On May 27, 8:24 am, Tom Roberts wrote:
Dono wrote:
On May 26, 9:13 pm, Tom Roberts wrote:
But I remark that in GR, for a non-local path [#], on the surface of the
earth, the measured 1-way speed of light _is_ different up from down,
for any sensible method of synchronizing clocks. [...]

This is interesting, much more interesting than all the crackpot stuff
that started the discussion. Is the proof easy to derive? Can you do a
short writeup? (the math associated with it would be great).

Already posted to this newsgroup, long ago (1998):http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...sg/dd9168f6ec3...

(I of course applied the equivalence principle to convert the
conclusions of this SR computation to the earth's surface.)

That is a computation in SR, in GR one would integrate the metric over
the light path. That's more complicated, but for the Schwarzschild
manifold and vertical paths it can be done. Somewhere I have a
Mathematica notebook with this computation for LIGO detecting sun and
moon (unfortunately they have no sensitivity at all for signals of this
frequency). The conclusions are essentially the same, but the details
differ a bit....

Tom Roberts



Thank you!
Much appreciated.

Dono wrote:
On May 27, 8:24 am, Tom Roberts wrote:
Dono wrote:
On May 26, 9:13 pm, Tom Roberts wrote:
But I remark that in GR, for a non-local path [#], on the surface of the
earth, the measured 1-way speed of light _is_ different up from down,
for any sensible method of synchronizing clocks. [...]

This is interesting, much more interesting than all the crackpot stuff
that started the discussion. Is the proof easy to derive? Can you do a
short writeup? (the math associated with it would be great).

Already posted to this newsgroup, long ago (1998):http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...sg/dd9168f6ec3...

(I of course applied the equivalence principle to convert the
conclusions of this SR computation to the earth's surface.)

That is a computation in SR, in GR one would integrate the metric over
the light path. That's more complicated, but for the Schwarzschild
manifold and vertical paths it can be done. Somewhere I have a
Mathematica notebook with this computation for LIGO detecting sun and
moon (unfortunately they have no sensitivity at all for signals of this
frequency). The conclusions are essentially the same, but the details
differ a bit....

Tom Roberts



Thank you!
Much appreciated.

See something much simpler:

http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~...tbook/ch13.pdf pp.2-4

What speed of light does the receiver (observer) measure? Let me tell
you: the receiver under the tower will measure c'=c(1+V/c^2) whereas
the accelerated receiver will measure c'=c+v, where v is the relative
speed of the light source and the receiver. if you do not believe me,
ask Master Tom Roberts - he may explain in a private message. After
all, HE is the expert on speed of light in an accelerated system. And
HE is the Albert Einstein of our generation (Hawking is no longer
etc.).

Pentcho Valev

"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message
oups.com...
: Dono wrote:
: On May 27, 8:24 am, Tom Roberts wrote:
: Dono wrote:
: On May 26, 9:13 pm, Tom Roberts wrote:
: But I remark that in GR, for a non-local path [#], on the surface
of the
: earth, the measured 1-way speed of light _is_ different up from
down,
: for any sensible method of synchronizing clocks. [...]
:
: This is interesting, much more interesting than all the crackpot
stuff
: that started the discussion. Is the proof easy to derive? Can you do
a
: short writeup? (the math associated with it would be great).
:
: Already posted to this newsgroup, long ago
(1998):http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...sg/dd9168f6ec3...
:
: (I of course applied the equivalence principle to convert the
: conclusions of this SR computation to the earth's surface.)
:
: That is a computation in SR, in GR one would integrate the metric over
: the light path. That's more complicated, but for the Schwarzschild
: manifold and vertical paths it can be done. Somewhere I have a
: Mathematica notebook with this computation for LIGO detecting sun and
: moon (unfortunately they have no sensitivity at all for signals of
this
: frequency). The conclusions are essentially the same, but the details
: differ a bit....
:
: Tom Roberts
:
:
:
: Thank you!
: Much appreciated.
:
: See something much simpler:
:
: http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~...tbook/ch13.pdf pp.2-4
:
: What speed of light does the receiver (observer) measure? Let me tell
: you: the receiver under the tower will measure c'=c(1+V/c^2) whereas
: the accelerated receiver will measure c'=c+v, where v is the relative
: speed of the light source and the receiver. if you do not believe me,
: ask Master Tom Roberts - he may explain in a private message. After
: all, HE is the expert on speed of light in an accelerated system. And
: HE is the Albert Einstein of our generation (Hawking is no longer
: etc.).
:
: Pentcho Valev

Oh, so gravity is a force, then?
Dear or dear, and there was I starting to believe it was a curvature
in "spaceTIME", as Humpty Roberts calls it. Humpty Roberts almost
had me converted to his religion.
"sigh The nuances of English. I was discussing the usage of words and
not the concepts they represent." -- Humpty Roberts.
Much appreciated, Pentcho.

