Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #408343
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics.relativity |
| Subject | Re: The constancy of light |
| Date | 2017-02-08 14:08 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <efvgdfF6k9iU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | <7c5d9bfa-9675-4249-b2f5-9e5a4dc08dfa@googlegroups.com> <d87f031d-d779-4716-9680-1f20780fdb03@googlegroups.com> <b72de20f-9687-4501-a5e9-25b6a01a6536@googlegroups.com> <efvc0nF5rrsU2@mid.individual.net> <18da0371-4f31-4910-9f6d-0dc873743757@googlegroups.com> |
On 8/02/2017 1:19 PM, John Gogo wrote: > On Tuesday, February 7, 2017 at 7:53:30 PM UTC-6, Sylvia Else wrote: >> On 8/02/2017 12:06 PM, John Gogo wrote: >>> On Tuesday, February 7, 2017 at 4:59:41 PM UTC-6, >>> numbernu...@gmail.com wrote: >>>> The velocity of light has not been measured. Roemer (1676) did >>>> not measure or calculate the velocity of light (Roemer, p. >>>> 276-279). Huygens (1690) measured the velocity of light using >>>> the earth's orbital diameter and a 22 minute time delay based >>>> on Roemer's observation of the period of Io but the period of >>>> Io has been measured at 42.45930686 hours which proves Roemer's >>>> time delay of Io's period does not occur and cannot be used to >>>> calculate the velocity of light. >>> >>> The 22 minute delay is the variable occultation as Io emerges >>> from behind Jupiter as seen from the far/near point from Earth, >>> at roughly 6 month intervals. How does this relate with Io's >>> period of 42.45930686 hours? >>> >> >> John, you appear to have found some sanity pills that actually >> work. Good on ya'. >> >> Sylvia. > > I'm still curious how numbernu relates the 22 minutes with the period > of 42.45... hours. I feel like you are not curious enough or are > criticizing without explaining the error in numernu's logic. > I'm not criticising, and certainly not criticising you. On the contrary, I'm applauding your comment, which seems, by any measure, a completely rational critique of the previous poster's comment. Sylvia.
Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
The constancy of light Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-02-06 17:11 -0800
Cretin Peter Riedt at it again "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-06 17:16 -0800
Re: Cretin Peter Riedt at it again, was re: constancy of light RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-13 12:38 -0800
Re: The constancy of light Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-07 12:25 +1100
Re: The constancy of light Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-02-06 20:26 -0800
Peter Riedt eats shit "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-06 20:36 -0800
Re: The constancy of light Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 06:56 +0100
Re: The constancy of light Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-07 19:31 +1100
Re: The constancy of light "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-07 00:39 -0800
Re: The constancy of light benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-07 17:07 -0500
Re: The constancy of light Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 07:22 -0600
Re: The constancy of light Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-02-07 16:02 -0800
Re: The constancy of light Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-07 17:11 -0800
Re: The constancy of light Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-02-07 18:16 -0800
Re: The constancy of light Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-07 18:31 -0800
Re: The constancy of light Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 08:33 -0600
Re: The constancy of light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-08 06:53 -0800
Re: The constancy of light Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 08:32 -0600
Re: The constancy of light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-07 10:36 -0800
Re: The constancy of light matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-08 05:07 -0800
Re: The constancy of light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-08 05:25 -0800
Re: The constancy of light matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-08 05:59 -0800
Re: The constancy of light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-08 06:14 -0800
Re: The constancy of light Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 21:15 +0100
Re: The constancy of light matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-09 03:44 -0800
Re: The constancy of light Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 13:36 +0100
Re: The constancy of light matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-09 04:51 -0800
Re: The constancy of light Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-09 05:36 -0800
Re: The constancy of light Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 15:12 +0100
Re: The constancy of light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-09 08:52 -0600
Re: The constancy of light matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-09 10:20 -0800
Imbecile Jay Mosley back with a vengeance "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-09 10:44 -0800
Re: The constancy of light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-13 10:16 -0600
Re: The constancy of light Sanjuanita Peeples <naalu@nwmeela.org> - 2017-02-13 18:32 +0000
Re: The constancy of light matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-13 11:01 -0800
Re: The constancy of light alsor@interia.pl - 2017-02-10 12:49 -0800
Re: The constancy of light "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-02-10 14:47 +0100
Re: The constancy of light matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-10 07:48 -0800
Re: The constancy of light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-13 10:34 -0600
Re: The constancy of light matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-13 10:34 -0800
Re: The constancy of light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-13 14:16 -0600
Re: The constancy of light matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-13 14:31 -0800
Re: The constancy of light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-14 09:33 -0600
Re: The constancy of light matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-14 08:18 -0800
Re: The constancy of light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-14 12:24 -0600
Re: The constancy of light matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-14 10:40 -0800
Re: The constancy of light "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-02-13 21:16 +0100
Re: The constancy of light Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 21:00 +0100
Re: The constancy of light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-07 14:59 -0800
Re: The constancy of light John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-07 15:51 -0800
Re: The constancy of light John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-07 17:06 -0800
Re: The constancy of light John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-07 17:09 -0800
Re: The constancy of light Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-08 12:53 +1100
Re: The constancy of light John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-07 18:19 -0800
Re: The constancy of light Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-08 14:08 +1100
Re: The constancy of light John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-07 18:24 -0800
Re: The constancy of light Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-08 14:11 +1100
Re: The constancy of light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-08 11:24 -0800
Re: The constancy of light "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-08 12:10 -0800
Re: The constancy of light Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-09 12:45 +1100
Re: The constancy of light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-09 10:36 -0800
Re: The constancy of light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-10 12:57 -0800
Re: The constancy of light John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-10 14:56 -0800
Re: The constancy of light alsor@interia.pl - 2017-02-11 14:42 -0800
Re: The constancy of light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-10 13:09 -0800
Re: The constancy of light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-10 13:23 -0800
Re: The constancy of light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-10 13:27 -0800
Re: The constancy of light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-11 11:23 -0800
Re: The constancy of light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-11 14:56 -0800
Re: The constancy of light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-14 10:44 -0800
csiph-web