Paper:

Here is a summary of a model describing how light might travel across space. It
appears to fit the data.

First, consider a long straight highway on which a stream of cars is
continually running. The highway has a speed limit of 40 m/sec but passes
through towns and cities where the limits vary. The cars always travel at the
speed limit except during the transition from one speed to another. In all
speed zones, the number of cars passing a particular point per unit time is
constant.

Along the 40 zones, the cars are spaced exactly 40 m apart...so 1 car passes
every second. In the 30 zone, their spacing decreases to 30 metres...in the 20
zone, to 20 metres..etc....

Thus, a satellite photo of the stream would reveal a constant pattern of
equally spaced cars that were bunched closer together along relatively small
and random sections of the highway.

At the zone junctions, there is a short transition between speeds that
necessarily involves an energy release and an entropy increase.

The theory to be presented is based on the concept that light behaves in a
somewhat similar way as it travels across space.
The universe may be likened to a very low pressure turbulent gas, each swirl or
eddy effectively defining a reference frame for light, albeit only a very loose
one. Light entering or originating in such a frame TENDS TOWARDS the natural
speed of EM in that frame. Only at this speed do the E and B fields (of
Maxwell) cooperate without loss.

Thus, the speed zones of the above highway are somewhat analogous to the
equilibrium EM speeds in the swirls of space. The spacing between cars is
analogous to the ABSOLUTE distance between photon 'wavecrests'. Whenever a
photon changes speed, so does this spacing.
IMPORTANTLY, the absolute spacing always retains information about the speed of
the source relative to the current frame. The transition zones involve an
irreversible loss or gain of KE and an increase in entropy. (probably related
to the CMBR)

The theory also postulates that another type of EM reference frame exists
around large mass centres in the universe. Light entering the vicinity of our
solar system adjusts speed accordingly. Closer to home, the Earth's atmosphere
provides a more precise reference frame in which light behaves roughly
according to Maxwell.

Thus, light from a relatively moving star will adjust both its speed and
absolute wavelength on entering the Earth's atmosphere such that a true measure
of doppler shift can be achieved with a diffraction grating. Its original speed
was c wrt its source star and its ABSOLUTE wavelength 'L'. Its speed goes from
c+v to c, relative to Earth and its absolute wavelength changes from L to
Lc/(c+v). The number of wavecrests arriving per second is (c+v)/L

This raises the question as to why a grating outside the atmosphere, for
instance onboard the HST, should also provide a true reading of doppler shift
for incoming light. (note: whether or not it does is not regarded as having
been conclusively established)

Reverting back to the 'car analogy', a pedestrian walking towards the cars at 1
m/s, will note an increase in the frequency at which they pass. If they are
traveling at 40 m/s wrt the road, they will travel at 41 m/s wrt the
pedestrian, who will count an average of 1.025 cars passing per second. If he
carries a 40 metres rod, he will observed that consecutive cars are always
adjacent to the ends simultaneously...so he knows their spacing is exactly 40
metres.

This raises several possibilities.

1) To the HST, the average incoming light speed from the abovementioned star
will be c+v. Its absolute wavelength remains at L. The rate of arrival of
'wavecrests' is again (c+v)/L. A grating on the HST will not measure stellar
doppler shift because gratings are sensitive to absolute wavelength.
or
2) The EM reference frame surrounding Earth is not solely dependent on the
presence of particulate matter but extends to beyond the limits of the solar
system. Therefore light reaching the HST will average somewhere between c+v and
c wrt Earth and the wavelength of this light will be reduced to Lc/(c+v-?). The
HST grating will give answers different from those on Earth.
or
3) Gratings are not sensitive to absolute wavelength. Rather they are sensitive
to 'frequency of wavecrest arrival' or 'apparent wavelength'. (the apparent
distance between cars is approx. 39 metres to the above pedestrian).

