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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #616973 > unrolled thread

Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Contents

  Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-07 01:50 -0700
    Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-07 10:26 -0700
      Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-07 13:26 -0700
        Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-07 14:03 -0700
      Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-07 17:04 -0400
        Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-07 14:06 -0700
          Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-07 23:32 -0400
            Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-07 21:15 -0700
            Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Hever Zhelobinsky <zzzz@ohhsoyby.ne> - 2023-08-08 10:15 +0000
            Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-08 07:27 -0700
              Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-08 09:54 -0500
              Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-08 11:08 -0400
                Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-09 11:06 -0700
                  Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-09 19:05 -0500
                    Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-09 19:11 -0700
                      Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-09 22:02 -0500
                      Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-09 21:03 -0700
                  Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-10 07:49 -0400
        Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-07 16:28 -0700
          Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-07 22:26 -0500
          Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-08 00:13 -0400
        Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-07 16:30 -0700
          Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-07 22:28 -0500
          Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-08 11:11 -0400
            Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-08 09:05 -0700
        Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-07 16:34 -0700
          Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-07 22:29 -0500
          Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-08 00:17 -0400
            Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-07 21:36 -0700
              Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-08 08:20 -0700
                Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-08-08 10:30 -0700
                Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-08 12:48 -0500
            Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-08 08:10 +0200
    Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-07 10:35 -0700
      Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-07 12:40 -0500
    Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-08-08 00:11 -0700
      Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-08-10 10:40 -0700
        Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-08-10 10:52 -0700
    Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-08 11:25 -0700
    Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-09 11:06 -0700
      Re: Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-09 19:01 -0500

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#616973 — Variable Speed of Light and Protective Stupidity

(frequency at observer) = (speed of light relative to observer)/(distance between light pulses) https://youtube.com/watch?v=bg7O4rtlwEE

(frequency at observer) varies with speed of observer - Doppler effect.

(speed of light relative to observer) varies proportionally (end of Einstein).

Protective stupidity:

George Orwell: "Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are inimical to Ingsoc, and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction. Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity."

Pentcho Valev https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#617012

On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 1:51:01 AM UTC-7, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> (frequency at observer) = (speed of light relative to observer)/(distance between light pulses) https://youtube.com/watch?v=bg7O4rtlwEE 
> 
> (frequency at observer) varies with speed of observer - Doppler effect. 
> 
> (speed of light relative to observer) varies proportionally (end of Einstein). 
> 
> Protective stupidity: 
> 
> George Orwell: "Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are inimical to Ingsoc, and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction. Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity." 
> 
> Pentcho Valev https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
Yes, the speed of the starlight from Sirius is 300,005.5 km/sec, and this is recognized by modern astronomy as giving the radial velocity of the two stars approaching each other.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617034

On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 10:26:21 AM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

> Yes, the speed of the starlight from Sirius is 300,005.5 km/sec, and this is recognized by modern astronomy as giving the radial velocity of the two stars approaching each other.

Your kidding, right?

https://www.universeguide.com/star/32349/sirius#properradial

"The radial velocity, the speed at which Sirius is [heading] towards the Sun, is -5.50000 km/s with an error of about 0.40 km/s ."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617040

On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 1:26:19 PM UTC-7, Paul Alsing wrote:
> On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 10:26:21 AM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> 
> > Yes, the speed of the starlight from Sirius is 300,005.5 km/sec, and this is recognized by modern astronomy as giving the radial velocity of the two stars approaching each other.
> Your kidding, right? 
> 
> https://www.universeguide.com/star/32349/sirius#properradial 
> 
> "The radial velocity, the speed at which Sirius is [heading] towards the Sun, is -5.50000 km/s with an error of about 0.40 km/s ."
Yes, can you add 300,000 to 5.5? Yes, the negative means the two stars are moving towards each other, so the relative velocity is 300,005.5.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617041

On 8/7/2023 1:26 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

> Yes, the speed of the starlight from Sirius is 300,005.5 km/sec, and this is recognized by modern astronomy as giving the radial velocity of the two stars approaching each other.

