This statement made in an explanation of addition of velocities shows
the confusion existing in the minds of scientists about velocity of
light.
"The constancy of light (Einstein's dictum) tells us that the velocity
of light in the forward direction is equal to the velocity of light in
the backward direction, i.e. CF = CB = C."

Relative to a set of coordinates S, if a photon is traveling on the x
axis in the +x direction, it has a velocity of c. If a photon is
traveling on the x axis in the -x direction, it has a velocity of
(-c). Scientists do not seem to be aware that the Lorentz equations
automatically resolve the velocities of photons because c is always
squared in those equations, and the velocity of a photon is only shown
implicitly in the variables x and x'. Einstein's own equations for
velocity of light do not work in the Lorentz equations if x or x' are
negative. The equations x=ct and x'=ct' should have been x=wt and
x'=wt', where w is the velocity of light. This can be shown by
considering the equation for t'.

t'=(t-vx/c^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)

If x is negative, then w = (-c).
What Einstein was actually doing was using photons as clocks, but
without the Lorentz equations to keep velocities straight, his logic
did not hold together because CF does not = CB as this statement
claims is shown by Einstein's dictum. This results in the devotion
that scientists of today have for the distance contraction generated
by the Lorentz equations.
Robert B. Winn

rbwinn wrote:
Einstein's own equations for
velocity of light do not work in the Lorentz equations if x or x' are
negative.

Wrong. They work.

On May 5, 11:18�am, YBM wrote:
rbwinn wrote:
Einstein's own equations for
velocity of light do not work in the Lorentz equations if x or x' are
negative.

Wrong. They work.

No, they do not work. Einstein said that x=ct, x'=ct'. If x is
negative, then

t'=(t-vx/c^2)/sqrt (1-v^2/c^2)

cannot be used with the equation x=ct. The velocity of light has to
be -c in the equation for t' in order for the equation to work if x is
negative. x=(-c)t, not x=ct.
Robert B. Winn

rbwinn a écrit :
On May 5, 11:18�am, YBM wrote:
rbwinn wrote:
Einstein's own equations for
velocity of light do not work in the Lorentz equations if x or x' are
negative.
Wrong. They work.

No, they do not work. Einstein said that x=ct, x'=ct'. If x is
negative, then

t'=(t-vx/c^2)/sqrt (1-v^2/c^2)

cannot be used with the equation x=ct. The velocity of light has to
be -c in the equation for t' in order for the equation to work if x is
negative. x=(-c)t, not x=ct.

Wrong.

Let's assume that x=ct

By LT we get :

x'= gamma*(x-vt)
t'= gamma*(t-vx/c^2) where gamma=1/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)

let's have a look at x'/t' (*) under the condition that x=ct :

x'/t' = (x-vt)/(t-vx^2/c^2) = (ct-vt)/(t-vct/c^2)
= t(c-v)/( t (1 - v/c) ) = c(c-v)/(c-v)
= c

= x'=ct'


(*) the case t'=0 is trivially ok (0=c0).

YBM a écrit :
rbwinn a écrit :
On May 5, 11:18�am, YBM wrote:
rbwinn wrote:
Einstein's own equations for
velocity of light do not work in the Lorentz equations if x or x' are
negative.
Wrong. They work.

No, they do not work. Einstein said that x=ct, x'=ct'. If x is
negative, then

t'=(t-vx/c^2)/sqrt (1-v^2/c^2)

cannot be used with the equation x=ct. The velocity of light has to
be -c in the equation for t' in order for the equation to work if x is
negative. x=(-c)t, not x=ct.

Wrong.

Let's assume that x=ct

By LT we get :

x'= gamma*(x-vt)
t'= gamma*(t-vx/c^2) where gamma=1/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)

let's have a look at x'/t' (*) under the condition that x=ct :

x'/t' = (x-vt)/(t-vx^2/c^2) = (ct-vt)/(t-vct/c^2)
obvious typo : ..../(t-vx/c^2) = (ct-vt)/(t-vct/c^2)

= t(c-v)/( t (1 - v/c) ) = c(c-v)/(c-v)
= c

= x'=ct'


(*) the case t'=0 is trivially ok (0=c0).

On May 5, 12:07Â*pm, YBM wrote:
rbwinn a écrit :

On May 5, 11:18�am, YBM wrote:
rbwinn wrote:
Einstein's own equations for
velocity of light do not work in the Lorentz equations if x or x' are
negative.
Wrong. They work.

No, they do not work. Â*Einstein said that x=ct, x'=ct'. Â*If x is
negative, then

Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â*t'=(t-vx/c^2)/sqrt (1-v^2/c^2)

cannot be used with the equation x=ct. Â*The velocity of light has to
be -c in the equation for t' in order for the equation to work if x is
negative. Â* x=(-c)t, not x=ct.

Wrong.

