On May 14, 12:53*pm, kenseto wrote:
On May 14, 11:22*am, " wrote:



On 14 mayo, 10:03, kenseto wrote:

On May 13, 6:36 pm, "Simple Simon" wrote:

3. Einstein asserted that the train observer is rushing toward the
light front from the front and receding away from the light front from
the rear.
These assertions means that the light front from the front
will take less transit time to reach the train observer and that the
light front from the rear will take more transit time to reach the
train observer.

Obviously (assuming that the specificity that you omit has the observers and
events at the same times and locations as the classic thought experiment
does).

No I didn't assume anything of the sort. Einstein's assertion implies
that the light front from the front will take less transit time to
reach the train observer and the light front fron the rear will take
longer transit time to reach the train observer. This can only mean
one thing: Einstein's assertion violates the isotropy of the speed of
light in the train.

Once more you show you do not understand English!. Stop lying!

On the contrary, what Einstein said, and everybody else but you
understands, is that the train observer is moving towards the light
signal coming from the front of the train, and that light signal is,
for sure, traveling at c to reach him (as the back light signal is
also doing). Isotropy is never touched here

****ing idiot....the light signal from the front and the rear were
generated at equal distance from the train observer. if the signal
from the front reaches the train observer before the signal from the
rear that means that it takes different transit times for light to
travel equal distance in different directions.

No, the light signals *started* their transit at different times in
the train frame. The transit times are equal. As a consequence, they
arrive at different times.

Note that the order of deduction is actually the reverse of this.
1. First, it is *observed* by the train observer that they arrive at
different times. No amount of telling him what he should have seen
instead will convince him otherwise, because he knows what he saw.
2. The transit times are determined to be equal. This is because the
distance traveled is equal, as verified by the train observer, and
because the speed of light is equal in both directions, as verified by
the train observer.
3. Therefore, the only possible conclusion is that the original
strikes occurred at different times in the train frame.

That means that the
speed of light is not isotropic.



The exact wording from Einstein is "...he is hastening towards the
beam of light coming from B, whilst he is riding on ahead of the beam
of light coming from A. Hence the observer will see the beam of light
emitted from B earlier than he will see that emitted from A.."

Right....that means that the speed of light from B is (c+v) and the
speed of light from A is (c-v). So again what Einstein is saying is
that the train observer is seeing anisotropy light speed from A and B.
You are so stupid.

Ken Seto



That means that Einstein's assertion destroys the
isotropy of the speed of light in the train.

Not at all. It is exactly because of the isotropy of the speed of light that
the above is true!

How can that Be? Einstein's assertion the two light fronts takes
different transit times to reach the train observer and both of these
light fronts were generated at equal distance from the train observer
originally. Do you understand what isotropy of the speed of light
mean????

Ken Seto

Everybody does understand isotropy but you!. Light signals propagate
isotropically from their sources while the moving observer changes
location. Transit times have nothing to do with isotropy.

Of course as, you know nothing about this relativity of simultaneity
stuff, you would never understand the solution of the pole and barn
thought problem.

Miguel Rios- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -