who by?
Maxwell's grandmother I suppose.....
...and lots of others....It was a standard university experiment.
>>>> What is measured are the properties of the fields used in the
>>>> experiiment.
>>>
>>>WHAT FUCKIN' EXPERIIMENT? Nobody has yet invented a
>>>fuckin' permittivity meter for someone to measure the permittivity
>>>of aether for Maxwel to use.
>>
>> Please don't swear on the internet.
>
>Please don't lie on the internet.
>WHAT FUCKIN' EXPERIIMENT, DUMBFUCK?
Capacity and delectric constant. Magnetic permeability in vacuum..... that kind
of thing
>>>>>Matter can have permittivity, empty space cannot. The fuckin'
>>>>>aether has been dead for 125 years and dumbfucks like you are
>>>>>still talking about its properties. This is 21st century, Wilson,
>>>>>not the 19th.
>>>>
>>>> You're out of date enough to remember the latter.
>>>
>>>I'm not the one claiming I didn't mean Maxwell measured the properties
>>>of the fields used in the experiiment with a fuckin' permittivity meter,
>>> you ranting lunatic.
>>
>> ....time for your morning dram...
>
>time you quit bullshitting.
Have you learnt how to use google yet?
Androcles
"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message
> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 08:58:46 -0000, "Androcles"
> <Headm...@Hogwarts.physics_p>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message
>>news:2uvcf5plk5p1qfnsf...@4ax.com...
>>> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 07:48:10 -0000, "Androcles"
>>> <Headm...@Hogwarts.physics_p>
>>> wrote:
>
>
>>>
>>> Being an engineer, you wouldn't know anything about the finer points of
>>> physics.
>>
>>
>>Being a moron, you wouldn't know anything about the finer points of
>>bullshit, you just spew the obvious kind.
>>
>>> Maxwell reckoned that'c' was the ratio of e.m.u. to e.s.u. units
>>> To determine that value of c, measurements had to be made to determine e
>>> and
>>> mu. This was done on Earth and therefore reveals nothing about empty
>>> space..
>>
>>Who by?
>
> Maxwell's grandmother I suppose.....
> ...and lots of others....It was a standard university experiment.
What, measuring epsilon_0 in aether? Are you an aetherialist?
I thought your brand was lucky white heather. Is that what
standard universities use?
>
>>>>> What is measured are the properties of the fields used in the
>>>>> experiiment.
>>>>
>>>>WHAT FUCKIN' EXPERIIMENT? Nobody has yet invented a
>>>>fuckin' permittivity meter for someone to measure the permittivity
>>>>of aether for Maxwel to use.
>>>
>>> Please don't swear on the internet.
>>
>>Please don't lie on the internet.
>>WHAT FUCKIN' EXPERIIMENT, DUMBFUCK?
>
> Capacity and delectric constant. Magnetic permeability in vacuum..... that
> kind
> of thing
Where do you get the lucky white h-aether?
>>>>>>Matter can have permittivity, empty space cannot. The fuckin'
>>>>>>aether has been dead for 125 years and dumbfucks like you are
>>>>>>still talking about its properties. This is 21st century, Wilson,
>>>>>>not the 19th.
>>>>>
>>>>> You're out of date enough to remember the latter.
>>>>
>>>>I'm not the one claiming I didn't mean Maxwell measured the properties
>>>>of the fields used in the experiiment with a fuckin' permittivity meter,
>>>> you ranting lunatic.
>>>
>>> ....time for your morning dram...
>>
>>time you quit bullshitting.
>
> Have you learnt how to use google yet?
Yes, look:
http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/jgr/lowres/jgrn809l.jpg
Paul B. Andersen
> On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:53:09 +0100, "Paul B. Andersen"
> <paul.b....@somewhere.no> wrote:
>
>> Henry Wilson DSc wrote:
>>> One of the main arguments in support of Einstein's P2 comes from consideration
>>> of Maxwells' derivation of c. Accordingly, the intrinsic impedance of free
>>> space is claimed to be the same everywhere and from this can be derived the
>>> speed of light in any observer's frame.
>>>
>>> The fact is, Maxwell merely derived a value for the UNIVERSAL CONSTANT known as
>>> c. It has the dimensions of a speed, L/T, but its only known connection with
>>> any physical speed is that it is defines the magnitude at which light leaves
>>> its source.
>> The fact is that Maxwell merely derived that his equations predicted the existence
>> of a wave which in vacuum should propagate at the speed c regardless of the speed of
>> the source. One very obvious known connection with a physical speed is that it is
>> the speed of light in vacuum.
>
> WRT the source, yes. Nothing more.
Maxwell's equations predict that the speed of light is independent of
the speed of the source.
Fact, nothing to discuss.
--
Paul
Henry Wilson DSc
<paul.b....@utopia.no> wrote:
>Henry Wilson DSc wrote:
>> On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:53:09 +0100, "Paul B. Andersen"
>> <paul.b....@somewhere.no> wrote:
>>
>>> Henry Wilson DSc wrote:
>>>> One of the main arguments in support of Einstein's P2 comes from consideration
>>>> of Maxwells' derivation of c. Accordingly, the intrinsic impedance of free
>>>> space is claimed to be the same everywhere and from this can be derived the
>>>> speed of light in any observer's frame.
>>>>
>>>> The fact is, Maxwell merely derived a value for the UNIVERSAL CONSTANT known as
>>>> c. It has the dimensions of a speed, L/T, but its only known connection with
>>>> any physical speed is that it is defines the magnitude at which light leaves
>>>> its source.
>>> The fact is that Maxwell merely derived that his equations predicted the existence
>>> of a wave which in vacuum should propagate at the speed c regardless of the speed of
>>> the source. One very obvious known connection with a physical speed is that it is
>>> the speed of light in vacuum.
>>
>> WRT the source, yes. Nothing more.
>
>Maxwell's equations predict that the speed of light is independent of
>the speed of the source.
>Fact, nothing to discuss.
Hahahhahhahahhaahha! You haven't learnt a thing in ten years.
Maxwell's equations apply to EM waves in his imaginary aether, a semblence of
which is approximated near large masses.
ALL speeds need a reference.
Here' something for you: www.scisite.info/r cru2.jpg
Not a bad match, eh?
Inertial
news:fmafg5dqvn5j00n53...@4ax.com...
> ALL speeds need a reference.
Noone is claiming they don't. Do you have problems reading?