You lie. Why do you lie? The speed of light from Sirius is MEASURED as 
c, as well as predicted as c by modern physics.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617042

On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 2:04:21 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote:
> On 8/7/2023 1:26 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> 
> > Yes, the speed of the starlight from Sirius is 300,005.5 km/sec, and this is recognized by modern astronomy as giving the radial velocity of the two stars approaching each other.
> You lie. Why do you lie? The speed of light from Sirius is MEASURED as 
> c, as well as predicted as c by modern physics.
No, it is measured by spectroscope to be 300,005.5 km/sec. It is only interpreted as c by relativists out of protective stupidity or, as George Orwell says, crimestop (see above).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617069

On 8/7/2023 5:06 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 2:04:21 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote:
>> On 8/7/2023 1:26 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, the speed of the starlight from Sirius is 300,005.5 km/sec, and this is recognized by modern astronomy as giving the radial velocity of the two stars approaching each other.

>> You lie. Why do you lie? The speed of light from Sirius is MEASURED as
>> c, as well as predicted as c by modern physics.

> No, it is measured by spectroscope to be 300,005.5 km/sec.

Reference? Spectrum measurement typically works by the WAVELENGTH of the 
light. Of course, fools and relativity cranks (I repeat myself) may 
assume the frequency remains the same and therefore multiply the 
(measured) wavelength by the (assumed) frequency and get a bogus speed 
of 300,005.5 km/sec or something.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617075

On Tuesday, 8 August 2023 at 05:32:55 UTC+2, Volney wrote:
> On 8/7/2023 5:06 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 2:04:21 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote: 
> >> On 8/7/2023 1:26 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> >> 
> >>> Yes, the speed of the starlight from Sirius is 300,005.5 km/sec, and this is recognized by modern astronomy as giving the radial velocity of the two stars approaching each other. 
> 
> >> You lie. Why do you lie? The speed of light from Sirius is MEASURED as 
> >> c, as well as predicted as c by modern physics. 
> 
> > No, it is measured by spectroscope to be 300,005.5 km/sec.
> Reference? Spectrum measurement typically works by the WAVELENGTH of the 


And do you still believe that  9 192 631 770  ISO idiocy
is some "Newton mode"? You're such an amazing idiot, 
stupid Mike, even considering the standards of your
moronic religion.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617091

Volney wrote:

> On 8/7/2023 5:06 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
>> No, it is measured by spectroscope to be 300,005.5 km/sec.
> 
> Reference? Spectrum measurement typically works by the WAVELENGTH of the
> light. Of course, fools and relativity cranks (I repeat myself) may
> assume the frequency remains the same and therefore multiply the
> (measured) wavelength by the (assumed) frequency and get a bogus speed
> of 300,005.5 km/sec or something.

what, you want the proofs?? Here's another proof for the nazi regime you 
pay in ukurina. You disgusting LGBTQ+ freak.

𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹_𝗗𝗿𝗮𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻_𝗼𝗳_𝗨.𝗦._𝗕𝗿𝗮𝘃𝗮𝗱𝗼_𝗜𝗻_𝗨𝗸𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗲
https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/jpY9Q44fC3yR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617106

On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 8:32:55 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote:
> On 8/7/2023 5:06 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 2:04:21 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote: 
> >> On 8/7/2023 1:26 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> >> 
> >>> Yes, the speed of the starlight from Sirius is 300,005.5 km/sec, and this is recognized by modern astronomy as giving the radial velocity of the two stars approaching each other. 
> 
> >> You lie. Why do you lie? The speed of light from Sirius is MEASURED as 
> >> c, as well as predicted as c by modern physics. 
> 
> > No, it is measured by spectroscope to be 300,005.5 km/sec.
> Reference? Spectrum measurement typically works by the WAVELENGTH of the 
> light. Of course, fools and relativity cranks (I repeat myself) may 
> assume the frequency remains the same and therefore multiply the 
> (measured) wavelength by the (assumed) frequency and get a bogus speed 
> of 300,005.5 km/sec or something.
I see you couldn't understand the YouTube video Valev provided.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617110

On 8/8/2023 9:27 AM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 8:32:55 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote:
>> On 8/7/2023 5:06 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
>>> On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 2:04:21 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote:
>>>> On 8/7/2023 1:26 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Yes, the speed of the starlight from Sirius is 300,005.5 km/sec, and this is recognized by modern astronomy as giving the radial velocity of the two stars approaching each other.
>>
>>>> You lie. Why do you lie? The speed of light from Sirius is MEASURED as
>>>> c, as well as predicted as c by modern physics.
>>
>>> No, it is measured by spectroscope to be 300,005.5 km/sec.
>> Reference? Spectrum measurement typically works by the WAVELENGTH of the
>> light. Of course, fools and relativity cranks (I repeat myself) may
>> assume the frequency remains the same and therefore multiply the
>> (measured) wavelength by the (assumed) frequency and get a bogus speed
>> of 300,005.5 km/sec or something.
> I see you couldn't understand the YouTube video Valev provided.