In the absence of conclusive proof that a grating on the HST DOES produce the
same results as one on Earth, I will throw this open to discussion now rather
than speculate further.
In fact, I anticipate that a comparison between grating performance on Earth
and on the HST might drive the final nail into Einstein's coffin.....(take a
shovel)

On Feb 12, 4:08 pm, HW@....(Henri Wilson) wrote:
Paper:

....which is self-published on USENET under a pseudonym by a compulsive
liar.


Here is a summary of a model describing how light might travel across space. It
appears to fit the data.

You don't actually know what the data is. An interesting assertion.

[...]

The theory to be presented is based on the concept that light behaves in a
somewhat similar way as it travels across space.
The universe may be likened to a very low pressure turbulent gas, each swirl or
eddy effectively defining a reference frame for light, albeit only a very loose
one. Light entering or originating in such a frame TENDS TOWARDS the natural
speed of EM in that frame. Only at this speed do the E and B fields (of
Maxwell) cooperate without loss.

The speed of light in a medium is _lower_ than the speed of light in
vaccum - never faster. Quit attempting to use Maxwell's equations to
support your argument when they obviously do not. Furthermore, the
speed of light is _independent_ of the velocity of the observer
regardless of whether Maxwell's equations are solved in vacuum or in a
medium.

If you think I am wrong [when have you not?], SOLVE Maxwell's
equations for me.

[...]

On Feb 12, 5:08 pm, HW@....(Henri Wilson) wrote:
snip cretinisms from **** paper

Allow some cretinisms just for the fun of kicking "Master" Henri's
ass:


This raises several possibilities.

1) To the HST, the average incoming light speed from the abovementioned star
will be c+v.


Umm, no.

Its absolute wavelength remains at L.

Ah, I see, you studied "physics" with seto

The rate of arrival of 'wavecrests' is again (c+v)/L.

Of course not.


A grating on the HST will not measure stellar
doppler shift because gratings are sensitive to absolute wavelength.

Still whiffing on all your swings.Strike 3, you are out, ****head.

turn snipping back on, too many imbecilities per unit of line

In article .com, writes:
On Feb 12, 5:08 pm, HW@....(Henri Wilson) wrote:
snip cretinisms from **** paper

Allow some cretinisms just for the fun of kicking "Master" Henri's
ass:


This raises several possibilities.

1) To the HST, the average incoming light speed from the abovementioned star
will be c+v.


Umm, no.

Its absolute wavelength remains at L.

Ah, I see, you studied "physics" with seto

The rate of arrival of 'wavecrests' is again (c+v)/L.

Of course not.


A grating on the HST will not measure stellar
doppler shift because gratings are sensitive to absolute wavelength.

Still whiffing on all your swings.Strike 3, you are out, ****head.

turn snipping back on, too many imbecilities per unit of line

Hmm, imbecilic density measured, as you say by "imbecilities per
line", is so commonly observed around here that it probably deserves a
named unit. Since "Henri" is already taken, should we call it
"Wilson", or "Seto"? It'l greatly simplify notation, instead of going
into detailed description one will be able just to describe a post as
a "2.7 Wilson" or so.

Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
| chances are he is doing just the same"

On Feb 12, 8:06 pm, wrote:
In article .com, writes:
On Feb 12, 5:08 pm, HW@....(Henri Wilson) wrote:
snip cretinisms from **** paper

Allow some cretinisms just for the fun of kicking "Master" Henri's
ass:

This raises several possibilities.

1) To the HST, the average incoming light speed from the abovementioned star
will be c+v.

Umm, no.

Its absolute wavelength remains at L.

Ah, I see, you studied "physics" with seto

The rate of arrival of 'wavecrests' is again (c+v)/L.

Of course not.

A grating on the HST will not measure stellar
doppler shift because gratings are sensitive to absolute wavelength.

Still whiffing on all your swings.Strike 3, you are out, ****head.

turn snipping back on, too many imbecilities per unit of line

Hmm, imbecilic density measured, as you say by "imbecilities per
line", is so commonly observed around here that it probably deserves a
named unit. Since "Henri" is already taken, should we call it
"Wilson", or "Seto"? It'l greatly simplify notation, instead of going
into detailed description one will be able just to describe a post as
a "2.7 Wilson" or so.

Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
| chances are he is doing just the same"



ha,ha, ha

2.7 Wilson is excellent.
How about we kept the 2.7 (such that we have a common code) and we
attached the "seto", "androcles", "seppala", "barry" , "sharma"
etc,etc depending on context? "This 'discovery' registers a 2.7
seppala" , what do you think?

On Feb 12, 8:08 pm, HW@....(Henri Wilson) wrote:
Paper:

Here is a summary of a model describing how light might travel across space. It
appears to fit the data.

First, consider a long straight highway

Maxwell didn't drive.

[...]
The universe may be likened to a very low pressure turbulent gas, each swirl or
eddy effectively defining a reference frame for light, albeit only a very loose
one. Light entering or originating in such a frame TENDS TOWARDS the natural
speed of EM in that frame. Only at this speed do the E and B fields (of
Maxwell) cooperate without loss.

OK... like an electron cloud swirling around a nucleus.


Thus, the speed zones of the above highway are somewhat analogous to the
equilibrium EM speeds in the swirls of space. The spacing between cars is
analogous to the ABSOLUTE distance between photon 'wavecrests'. Whenever a
photon changes speed, so does this spacing.
IMPORTANTLY, the absolute spacing always retains information about the speed of
the source relative to the current frame. The transition zones involve an
irreversible loss or gain of KE and an increase in entropy. (probably related
to the CMBR)

The coulomb force ( 1/r^2 ) and the mass of an
electron establishes this.


The theory also postulates that another type of EM reference frame exists
around large mass centres in the universe.

Nuclei are large compared to electrons. I suppose that works.

Light entering the vicinity of our
solar system adjusts speed accordingly.

It adusts at every charge on its path so no reason
it can't adjust there too.

Closer to home, the Earth's atmosphere

Yes... it adjusts there too.

provides a more precise reference frame in which light behaves roughly
according to Maxwell.

It was behaving according to Maxwell before it encounterd
earth's atmosphere so no reason it can't keep doing what
it was doing.


Thus, light from a relatively moving star will adjust both its speed and
absolute wavelength on entering the Earth's atmosphere such that a true measure
of doppler shift can be achieved with a diffraction grating. Its original speed
was c wrt its source star and its ABSOLUTE wavelength 'L'. Its speed goes from
c+v to c, relative to Earth and its absolute wavelength changes from L to
Lc/(c+v). The number of wavecrests arriving per second is (c+v)/L

Was it John Kennedy that said you don't stop a dog from barking
by cutting of its tail?

Your tail is still wagging your dog and your bark is loud as ever.


This raises the question as to why a grating outside the atmosphere, for
instance onboard the HST, should also provide a true reading of doppler shift
for incoming light. (note: whether or not it does is not regarded as having
been conclusively established)


Reverting back to the 'car analogy'

Maxwell did not have one.

Propagation in a dielectric medium
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teachin...es/node98.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_impedance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_space
http://www-ssg.sr.unh.edu/ism/what.html


Time-independent Maxwell equations
Time-dependent Maxwell's equations
Relativity and electromagnetism
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teachin.../lectures.html

Maxwell's equations in classic electrodynamics
(classic field theory)_
a) Maxwell equations (no movement),
b) Maxwell equations (with moved bodies)
http://www.wolfram-stanek.de/maxwell...assic_extended

http://web.mit.edu/8.02t/www/802TEAL...ight/index.htm
http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/.../antennas.html

Sue...

In sci.physics.relativity, HW@....(Henri Wilson)
HW@
wrote
on Tue, 13 Feb 2007 01:08:31 GMT
:
Paper:

Here is a summary of a model describing how light might travel across space. It
appears to fit the data.

First, consider a long straight highway on which a stream of cars is
continually running. The highway has a speed limit of 40 m/sec but passes
through towns and cities where the limits vary. The cars always travel at the
speed limit except during the transition from one speed to another. In all
speed zones, the number of cars passing a particular point per unit time is
constant.

Interesting thus far.