Androcles wrote:
"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message
oups.com...
: Dono wrote:
: On May 27, 8:24 am, Tom Roberts wrote:
: Dono wrote:
: On May 26, 9:13 pm, Tom Roberts wrote:
: But I remark that in GR, for a non-local path [#], on the surface
of the
: earth, the measured 1-way speed of light _is_ different up from
down,
: for any sensible method of synchronizing clocks. [...]
:
: This is interesting, much more interesting than all the crackpot
stuff
: that started the discussion. Is the proof easy to derive? Can you do
a
: short writeup? (the math associated with it would be great).
:
: Already posted to this newsgroup, long ago
(1998):http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...sg/dd9168f6ec3...
:
: (I of course applied the equivalence principle to convert the
: conclusions of this SR computation to the earth's surface.)
:
: That is a computation in SR, in GR one would integrate the metric over
: the light path. That's more complicated, but for the Schwarzschild
: manifold and vertical paths it can be done. Somewhere I have a
: Mathematica notebook with this computation for LIGO detecting sun and
: moon (unfortunately they have no sensitivity at all for signals of
this
: frequency). The conclusions are essentially the same, but the details
: differ a bit....
:
: Tom Roberts
:
:
:
: Thank you!
: Much appreciated.
:
: See something much simpler:
:
: http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~...tbook/ch13.pdf pp.2-4
:
: What speed of light does the receiver (observer) measure? Let me tell
: you: the receiver under the tower will measure c'=c(1+V/c^2) whereas
: the accelerated receiver will measure c'=c+v, where v is the relative
: speed of the light source and the receiver. if you do not believe me,
: ask Master Tom Roberts - he may explain in a private message. After
: all, HE is the expert on speed of light in an accelerated system. And
: HE is the Albert Einstein of our generation (Hawking is no longer
: etc.).
:
: Pentcho Valev

Oh, so gravity is a force, then?
Dear or dear, and there was I starting to believe it was a curvature
in "spaceTIME", as Humpty Roberts calls it. Humpty Roberts almost
had me converted to his religion.
"sigh The nuances of English. I was discussing the usage of words and
not the concepts they represent." -- Humpty Roberts.
Much appreciated, Pentcho.

Perhaps it was just a coincidence that Orwell gave the gravity example
in his famous 2+2=5 text but still the analogy between Big Brother's
world and Divine Albert's world is complete:

http://www.online-literature.com/orwell/1984/ George Orwell "1984":
"In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and
you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make
that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it.
Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of
external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy
of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that
they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be
right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? OR
THAT THE FORCE OF GRAVITY WORKS? Or that the past is unchangeable? If
both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if
the mind itself is controllable what then?"

Pentcho Valev

On May 26, 8:15 pm, Pentcho Valev wrote:
Tom Roberts wrote:
Pentcho Valev wrote:
Sagnac's experiment can be regarded as a proof that Einstein criminal
cult has managed to destroy rationality in science completely. There
can be no other experiment more convincingly refuting Einstein's false
principle of constancy of the speed of light

This is plain and simply not true. The constancy of the speed of light
in SR applies ONLY to inertial frames. The rotating Sagnac apparatus is
manifestly not inertial. Indeed, applying an SR analysis in the inertial
frame of its center one obtains values that agree with experimental
observations.

References Roberts Roberts? (If possible available on the internet)

who is Roberts Roberts?

why dont you better shat tha fak ap when you dont contribute?

attack the ball not tha player fool


Exercise for the reader: show QUANTITATIVELY that for a Sagnac
apparatus on the surface of the earth the effects of gravitation
and earth's rotation and revolution are all negligible.

Valev continually and repeatedly tries to discuss things he does not
understand, and makes numerous errors therein. And his stupid writing
style underscores his lack of knowledge. He needs to grow up and STUDY,
rather than wasting time posting nonsense to the net.