On the contrary, you do not really understand what Valev propounds,
but you believe your idols are better than anything.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617112

On 8/8/2023 10:27 AM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 8:32:55 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote:
>> On 8/7/2023 5:06 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
>>> On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 2:04:21 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote:
>>>> On 8/7/2023 1:26 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Yes, the speed of the starlight from Sirius is 300,005.5 km/sec, and this is recognized by modern astronomy as giving the radial velocity of the two stars approaching each other.
>>
>>>> You lie. Why do you lie? The speed of light from Sirius is MEASURED as
>>>> c, as well as predicted as c by modern physics.
>>
>>> No, it is measured by spectroscope to be 300,005.5 km/sec.

>> Reference? Spectrum measurement typically works by the WAVELENGTH of the
>> light. Of course, fools and relativity cranks (I repeat myself) may
>> assume the frequency remains the same and therefore multiply the
>> (measured) wavelength by the (assumed) frequency and get a bogus speed
>> of 300,005.5 km/sec or something.

> I see you couldn't understand the YouTube video Valev provided.

Valev? He's the biggest crank around, other than Plutonium. Half of 
Valev's references state the opposite of what he claims anyway.

So tell us with a real reference (not a Valev YouTube) how that 
spectroscope supposedly measured the speed of light from Sirius as 
anything other than c.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617207

On Tuesday, August 8, 2023 at 8:08:56 AM UTC-7, Volney wrote:
> On 8/8/2023 10:27 AM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 8:32:55 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote: 
> >> On 8/7/2023 5:06 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> >>> On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 2:04:21 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote: 
> >>>> On 8/7/2023 1:26 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> >>>> 
> >>>>> Yes, the speed of the starlight from Sirius is 300,005.5 km/sec, and this is recognized by modern astronomy as giving the radial velocity of the two stars approaching each other. 
> >> 
> >>>> You lie. Why do you lie? The speed of light from Sirius is MEASURED as 
> >>>> c, as well as predicted as c by modern physics. 
> >> 
> >>> No, it is measured by spectroscope to be 300,005.5 km/sec. 
> 
> >> Reference? Spectrum measurement typically works by the WAVELENGTH of the 
> >> light. Of course, fools and relativity cranks (I repeat myself) may 
> >> assume the frequency remains the same and therefore multiply the 
> >> (measured) wavelength by the (assumed) frequency and get a bogus speed 
> >> of 300,005.5 km/sec or something. 
> 
> > I see you couldn't understand the YouTube video Valev provided.
> Valev? He's the biggest crank around, other than Plutonium. Half of 
> Valev's references state the opposite of what he claims anyway. 
> 
> So tell us with a real reference (not a Valev YouTube) how that 
> spectroscope supposedly measured the speed of light from Sirius as 
> anything other than c.
You'll have to watch the video again!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617231

On 8/9/2023 1:06 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 8, 2023 at 8:08:56 AM UTC-7, Volney wrote:
>> On 8/8/2023 10:27 AM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
>>> On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 8:32:55 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote:
>>>> On 8/7/2023 5:06 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 2:04:21 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/7/2023 1:26 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, the speed of the starlight from Sirius is 300,005.5 km/sec, and this is recognized by modern astronomy as giving the radial velocity of the two stars approaching each other.
>>>>
>>>>>> You lie. Why do you lie? The speed of light from Sirius is MEASURED as
>>>>>> c, as well as predicted as c by modern physics.
>>>>
>>>>> No, it is measured by spectroscope to be 300,005.5 km/sec.
>>
>>>> Reference? Spectrum measurement typically works by the WAVELENGTH of the
>>>> light. Of course, fools and relativity cranks (I repeat myself) may
>>>> assume the frequency remains the same and therefore multiply the
>>>> (measured) wavelength by the (assumed) frequency and get a bogus speed
>>>> of 300,005.5 km/sec or something.
>>
>>> I see you couldn't understand the YouTube video Valev provided.
>> Valev? He's the biggest crank around, other than Plutonium. Half of
>> Valev's references state the opposite of what he claims anyway.
>>
>> So tell us with a real reference (not a Valev YouTube) how that
>> spectroscope supposedly measured the speed of light from Sirius as
>> anything other than c.

