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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #471315

Re: Ectoplasm

Show all headers | View raw

Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/09/2018 18:53, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 10/09/2018 18:05, Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 10/09/2018 13:07, Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>> The only problem with that is that Maxwell's Equations just
>>>>>> come up with the speed of light = constant. Never constant
>>>>>> relative to anything, just the same constant everywhere.
>>>>>> Part of the motivation for Einstein's SR later, which raised
>>>>>> the speed of light=c to all inertial observers to a postulate.
>>>> 
>>>>> Clearly you have never read Maxwell's "Treatise on Electricity
>>>>> and Magnetism", Michael. If you had you would surely know that
>>>>> Maxwell did NOT come up with the speed of light = constant, but
>>>>> rather a speed which depended on the electric permitivity and
>>>>> magnetic permeability OF THE MEDIUM. Not only did he NOT
>>>>> introduce the constants epsilon0 and mu0, but it is obvious
>>>>> that he would have reject such concepts, since the final
>>>>> chapter of his famous Treatise is headed "A MEDIUM NECESSARY".
>>>> 
>>>> The modern Maxwell's Equations (modified by Heaviside, Hertz and others)
>>>> have two forms: an unwieldy form where you essentially have to account for
>>>> every single charge and current but applies to all situations, and a
>>>> simpler/integral form where materials of a bulk form have a displacement
>>>> field D replacing the electric field E, and the H magnetizing field
>>>> replacing the magnet field B. The difference between D and E is D contains
>>>> a permittivity of a material which is E_r*E_0, and H is B divided by the
>>>> magnetic permeability mu of the material, which is mu_r*mu_0.
>>>> 
>>>> The first form does not involve materials (except as a whole bunch of
>>>> charges/currents that have to be accounted for) and produces the vacuum
>>>> speed of light c=1/sqrt(mu_0*E_0). The second form can produce the speed
>>>> of light in a material with permittivity E_r*E_0 and permeability
>>>> mu_r*mu_0.
>>>> 
>>>> Maxwell did not know E_0 and mu_0 individually, but he did know their
>>>> product, and noticed that 1/square root of it was very close to the known
>>>> speed of light. This is why Maxwell suggested light was electromagnetic
>>>> radiation. The product E_0*mu_0 was discovered in an 1855 experiment by
>>>> Weber and Kohlrausch.
>>>> 
>>>> In empty space (no charges, no currents, no materials) the first form is
>>>> used and E_0*mu_0 is constant, so the speed of light c=1/sqrt(E_0*mu_0) is
>>>> also constant.  It does not (cannot) depend on the velocity of anything
>>>> since in empty space there is nothing there to move!
>>> 
>>> 
>>> No one ever measured E_0 or mu_0, Michael, for the very simple reason
>>> that THERE ISN'T ANY VACUUM. If you measure the appropriate values for
>>> a low pressure gas then you obtain the velocity of light RELATIVE TO
>>> THAT LOW PRESSURE GAS. It is really very simple. You make difficulties
>>> where there aren't any, Michael.
>>> 
>>> keith stein
>>> 
>> 
>> Isn’t this like saying no one has measured where absolute temperature on
>> the temperature scale is? There comes a point where you can fit a line and
>> say these are the values of T_0, mu_0, and epsilon_0, because we’ve gotten
>> ever so close and the extrapolation is completely unambiguous.
>> 
> 
> There is a critical difference between extrapolating to absolute zero,
> and extrapolating to perfect vacuum. When one extrapolates to (non 
> existent) perfect vacuum one is omitting the "stuff" which defines the 
> frame of reference with which light travels at its characteristic 
> velocity c, and thereby creating non existent difficulties, because a
> velocity relative to "nothing" is meaningless eh!

But it’s not nothing. You are now saying that the ONLY CONCEIVABLE
reference for the signal speed is a medium. This is of course not true. 

Now it may be that a PARTICULAR THEORY uses the medium as a speed
reference, but it isn’t so that the only sensible theories are ones like
that. 

> 
> keith stein
> 
> 



-- 
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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

Thread

Ectoplasm xip1415926@gmail.com - 2018-09-08 09:37 -0700
  Re: Ectoplasm Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 09:51 +0100
    Re: Ectoplasm Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 10:12 +0100
      Re: Ectoplasm moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-10 12:07 +0000
        Re: Ectoplasm Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 13:32 +0100
          Re: Ectoplasm moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-10 17:05 +0000
            Re: Ectoplasm Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 18:42 +0100
              Re: Ectoplasm Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 17:53 +0000
                Re: Ectoplasm Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 19:16 +0100
                Re: Ectoplasm moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-10 18:27 +0000
                Re: Ectoplasm "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 12:23 -0700
                Re: Ectoplasm Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 19:27 +0000
                Re: Ectoplasm Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 08:16 +0100
                Re: Ectoplasm Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 11:52 +0000
                Re: Ectoplasm Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 14:54 +0100
                Re: Ectoplasm (Whoops! Typos eh!) Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 16:00 +0100
                Re: Ectoplasm (Whoops! Typos eh!) xip1415926@gmail.com - 2018-09-11 08:27 -0700
                Re: Ectoplasm ( and Epistemology and Einstein's Nefarious Practices.) Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 16:57 +0100
                Re: Ectoplasm Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-09-16 08:56 -0500
                Re: Ectoplasm xip1415926@gmail.com - 2018-09-16 12:48 -0700
                Re: Ectoplasm xip1415926@gmail.com - 2018-09-16 13:01 -0700
                Re: Ectoplasm Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 18:38 +0100
                Re: Ectoplasm moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-17 18:04 +0000
                Re: Ectoplasm Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-09-17 14:00 -0500
                Re: Ectoplasm "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 20:59 -0700
                Re: Ectoplasm "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 21:16 -0700
                Re: Ectoplasm "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 20:07 -0700
              Re: Ectoplasm moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-10 18:16 +0000
                Re: Ectoplasm Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 07:52 +0100
                Re: Ectoplasm moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-11 12:01 +0000
            Re: Ectoplasm Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-09-14 21:16 +0200
              Re: Ectoplasm Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-09-16 20:23 +0200
      Re: Ectoplasm xip1415926@gmail.com - 2018-09-10 07:03 -0700
      Re: Ectoplasm Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-09-10 09:39 -0500
        Re: Ectoplasm Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 16:18 +0100
        Re: Ectoplasm Wilbur Foley <boue@eywffl.uf> - 2018-09-10 17:07 +0000
  Re: Ectoplasm (or History and Foundations of the LT) Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 16:24 +0100
    Re: Ectoplasm (or History and Foundations of the LT) xip1415926@gmail.com - 2018-09-14 03:45 -0700

csiph-web