"SRdude" wrote in message
oups.com...
Wrong answer, Dirk Vdm. (And I seriously doubt that anyone else
will concur with you.)

At that point in his book, Einstein had yet to even mention the
relativistic velocity composition theorem, let alone derive it.

w = c - v is a direct measurement of the one-way speed of a
departing light ray wrt a single frame (the carriage).

Further note, Dirk Vdm, that if the result had been - as you claim -
compatible with special relativity, then Einstein would not have
lamented that "...this result comes into conflict with the principle
of relativity...."

Quit trying to rewrite SR history in order to squirm out of my
challenge.

Quit trying to understand relativity buy reading Einstein's ancient popular
writings. Do something daring and study modern presentations.

http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0110076,
and ancient, but I still think excellent post by Tom Roberts
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e....ih.lucent.com
and chapter 10 of
http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~phys16/Textbook/
under the heading of Relativity without c.

However I have been dealing with cranks long enough on
sci.physics.relativity to know understanding relativity is not their aim.
This is the very reason they like to examine ancient popular writings.
Firstly it allows them to shift discussion to what Einstein may (and I
emphasis may) have thought 80 years ago rather that what we now know.
Secondly physicists have been known to be less than rigorous in what they
say in popular writings so they can pick up on such and claim it is some
fundamental problem with relativity.

Bill