Along the 40 zones, the cars are spaced exactly 40 m apart...so 1 car passes
every second. In the 30 zone, their spacing decreases to 30 metres...in the 20
zone, to 20 metres..etc....

Thus, a satellite photo of the stream would reveal a constant pattern of
equally spaced cars that were bunched closer together along relatively small
and random sections of the highway.

At the zone junctions, there is a short transition between speeds that
necessarily involves an energy release and an entropy increase.

And that transition space is precisely how long?


The theory to be presented is based on the concept that light behaves in a
somewhat similar way as it travels across space.

Only somewhat?

You have basically described a scenario where time intervals are
absolute, which necessitates the Galilean transformation. To continue
the analogy, a car would have to be dumped off a truck moving at,
say, 5 miles per hour. The car would immediately accelerate to its
"natural" speed -- 40 m/s -- *relative to the truck*. Because the
truck is moving the car would be moving at a different speed relative
to the highway.

The question then becomes how long and/or how quickly does the car
adjust its speed to the speed limit of the highway.

The universe may be likened to a very low pressure turbulent gas, each swirl or
eddy effectively defining a reference frame for light, albeit only a very loose
one. Light entering or originating in such a frame TENDS TOWARDS the natural
speed of EM in that frame. Only at this speed do the E and B fields (of
Maxwell) cooperate without loss.

Be very careful here. Air has a density of about 40 moles or 1.16 kg
or 2.4088 * 10^25 atoms per cubic meter. Its refractive index (n_air) is
approximately 1.0008, and c_air = c / n.

Gladstone-Dale postulated that (n - 1) / d = K for some
K, where K is the Gladstone-Dale constant. (I have no
idea how this might be symbolized.) This is primarily
in minerals but appears to be applicable here. It is
also possible that log(n) / d = K is the more accurate
relationship, but it's hard for me to say and since n is
so close to 1 anyway the two quantities n - 1 and log(n)
are almost equal. No doubt greater minds than mine can
puzzle this one out.

For air, d_air = 1.16 kg/m^3; therefore K_air = 0.00068966 m^3/kg.
Space has the density of about 1 million atoms per cubic meter (the
exact average density should be of interest to the theoretical types, as
it determines whether we're going to play Big Crunch or Heat Death; however,
I'm not sure precisely how to pull that up properly); if every
atom is assumed to be monatomic hydrogen, that translates into
1.6606 * 10^-21 kg/m^3. Therefore n_space is going to be on the order
of 1 + 1.14523 * 10^-24, which will mean c_space = c0 - 3.4333 * 10^-16 m/s
or a variance of 10 meters in transit distance every billion years.

Even if one postulates a thousand times this density a billion year
transit only varies by 10 km. That's not very much for a light beam.


Thus, the speed zones of the above highway are somewhat analogous to the
equilibrium EM speeds in the swirls of space. The spacing between cars is
analogous to the ABSOLUTE distance between photon 'wavecrests'. Whenever a
photon changes speed, so does this spacing.
IMPORTANTLY, the absolute spacing always retains information about the speed of
the source relative to the current frame. The transition zones involve an
irreversible loss or gain of KE and an increase in entropy. (probably related
to the CMBR)

The theory also postulates that another type of EM reference frame exists
around large mass centres in the universe. Light entering the vicinity of our
solar system adjusts speed accordingly. Closer to home, the Earth's atmosphere
provides a more precise reference frame in which light behaves roughly
according to Maxwell.

Thus, light from a relatively moving star will adjust both its speed and
absolute wavelength on entering the Earth's atmosphere such that a true measure
of doppler shift can be achieved with a diffraction grating. Its original speed
was c wrt its source star and its ABSOLUTE wavelength 'L'. Its speed goes from
c+v to c, relative to Earth and its absolute wavelength changes from L to
Lc/(c+v). The number of wavecrests arriving per second is (c+v)/L

This raises the question as to why a grating outside the atmosphere, for
instance onboard the HST, should also provide a true reading of doppler shift
for incoming light. (note: whether or not it does is not regarded as having
been conclusively established)

Reverting back to the 'car analogy', a pedestrian walking towards the cars at 1
m/s, will note an increase in the frequency at which they pass. If they are
traveling at 40 m/s wrt the road, they will travel at 41 m/s wrt the
pedestrian, who will count an average of 1.025 cars passing per second. If he
carries a 40 metres rod, he will observed that consecutive cars are always
adjacent to the ends simultaneously...so he knows their spacing is exactly 40
metres.