I do not have time right now Roberts Roberts but tomorrow I am going
to compare my stupidity and your stupidity:

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...rowse_frm/thre...
Tom Roberts in sci.physics.relativity: "The speed of the light is also
independent of source velocity, both in SR and GR, and experimentally.
The frequency and wavelength of the emitted light, however, are not
independent of source velocity, and depend upon the relative velocity
of the source and observer, including the direction of this velocity 3-
vector wrt the beam of light. The SR Doppler formula describes this
quite well (i.e. agrees with experimental measurements)." Tom Roberts


Pentcho Valev

bolkestein wrote:
On May 26, 8:15 pm, Pentcho Valev wrote:
Tom Roberts wrote:
Pentcho Valev wrote:
Sagnac's experiment can be regarded as a proof that Einstein criminal
cult has managed to destroy rationality in science completely. There
can be no other experiment more convincingly refuting Einstein's false
principle of constancy of the speed of light

This is plain and simply not true. The constancy of the speed of light
in SR applies ONLY to inertial frames. The rotating Sagnac apparatus is
manifestly not inertial. Indeed, applying an SR analysis in the inertial
frame of its center one obtains values that agree with experimental
observations.

References Roberts Roberts? (If possible available on the internet)

who is Roberts Roberts?

The Albert Einstein of our generation. Some time ago Stephen Hawking
was the Albert Einstein of our generation but that was a mistake:

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...6f54853449465?

Pentcho Valev

"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message
ups.com...
:
: Androcles wrote:
: "Pentcho Valev" wrote in message
: oups.com...
: : Dono wrote:
: : On May 27, 8:24 am, Tom Roberts wrote:
: : Dono wrote:
: : On May 26, 9:13 pm, Tom Roberts
wrote:
: : But I remark that in GR, for a non-local path [#], on the
surface
: of the
: : earth, the measured 1-way speed of light _is_ different up from
: down,
: : for any sensible method of synchronizing clocks. [...]
: :
: : This is interesting, much more interesting than all the crackpot
: stuff
: : that started the discussion. Is the proof easy to derive? Can
you do
: a
: : short writeup? (the math associated with it would be great).
: :
: : Already posted to this newsgroup, long ago
:
(1998):http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...sg/dd9168f6ec3...
: :
: : (I of course applied the equivalence principle to convert
the
: : conclusions of this SR computation to the earth's
surface.)
: :
: : That is a computation in SR, in GR one would integrate the metric
over
: : the light path. That's more complicated, but for the Schwarzschild
: : manifold and vertical paths it can be done. Somewhere I have a
: : Mathematica notebook with this computation for LIGO detecting sun
and
: : moon (unfortunately they have no sensitivity at all for signals of
: this
: : frequency). The conclusions are essentially the same, but the
details
: : differ a bit....
: :
: : Tom Roberts
: :
: :
: :
: : Thank you!
: : Much appreciated.
: :
: : See something much simpler:
: :
: : http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~...tbook/ch13.pdf pp.2-4
: :
: : What speed of light does the receiver (observer) measure? Let me tell
: : you: the receiver under the tower will measure c'=c(1+V/c^2) whereas
: : the accelerated receiver will measure c'=c+v, where v is the relative
: : speed of the light source and the receiver. if you do not believe me,
: : ask Master Tom Roberts - he may explain in a private message. After
: : all, HE is the expert on speed of light in an accelerated system. And
: : HE is the Albert Einstein of our generation (Hawking is no longer
: : etc.).
: :
: : Pentcho Valev
:
: Oh, so gravity is a force, then?
: Dear or dear, and there was I starting to believe it was a curvature
: in "spaceTIME", as Humpty Roberts calls it. Humpty Roberts almost
: had me converted to his religion.
: "sigh The nuances of English. I was discussing the usage of words and
: not the concepts they represent." -- Humpty Roberts.
: Much appreciated, Pentcho.
:
: Perhaps it was just a coincidence that Orwell gave the gravity example
: in his famous 2+2=5 text but still the analogy between Big Brother's
: world and Divine Albert's world is complete:
:
: http://www.online-literature.com/orwell/1984/ George Orwell "1984":
: "In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and
: you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make
: that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it.
: Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of
: external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy
: of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that
: they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be
: right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? OR
: THAT THE FORCE OF GRAVITY WORKS? Or that the past is unchangeable? If
: both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if
: the mind itself is controllable what then?"
:
: Pentcho Valev

So it's a conspiracy, not just old-fashioned religious-like stupidity?
Now you'll have me paranoid...
Nah... the knuckle-draggers are just plain stooopid.

"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message
oups.com...
:
: bolkestein wrote:
: On May 26, 8:15 pm, Pentcho Valev wrote:
: Tom Roberts wrote:
: Pentcho Valev wrote:
: Sagnac's experiment can be regarded as a proof that Einstein
criminal
: cult has managed to destroy rationality in science completely.
There
: can be no other experiment more convincingly refuting Einstein's
false
: principle of constancy of the speed of light
:
: This is plain and simply not true. The constancy of the speed of
light
: in SR applies ONLY to inertial frames. The rotating Sagnac apparatus
is
: manifestly not inertial. Indeed, applying an SR analysis in the
inertial
: frame of its center one obtains values that agree with experimental
: observations.
:
: References Roberts Roberts? (If possible available on the internet)
:
: who is Roberts Roberts?
:
: The Albert Einstein of our generation. Some time ago Stephen Hawking
: was the Albert Einstein of our generation but that was a mistake:
:
:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...6f54853449465?
:
: Pentcho Valev

Heck, anyone that turns down a free beer when it's my shout can't possibly
be an Albert Einstein, but that's what Hawking did. He was pussy whipped.

