Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #408565

Re: The constancy of light

From Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com>
Newsgroups sci.physics.relativity
Subject Re: The constancy of light
Date 2017-02-09 13:36 +0100
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <o7hnkd$fls$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References (2 earlier) <29c76655-f43e-4574-8d45-2887d883a222@googlegroups.com> <3b7673ad-0968-4363-95e4-8d70a7aae8ae@googlegroups.com> <5230a1af-9882-4553-bbe0-4d16370c8bef@googlegroups.com> <o7fu6g$4de$1@dont-email.me> <a22fffdc-eb24-4640-a990-312123230646@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw


On 02/09/2017 12:44 PM, matt.rush200@outlook.com wrote:
> Poutnik
>>> They imagined that if you couldn't measure any isotropic change in
>>> light speed in MMX, light couldn't be a wave in MMX.
>
>> Who are they ? It is definitely not
>> the standard MMX nor SR interpretation.
>
> Are you suggesting that you think a classical model of
> light where it *is a wave* isn't ruled out by MMX?

No, it is not.
It is ruled out by later experiments.

What is rule out by MMX is the classical EM wave theory
considering stationary aether.

>>> Despite the fact that
>>> the measurement process in MMX involved looking for any offset in the
>>> interference pattern observed in the experimental setup.
>
>>> Obviously waves can't cause interference patterns in SR.
>
>> Obviously they can and they do.
>> The point is, the patterns did not change,
>> while it had been expected they would have.
>
> This doesn't prove that light isnt a wave. It only proves
> that the aether/vacuum medium is not measureable.

I did not say otherwise. If you think I did,
you have misinterpreted what I said.

>
> How do you explain the interference pattern with waves,
> while at the same time saying the experiment rules out
> a wave model of light?

You have said MMX ruled a wave model of light, not me.

-- 
Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer )

A wise man guards words he says,
as they say about him more,
than he says about the subject.

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


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