There are certain observational difficulties here. For starters, how
does he know that one car's bumper is "simultaneously" at one end of the
rod, while another car's bumper is at the other? Best I can do here is
have a small part of one car bounce off a mirror at the far end, and
hit one's eye while the other car continues to drive until both the
bounced-off portion and the unaffected car hit the exact center of
the moving rod.

It turns out that in SR this is not difficult (although the cars will
change color slightly).


This raises several possibilities.

1) To the HST, the average incoming light speed from the abovementioned star
will be c+v. Its absolute wavelength remains at L. The rate of arrival of
'wavecrests' is again (c+v)/L. A grating on the HST will not measure stellar
doppler shift because gratings are sensitive to absolute wavelength.

But an Earthbound grating because of the atmosphere will?

An interesting but ultimately fruitless hyothesis, in light of
such experimental results as Sagnac and Ives-Stilwell.

or
2) The EM reference frame surrounding Earth is not solely dependent on the
presence of particulate matter but extends to beyond the limits of the solar
system. Therefore light reaching the HST will average somewhere between c+v and
c wrt Earth and the wavelength of this light will be reduced to Lc/(c+v-?). The
HST grating will give answers different from those on Earth.
or
3) Gratings are not sensitive to absolute wavelength. Rather they are sensitive
to 'frequency of wavecrest arrival' or 'apparent wavelength'. (the apparent
distance between cars is approx. 39 metres to the above pedestrian).

In the absence of conclusive proof that a grating on the HST DOES produce the
same results as one on Earth, I will throw this open to discussion now rather
than speculate further.
In fact, I anticipate that a comparison between grating performance on Earth
and on the HST might drive the final nail into Einstein's coffin.....(take a
shovel)


I wouldn't bet the farm on it just yet.

--
#191,
Windows. When it absolutely, positively, has to crash.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

In article . com, writes:
On Feb 12, 8:06 pm, wrote:
In article .com, writes:
On Feb 12, 5:08 pm, HW@....(Henri Wilson) wrote:
snip cretinisms from **** paper

Allow some cretinisms just for the fun of kicking "Master" Henri's
ass:

This raises several possibilities.

1) To the HST, the average incoming light speed from the abovementioned star
will be c+v.

Umm, no.

Its absolute wavelength remains at L.

Ah, I see, you studied "physics" with seto

The rate of arrival of 'wavecrests' is again (c+v)/L.

Of course not.

A grating on the HST will not measure stellar
doppler shift because gratings are sensitive to absolute wavelength.

Still whiffing on all your swings.Strike 3, you are out, ****head.

turn snipping back on, too many imbecilities per unit of line

Hmm, imbecilic density measured, as you say by "imbecilities per
line", is so commonly observed around here that it probably deserves a
named unit. Since "Henri" is already taken, should we call it
"Wilson", or "Seto"? It'l greatly simplify notation, instead of going
into detailed description one will be able just to describe a post as
a "2.7 Wilson" or so.

Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
| chances are he is doing just the same"



ha,ha, ha

2.7 Wilson is excellent.
How about we kept the 2.7 (such that we have a common code) and we
attached the "seto", "androcles", "seppala", "barry" , "sharma"
etc,etc depending on context? "This 'discovery' registers a 2.7
seppala" , what do you think?

I'm all for it:-)

Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
| chances are he is doing just the same"

On 12 Feb 2007 21:31:44 -0800, "Sue..." wrote:

On Feb 12, 8:08 pm, HW@....(Henri Wilson) wrote:
Paper:


First, consider a long straight highway

Maxwell didn't drive.

