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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #402072

Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong.

From HGW <hw@....>
Newsgroups sci.physics.relativity
Subject Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong.
Date 2016-12-17 09:07 +1100
Organization Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID <o31oi8$419$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References (5 earlier) <3ef8c7d9-fadb-4a92-9fa7-de1569cd9e39@googlegroups.com> <o2tpv1$1jcq$1@gioia.aioe.org> <o2u9e7$jkt$1@news.albasani.net> <o2v33i$1ums$1@gioia.aioe.org> <o30n1t$h2g$1@news.albasani.net>

Show all headers | View raw

On 16/12/16 23:35, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> On 15.12.2016 22:48, HGW wrote:
>> On 16/12/16 01:30, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>> On 15.12.2016 11:06, HGWilson, DSc. wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Have any of you dingleberries considered what a digital light
>>>> pulse actually looks like? What are the photons doing? Where is
>>>> the frequency?
>>>>
>>>
>>> https://paulba.no/temp/Fourier.pdf Page 12
> ' Ralph, you are revealing an amazing ignorance about signal
> transmission. :-D
>
>> Irrelevant. Traveling light does not have a frequency.
>
> Let's have a look at "what a digital light pulse actually look
> like". (I will not ask you what makes a light pulse "digital".) When
> light is used in communication, it will be in optical fibers, and
> today mono mode optical fibers are almost exclusively used. An
> optical fiber is a waveguide, and exactly the same maths is applied
> to analyse the properties of the optical waveguide as was used to
> analyse microwave waveguides (Maxwell's equations), and exactly the
> same parameters are used. Cut-off frequency, frequency dependent
> phase velocity (> c/n), frequency dependent group velocity (< c/n).
> The latter means that there is dispersion, which will limit the
> signal bandwidth (but since the 'carrier frequency' is so extremely
> high the signal bandwidth can still be very high).

When a medium is involved, so are Maxwell's equations. I am talking
about digital signals sent through empty space.

> This make it obvious that light is em-radiation with frequency and
> wavelength exactly like radio waves.

Radio waves do not have a frequency.
The reason you do not understand that is the simple fact that I appear 
to be the only person in the whole history of physics that has realized 
it. That makes me smarter than the rest...and you should feel privileged 
to be one of the first to be enlightened.
The frequency c/lambda exists only in the broadcasting antenna and 
refers to the rate at which the electric field varies. Consequently, a 
signal of specific SPATIAL PATTERN emerges from the antenna traveling at 
relative speed c. That pattern does not change during travel and is not 
oscillating in any known way (although it might do so as part of its 
intrinsic structure...but not related to c/l)).
When intercepted by a receiver, the pattern (which arrives at c or c+v 
depending on the relative speed of the receiver) regenerates the 
original frequency as an electric potential in a tuned circuit.

The general traveling wave equation A = AoSin(2pi(t/tor-x/l)) 
demonstrates how the frequency 1/tor will be generated in a receiver at 
fixed location x. Since tor is actually l/c in the source frame, the 
equation becomes A = AoSin(2pi((ct-x)/l)) in the frame of a receiver at 
rest with the source. That is the equation of a fixed sine pattern 
moving at c. Note, wavelength, l, is an absolute and frame independent 
distance.

Also note that since this makes a mockery of your funny little Sagnac 
article, you will no doubt be typically reluctant to accept the plain 
facts.

> So what about the photons? I am sure you could use QED to calculate
> the properties of an optical fiber. But it would probably be
> extremely complicated, and it would give the same results as
> Maxwell. It always does for phenomena which are not dominated by
> quantum phenomena.
>
>> The frequency you are talking about is used in the transmitter to
>> create the traveling series of pulses and is subsequently
>> regenerated in the receiver.
>
> The frequency I am talking about is the frequency spectrum of a
> pulse. https://paulba.no/temp/Fourier.pdf Page 12 Shows the spectrum
> of a few pulses. A rectangular pulse will be bad because the
> frequency spectrum is very broad. A triangular pulse (page 13) is
> better, but a (limited) Gauss-pulse is best (page 15, bottom)

Square waves are commonly used in electrical transmission. They are 
effectively used in radio transmission too by combining frequencies in 
the complicated waves you mention.

> When light is modulated (simple DSB modulation) with a pulse, the
> frequency spectrum of the pulse is shifted up to the frequency of the
> light. https://paulba.no/temp/Modulation.pdf See page 6 (triangular
> pulse)
>
>> A digital signal consists of a series of short bursts of fixed
>> wavelengths (of a carrier frequency).
>
> As explained above "a short burst" haven't got a fixed wavelength,
> but a distribution of wavelengths c/F(w). Bandwidth > 0.
>
> And if we are talking about radio signals, on/off keying of the
> carrier hasn't been used since Morse signals were used.

Not true. The end result has to be a square-ish type of signal.

