Phase velocity and group velocity??

Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket wrote:
Phase velocity and group velocity??

It is the same because all observers get
their matter from the only store in the
world.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...&btn G=Search

)
Sue...

http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Images/alphaeq.gif
http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Constants/alpha.html

Sue... wrote:
Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket wrote:
Phase velocity and group velocity??

It is the same because all observers get
their matter from the only store in the
world.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...&btn G=Search

)
Sue...

http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Images/alphaeq.gif
http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Constants/alpha.html

That'd be Wall-In-Velocity-Space Mart.

Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket wrote:
Phase velocity and group velocity??

xxein: Try (c+v)^2 along with the mandatory (c-v)^2.

Both are present at all times in all (inertial) frames.

If you need further explanation, you are just a poser. Go away.

"Why is the speed of light the same for all observers?" Ans: No body
knows. That is the correct answer and it should be given quickly. Some
un professional defenders of relativity on this ng, become incredibly
defensive when asked this question or like questions where the answer is
unknown.
By their immature and canned responses,
you would think that somebody's ancestry had been called into question.

It is not a crime to ask why, meaning by what mechanism. It is not a
crime to answer such questions with an honest and simple, 'we don't
know'.

Daniel Weston wrote:
"Why is the speed of light the same for all observers?" Ans: No body
knows.

Students of electromagnetism know...or think they know:
http://www.conformity.com/0102reflectionsfig3.gif from:
http://www.conformity.com/0102reflections.html

http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Images/alphaeq.gif from:
http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Constants/alpha.html

But the study of electromagnetism is
uh...harrrrd.... ya hafta be workin' harrrd ;-)
http://web.mit.edu/8.02t/www/802TEAL3D/teal_tour.htm

==== No Physics below this line ====

Morning Sedition: Tuesday -- Either Way, Bush Loses
Followed the Streisand compound marching orders from
Friday: Bush "uh's" to a ... Links
are, uh...harrrrd....workin' harrrd...orderin' in...Sattidays...Sundies
....
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...=Google+Search
©2005 Google

That is the correct answer and it should be given quickly. Some
un professional defenders of relativity on this ng, become incredibly
defensive when asked this question or like questions where the answer is
unknown.
By their immature and canned responses,
you would think that somebody's ancestry had been called into question.

It is not a crime to ask why,

You talkin 'bout aluminum tubes or faked letters.
If that's not a crime to ask about then
we need to make it one.
.... And lets put something in it about the
commandments, the pledge, vouchers, flag burning,
vouchers gays and tax cuts.

meaning by what mechanism. It is not a
crime to answer such questions with an honest and simple, 'we don't
know'.

Mom, apple-pie, and Reagan's national debt is
not a crime is it?

But yes... Most of us don't know how much we
don't know.
http://www.lafn.org/politics/gvdc/Natl_Debt_Chart.html

;-)
Sue...

"Daniel Weston" wrote in message ...
| "Why is the speed of light the same for all observers?" Ans: No body
| knows. That is the correct answer


No it so. That's a "Do you still beat your wife?" question which
no judge would allow before a jury and would hold the questioner
in contempt of court. Answer 'yes' and you admit beating your wife.
Answer 'no' and you admit having once beaten your wife.
The question shall be stricken from the record and the jury is instructed
to ignore it. First establish the wife was ever beaten or the speed of
light was ever the same for all observers.


| and it should be given quickly. Some
| un professional defenders of relativity on this ng, become incredibly
| defensive when asked this question or like questions where the answer is
| unknown.
| By their immature and canned responses,
| you would think that somebody's ancestry had been called into question.

The ancestry of the cuckoo transformation IS called into question.

"But the ray moves relatively to the initial point of k,
when measured in the stationary system, with the velocity c-v..." --Albert Einstein.

"It follows, further, that the velocity of light c cannot be altered by
composition with a velocity less than that of light. For this case we obtain
V = (c+w)/(1+w/c) = c." -- Albert Einstein.

Albert Einstein is not a credible witness and is impeached.


| It is not a crime to ask why, meaning by what mechanism. It is not a
| crime to answer such questions with an honest and simple, 'we don't
| know'.

"It is a crime committed by a scientist against fellow scientists and scholars, a betrayal of the ethics and integrity of his profession that has forever deprived mankind of fundamental information about an important area of astronomy and history." -- Sir Isaac Newton (said of Ptolemy).

