"Brian Kennelly" wrote in message
...
Androcles wrote:

"Brian Kennelly" wrote in message
...

Androcles wrote:


[snip]

The speed of light does not obey the V=u+v law,

Evidence, please.

Fresnel's hypothesis, which has been experimentally verified, says
that
light speed transforms as V=c/N+v(1-1/N^2). This is in obvious
conflict
with V=c/N+v.

I asked for evidence, not assertion.

Fizeau's 1851 experiment and it repetition by Michelson and Morley in
1886 provide evidence for Fresnel's formula, as do the observations of
Arago and Airy. It is not just assertion.



Yada yada yada...
Gawd! GET OF YOUR ARSE and put on the Newsgroup.
Stop asserting and PRESENT YOUR EVIDENCE!!!!!
Androcles
Are you dense?
One of us is.

I just presented evidence.
No you haven't! I don't see anything I can debate.
DESCRIBE THE EXPERIMENT!

Apparently, you ignore what you cannot explain.
Bull! I have nothing before me, how can I ignore what you haven't presented?
Apparently, you think that naming an experiment vaguely is sufficient to
enter into a discussion. If I want to discuss Einstein's Relativity, I cite
"On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies"
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
then we can both read it and talk about it.
Now you do the same. I have nothing before me.
You said "Obvious conflict". WHAT IS "OBVIOUS"?
Androcles

Androcles wrote:
"Brian Kennelly" wrote in message
...

Androcles wrote:


"Brian Kennelly" wrote in message
...


Androcles wrote:


[snip]


The speed of light does not obey the V=u+v law,

Evidence, please.

Fresnel's hypothesis, which has been experimentally verified, says

that

light speed transforms as V=c/N+v(1-1/N^2). This is in obvious

conflict

with V=c/N+v.

I asked for evidence, not assertion.

Fizeau's 1851 experiment and it repetition by Michelson and Morley in
1886 provide evidence for Fresnel's formula, as do the observations of
Arago and Airy. It is not just assertion.



Yada yada yada...
Gawd! GET OF YOUR ARSE and put on the Newsgroup.
Stop asserting and PRESENT YOUR EVIDENCE!!!!!
Androcles

Are you dense?

One of us is.


I just presented evidence.

No you haven't! I don't see anything I can debate.
DESCRIBE THE EXPERIMENT!
Arago and Airy observer aberration using materials of different
refractive index and found that the aberration angle of stars did not
depend on the refractive index.

In 1851, Fizeau set up an interferometer with a light path that passed
through water and observed the fringe shift when the water was set in
motion. Michelson and Morley repeated the experiment in 1886.

All of these experiments can be explained by Fresnel's formula, but not
with V=c/N+v.



Apparently, you ignore what you cannot explain.

Bull! I have nothing before me, how can I ignore what you haven't presented?
Apparently, you think that naming an experiment vaguely is sufficient to
I named only well known experiments, discussed in most introductions to
relativity. I didn't think it was necessary to be more specific, as
they should be as well known as 'MMX'.

enter into a discussion. If I want to discuss Einstein's Relativity, I cite
"On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies"
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
then we can both read it and talk about it.
I don't know if the papers are available on the internet, but if
necessary, I can look for them.

Now you do the same. I have nothing before me.
You said "Obvious conflict". WHAT IS "OBVIOUS"?f
Fresnel's formula gives a different result than naive velocity addition.
I think the v/N^2 term is obvious.



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----