O and O', of course. Now go back and read the rest of the post.
The burn mark problem
- Thread starter Jack_
- Start date
- Status
O and O', of course. Now go back and read the rest of the post.
No, Jack, that was there from the start. You're just too dumb to see it.
Repost
Sure I understand.
Each frame carries their own light sphere according to Ritz's theory.
You love the ballistic theory of light.
You boneheads fell right into this.
Yes, Jack, this is nothing new.
No, Jack, it has nothing to do with ballistic light. This is really ancient stuff.
Jack_:
Good. Are we done, then?
What's Ritz's theory?
What's the ballistic theory of light?
Personal insults, Jack_? Tut tut. They tend to destroy your credibility, because they make it look like you have no substantive response, so that the only way you feel you can save face is to resort to ad hominem abuse. In future discussions of this kind, I suggest you avoid such comments. Otherwise you risk people immediately dismissing you as not worth talking to.
Good. Are we done, then?
What's Ritz's theory?
What's the ballistic theory of light?
Personal insults, Jack_? Tut tut. They tend to destroy your credibility, because they make it look like you have no substantive response, so that the only way you feel you can save face is to resort to ad hominem abuse. In future discussions of this kind, I suggest you avoid such comments. Otherwise you risk people immediately dismissing you as not worth talking to.
Pete, you will need to backpeddle from the multiple light emission points since that is the ballistic theory of light, light emission theory, Ritz's theory.
LOL.
Checkmate.
No, Jack, I see you don't understand ballistic theory either.
O emits a flash of light as O' passes by.
In the ballistic theory, the result is an expanding sphere of light centred on O, in both rest frames of reference.
In SR, the result in an expanding sphere of light centred on O in the rest frame of O, and centred on O' in the rest frame of O'.
O emits a flash of light as O' passes by.
In the ballistic theory, the result is an expanding sphere of light centred on O, in both rest frames of reference.
In SR, the result in an expanding sphere of light centred on O in the rest frame of O, and centred on O' in the rest frame of O'.
Problems with emission theory
The simplest form of emission theory says that radiating objects throw off light with a speed of "c" relative to their own state of motion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emission_theory
Emission theory
Walter Ritz's emitter theory (or ballistic theory), was also consistent with the results of the experiment, not requiring aether. The theory postulates that light has always the same velocity in respect to the source.[6] However it also led to several "obvious" optical effects that were not seen in astronomical photographs, notably in observations of binary stars in which the light from the two stars could be measured in an interferometer. If this was correct, the light from the stars should cause fringe shifting due to the velocity of the stars being added to the speed of the light, but again, no such effect could be seen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson-Morley_experiment
The velocity v_ is the velocity of the source and v_(t − r/c) is the velocity of the source at the moment of emission. Equation (10) describes an expanding sphere whose center is no longer at rest in the coordinate system; if the source were to continue to move uniformly with velocity v_, it would remain the center of the sphere. This geometrical description was favored by Ritz. http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers/Einstein1905.pdf
Yeah, real funny. Now you're not just an ignorant asshole, you're a trolling ignorant asshole spammer.
How many boards have you posted this bullshit on? How many more people are you going to waste the time of?
Get a fucking life, or at least an education.
That's right, Jack. Just like I said:
O emits a flash of light as O' passes by.
In the ballistic theory, the result is an expanding sphere of light centred on O, in both rest frames of reference.
In SR, the result is an expanding sphere of light centred on O in the rest frame of O, and centred on O' in the rest frame of O'.
The problem is the following.
At first, you claimed only one light emission point.
Then I made you graduate to multiple light emission points.
Then I proved to you that is the ballistic theory of light.
Now, you are upset.
Before you take a superior attitude, I recommend you know who you are talking to.
The problem, Jack, is that you're a lazy shit who can't be bothered to read what people write.
I consistenly claimed one light emission event, and frame dependent light emission location.
Then you proved that you also don't know what the ballistic theory of light is.
I'm Pete, who the fuck are you?
You did not get it yet.
he velocity v_ is the velocity of the source and v_(t − r/c) is the velocity of the source at the moment of emission. Equation (10) describes an expanding sphere whose center is no longer at rest in the coordinate system; if the source were to continue to move uniformly with velocity v_, it would remain the center of the sphere. This geometrical description was favored by Ritz. http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers/Einstein1905.pdf
Yes, Jack, I can read just fine. Your turn, now.
Well now, such talk.
I am not lazy.
We are not talking one emission event.
You confessed multiple emission points until I checkmated you.
Now you are claiming something else.
You look real funny.
LOL
- Status