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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #416130

Re: Speed of light

Show all headers | View raw

kenseto wrote:

> On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 6:36:29 PM UTC-4, Thomas 'PointedEars'
> Lahn wrote:

What part of “attribution line” did you not understand?

>> kenseto wrote:
>> >> The speed of light in vacuum is c₀ = 299'792'458 m∕s.
>> > This is an artificially
>> This is gibberish.  But if you mean “this is artificially”, then no, it
>> is not: It is the result of increasingly precise attempts at measurement.
> 
> Sight.....

You probably meant “Sigh” here.  Sloppy writer, sloppy thinker…

> using the speed of light to defined the meter is circular
> physics.

Not at all.

>> > The fields of QFT  defined speed and it is based on the circular
>> > definition for the meter that a meter is 1/299,792,458 light-second.
>> 
>> Such a nonsense, it is not even wrong.
> 
> What you said is wrong.....the definition of a meter is indeed
> 1/299,792,458 light-second.

I have almost literally quoted the SI definition further below (and you 
quoted that), and what you say *now* is equivalent to that.

What you said *before* is nonsense, though.  Spot the difference.
 
>> Instead:
>> 
>> By 1983, measurements of the speed of light in vacuum had become so
>> precise that, whereas in the International System of Units (SI)
>> previously the speed of light in vacuum had been based on the meter, with
>> the meter defined based on the wavelength of a specific emission line, it
>> is now the other way around: the meter is defined as 1∕299'792'458 of the
>> distance that light travels in vacuum in 1 second.
> 
> Originally the meter is the length of a metal bar in Paris.

Yes, much earlier.  The SI definition of the meter had been updated *several 
times* since then, as science progressed.

> In order to save SRT the meter was redefined to be 1/299,792,458 light-
> second.

No.  SR (or _STR_; “SRT” is the _German_ abbreviation) was postulated in 
1905, and widely accepted by 1960/1961 (Hughes–Drever experiment), at the 
latest, already.  You would have known that your statement is nonsense if 
you had cared to read what I referred you to.

> This circular definition of the meter guarantees that the speed of light
> to be c in any frame.

Nonsense.  That the speed of light is constant and the same for all 
observers, depending only on the optical thickness of the medium through 
which it travels, was already known through experiments *before* 1905.
 
> Do you realize that I can walk at a speed of c if I define the length of a
> walk meter is 1/299,792,458 walk-second?

No, because that is such a nonsense that it is not even wrong.

>> >> You can either say that the vacuum is the medium through which (_not_:
>> >> by which) light is transmitted, or as vacuum is defined as “space void
>> >> of matter” (QFTs notwithstanding), that there is no medium.  It is
>> >> usually generally stated that the transmission of light, and
>> >> electromagnetic radiation in general, does not require a medium.
>> > The fields QFT do not exist without a medium.
>> Not even wrong.
> 
> Can you give us a physical description of a field in QFT?

Yes.  (There is no “us” in the sense that you think; you are alone in that 
misconception, other crackpots aside.)

>> > Weinberg said that the fields in QFT are stress and stains in a medium.
>> Most likely he did not.  But you may cite evidence.
> 
> Page 25 in his book "Dream Of A Final Theory".

You need to be more precise.  What is the ISBN, URL etc.?  And which 
paragraph, which sentence on that page, do *you* think, says that?

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

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

Thread

Science School The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-09 13:03 -0700
  Re: Science School The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-09 13:33 -0700
  Re: Science School Robert Bannister <robban@clubtelco.com> - 2017-04-11 10:10 +0800
    Re: Science School Paul Colquhoun <newsposter@andor.dropbear.id.au> - 2017-04-11 17:39 +1000
    Re: Science School Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-11 15:06 +0200
      Re: Science School Jolie Osokuro <uuol@oowo.ou> - 2017-04-11 13:32 +0000
        Re: Science School Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 15:48 +0200
      Re: Science School kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-11 08:25 -0700
        Re: Science School Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-04-11 18:16 +0200
          Re: Science School Wendi Maddox <ox@awdodww.oe> - 2017-04-14 14:40 +0000
        Speed of light (was: Science School) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-11 18:21 +0200
          Re: Speed of light (was: Science School) kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-11 11:25 -0700
            Re: Speed of light (was: Science School) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-11 20:49 +0200
              Re: Speed of light (was: Science School) mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-11 12:17 -0700
                Re: Speed of light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-11 22:00 +0200
              Re: Speed of light (was: Science School) kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-12 06:34 -0700
                Re: Speed of light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-13 00:36 +0200
                Re: Speed of light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-13 05:29 -0700
                Re: Speed of light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-13 14:41 +0200
                Re: Speed of light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-13 06:07 -0700
                Re: Speed of light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-13 15:20 +0200
                Re: Speed of light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-13 06:25 -0700
                Re: Speed of light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-13 15:43 +0200
                Re: Speed of light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-13 06:53 -0700
                Re: Speed of light kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-13 05:47 -0700
                Re: Speed of light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-13 15:15 +0200
                Re: Speed of light moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-13 16:54 +0000
                Re: Speed of light kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-13 10:44 -0700
                Re: Speed of light moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-13 21:33 +0000
            Re: Speed of light (was: Science School) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-11 20:22 +0000
              Re: Speed of light (was: Science School) kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-12 07:16 -0700
                Re: Speed of light (was: Science School) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-12 15:49 +0000
                Re: Speed of light (was: Science School) mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-12 10:04 -0700
                Re: Speed of light (was: Science School) kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-13 05:22 -0700
                Re: Speed of light (was: Science School) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-13 16:33 +0000
  Re: Science School Nobody <nobody@nowhere.nohow> - 2017-04-11 00:41 -0400

csiph-web