On Wed, 14 May 2008 03:54:52 +0100, "Androcles"
wrote:


"Dr. Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
.. .

| 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.



It can't be right next to, left next to, front next to or back next to, it
can only be above next to or below next to. There is no "of course"
about it, your descriptions are vague and imprecise. Just because
you know what you mean doesn't mean anybody else does.

Stop acting dumb.....I assume you're acting....
The two rings are parallel and adjacent. Have a look at the back wheels of the
next semi-trailer that goes past.
What happens if the brakes are put on one and not the other....jacked up of
course.

| | 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..

Are you saying ring microwave gyroscopes won't work?
I don't ASSUME anything, Wilson, especially when there is no need to.

the movement is straight.
Forget the ****ing sine.

You are less intelligent so can't possibly see what's going on.
READ CAREFULLY as I do.

THE MARK MOVES AWAY AT V.SIN(T), EVENTUALLY RETURNING.
****ing physicists, hopeless at mathematics, clueless the lot of them.

The pulse moves away at c in the rotating frame and eventually returns.
The mark moves only a few microns at most during that time interval.

| | 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.


Ok, so far I have read carefully and:
i) the mark is stationary and moves.

The mark is stationary in the inertial frame but moves in the rotating frame.
Relativists are incapable of understanding that.

ii) the mark moves in a straight line.

Near enough.

iii) arcs are straight lines.

A micron long arc on a 10cm circle is as good as straight.

iv) the light reflects from total internal reflection by sqrt(2), you once
said.

I did not.

v) the world is flat.

My neighbour's tennis court is....but he's quite round.

vi) You are upside down.

Not in polar coordinates.

vii) You are less intelligent so you can't possibly see what's going on.

I might be a specialist in teaching physics to engineers but sometimes the
pupils are incapable of learning.


| 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.

The detector is not where the rays meet "in phase" going in opposite
directions, Wilson, or it wouldn't detect anything. First, one of the rays
has to meet a reflector "in which total internal reflection occurs" so that
it goes the same way as the other ray.

The 'reflector' is a half silvered plain mirror. It doesn't involve internal
reflection.


|
| | 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.

You are less intelligent so you can't possibly see what's going on.
READ CAREFULLY as I do.
They walk around in a circle at the tail, collide (in step) and
walk down the aisle of the plane at different speeds, one arriving
at the flight deck before the other. The captain sees which one
arrived first and knows which way his plane is rotating. It doesn't
work if he's at the tail.

That's the SR/aether analysis.
You have revealed your true beliefs.



|
| 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?

Georges Sagnac was not christ, you dumb *******.
You are less intelligent so you can't possibly see what's going on.
READ CAREFULLY as I do.
It is Sagnac's original sketch, animated by me.

It's wrong.
http://www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/sagnac.jpg
shows a four mirror sagnac interferomete works.

| | 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".

Not at all, you were in fact actually correct for a change and that's a
fact, actually.


You don't even agree that a 1 micron arc of a 10cm circle is effectively
straight.


| | 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.

Aussie sheep shaggers obviously hallucinate an arc is a straight line, in
fact, actually.
In fact rotation is relative, actually, and that's a fact.

Rotation is absolute no matter what configuration. It can be detected
ABSOLUTELY.




Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

.....specialising in teaching physics to engineers and mathematicians....