> You'll have to watch the video again!

Yet another missive from the self-proclaimed expert living in his
mother's basement. The problem with his postings is that he doesn't
actually know enough about physics to appreciate the garbage nature
of Valev's proclamations.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617237

On Wednesday, August 9, 2023 at 5:05:54 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote:
> On 8/9/2023 1:06 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > On Tuesday, August 8, 2023 at 8:08:56 AM UTC-7, Volney wrote: 
> >> On 8/8/2023 10:27 AM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> >>> On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 8:32:55 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote: 
> >>>> On 8/7/2023 5:06 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> >>>>> On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 2:04:21 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote: 
> >>>>>> On 8/7/2023 1:26 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> Yes, the speed of the starlight from Sirius is 300,005.5 km/sec, and this is recognized by modern astronomy as giving the radial velocity of the two stars approaching each other. 
> >>>> 
> >>>>>> You lie. Why do you lie? The speed of light from Sirius is MEASURED as 
> >>>>>> c, as well as predicted as c by modern physics. 
> >>>> 
> >>>>> No, it is measured by spectroscope to be 300,005.5 km/sec. 
> >> 
> >>>> Reference? Spectrum measurement typically works by the WAVELENGTH of the 
> >>>> light. Of course, fools and relativity cranks (I repeat myself) may 
> >>>> assume the frequency remains the same and therefore multiply the 
> >>>> (measured) wavelength by the (assumed) frequency and get a bogus speed 
> >>>> of 300,005.5 km/sec or something. 
> >> 
> >>> I see you couldn't understand the YouTube video Valev provided. 
> >> Valev? He's the biggest crank around, other than Plutonium. Half of 
> >> Valev's references state the opposite of what he claims anyway. 
> >> 
> >> So tell us with a real reference (not a Valev YouTube) how that 
> >> spectroscope supposedly measured the speed of light from Sirius as 
> >> anything other than c. 
> 
> > You'll have to watch the video again!
> Yet another missive from the self-proclaimed expert living in his 
> mother's basement. The problem with his postings is that he doesn't 
> actually know enough about physics to appreciate the garbage nature 
> of Valev's proclamations.

As I have claimed before, he does not know what he does not know, and anyone with 2 functioning neurons can plainly see this for himself... and he is certainly not alone here!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617240

On 8/9/2023 9:11 PM, Paul Alsing wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 9, 2023 at 5:05:54 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote:
>> On 8/9/2023 1:06 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, August 8, 2023 at 8:08:56 AM UTC-7, Volney wrote:
>>>> On 8/8/2023 10:27 AM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 8:32:55 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/7/2023 5:06 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
>>>>>>> On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 2:04:21 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/7/2023 1:26 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes, the speed of the starlight from Sirius is 300,005.5 km/sec, and this is recognized by modern astronomy as giving the radial velocity of the two stars approaching each other.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You lie. Why do you lie? The speed of light from Sirius is MEASURED as
>>>>>>>> c, as well as predicted as c by modern physics.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, it is measured by spectroscope to be 300,005.5 km/sec.
>>>>
>>>>>> Reference? Spectrum measurement typically works by the WAVELENGTH of the
>>>>>> light. Of course, fools and relativity cranks (I repeat myself) may
>>>>>> assume the frequency remains the same and therefore multiply the
>>>>>> (measured) wavelength by the (assumed) frequency and get a bogus speed
>>>>>> of 300,005.5 km/sec or something.
>>>>
>>>>> I see you couldn't understand the YouTube video Valev provided.
>>>> Valev? He's the biggest crank around, other than Plutonium. Half of
>>>> Valev's references state the opposite of what he claims anyway.
>>>>
>>>> So tell us with a real reference (not a Valev YouTube) how that
>>>> spectroscope supposedly measured the speed of light from Sirius as
>>>> anything other than c.
>>
>>> You'll have to watch the video again!
>> Yet another missive from the self-proclaimed expert living in his
>> mother's basement. The problem with his postings is that he doesn't
>> actually know enough about physics to appreciate the garbage nature
>> of Valev's proclamations.
> 
> As I have claimed before, he does not know what he does not know, 
> and anyone with 2 functioning neurons can plainly see this for himself... 
> and he is certainly not alone here!