[...]
The universe may be likened to a very low pressure turbulent gas, each swirl or
eddy effectively defining a reference frame for light, albeit only a very loose
one. Light entering or originating in such a frame TENDS TOWARDS the natural
speed of EM in that frame. Only at this speed do the E and B fields (of
Maxwell) cooperate without loss.

OK... like an electron cloud swirling around a nucleus.

no, nothing like it..

Thus, the speed zones of the above highway are somewhat analogous to the
equilibrium EM speeds in the swirls of space. The spacing between cars is
analogous to the ABSOLUTE distance between photon 'wavecrests'. Whenever a
photon changes speed, so does this spacing.
IMPORTANTLY, the absolute spacing always retains information about the speed of
the source relative to the current frame. The transition zones involve an
irreversible loss or gain of KE and an increase in entropy. (probably related
to the CMBR)

The coulomb force ( 1/r^2 ) and the mass of an
electron establishes this.

not related...

The theory also postulates that another type of EM reference frame exists
around large mass centres in the universe.

Nuclei are large compared to electrons. I suppose that works.

irrelevant.

Light entering the vicinity of our
solar system adjusts speed accordingly.

It adusts at every charge on its path so no reason
it can't adjust there too.

Correct....finally

Closer to home, the Earth's atmosphere

Yes... it adjusts there too.

pretty bloody obvious really

provides a more precise reference frame in which light behaves roughly
according to Maxwell.

It was behaving according to Maxwell before it encounterd
earth's atmosphere so no reason it can't keep doing what
it was doing.

No it wasn't.
Maxwells' equation applies in a reference medium.

Thus, light from a relatively moving star will adjust both its speed and
absolute wavelength on entering the Earth's atmosphere such that a true measure
of doppler shift can be achieved with a diffraction grating. Its original speed
was c wrt its source star and its ABSOLUTE wavelength 'L'. Its speed goes from
c+v to c, relative to Earth and its absolute wavelength changes from L to
Lc/(c+v). The number of wavecrests arriving per second is (c+v)/L

Was it John Kennedy that said you don't stop a dog from barking
by cutting of its tail?

Look where it got HIM!

Your tail is still wagging your dog and your bark is loud as ever.

Have you anything useful to contribute?

This raises the question as to why a grating outside the atmosphere, for
instance onboard the HST, should also provide a true reading of doppler shift
for incoming light. (note: whether or not it does is not regarded as having
been conclusively established)


Reverting back to the 'car analogy'

Maxwell did not have one.


Propagation in a dielectric medium
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teachin...es/node98.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_impedance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_space
http://www-ssg.sr.unh.edu/ism/what.html

Speed is always specified relative to something...
Any physicist would know that.

....but not a radio engineer...

Time-independent Maxwell equations
Time-dependent Maxwell's equations
Relativity and electromagnetism
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teachin.../lectures.html

Maxwell's equations in classic electrodynamics
(classic field theory)_
a) Maxwell equations (no movement),
b) Maxwell equations (with moved bodies)
http://www.wolfram-stanek.de/maxwell...assic_extended

http://web.mit.edu/8.02t/www/802TEAL...ight/index.htm
http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/.../antennas.html

...useless...

Why do you bother...?


Sue...

On Feb 13, 5:55 am, HW@....(Henri Wilson) wrote:


Why do you bother...?

I bother because not all people are as hard-headed as you
and they might want to invest the time and understand
what you can't seem to fathom.

Propagation in a dielectric medium
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teachin...es/node98.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_impedance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_space
http://www-ssg.sr.unh.edu/ism/what.html


Time-independent Maxwell equations
Time-dependent Maxwell's equations
Relativity and electromagnetism
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teachin.../lectures.html

Maxwell's equations in classic electrodynamics
(classic field theory)_
a) Maxwell equations (no movement),
b) Maxwell equations (with moved bodies)
http://www.wolfram-stanek.de/maxwell...assic_extended

http://web.mit.edu/8.02t/www/802TEAL...ight/index.htm
http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/.../antennas.html

Sue...