On May 26, 12:20 pm, Pentcho Valev wrote:
snipped usual nonsense

Speaking of criminal cults, I think that you and Androcles are the
nearest thing to a criminal cult to be found on sci.physics. You are
both ciminally stupid. The entire educational aparatus of Great
Britain and Bulgaria should be sent to Guantanemo Bay. They have
evidently weakened the West far more grievously than most Islamic
fundamentalists.

I would have thought it impossible for someone to go so long
without learning anything at all, but Petko and DUMBledore have
performed the amazing feat of going backward.

Perhaps even more fundamental to the universe than the speed of light
in inertial frames is the overwhelming stupidity of so many people.

Ok there ia Movie called lathe of heaven and two versions.One by PBS and
a second Tv movie and its got this laser sanner relativity thingy going
on and everytime you watch it it caahnges

And the movie Phenomenom with John Travolta is just like that with the
rabiitt thingy in the fence cahanging thingy


They are both a Lathe of heaven or something kind of thingy kinda of a
laser scanner bar code scanner relativity thingy.

If YA Know What I mean DUDE!


Kind of useful for robots I bet

I ade Robocop and discovered Rodney King MR RIOT was a quadropole
splitting tramp/slut relativity drifting aprt kind of a you know why
kind aof guy

I made a robot boxer and knocked you mother****er OUT


And speaking oh Aggravation Hurricanes whats up with those wankel/mazda
Rotary engines and that warp drve triangle PISTON? thingy and geometry
thingy.


I was Listening to the moon and the moon said BOLD FACE LIE.Do you think
my theory of socialbility was a LIE?

Which one Did it?

Oh mercy


And you know there is a slipstream class of airplane racing being
created


And I believe another class of antigrav.

A little of the OL ULTRAVIOLENCE

Exactly Do wack wacky Do

Related to Wipe out fusion videogame for Sony Playstation I bet.


And The bank wants to make a transporttaion sysyem with the air tube
Torquey thingy

OH Mercy


And I was in a rtobbaco store and met Cher from Sonny and Cher and she
got a wing ding thing going on

i was like Oh mERcy

and I think Denise is another wing dinger but an anti trampy thingy
going on.

Its like a velvet indian/chineese thingy


M ERCY
merc Y

Its like a wing dingy thingy

And my coffe grinder got a HECTIC kinda hillbillie / hick kinda HEE HAW
kind of thinking positive or it wont work easy button saving reactors
kind of thingy going on.Thats not grinding nothing but making an
earthquake and liquefying things and **** floats to the top if your
healthing kind of thingy going on.

Obviously invented by john HYE

And as he always says

EXACTLY

Do wack Do wacky Do


And you know those washer and dryers are like a memory device or
something

Do wacky do wacky do


And I think you guys got a letter in the mail from me

on the Robot thingy among other things


Black as coal and all of space
Want a thumb get some
Im a socke Em in the eye kinda guy
Funky mother****er dont know Oh woe

Knocked the mother ****er out!

I changed my mind about the not making a doghouse.

Nyeh Nyeh Nyah nyah you cant catch me HA/

i got water and anarchy and you dont?

RH EH AH EH AH AH Ah

They call me yankee doodle dandy


And ****ing Denise keeps playing with my cock making crazy diamonds.

My sharona give it up from the top my my sharona WHOO

And I am Smokey and the Bandit and we are trying to deliver a truck

And also the gumball ralley

And spaeking of ball are you a slithery snake or a slithery cat?

And there is a Star Trek about this ghostly gren guy thingy with the
cancer pimples thingy and the corrupted kids singing about angels and
killing their parents

And onother one about the companion raping zephrym cocahren the founder
of the federation trapping him on the planet

HELp mEEEE

HE ELP mEEE

And we are ****ed up now
Oh Mercy


Captian James T Kirk of the Star Ship Enterprise this Captian Picard
speaking engage the EASY Hectic button and Deana Troi the EM Pathic
Counselour will assist you

I AM Wishmaster

Make Your Wishes

--
My kaleidoscope art webpage:
http://community-2.webtv.net/Amused_.../Kaleidoscope/

Keep spam illegitimate, Report spam to:
http://spamcop.net/