You are not the judge, Daniel Weston, you are a juror. You may discuss
the case with your fellow jurors by all means, but I, Androcles, am the prosecutor ands defender of my client Sir Isaac Newton, the most qualified litigant in this courtroom; we need a fair judge who is conversant with the law, whether physical law or criminal law, to hold a fair trial.
My client was raped by this despicable upstart Einstein and is the victim in this trial. I cannot be the judge and prosecutor both, so it behooves us all to find a fair judge and a fair jury to decide the matter.
If you would be that judge I ask that you be impartial, silent as to your own opinion and fair.
Androcles.

Daniel Weston wrote:
"Why is the speed of light the same for all observers?" Ans: No body
knows. That is the correct answer and it should be given quickly. Some
un professional defenders of relativity on this ng, become incredibly
defensive when asked this question or like questions where the answer is
unknown.
By their immature and canned responses,
you would think that somebody's ancestry had been called into question.

It is not a crime to ask why, meaning by what mechanism. It is not a
crime to answer such questions with an honest and simple, 'we don't
know'.

According to Relativity, the speed of light *isn't* the same for all
observers.

When measuured locally, or within Inertial reference frames, the speed
of light in vacuum is constant because in 1983 the meter was redefined
in such a way as to make it constant.

Want the answer to a related question, like "Why does Nature have a
speed limit?"? Well, suppose it didn't have one. Think about how you'd
answer the question "Why doesn't Nature have a speed limit?".

Sue... wrote:
Daniel Weston wrote:
"Why is the speed of light the same for all observers?" Ans: No body
knows.

Students of electromagnetism know...or think they know:
http://www.conformity.com/0102reflectionsfig3.gif from:
http://www.conformity.com/0102reflections.html

http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Images/alphaeq.gif from:
http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Constants/alpha.html

But the study of electromagnetism is
uh...harrrrd.... ya hafta be workin' harrrd ;-)

Seems like the right direction... But all that hard stuff is pretty
confusing. Do you suppose we could find some explanation that may not
be so hard? Maybe not a timeline but at least a list of goals, and
maybe a roadmap to understanding?

Okay, start with a stationary charged particle. It has a central
electric field. If that particle is moving, if I am not mistaken, it
creates a magnetic field. However, somebody moving along with the
particle doesn't see the magnetic field.

Now, I don't quite see how this particular idea leads to a constant
speed of light, but it is a bit strange, anyway. I'm just bringing it
up because that's a question I've never fully explored.

I do remember sometime in college when I THOUGHT I understood how
electric and magnetic fields explained the speed of light. Multiplying
the permittivity times the permeability of free space yielded the speed
of light. However, I can't remember what would make a person multiply
these two values together, except that they happen to produce the speed
of light.

So, I guess the question I want to ask is, why do you multiply
permittivity and permeability together?

"Spoonfed" wrote in message ups.com...

Sue... wrote:
Daniel Weston wrote:
"Why is the speed of light the same for all observers?" Ans: No body
knows.

Students of electromagnetism know...or think they know:
http://www.conformity.com/0102reflectionsfig3.gif from:
http://www.conformity.com/0102reflections.html

http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Images/alphaeq.gif from:
http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Constants/alpha.html

But the study of electromagnetism is
uh...harrrrd.... ya hafta be workin' harrrd ;-)

Seems like the right direction... But all that hard stuff is pretty
confusing. Do you suppose we could find some explanation that may not
be so hard? Maybe not a timeline but at least a list of goals, and
maybe a roadmap to understanding?

Okay, start with a stationary charged particle. It has a central
electric field. If that particle is moving, if I am not mistaken, it
creates a magnetic field. However, somebody moving along with the
particle doesn't see the magnetic field.

Now, I don't quite see how this particular idea leads to a constant
speed of light, but it is a bit strange, anyway. I'm just bringing it
up because that's a question I've never fully explored.

I do remember sometime in college when I THOUGHT I understood how
electric and magnetic fields explained the speed of light. Multiplying
the permittivity times the permeability of free space yielded the speed
of light. However, I can't remember what would make a person multiply
these two values together, except that they happen to produce the speed
of light.

So, I guess the question I want to ask is, why do you multiply
permittivity and permeability together?

When you juggle with Maxwell's equations, they turn out
to produce standard wave equations that all have
epsilon_0 * mu_0 as a coefficient of the second order
partial time derivative term.
The standard wave equation has 1 / wave speed^2
as its coefficient at that place
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/WaveEquation.html

Dirk Vdm