c with the value of +-300000 km/s is the physically infinite value for
speed.
I claim that infinite values in physics can have a certain value that
is not infinite in math. sense.
Whith this fact the weird behaviour of light to be emitted and received
with c at a moving receiver with recpect to the emitter is now
explained -at minimum for me-. Automatically it follows that there is a
highest temperature, which will help in BB studies, e.g. exact age of
universe, I think.
Only in math an infinite number is still infinite.

How did I come to this conclusion:

In former threads I said, that I want to understand SR intuitively.
I was warned enough, but I was going on.
I compared 2 objects in inertial motion in space with 2 ships on a sea
and each ship has its own sea surface.
So, if from each ship a stone is thrown into the water the resulting
waves will remain concentric around each ship.
This behaviour of waves = light is not explained to date -what I know-
and makes it difficult to accept/understand a lot.
It is not hindering me, as also said, from accepting SR as the best
tool to explain/predict effects involved.

But we have the 2 classes of people: Sirians with c+v=c and Newtonians
with c+v=c+v
SR is built around the axiom c = const and is the highest possible
speed between 2 points.
See 1905 papers for more conditions.

In the thread "SR false?" some days ago I also stated, that if c would
have another, higher value
the formulas of SR will remain the same, just the value of c would be
n.c, so c+v=c+v would be correct if
c+v n.c
With that I wanted to express, that the Newtonians can't get out.
O.k. now let's take c as infinite speed.
Nothing happens, only the Newtonians must now accept that
infinite_speed + v = infinite_speed.
In my view they are now Sirians in a certain way.

So as long as there is no evidence that c is not the highest speed, we
can say
c is the "infinite speed" for light.
When I came to this conclusion, suddenly the paradoxon of the 2 ships
with 2 sea surfaces was dissolved for me.
I ask the community for friendly comments to my statement/finding. May
be it's "ein alter Hut", but not for me.

Also this explanation works easyly for light interpreted as elastic
particles=photons.
Photons are emitted with c. arrive with c at a moving mirror, bounced
back with c at the mirror moving with v
with respect to the emmitter and arrive finally at the emitter with c.
Conservation of momentum is still valid.
For me personally, I made a step in my intuitive understanding.

In the near past I had a not succesful thread regarding an evidence if
c+v is possible.
A nice comment was "oh dear", but not so nice also were sent. I no more
need this experiment
with which I designed to clean up the question in the group.
(I have improved the setup, now very simple, may be I come back).
Rudi

Rudolf Drabek wrote:
c with the value of +-300000 km/s is the physically infinite value for
speed.
I claim that infinite values in physics can have a certain value that
is not infinite in math. sense.

OK! So you have noticed that the behavior of the
speed of the light in vacuum resembles that of an
"infinite" speed ! Do not jump now
in the other extreme and declare it "infinite"!


Whith this fact the weird behaviour of light to be emitted and received
with c at a moving receiver with recpect to the emitter is now
explained -at minimum for me-. Automatically it follows that there is a
highest temperature, which will help in BB studies, e.g. exact age of
universe, I think.
Only in math an infinite number is still infinite.

How did I come to this conclusion:

In former threads I said, that I want to understand SR intuitively.
I was warned enough, but I was going on.
I compared 2 objects in inertial motion in space with 2 ships on a sea
and each ship has its own sea surface.
So, if from each ship a stone is thrown into the water the resulting
waves will remain concentric around each ship.
This behaviour of waves = light is not explained to date -what I know-
and makes it difficult to accept/understand a lot.
It is not hindering me, as also said, from accepting SR as the best
tool to explain/predict effects involved.

But we have the 2 classes of people: Sirians with c+v=c and Newtonians
with c+v=c+v
SR is built around the axiom c = const and is the highest possible
speed between 2 points.
See 1905 papers for more conditions.

In the thread "SR false?" some days ago I also stated, that if c would
have another, higher value
the formulas of SR will remain the same, just the value of c would be
n.c, so c+v=c+v would be correct if
c+v n.c

Theoretically you could have c actual value , as long
as cv and the frame independence is valid.
SR does not tell you what the value of c should be.

With that I wanted to express, that the Newtonians can't get out.
O.k. now let's take c as infinite speed.
Nothing happens, only the Newtonians must now accept that
infinite_speed + v = infinite_speed.

Mathematically this is true !
But not for c+v =c, as this is an oversimplification
of the issue.

In my view they are now Sirians in a certain way.

So as long as there is no evidence that c is not the highest speed, we
can say
c is the "infinite speed" for light.
When I came to this conclusion, suddenly the paradoxon of the 2 ships
with 2 sea surfaces was dissolved for me.
I ask the community for friendly comments to my statement/finding. May
be it's "ein alter Hut", but not for me.

