Path: csiph.com!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: The Starmaker Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity Subject: Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2018 20:33:31 -0700 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Lines: 76 Message-ID: <5B7CD98B.1378@ix.netcom.com> References: <6fceaded-718d-4c9b-ba23-577dd41380ec@googlegroups.com> <43cf91f6-44bc-4e68-a697-8d8d554d0470@googlegroups.com> <5B7A789A.3AA4@ix.netcom.com> <734f6110-0cb4-4494-8c29-f45e17a78b87@googlegroups.com> <5B7BB02A.8EC@ix.netcom.com> Reply-To: starmaker@ix.netcom.com NNTP-Posting-Host: X9ItFNC7Zcz4l6MobL/YRA.user.gioia.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 180821-6, 08/21/2018), Outbound message X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.3 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; U) X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Xref: csiph.com sci.physics.relativity:468666 The Starmaker wrote: > > Ed Lake wrote: > > > > On Monday, August 20, 2018 at 3:15:27 AM UTC-5, The Starmaker wrote: > > > Ed Lake wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 11:48:17 AM UTC-5, Ed Lake wrote: > > > > > Hey guys, I'm baaaack. > > > > > > > > > > I just put a new paper on vixra.org. It is titled "Variable Time and the > > > > > Variable Speed of Light." Here is the link: http://vixra.org/pdf/1607.0289v6.pdf > > > > > > > > > > And here is the opening paragraph: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since the facts in that paragraph are undeniable, I assume everyone here fully agrees with it. Nevertheless, I'd be interested in your thoughts. :-) > > > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > While doing some research this morning, I realized that many of my arguments were previously stated by Cal-Tech's Carver Mead. https://en.wikipedia.org/ > > > > > > > > Example: > > > > > > > > "Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with mathematics--it's the language we use to express the precise relations of physical law. But there is an increasing tendency to mistake the language for the physics itself. Once we lose the conceptual foundations, the whole thing becomes a shell game." > > > > > > > > Source: http://worrydream.com/refs/Mead%20-%20American%20Spectator%20Interview.html > > > > > > > > Here's another article about Carver Mead: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/02/20/carver_mead_on_the_future_of_science/ > > > > > > > > It says, > > > > > > > > "Einstein, of course, was mightily influenced by what the ex–patent clerk called Mach's Principle, which Mead explained as the proposition that "the inertia of every element of matter is due to its interaction with all the other elements of matter in the universe." > > > > > > > > "We haven't fully followed that investigative road, Mead said. "Instead what we've done is we've treated isolated objects as if all their attributes were just given us, and [we] haven't asked where they came from," he said. "Things like the inertia of an object, the rest energy of an object, the velocity of light — all those things. We have a list of fundamental constants that we're not allowed to ask where they come from." > > > > > > > > "If we want to get that stalled 100-year-old revolution unstuck, Mead said, we've got to ask – and discover – where those constants come from, and not just believe in them as handed down by academics and buried in mountains of math. We need to discover their basis in the interactions and interrelationships of all matter in the universe." > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > > The truth is...Albert Einstein has no idea what the speed of light is. > > > > > > His who special relativity is based on 'nothing travels faster than the > > > speed of light', not what the speed of light is. > > > > > > > > > The c in E=Mc^2 is a constant number...what the number is doesn't matter > > > to Einstein. > > > > > > So whether the speed of light is ten times the speed of sound or a > > > million times the speed of sound it doesn't matter to Einstein. > > > > > > > > > > > > In other words...the c in E=Mc^2 stands for...constant. > > > > C is a "constant" only in that it is 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND at any given location. So, at any given location E=Mc^2. > > > > However, because a second will have a different duration in different locations, c is NOT a "universal constant." > > > > Einstein knew that the speed of light was different in different locations. It is the basis for his "relativity of simultaneity" ideas. If light is emitted from two different locations that are the same distance away from an observer, the light will NOT arrive simultaneously for the observer if the emitter at the first location is moving faster than the emitter at the second location, OR if the first emitter is at a higher altitude than the second emitter. > > > > Some people confuse this with Newton's debunked "emission theory" idea that the speed of the emitter is added to the speed of light. Einstein says that "idea is NOT TRUE. Unfortunately, he phrased it this way, "light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body." > > > > He was saying that you do NOT add c to v, where v is the velocity of the emitter. > > > > However, he was also saying that when time slows for an emitter, the light that is emitted is equally slowed. So, c is NOT truly "independent of the state of motion of the emitter." C changes when the state of motion of the emitter changes, but v does not ADD to c NOR subtract from c. C remains 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND, but the duration of a second changes. > > > > Ed > > what is the funtion of the number 2 in E=Mc^2? i just don't understand why one needs to mutiply the speed of light by ...2