"OG" wrote in message
...
| Andy at earth-lab had to flash 1.2 seconds before he saw moon-lab's
| flash to produce simultaneity, but (B) only had to flash 0.6 seconds
| before seing moon-lab's flash to produce simultaneity. But both flashes
| were at the same places (earth-lab and moon-lab).
|
| Agreed?

Yes

"Spaceman" wrote in message
. ..

"Greg Neill" wrote in message
. ..
| "Spaceman" wrote in message
...
|
| "Greg Neill" wrote in message
| . ..
| | "Spaceman" wrote in message
| ...
| |
| | "Greg Neill" wrote in message
| | . ..
| | | For material particles, yes, if you're referring to
| | | the observed deBroglie wavelength. For light,
| | | the observation velocity is fixed and the momentum
| | | change shows up as a frequency change.
| |
| | What was changed about the momentum Greg?
| |
| | That's like asking what was changed about the
| | size of something. The measured energy is
| | changed. Remember? You said yourself, photons
| | are packets of energy.
|
| The energy can not change without a speed difference
| Greg.
|
| Sure it can, if the frequency has changed. E = h*f.

Greg,
the frequency can't change without a speed change.

Why?

you have to change the speed to get the energy and the frequency
to change at all.

Why?

And more to the point, the speed is empirically measured
not to change. So deal with it.



| How did the energy change without a speed difference Greg?
|
| By a change of frequency. E = h*f.

Greg,
the frequency can't change without a speed change.

Your repetition of that statement does not make it
any more true. It is as false now as the first time
you uttered it. James, the speed is empirically
measured to be the same. Deal with it.

you have to change the speed to get the energy and the frequency
to change at all.

Nope. Show how the speed can change as well as the
frequency in the observed way and still conserve
energy.

"Greg Neill" wrote in message
. ..
|
| "Spaceman" wrote in message
| . ..
|
| "Greg Neill" wrote in message
| . ..
| | "Spaceman" wrote in message
| ...
| |
| | "Greg Neill" wrote in message
| | . ..
| | | "Spaceman" wrote in message
| | ...
| | |
| | | "Greg Neill" wrote in message
| | | . ..
| | | | For material particles, yes, if you're referring to
| | | | the observed deBroglie wavelength. For light,
| | | | the observation velocity is fixed and the momentum
| | | | change shows up as a frequency change.
| | |
| | | What was changed about the momentum Greg?
| | |
| | | That's like asking what was changed about the
| | | size of something. The measured energy is
| | | changed. Remember? You said yourself, photons
| | | are packets of energy.
| |
| | The energy can not change without a speed difference
| | Greg.
| |
| | Sure it can, if the frequency has changed. E = h*f.
|
| Greg,
| the frequency can't change without a speed change.
|
| Why?

Because there is no physical reason for such.

|
| you have to change the speed to get the energy and the frequency
| to change at all.
|
| Why?

Because there is no physical reason for such

| And more to the point, the speed is empirically measured
| not to change. So deal with it.

I won't,
you can't take away the physical reason for such a thing
and just say it happens.

| Your repetition of that statement does not make it
| any more true. It is as false now as the first time
| you uttered it. James, the speed is empirically
| measured to be the same. Deal with it.

I asked Greg,
If the speed does not change,
How are you changing the energy or the frequency at all.
Why are you not answering that?
No reason huh?
LOL

"Greg Neill" wrote in message
. ..
| "Spaceman" wrote in message
...
|
| |
| | Greg,
| | the frequency can't change without a speed change.
| |
| | Why?
|
| Because there is no physical reason for such.
|
| What physical reason is there for any change,
| except to say that it happens to be the way
| the universe works?

Greg,
you have to be kidding right?
Or is this the ignorant "we don't look for causes" physicist view.?

Physical reason for a change would be something like
The board is shorter now because I cut it with a saw.
etc..

| You are saying that light has different frequencies
| because it has different speeds. That's clearly
| not so...

Bull****.


| ...Split white light apart and you find a multitude
| of colors.

and already a multitude of frequencies traveling
at c from source.
Irrelevant to change in speed anyway.


| What do you mean? What kind of physical reason
| are you looking for? The very best reason is that
| the speed of light is constant, so something else
| has got to give!

Something like what?
You keep saying the energy and frequency changes
but you have not shown any reason for such change.

| The change is rendered by the fact that the observer is
| in a different frame of reference than the source; He
| has a different state of motion than the frame in which
| the light was emitted, so he must see a different momentum
| for the photon (just as he would see a different momentum
| for any other body). The Lorentz transforms and energy
| conservation predict the result.

Dang,
you are saying it again and don't even realize it.
The relative motion is changing the frequency to
that observer..
LOL
You truly are ignorant!
you state what I state, but in your own little spacetime way
so it is supposedly more correct.
LOL