On Mon, 7 May 2007 11:17:54 +0100, "George Dishman"
wrote:


"Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
.. .

see: www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/bathgrating.jpg

Well done Henry. So your equation is

lambda_i * (c+u)
sin(phi) = ---------------
D * (c+v)

where lambda_i is the wavelength of the _incident_
light.

The wavelength of the reflected light, lambda_r, is
given by

lambda_r c+u
-------- = ---
lambda_i c+v

So your equation can also be written

lambda_r
sin(phi) = --------
D

You have been claiming that the speed didn't appear in
the equation and that wavelength couldn't change. One
or the other is wrong. You also claimed the formula
used frequency instead of wavelength but that too isn't
true. Naturally you can replace the wavelength by speed
over frequency but that just reintroduces speed in the
equation.

Desperate again George?

Lambda_i is absolute and all we need.

Lambda_r doesn't enter into this.

The equation uses points of equal phase to calculate the angle of the wavefront
of the diffracted beam.

Let's assume that u =0, ie., the reflected light moves at c wrt the GRATING.

The result is as I said: Sin(phi)=D/lambda.(c/(c+v)), for 1st order
diffraction.
Speed is included in the equation....so the BaTh explains what is observed.

SR does not.


The lesson Henry, is to work out the equation before you
start telling people what it contains.

The BaTh wins again.
The BaTh also explains sagnac.
The BaTh wins yet again.

George




www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

Einstein's Relativity - the greatest HOAX since jesus christ's virgin mother.