On Tue, 13 May 2008 14:33:32 +0100, "Androcles"
wrote:
"Dr. Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
.. .
| | My equation is for the rotating frame in which both rays appear to move
at
| c
| | wrt the source/detector.
| | ct = 2piR + alphaR
|
| In the rotating frame the "observer" (what or whomever that may be)
doesn't
| move at all, he goes along with the rotating frame. You don't move with
| respect
| to the city of Sydney, but you do move around the Sun by one degree a day
| (alpha).
| As far as you are concerned the speed of light from your home to downtown
| Sydney
| is c and the distance is ct. It is NOT ct-alpha.R, you have to be off
the
| Earth to make
| that determination. You can't frame hop, Wilson.
|
| Look, I've tried to explain this to relativists but they're too dumb to
| understand. You are more intelligent so can probably see what's going on.
Read
| carefully.
Ok, then read my replies carefully.
| Consider you are on the ring and rotating with it at v.
| Next to you is another ring that is NOT rotating.
If this second ring is concentric with the rotating ring then it IS rotating
in the
opposite direction in frame of reference, and if not then it is orbiting my
ring,
crossing my sky as I turn just as the sun does. Indeed, the Earth and Sun
are
two such rings.
I've intelligently read carefully and find you have not made adequate
definition
for me to understand your intent at this stage.
Of course the second ring is concentric. it is right next to the gyro ring.
| At certain instant, you emit two pulses of light in opposite directions
around
| the ring. You also place a mark on the nonrotating ring.
|
| What happens to the mark?
| Answer: it appears to move away from you at v.
Not at all, it moves away at v.sin(t), eventually returning.
The movement is only a couple of light wavelengths at the most.
You can assume the movement is in a straight line and is just vt..
| By the time the pulses return, the mark has moved a distance vt away.
The pulses never return, they travel directly away from me in opposite
directions and continue forever.
We are discussing a ring gyro in which total internal reflection occurs. As far
as this argument is concerned the rays move in straight lines.
You are not doing a very good job here with your specialising in teaching
physics to engineers and mathematicians... or perhaps you are, this
is typical of the kind of undefined crap we've come to expect of
physicists. It is also why your programs are loaded down with constants,
you fail to define them at the beginning, inventing them as you need them.
That's a very poor programming technique, you have only to make
a typographical error in "3.14259265" somewhere and you'll never spot it,
whereas by writing "pi = 3.14159265" at the beginning it is defined
throughout.
I never write 3.141592653589790
as a value in excel, I use pi() instead.
Grandpa doesn't ride the carousel, Wilson, only the kids do that.
http://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/(Gh)/gu...s/coriolis.mov
In a ring gyro, the detector rides the ring.
| Of course YOU have no way of knowing that the mark represents the original
| position of the emission point or that you are rotating with a peripheral
speed
| of v. You have every reason to believe that both pulses move away from you
at c
| and travel the same distance, 2piR in the same time. You are therefore
| mystified by the fact that they are not in phase when they reunite.
I'm not mystified at all, Wilson, but you are.
When two kids pace their way around the carousel matching step for step
they arrive "in phase" back at the start point. Only when they step off
and one rides the moving sidewalk and the other does not do they get
"out of phase" because one is travelling faster than the other.
In a ring gyro stuck in an aeroplane, the kids don't ever get off.
Here's some pictures of it:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...RealSagnac.gif
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...agnacFixed.gif
What in christ's name is that?
|
| This is a perfect example of how the use of rotating frames can be
misleading.
| In fact, the rays travel different distances EVEN IN THE ROTATING FRAME.
| AND their wavelengths are the same.
In fact you are stupidly wrong and misleading only yourself, in fact,
actually, and that's a fact. It is also a fact that anyone starting a
sentence with "in fact" is in fact about to lie through their ****ing
teeth in an attempt to misleadingly convince themselves, in fact, actually.
You are full of ****, Wilson.
I was being facetious when I said "you are more intelligent than the rest".
|
| | Alpha is the angle through which the STATIONARY EMISSION POINT of each
| 'ray
| | element' moves (backwards) in the rotating frame.
|
| We know that, but the STATIONARY EMISSION POINT is OUT IN SPACE
| for a TV signal sent from a tower in Sydney, and even then it is not
| stationary,
| the Sun moves too.
|
| We're only interested in rotation here not linear movement or position.
| Rotation is absolute. Every rotating object has an associated nonrotating
frame
| perpendicular to and at rest with its axis of rotation.
|
You are full of ****, Wilson.
Engineers obviously aren't aware that rotation is absolute.
Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
.....specialising in teaching physics to engineers and mathematicians....