Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #461111

Re: Instantaneous light proved

From	Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address>
Newsgroups	sci.physics.relativity
Subject	Re: Instantaneous light proved
Date	2018-06-13 11:28 +1000
Message-ID	<foba96Fbqt5U1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References	(1 earlier) <Ns2dnXQmrZBBZ2fHnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <24413af0-5681-4c8d-97fb-4bb86edf9bfe@googlegroups.com> <pdfcmg$6cd$5@gioia.aioe.org> <ub6dnV4uUpDVAWbHnZ2dnUU7_8xj4p2d@giganews.com> <42311cdb-8f21-43b1-a1c9-0aaf7b785715@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 16/05/2018 1:47 PM, John Gogo wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 15, 2018 at 9:49:50 PM UTC-5, tjrob137 wrote:
>> On 5/15/18 2:33 PM, Ursula Vankeuren wrote:
>>> a correlation reveals causation. That's the whole
>>> idea in setting up a correlation. To reveal, or not, the causation.
>>
>> Not really. Sometimes correlation does reveal a cause, but of course one
>> needs other information to determine which way the causation goes.
>>
>> There are zillions of examples of correlations which do not imply
>> causation at all. For instance:
>> 	http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations
>>
>> Tom Roberts
> 
> Tom I don't mean to waste your time. I think all of these examples are not representative of what my vision is. I believe the moon is seen where it lies without delay. I believe that the sun is seen where it lies and when we attach a telescope and filter are able to literally see the fire on the surface of the sun. To try to prove my theory I simply say that a light source stationed on the moon that is large enough to be seen will be observed instantaneously. Now the baseline of the speed of light with respect from the distance of the moon is approximately one second- ALL light experiments are performed on Earth or close to Earth (GPS) is bound to have multitudes of atmospheric affects when the measure is a matter of a few miles or much less like counting the number reverberations of an atom within a meter stick.
> 

If vision were instantaneous, then the moons of Jupiter would have to 
slow down when Jupiter is receding from us, and speed up when it 
approaches us. It would be very strange indeed for the actual behaviour 
of the moons to depend on Jupiter's relationship with the Earth, and 
their behaviour as seen from any other vantage point would look very odd.

A much simpler explanation for their observed behaviour is that what we 
see lags behind what actually happens, based on their distance from us. 
This also makes their behaviour consistent for all observers, not just 
those on Earth.

This, BTW, is an example of a light experiment that is not performed 
entirely on Earth, in that part of the experimental set up is in the 
vicinity of Jupiter.

Sylvia.

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Instantaneous light proved Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-06-13 11:28 +1000
  Re: Instantaneous light proved John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-15 17:53 -0700
    Re: Instantaneous light proved John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-17 19:16 -0700
    Re: Instantaneous light proved Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-06-18 12:39 +1000
      Re: Instantaneous light proved John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-20 16:17 -0700
        Re: Instantaneous light proved Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-20 17:25 -0700
          Re: Instantaneous light proved John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-20 18:18 -0700
            Re: Instantaneous light proved John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-20 18:40 -0700
              Re: Instantaneous light proved Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-20 20:15 -0700
                Re: Instantaneous light proved John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-22 16:29 -0700
                Re: Instantaneous light proved Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-22 17:48 -0700
              Re: Instantaneous light proved Steve BH <sbharris@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 21:24 -0700
            Re: Instantaneous light proved Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-06-21 11:46 +1000
              Re: Instantaneous light proved John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-22 16:27 -0700
                Re: Instantaneous light proved Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-06-23 11:48 +0200
                Re: Instantaneous light proved John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-27 18:25 -0700
                Re: Instantaneous light proved John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-27 18:28 -0700
                Re: Instantaneous light proved John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-27 18:36 -0700
                Re: Instantaneous light proved John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-27 18:55 -0700
        Re: Instantaneous light proved Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-06-21 11:41 +1000
          Re: Instantaneous light proved John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-20 18:46 -0700
            Re: Instantaneous light proved Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-06-21 11:51 +1000
              Re: Instantaneous light proved benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-21 02:18 -0400
                Re: Instantaneous light proved Steve BH <sbharris@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 23:54 -0700
                Re: Instantaneous light proved John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-24 18:48 -0700
                Re: Instantaneous light proved John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-25 19:18 -0700
                Re: Instantaneous light proved Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-25 20:48 -0700
            Re: Instantaneous light proved Steve BH <sbharris@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 21:35 -0700
              Re: Instantaneous light proved John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-22 16:31 -0700
          Re: Instantaneous light proved John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-20 18:49 -0700

csiph-web