Also this explanation works easyly for light interpreted as elastic
particles=photons.
Photons are emitted with c. arrive with c at a moving mirror, bounced
back with c at the mirror moving with v
with respect to the emmitter and arrive finally at the emitter with c.
Conservation of momentum is still valid.
For me personally, I made a step in my intuitive understanding.

In the near past I had a not succesful thread regarding an evidence if
c+v is possible.
A nice comment was "oh dear", but not so nice also were sent. I no more
need this experiment
with which I designed to clean up the question in the group.
(I have improved the setup, now very simple, may be I come back).
Rudi

Keep working and then, from time to time, come back
and ponder over your initial ideas!

All the best, LL

xray4abc schrieb:

Rudolf Drabek wrote:
c with the value of +-300000 km/s is the physically infinite value for
speed.
I claim that infinite values in physics can have a certain value that
is not infinite in math. sense.

OK! So you have noticed that the behavior of the
speed of the light in vacuum resembles that of an
"infinite" speed ! Do not jump now
in the other extreme and declare it "infinite"!


Whith this fact the weird behaviour of light to be emitted and received
with c at a moving receiver with recpect to the emitter is now
explained -at minimum for me-. Automatically it follows that there is a
highest temperature, which will help in BB studies, e.g. exact age of
universe, I think.
Only in math an infinite number is still infinite.

How did I come to this conclusion:

In former threads I said, that I want to understand SR intuitively.
I was warned enough, but I was going on.
I compared 2 objects in inertial motion in space with 2 ships on a sea
and each ship has its own sea surface.
So, if from each ship a stone is thrown into the water the resulting
waves will remain concentric around each ship.
This behaviour of waves = light is not explained to date -what I know-
and makes it difficult to accept/understand a lot.
It is not hindering me, as also said, from accepting SR as the best
tool to explain/predict effects involved.

But we have the 2 classes of people: Sirians with c+v=c and Newtonians
with c+v=c+v
SR is built around the axiom c = const and is the highest possible
speed between 2 points.
See 1905 papers for more conditions.

In the thread "SR false?" some days ago I also stated, that if c would
have another, higher value
the formulas of SR will remain the same, just the value of c would be
n.c, so c+v=c+v would be correct if
c+v n.c

Theoretically you could have c actual value , as long
as cv and the frame independence is valid.
_ SR does not tell you what the value of c should be.
Correct, that was the way for me to come to this conclusion.

With that I wanted to express, that the Newtonians can't get out.
O.k. now let's take c as infinite speed.
Nothing happens, only the Newtonians must now accept that
infinite_speed + v = infinite_speed.

Mathematically this is true !
_ But not for c+v =c, as this is an oversimplification
_ of the issue.
Can correct this to phys_infinite_speed +v = phys_infinite_speed
That is more correct. Thank's for your comment.

In my view they are now Sirians in a certain way.

So as long as there is no evidence that c is not the highest speed, we
can say
c is the "infinite speed" for light.
When I came to this conclusion, suddenly the paradoxon of the 2 ships
with 2 sea surfaces was dissolved for me.
I ask the community for friendly comments to my statement/finding. May
be it's "ein alter Hut", but not for me.

Also this explanation works easyly for light interpreted as elastic
particles=photons.
Photons are emitted with c. arrive with c at a moving mirror, bounced
back with c at the mirror moving with v
with respect to the emmitter and arrive finally at the emitter with c.
Conservation of momentum is still valid.
For me personally, I made a step in my intuitive understanding.

In the near past I had a not succesful thread regarding an evidence if
c+v is possible.
A nice comment was "oh dear", but not so nice also were sent. I no more
need this experiment
with which I designed to clean up the question in the group.
(I have improved the setup, now very simple, may be I come back).
Rudi

Keep working and then, from time to time, come back
and ponder over your initial ideas!

All the best, LL

So I guess this means that, if Tachyons exist, they must be transfinite?

Rudolf Drabek wrote:
c with the value of +-300000 km/s is the physically infinite value for
speed.

The very bad PUN you use on the word "infinite" is neither helpful nor
useful. Use words with their normal meanings or you risk serious
misunderstandings (as evidenced around here daily).

We say "c is the limiting speed for massive objects."


Tom Roberts

"Rudolf Drabek" wrote in message
ups.com...
c with the value of +-300000 km/s is the physically infinite value for
speed.

That is not what SR says. It says it is the maximum speed information can
be sent. Learn what something actually says before criticizing it.

Rest snipped.

Bill

Rudolf Drabek wrote:
c with the value of +-300000 km/s is the physically infinite value for
speed.
I claim that infinite values in physics can have a certain value that
is not infinite in math. sense.
Whith this fact the weird behaviour of light to be emitted and received
with c at a moving receiver with recpect to the emitter is now
explained -at minimum for me-. Automatically it follows that there is a
highest temperature, which will help in BB studies, e.g. exact age of
universe, I think.
Only in math an infinite number is still infinite.

