In message , Androcles
writes

"Jonathan Silverlight" wrote
in message ...
In message , Dastardly
Fiend writes

Idiot. You can perform MMX in your kitchen for less than $20.

Androcles.



Show me :-)

http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/mimg453.gif
http://www.dvhardware.net/modules.ph...wcontent&id=23
(batteries not included)

Sorry about that, I should have said "Idiot. I can perform MMX in my kitchen
for less than $20."

For a few dollars more, you can detect fringe shifts.

http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/a...1985/may-jun/s
haw1.jpgIt's your dollar.Androcles.


Let's see now. I have a textbook picture of the experiment, a page about
laser diodes, and a link to a picture of a laser gyroscope which I had
to edit because you typed it wrong - try
http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/a...1985/may-jun/s
haw1.jpg
That's a very long way from actually doing it.

"Jonathan Silverlight" wrote
in message ...
In message , Androcles
writes

"Jonathan Silverlight"
wrote
in message ...
In message , Dastardly
Fiend writes

Idiot. You can perform MMX in your kitchen for less than $20.

Androcles.



Show me :-)

http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/mimg453.gif
http://www.dvhardware.net/modules.ph...wcontent&id=23
(batteries not included)

Sorry about that, I should have said "Idiot. I can perform MMX in my
kitchen
for less than $20."

For a few dollars more, you can detect fringe shifts.
http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/a...1985/may-jun/s
haw1.jpgIt's your dollar.Androcles.


Let's see now. I have a textbook picture of the experiment, a page about
laser diodes, and a link to a picture of a laser gyroscope which I had to
edit because you typed it wrong - try
http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/a...1985/may-jun/s
haw1.jpg

I didn't type it. I copied and pasted.
I'm not responsible for the word wrap anymore than you are.
You typed it wrong.

That's a very long way from actually doing it.

I corrected myself.
I said *I* could do it. I should not have said the idiot or you could do it,
that was my error.
I have no plans to visit your kitchen.

Androcles.

Wormy is a runt of the SR experts.
Definition for a runt of the SR experts:
An idiot who think that SR is a religion. A moron who can't comprehend
beyond what he learn in school. An asshole who will attack anybody who
dared to disagree with SR.

Ken:
All the posters in these NGs are under the bogus assumption that the
MMX supposed to detect the motion of the earth in the ether.

George:
Specifically it was designed to measure the speed
of the apparatus through an un-dragged, Galilean
invariant aether. In that model, light moves at c
relative to the aether. The design is perfectly
capable of doing that. The sensitivity they
achieved should have easily detected the 60km/s
change in motion over a 6 month period.

Ken:
But that interpretation of the design is wrong. It is not capable of
detecting the absolute motion of the earth wrt the aether. It is capble
of detecting the absolute motion of the apparatus within the plane of
its light rays. The proper interpretation of the MMX results are as
follows: A null result means that there is no absolute motion of the
apparatus within the plane of its light rays. A non-null result means
that there is absolute motion of the apparatus within the plane of its
light rays.


This is
not true. The design of the MMX can only detect the absolute motion
(Motion wrt light) ...

George:
"absolute motion" in that experiment meant motion
relative to the aether through which the equipment
was moving.

Ken:
Again this interpretation of the MMX is wrong. You can't measure
absolute motion of the the equipment through the ether. You can measure
the absolute motion of the apparatus wrt the plane of its light rays.

George:
Your phrase "Motion wrt light" is meaningless
because there is no unique direction in which light
moves. You would have to say "Motion wrt THE light

Ken:
It is not meangless....in favt it's only the proper interpretation. If
there is absolute motion within the plane of its light rays then there
will be fringe shift. This interpretation is supported by the pound and
Rebka experiment.

Ken Seto

In sci.physics.relativity,

wrote
on 3 Dec 2005 08:45:31 -0800
. com:

KS:
All the posters in these NGs are under the bogus assumption that the
MMX supposed to detect the motion of the earth in the ether. This is
not true. The design of the MMX can only detect the absolute motion
(Motion wrt light) of the apparatus within the plane of its light rays.

Ghost:
MMX has been conducted more than once. What, precisely, does
that do to your theory?

(Besides blowing it into small radioactive flinders, of course.)

Ken:
So what is your point? Each time the MMX is performed the null rewsult
shows that the apparatus is not moving within the "Horizontal" plane of
its light rays. In fact that's the reason why the speed of light in the
horizontal plane is isotropic. Both the isotropy of the speed of light
and the null result of the MMX can be explained if the absolute motion
of the apparatus is moving in the vertical direction.

Ken Seto

Idiot machine.

So what?? Even today you all still mis-interpreted the design of the
experiment.

Androcles is an idiot.

George Dishman wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
All the posters in these NGs are under the bogus assumption that the
MMX supposed to detect the motion of the earth in the ether.

Specifically it was designed to measure the speed
of the apparatus through an un-dragged, Galilean
invariant aether. In that model, light moves at c
relative to the aether. The design is perfectly
capable of doing that. The sensitivity they
achieved should have easily detected the 60km/s
change in motion over a 6 month period.

This is
not true. The design of the MMX can only detect the absolute motion
(Motion wrt light) ...

"absolute motion" in that experiment meant motion
relative to the aether through which the equipment
was moving.

Your phrase "Motion wrt light" is meaningless
because there is no unique direction in which light
moves. You would have to say "Motion wrt THE light"
and specify which particular light you meant.

George

You must realize that the kenseto is incapable of comprehending that
the direction 'up' is different in different parts of the world, and he
[sic] is also incapable of comprehending that the direction 'up'
changes as Earth rotates. The kenseto is also proud of his [sic]
ignorance, brutally stupid, and he [sic] is lying scum.

Paul Cardinale

wrote:
All the posters in these NGs are under the bogus assumption that the
MMX supposed to detect the motion of the earth in the ether. This is
not true. The design of the MMX can only detect the absolute motion
(Motion wrt light) of the apparatus within the plane of its light rays.
Null result for the MMX means that there is no absolute motion of the
apparatus within the plane of its light rays. OTOH non-null result
means that there is absolute motion of the apparatus within the plane
of its light rays.

Parable:
A carpenter builds a dining room table wants to make sure that the
table is flat. So he takes a metal straight-edge and lays it across the
table along a diameter. The table makes contact with the straight-edge
along its whole length. "The table appears flat," the carpenter says.

"Not so!" Seto says. "You've only shown that the table is flat along
the direction of the straight-edge. You haven't shown that it is flat
in the direction perpendicular to the straight-edge."

"Quite right," the carpenter says. "But notice that the table happens
to be on a motorized rotating platform. All I have to do is wait...."
And he waits until the table is ninety degrees from its previous
position and then puts the straight-edge back down. It still makes
contact with the table along its whole length. "The table appears
flat."

"Not so!" Seto says. "You've only shown that the table is flat along
the direction of the straight-edge. You haven't shown that it is flat
in the direction perpendicular to the straight-edge."

"But I just did that!" the carpenter objects. I took care to measure it
in both directions.

"There is table curvature in the direction perpendicular to the
straight-edge. This curvature is local to the position of the
turntable."

"But that's impossible!"

"I define it to be so. What's so hard to believe about that?"

PD