I have to wonder how he scores on any standardized test. I know we run
into these clowns in the sci. newsgroups but I wonder what drives them
to post about stuff they clearly aren't conversant in, so the easy
approach is to join up with dissenters. But why bother? Is this the only
acceptance they can find, joining other losers faking competence?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617244

On Thursday, 10 August 2023 at 04:11:15 UTC+2, Paul Alsing wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 9, 2023 at 5:05:54 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote: 
> > On 8/9/2023 1:06 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > > On Tuesday, August 8, 2023 at 8:08:56 AM UTC-7, Volney wrote: 
> > >> On 8/8/2023 10:27 AM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > >>> On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 8:32:55 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote: 
> > >>>> On 8/7/2023 5:06 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > >>>>> On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 2:04:21 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote: 
> > >>>>>> On 8/7/2023 1:26 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > >>>>>> 
> > >>>>>>> Yes, the speed of the starlight from Sirius is 300,005.5 km/sec, and this is recognized by modern astronomy as giving the radial velocity of the two stars approaching each other. 
> > >>>> 
> > >>>>>> You lie. Why do you lie? The speed of light from Sirius is MEASURED as 
> > >>>>>> c, as well as predicted as c by modern physics. 
> > >>>> 
> > >>>>> No, it is measured by spectroscope to be 300,005.5 km/sec. 
> > >> 
> > >>>> Reference? Spectrum measurement typically works by the WAVELENGTH of the 
> > >>>> light. Of course, fools and relativity cranks (I repeat myself) may 
> > >>>> assume the frequency remains the same and therefore multiply the 
> > >>>> (measured) wavelength by the (assumed) frequency and get a bogus speed 
> > >>>> of 300,005.5 km/sec or something. 
> > >> 
> > >>> I see you couldn't understand the YouTube video Valev provided. 
> > >> Valev? He's the biggest crank around, other than Plutonium. Half of 
> > >> Valev's references state the opposite of what he claims anyway. 
> > >> 
> > >> So tell us with a real reference (not a Valev YouTube) how that 
> > >> spectroscope supposedly measured the speed of light from Sirius as 
> > >> anything other than c. 
> > 
> > > You'll have to watch the video again! 
> > Yet another missive from the self-proclaimed expert living in his 
> > mother's basement. The problem with his postings is that he doesn't 
> > actually know enough about physics to appreciate the garbage nature 
> > of Valev's proclamations.
> As I have claimed before, he does not know what he does not know,

Come on, poor trash, your Shit has been proven inconsistent
and your wise faces are changing nothing.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617257

On 8/9/2023 2:06 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 8, 2023 at 8:08:56 AM UTC-7, Volney wrote:

>> So tell us with a real reference (not a Valev YouTube) how that
>> spectroscope supposedly measured the speed of light from Sirius as
>> anything other than c.

> You'll have to watch the video again!

I ask you for an actual reference, explicitly stating not a Valev 
YouTube, and the best you can do is to tell me to watch the Valev 
YouTube again?????

As the others have pointed out, you don't know what you don't know.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617055

On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 2:04:21 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote:
> On 8/7/2023 1:26 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> 
> > Yes, the speed of the starlight from Sirius is 300,005.5 km/sec, and this is recognized by modern astronomy as giving the radial velocity of the two stars approaching each other.
> You lie. Why do you lie? The speed of light from Sirius is MEASURED as 
> c, as well as predicted as c by modern physics.
If anyone changes the distance or time in the speed formula for anything while keeping the speed unchanged, the math is incorrect. That is what happens when it is claimed the speed of light is always "measured" as c irrespective of relative motion.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617066

On 8/7/2023 6:28 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 2:04:21 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote:
>> On 8/7/2023 1:26 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, the speed of the starlight from Sirius is 300,005.5 km/sec, and this is recognized by modern astronomy as giving the radial velocity of the two stars approaching each other.

>> You lie. Why do you lie? The speed of light from Sirius is MEASURED as
>> c, as well as predicted as c by modern physics.

> If anyone changes the distance or time in the speed formula for anything while keeping the speed unchanged, the math is incorrect. That is what happens when it is claimed the speed of light is always "measured" as c irrespective of relative motion.

Gobbledygook. Have you been drinking?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web