The roundtrip time of light travel and how it really works!

[arfa brane]

Explain how light propagates at c in all directions from a source that then
moves away from itself at a speed greater than "the origin" of the emitted light sphere.
This sphere is supposed to be moving away from its point of emission (the origin
at t = 0) at the same speed in all directions.

Your diagrams show something else. If you can't see that I don't know what to say.

 

[Motor Daddy]

Explain how light propagates at c in all directions from a source that then
moves away from itself at a speed greater than "the origin" of the emitted light sphere.
This sphere is supposed to be moving away from its point of emission (the origin
at t = 0) at the same speed in all directions.

Your diagrams show something else. If you can't see that I don't know what to say.

If you want to fill in subsequent light spheres emitted by the source after t=0 be my guest. That has no bearing on what we are talking about. All you will do is show the wave length and frequency, which has no impact on the outer most light sphere emitted at t=0. ALL other spheres you input from the source at a time after t=0 will be INSIDE the outer most light sphere shown, that was emitted at t=0. You adding in smaller spheres will do nothing other than to show the Doppler affect.

Maybe you think the speed of light is supposed to be relative to the source at all times? Absolutely not. The light travels away from the point of origin and the source travels away from the point of origin as well. The light's motion is relative to the point of origin and so is the source's motion.

 

[arfa brane]

The outermost light sphere was emitted from the center of your box or cube.
If it expands outward at c in every direction, then figure 2 should have a light
sphere centered on this same point. It doesn't, so your explanation falls over.

You've explained at least 4 times that the sphere of light expands outward at c
in all directions. Of course, in real life, nobody can see this sphere of light except
an external observer. In your second figure the Z detector is "seeing" the leading
wavefront, but not of the light emitted from the center.

The second figure doesn't show a light sphere expanding from the center of the
box, which is what it needs to show if light spheres expand at c in all directions, AND
if light was emitted from that point.

 

[Motor Daddy]

The outermost light sphere was emitted from the center of your box or cube.
If it expands outward at c in every direction, then figure 2 should have a light
sphere centered on this same point. It doesn't, so your explanation falls over.

You've explained at least 4 times that the sphere of light expands outward at c
in all directions. Of course, in real life, nobody can see this sphere of light except
an external observer. In your second figure the Z detector is "seeing" the leading
wavefront, but not of the light emitted from the center.

The second figure doesn't show a light sphere expanding from the center of the
box, which is what it needs to show if light spheres expand at c in all directions, AND
if light was emitted from that point.

I have to tell you, arfa brane, you really are as dumb as a box of rocks. You still haven't figured out what the heck is going on.

The box is in motion in the preferred frame, as is the radius of the light sphere as it expands at c. Do you not understand that? Do you not understand that the box is in motion relative to the light sphere???? WTF?

 

[AlexG]

There is no preferred frame, except in MD's own little delusional universe.

 

[arfa brane]

Do you not understand that the box is in motion relative to the light sphere???? WTF?

Do you not understand that you said that light is emitted in all directions from the center of the box? So if it travels at c in every direction from that point the result is a sphere centered on the point OF EMISSION? NOT centered on some other point you've introduced in order to sort those rocks you mentioned?

Can't you see that you're really saying: "Light travels at c, and expands spherically from a source, except if the source is moving".

So does light travel at c or not? How does the center of the box "know" its moving?

 

[James R]

Motor Daddy:

Your diagram is correct for a frame in which the box is moving to the right. You have correctly determined the speed of the box relative to that frame of reference.

Your diagram does not apply when you go to another frame. In particular, it does not apply in a frame where the box is stationary.

We've already been through this in detail. Please review the following thread, where I walked you through it all in excrutiating detail.

[thread=101682]Relativity of simultaneity[/thread]

You keep making the same mistake over and over again. There is no absolute frame of reference, and you haven't determined any kind of absolute speed. Your thought experiment only determines the speed of the box in the frame you have chosen - which is not absolute.

Repeat the experiment inside the box (i.e. in a frame where the box is stationary) and the light pulse from the centre will hit all sides of the square box simultaneously.

I am the first person in the history of the world to be able to calculate the motion of a box in the preferred frame using the constancy of the speed of light in that preferred frame, all the while having all numbers in all frames add up properly.

There are no preferred frames. You have only managed to determine the motion of the box in your favorite frame, which need not be absolutely stationary.

It is quite clear that you still don't understand what a reference frame is. Please review the thread I linked above.

Oh, and there's nothing worth parading your ego about here. This is high school physics. Also, there's no relativity in your example, because you only consider one reference frame. I know you imagine this somehow disproves Einstein's relativity, but in fact it doesn't even begin to address the relevant issues.

Nobody has ever been able to make the numbers work without using a bunch of band-aid BS such as length contraction (which has never been proven), time dilation, or the really stupid concept of the relativity of simultaneity. After using all those band-aids to try to get the numbers to add up, Einstein still fails to be able to determine the velocity of the box.

Your numbers work just fine in the "embankment frame". They only apply to that frame. Your continuing problem is that you don't believe any other frames are possible.

Since this thread is a useless repeat, I will close it.