Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de>
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: What is a photon
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2025 06:46:57 +0200
Lines: 160
Message-ID: <man762F2uddU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <9af3e95b721801ec23446e0d70f081b3@www.novabbs.org>
 <%5W_P.1199819$lZjd.237071@fx05.ams4> <101hdi1$2104j$1@dont-email.me>
 <3fe4ff53feee25131897dec6bed26616@www.novabbs.com>
 <101mlhj$3v6bs$1@dont-email.me>
 <b3c79148a2a73e05267102dc02069b51@www.novabbs.org>
 <101pe06$qdb4$1@dont-email.me>
 <bf5db4fb77db2aa5d2d1d9ec07759e2d@www.novabbs.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net zf8DIVtfbS8MZkZQmWGbrQJ5AMHNt9MHTSAiP1oYbTJEzjNLEp
Cancel-Lock: sha1:fK6zzrsrKQf0B4YXku5fQ2IzypY= sha256:teYJOUrNcoTC+E7q3o6jpD/DKG7Sb1/oFepvibEmTMQ=
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: de-DE
In-Reply-To: <bf5db4fb77db2aa5d2d1d9ec07759e2d@www.novabbs.org>

Am Donnerstag000005, 05.06.2025 um 13:51 schrieb bertitaylor:
> On Wed, 4 Jun 2025 12:32:19 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
> 
>> Den 04.06.2025 10:39, skrev Bertitaylor:
>>> On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 11:22:38 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
>>>
>>>> Den 02.06.2025 05:16, skrev Bertietaylor:
>>>>>> On 01/06/2025 12:46, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Experiments show that the speed of light is invariant: [...]
>>>>>>> How is that possible if light is waves in an aether ?
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Speed of light has to be variant in the Copernican model. Light is a
>>>>> wave. All waves need media to propagate. Light's medium is aether.
>>
>>>>
>>>> A bit confused, Bertietaylor?
>>>
>>> Not at all.
>>
>> You use the Copernican model to defend your claim
>> that the speed of light isn't invariant, and are
>> not confused? :-D
> 
> Why should we be? Are you thick? We have following Arindam said clearly
> that as the Earth moves, light speed has to be variant as the nulls in
> MMX could not happen otherwise. The foolish or sinister physicists have
> either not thought of or ignored the fact that the Earth's movement
> would cause light to move more or less between any two points on the
> moving Earth.
>>
>>>
>>>> The Copernican model is wrong, the Sun isn't the centre of the 
>>>> Universe.
>>>> And in 1543 Copernicus  knew nothing about the speed of light.
>>
>>> The Sun is at the centre of the solar system, of which you may have
>>> heard. The Earth goes around the Sun. The Sun and the planets do NOT go
>>> around the Earth in crystal spheres. Where the stars are supposedly
>>> light from Heaven casting their light through pricks on the crystal
>>> spheres.
>>
>> And that means that the speed of light isn't invariant? :-D
> 
> Light speed would be invariant as per MMX if the Earth did not move in
> space as the Aristotle model has it.
> 
> We have following Arindam said clearly that as the Earth moves, light
> speed has to be variant as the nulls in MMX could not happen otherwise.
> The foolish or sinister physicists have either not thought of or ignored
> the fact that the Earth's movement would cause light to move more or
> less between any two points on the moving Earth.
>>
> 
> 
>>
>>>> But forget quantum theories, it is irrelevant to the question
>>>> if the speed of light is invariant.
>>>>
>>>> Many experiments are performed to answer the question.
>>>> A few of them:
>>>>
>>>> https://paulba.no/paper/Kennedy_Thorndike.pdf
>>>> https://paulba.no/paper/Michelson_1913.pdf
>>>> https://paulba.no/paper/Alvager_et_al.pdf
>>>> https://paulba.no/paper/Babcock_Bergman.pdf
>>>> https://paulba.no/paper/Brecher.pdf
>>>>
>>>> The result is that it is thoroughly confirmed that
>>>> the speed of light is invariant.
> 
> However the big daddy of them all, the MMX, clearly shows that the light
> speed is variant as the Earth moves. If the fact that light moves a
> greater or lesser distance between two points on the moving Earth is
> ignored, the experiments will start off with a false basis.  So nothing
> true will come from such an horrendous bungle.
>>>>
>>>> So I ask you again:
>>>> How can the speed of a wave in an aether be invariant?
> 
> It is never invariant. It is always variant for all objects in the
> universe move with respect to the common static medium, that is aum or
> aether.
>>>>
>>>> What is the speed of light measured in a frame of reference
>>>> where the aether is stationary?
> 
> The speed of light will always APPEAR to be invariant in an experiment
> like MMX whereas it is variant. Making APPEARANCE reality, on the
> unscientific subjective basis, is the constitution of Einsteinian
> pseudo-physics.
> 
> That light speed is variant is clearly shown from the Doppler effect,
> like radar or redshift and blueshift in the stars as the go away or come
> near.
> 
> 
>>>>
>>>> What is the speed of light measured in a frame of reference
>>>> where the aether is moving with the speed v?
> 
> Aether does not move. The speed of light from a plane flying at speed v
> to a radar on the ground is c+v.
>>
>> No answer, Bertietaylor?
> 
> Well, we cannot answer to all as promptly as we might wish. Lots of
> other things to do, what.
>>
>> I am beginning to suspect that you are unable to answer the question:
>> "How can the speed of a wave in an aether be invariant?"
> 
> It cannot be invariant, it will always be variant. However on Earth we
> may measure the speed as c following the usual methods. Also, Maxwell's
> equations provide a value for c, which match experimental values.
>>
>> Maybe you don't know what invariant means?
> 
> Invariant means that the speed does not depend upon the speed of the
> emitter, in this case.

Actually 'invarinat speed of light' means, that light travels always 
with the same speed through vacuum.

This does, of course, include independence from the speed of the emitter.

But that is't sufficiant.

If light would be faster near the Moon, for instance, and slower near 
Jupiter, we had also different speeds of light.

Also the speed of the observer shouldn't have an influence.

That part is actually tricky, because if we take a strong laser beam 
from, say, Alpha Centaury and fly with our spaceship along that beam, we 
would need to measure the same velocity of the light from that beam, 
weather we speed up or decelerate.

> Actually it does, as redshift and blueshift shows, and the Doppler radar
> effect.

Doppler effect is also tricky, because we could easily imagine to move 
faster than necessary to redshift below zero Hertz (of a beam from a 
remote station).

If so, what is frequency below zero?

Or we could do the opposite an fly towards the emitter and blueshift 
that ray beyond infinity.

Now we could measure the speed of that 'squezed ray' and find, that it 
behaves like a material object and does not move at all (in respect to 
our spaceship).


....


TH