There are
> many different modulation methods, most used nowadays are variants of
> phase modulation. (phase-shift keying, PSK)
>
> A PSK modulated signal is a continuous signal, no bursts.

see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_signal

> But back to your original posting.
>
> | On 13.12.2016 19:37, HGWilson, DSc. wrote: |> If Einstein's second
> postulate was correct, no digital technology would |> work. No
> digital TV, satellite communication or the Internet would be |>
> possible. |> In fact the whole subject of light physics has to be
> rewritten now that |> digital light signals are in use everywhere.
>
> Can you please explain what kind of reasoning is behind this
> remarkable statement?

There is no particular frequency and the Doppler shifts between pulses 
are clearly of the simple form (c+v)/c.



--

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

Thread

Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-12-14 05:37 +1100
  Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Zaida Orvis <iOsddiosaa@iOsddi.saa.iOs> - 2016-12-13 20:31 +0000
  Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-12-13 22:35 +0100
    Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Odilia Blatt <Bditttaliol@Bditttali.l.org> - 2016-12-13 21:39 +0000
      Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-12-16 18:54 +0100
  Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-12-13 17:04 -0800
  Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-12-14 12:14 +1100
    Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-13 20:37 -0800
      Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-12-14 22:24 +1100
        Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-12-15 06:47 +1100
          Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-12-15 12:24 +1100
        Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-14 14:23 -0800
        Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Michael Moroney <moroney@TheWorld.com> - 2016-12-15 01:23 +0000
          Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-12-14 19:08 -0800
            Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-12-15 21:06 +1100
              Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-15 03:28 -0800
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-12-15 22:41 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-16 08:35 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-12-16 13:21 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-16 19:08 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-12-16 19:11 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-17 08:02 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-17 09:30 -0600
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-18 08:29 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-18 09:02 -0800
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-18 09:08 -0800
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-19 08:56 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-12-18 14:39 -0800
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-12-19 21:06 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-12-19 04:11 -0800
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-19 04:57 -0800
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-19 17:32 +0000
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-19 05:21 +0000
              Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-12-15 15:30 +0100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-15 07:08 -0800
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-16 08:48 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-15 14:21 -0800
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-12-16 13:19 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-16 19:11 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-12-16 22:35 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-12-16 13:35 +0100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-17 09:07 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-16 20:56 -0800
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-17 19:30 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Python <python@python.invalid> - 2016-12-17 11:38 +0100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-17 04:46 -0800
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-17 16:20 +0000
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-17 16:14 +0000
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-18 08:40 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Lauretta Nagle <uattea@aeuatte.au> - 2016-12-17 21:49 +0000
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-17 16:38 -0600
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Lauretta Nagle <uattea@aeuatte.au> - 2016-12-17 23:17 +0000
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-17 20:24 -0600
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-18 15:13 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-12-18 16:13 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-18 20:14 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-12-19 15:11 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-12-19 20:59 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-12-19 22:44 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-19 03:57 -0800
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-20 09:01 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-19 14:29 -0800
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-18 02:05 -0800
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-20 22:49 -0800
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-21 19:36 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-12-21 13:45 +0100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-22 08:11 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-12-22 10:08 +0100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 09:31 -0600
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-12-23 06:06 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-22 12:20 -0800
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-12-23 08:10 -0600
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-23 08:14 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Demetrice Barren <teercere@tmerunin.tme> - 2016-12-28 21:48 +0000
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-12-29 11:01 +0100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-30 08:32 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-12-28 21:21 +0100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-30 08:45 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-29 18:35 -0800
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-30 14:33 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-29 21:04 -0800
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-30 19:23 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-30 07:01 -0800
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-31 07:41 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-30 15:11 -0800
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-12-31 15:15 +0100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2017-01-01 13:37 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-01 05:42 -0800
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2017-01-02 05:52 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-01 12:06 -0800
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2017-01-02 07:33 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-01 13:38 -0800
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-01 15:37 +0100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2017-01-02 05:57 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-18 02:10 +0000
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-18 15:21 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-19 05:20 +0000
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-12-19 21:03 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-19 17:43 +0000
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-12-19 09:07 +0100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-12-19 21:20 +1100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Mitzi Gilliard <iotoor@iGMaMiai.org> - 2016-12-20 04:07 +0000
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-12-19 18:57 +0100
                Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-16 18:19 +0000
      Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-14 15:03 -0800
        Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-14 15:12 -0800
        Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-14 15:19 -0800
          Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-14 15:55 -0800
        Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-14 19:10 -0800
          Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-14 19:25 -0800
      Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-16 03:57 -0800
        Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-16 04:37 -0800
          Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-18 02:32 -0800
    Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-16 03:55 -0800
      Mentally ill Jay Mosley escapes the local insane asylum and starts blogging again "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-16 10:04 -0800
        Mentally ill Jay Mosley escapes the local insane asylum and starts blogging again jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-18 02:33 -0800
  Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-19 10:48 -0800
  Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-19 10:49 -0800
  Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-19 14:39 -0800
    Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-20 11:18 +1100
      Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-19 18:38 -0800
        Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. Mitzi Gilliard <iotoor@iGMaMiai.org> - 2016-12-20 04:04 +0000
  Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-19 16:28 -0800
  Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-20 10:09 -0800
    Re: Digital Light Signals Prove Einstein Wrong. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-21 07:54 +1100

csiph-web