How did I come to this conclusion:

In former threads I said, that I want to understand SR intuitively.
I was warned enough, but I was going on.
I compared 2 objects in inertial motion in space with 2 ships on a sea
and each ship has its own sea surface.
So, if from each ship a stone is thrown into the water the resulting
waves will remain concentric around each ship.
This behaviour of waves = light is not explained to date -what I know-
and makes it difficult to accept/understand a lot.
It is not hindering me, as also said, from accepting SR as the best
tool to explain/predict effects involved.

But we have the 2 classes of people: Sirians with c+v=c and Newtonians
with c+v=c+v
SR is built around the axiom c = const and is the highest possible
speed between 2 points.
See 1905 papers for more conditions.

In the thread "SR false?" some days ago I also stated, that if c would
have another, higher value
the formulas of SR will remain the same, just the value of c would be
n.c, so c+v=c+v would be correct if
c+v n.c
With that I wanted to express, that the Newtonians can't get out.
O.k. now let's take c as infinite speed.
Nothing happens, only the Newtonians must now accept that
infinite_speed + v = infinite_speed.
In my view they are now Sirians in a certain way.

So as long as there is no evidence that c is not the highest speed, we
can say
c is the "infinite speed" for light.
When I came to this conclusion, suddenly the paradoxon of the 2 ships
with 2 sea surfaces was dissolved for me.
I ask the community for friendly comments to my statement/finding. May
be it's "ein alter Hut", but not for me.

Also this explanation works easyly for light interpreted as elastic
particles=photons.
Photons are emitted with c. arrive with c at a moving mirror, bounced
back with c at the mirror moving with v
with respect to the emmitter and arrive finally at the emitter with c.
Conservation of momentum is still valid.
For me personally, I made a step in my intuitive understanding.

In the near past I had a not succesful thread regarding an evidence if
c+v is possible.
A nice comment was "oh dear", but not so nice also were sent. I no more
need this experiment
with which I designed to clean up the question in the group.
(I have improved the setup, now very simple, may be I come back).
Rudi

The value of c depends only upon the arbitrary units of measure used.
We can make c approach infinite length/time by letting our unit of
length become arbitrarily short, by letting our unit of time become
arbitrarily long, or both. But regardless the numerical value of the
em interaction rate, it will still follow that it is finite. That rate
is what it is, and all other measures depend upon it directly, thus if
it were different we'd never know the difference. It is in a sense
simply the speed of interaction, but in a 4D block universe the delay
is a byproduct of a logical ordering of events which exist all together
in a single rigid structure. The speed of light is similar in nature to
the speed of execution of a command. If we look at a computer program
with If-then loops, then we might find in that program that a change in
one the value of one variable is sent through a loop causing the value
of some other variable to change, which in turn is sent through a loop
that causes a further change in the first variable's value, which
causes a change in the second variable's value, etc. etc. At what
speed does this loop execute? Depends upon the computer hardware
doesn't it? But the same end result is obtained regardless of processor
speed, and thus a village full of virtual sentient beings would never
know how fast their universe proceeded. They would only know that there
is a definite delay associated with each step of the logical sequence,
and they might call that delay c. Are we virtual entities? Well if the
universe is actually an immobile block, then I suppose that if the shoe
fits....

Richard Perry

Tom Roberts schrieb:

Rudolf Drabek wrote:
c with the value of +-300000 km/s is the physically infinite value for
speed.

The very bad PUN you use on the word "infinite" is neither helpful nor
useful. Use words with their normal meanings or you risk serious
misunderstandings (as evidenced around here daily).
I said and mean "physically infinite".
What I want to express is, that adding a velocity to the "physically
infinite value of c" the sum remains the same, as in math .
This helped me to understand the weird behaviour of light to be emitted
and received with c even if the receiver is moving with respect to the
emitter.
So the value of 300000 km/s which is not an infinite one, behaves like
an infinite value for light.
Therefore I said that, some lines above.
My surprise of my finding is, that c behaves like an infinite value. I
never heard/read this to date.
Rudi


We say "c is the limiting speed for massive objects."


Tom Roberts

Bill Hobba schrieb:

"Rudolf Drabek" wrote in message
ups.com...
c with the value of +-300000 km/s is the physically infinite value for
speed.

That is not what SR says. It says it is the maximum speed information can
be sent. Learn what something actually says before criticizing it.
I do not see where I have criticized anything.
One thing I've learned, namely to be very sensible and careful with the
wording.
With the same meaning I say therfo
c with the value of +-300000 km/s *behaves* like an infinite value for
light.
Surprisingly for me, a not infinite value can behave as an infinite
one.
That's the essence of my finding.
Sorry for any inconv., it's not my native language.
Rudi

Rest snipped.

Bill

Igor schrieb:

So I guess this means that, if Tachyons exist, they must be transfinite?
I said "physically infinite" for light only.
No idea about tachyons.