Let's assume that x=ct

By LT we get :

x'= gamma*(x-vt)
t'= gamma*(t-vx/c^2) Â* Â*where gamma=1/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)

let's have a look at x'/t' (*) under the condition that x=ct :

Â* x'/t' = (x-vt)/(t-vx^2/c^2) = (ct-vt)/(t-vct/c^2)
Â* Â* Â* Â* = t(c-v)/( t (1 - v/c) ) = c(c-v)/(c-v)
Â* Â* Â* Â* = c

= x'=ct'

(*) the case t'=0 is trivially ok (0=c0).

You neglect the fact that if x or x' is negative in the equations
x=ct, x'=ct', then either the velocity of light has to be negative or
time has to be negative. The equations you gave would apply only to
positive values of x and x', meaning that a photon is traveling in the
+x direction relative to the x axis. Where you scientists are making
a mistake is in saying CF = CB = C, such as when a photon is reflected
by a mirror. The velocity of the photon is changed from +c to -c
relative to the set of coordinates. The Lorentz equations compensate
for velocity of light automatically, which is why scientists like them
so much, in addition to their distance contraction, which scientists
seem to worship.
However, keeping velocities correct also allows use of the Galilean
transformation equations, which do not have a distance contraction.
If the velocity of light is shown to be c by two identical cesium
clocks, one in S and one in S', then this can be shown by the
equations

x=wt
x'=wn'

The time of the cesium clock in S' cannot be shown by t' because t' is
already defined to be t'=t in the Galilean transformation equations.

x'=x-vt
wn'=wt-vt
n'=t(1-v/w)

What is interesting about this equation is that it corresponds to
reality, which is that an observer with a cesium clock in S' which is
running slower than an identical cesium clock in S will perceive the
velocity of one frame of reference to the other to be higher as
measured by the slower clock in S' than as measured by the clock in
S. This makes it possible for a particle to be accellerated to the
speed of light as measured by atomic time in the frame of reference of
the particle, making the existence of light possible, as opposed to
the impossibillity of existence of light shown by the Lorentz
equations, since nothing can be accellerated to the speed of light.

n' in the above equation is actually the numerator of t' in the
Lorentz equations.

n'=t(1-v/w)= (t-vt/w) =(t-vx/w^2) = (t-vx/c^2)

It gives the same kind of difference in time without the distance
contraction. At a velocity of .9 c, if t= 1 sec., t' in the Lorentz
equations will be .23 sec. whereas, n' will be .1 sec. The faster
time of the Lorentz equation clock makes a distance contraction
necessary, whereas, n' corresponds to the Galilean transformation
equation value of x'. For slower velocities such as the velocity of
the planet Mercury, which was used to prove the accuracy of Einstein's
theory, n' agrees with t' in the Lorentz equations to several decimal
places.
In any event, the Lorentz equations show that nothing can be
accellerated to the velocity of light, whereas, the Galilean
transformation equations show that it is possible, making the
existence of light possible. However, it should already have been
obvious to scientists because without the existence of light, they
would not have been able to show with the Lorentz equations that light
can not exist.
Robert B. Winn

rbwinn a écrit :
You neglect the fact that if x or x' is negative in the equations
x=ct, x'=ct', then either the velocity of light has to be negative or
time has to be negative.

You're right that in the case of x=ct, when t in negative, so is x...
So what ?

The equations you gave would apply only to
positive values of x and x',

Where did you get this ? I used the equation of propagation
of light x=ct, which applies either when t or x are negative
or positive, and the LT which apply for any x,t, positive or
negative.

meaning that a photon is traveling in the
+x direction relative to the x axis.

x=ct means that light is traveling in the (Ox) (call this
+x if you want) direction and that x=0 at t=0. This equation
of movement applies as well for x,t being negative or positive.

[snip unrelated nonsense]

On May 5, 1:44�pm, YBM wrote:
rbwinn a �crit :

You neglect the fact that if x or x' is negative in the equations
x=ct, x'=ct', then either the velocity of light has to be negative or
time has to be negative. �

You're right that in the case of x=ct, when t in negative, so is x...
So what ?

The equations you gave would apply only to
positive values of x and x',

Where did you get this ? I used the equation of propagation
of light x=ct, which applies either when t or x are negative
or positive, and the LT which apply for any x,t, positive or
negative.
Well, for example, light is emitted at the origins of S and S' when
they coincide. According to Einstein, the light would propagate in S
as a sphere with a radius of ct, and in S' as a sphere with a radius
of ct', except that the sphere in S' is an oblate sphere because of
the distance contraction. So we consider a photon proceeding from the
origins of S and S' at t=t'=0 in the -x direction. When a time of t
has transpired in S, a time of t' has transpired in S'. The photon is
at the coordinate x in S and at the coordinate x' in S'. Both x and
x' are negative. Both t and t' are positive. The velocity of the
photon is -c, not c as you insist it would be. The Lorentz equations
themselves show that x=(-c)t.
meaning that a photon is traveling in the
+x direction relative to the x axis. �

x=ct means that light is traveling in the (Ox) (call this
+x if you want) direction and that x=0 at t=0. This equation
of movement applies as well for x,t being negative or positive.

The Lorentz equation works because it is showing velocity of light,
not speed of light as scientists say it does. If the equations were
using speed of light, you would be able to reduce them down by the
rules of algebra, and they would still work. They will not work if
you reduce them down past

t'=(t-vx/c^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)

with the equations x=ct, x'=ct', because if you do, the velocity of a
photon is wrong. Why not reduce the numerator to t(1-v/c)?
If you did, you would have to put a -c into the equation for c
every time x was negative. So if you reflect light from a mirror, the
velocity of a photon changes, and you have to change from c to -c.
The Lorentz equations do this automatically with the value of x,
however, they do so at the price of a distance contraction.
So what is your theory about how light exists if nothing can be
accellerated to the speed of light?
Robert B. Winn

On 5 mayo, 17:32, rbwinn wrote:
On May 5, 1:44�pm, YBM wrote:

rbwinn a �crit :

You neglect the fact that if x or x' is negative in the equations
x=ct, x'=ct', then either the velocity of light has to be negative or
time has to be negative. �

You're right that in the case of x=ct, when t in negative, so is x...
So what ?

The equations you gave would apply only to
positive values of x and x',

Where did you get this ? I used the equation of propagation
of light x=ct, which applies either when t or x are negative
or positive, and the LT which apply for any x,t, positive or
negative.

Well, for example, light is emitted at the origins of S and S' when
they coincide. According to Einstein, the light would propagate in S
as a sphere with a radius of ct, and in S' as a sphere with a radius
of ct', except that the sphere in S' is an oblate sphere because of
the distance contraction. So we consider a photon proceeding from the
origins of S and S' at t=t'=0 in the -x direction. When a time of t
has transpired in S, a time of t' has transpired in S'. The photon is
at the coordinate x in S and at the coordinate x' in S'. Both x and
x' are negative. Both t and t' are positive. The velocity of the
photon is -c, not c as you insist it would be. The Lorentz equations
themselves show that x=(-c)t.

meaning that a photon is traveling in the
+x direction relative to the x axis. �

x=ct means that light is traveling in the (Ox) (call this
+x if you want) direction and that x=0 at t=0. This equation
of movement applies as well for x,t being negative or positive.

The Lorentz equation works because it is showing velocity of light,
not speed of light as scientists say it does. If the equations were
using speed of light, you would be able to reduce them down by the
rules of algebra, and they would still work. They will not work if
you reduce them down past

t'=(t-vx/c^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)

with the equations x=ct, x'=ct', because if you do, the velocity of a
photon is wrong. Why not reduce the numerator to t(1-v/c)?
If you did, you would have to put a -c into the equation for c
every time x was negative. So if you reflect light from a mirror, the
velocity of a photon changes, and you have to change from c to -c.
The Lorentz equations do this automatically with the value of x,
however, they do so at the price of a distance contraction.
So what is your theory about how light exists if nothing can be
accellerated to the speed of light?
Robert B. Winn

We all agree with you. So in the interest of science, and since you
have the uttermost knowledge about this subject, please disconnect
yourself right now from your Internet and start writing a book or
paper about this new science. We, in the mean time will contact the
editors of some prestigious Journals, such as Science and Nature, and
let them know that you are about to provide to the scientific
community with the most important discovery of this century, so they
can be ready when your work is ready.

Miguel Rios

On May 5, 1:01*pm, rbwinn wrote:
This statement made in an explanation of addition of velocities shows
the confusion existing in the minds of scientists about velocity of
light.
"The constancy of light (Einstein's dictum) tells us that the velocity
of light in the forward direction is equal to the velocity of light in
the backward direction, i.e. *CF = CB = C."

If the above is a quotation, whom are you quoting?

The statement is wrong. The *speed* of light in a vacuum is constant,
not the velocity.


Relative to a set of coordinates S, if a photon is traveling on the x
axis in the +x direction, it has a velocity of c. *If a photon is
traveling on the x axis in the -x direction, it has a velocity of
(-c). *Scientists do not seem to be aware that the Lorentz equations
automatically resolve the velocities of photons because c is always
squared in those equations, and the velocity of a photon is only shown
implicitly in the variables x and x'. *Einstein's own equations for
velocity of light do not work in the Lorentz equations if x or x' are
negative. *

Of course they do. Wherever did you get such a foolish idea?

Note that x is the location of an event, not necessarily the direction
light is going. That is, you can have light going in the positive
direction from an event with x0. You can also have light going in the
negative direction from an event with x0.

The equations x=ct and x'=ct' should have been *x=wt and
x'=wt', where w is the velocity of light. *This can be shown by
considering the equation for t'.

* * * * * * * * * *t'=(t-vx/c^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)

* *If x is negative, then w = (-c).
What Einstein was actually doing was using photons as clocks, but
without the Lorentz equations to keep velocities straight, his logic
did not hold together because CF does not = CB as this statement
claims is shown by Einstein's dictum. *This results in the devotion
that scientists of today have for the distance contraction generated
by the Lorentz equations.
Robert B. Winn