On 10 Jul 2003 10:25:33 -0700, (George G. Dishman)
wrote:

[Much snipped, subject revised]:

HW@..(Henri Wilson) wrote in message . ..

It could be measured to a certain known level of accuracy. OWLS differences
could be quite large.

Before you can measure it, you have to define it.
Generally that comes down to defining how you
intend to synchronise separated clocks since a
one-way measurement means the light doesn't finish
where it started. I don't mean the practical
problems of synchronisation but what you are trying
to achieve.

Practical considerations of clock drift, resolution
and accuracy are valid but can be dealt with by good
experimental technique, and of course can be assumed
to be negligible in a thought experiment.

The best available clocks should be quite stable enough to perform this type of
experiment. Synching is done when they are together and assumed to remain when
they are carefully transported across flat ground for some 3000m. There are
brought together every 30 mins or so for checking.


One very feasible OWLS experiment I suggested involved comparing short pulses
of light from a red-shifted star with that from a blue shifted one. An optical
system including a fast 'gate' somewhere 'up there' would simuilaneously
deflect very short pulses of light from both sources down to Earth. If the
velocity of light from the two stars differed slightly, the pulses would not
arrive simultaneously.

That assumes your gate doesn't reset the speed to c
relative to the gate. The binary star evidence you
have been discussing is generally taken as conclusive
but I believe you postulate that the speed tends to c
relative to your medium over a short distance so
wouldn't this mean that the speed of light from both
sources would be the same in the vicinity of the gate
anyway?

That is probably correct - but it would be interesting to see verified the
fact.
If the gate was on, say, the moon, very small velocity differences could be
detected with powerful telescopes and photomultipliers here on earth..


It should not violate the evidence about binary stars or the
clarity of very distant objects because the velocity changes
affect the whole beam and are fairly short lived and small.

Define "short-lived" and "small". 1 light-second? 1 wavelength?

Probably light-seconds or light-minutes depending on the local
density. I suppose it could even be LYs in some cases.

1 light-year is 9.46 * 10^15 m.

That's right. Pretty small in the overall scheme. I think even the closest
Binary stars are light years away. If light from these took many lightdays to
adjust speed, De Sitter's theory about source dependency would not be
affected.

On the other hand even one light second is large
compared to lab measurements and dependence on the
speed of the source doesn't show up in bench tests.

What tests are those?
The MMX strongly suggests that light speed is locally source dependent.


George


Henri Wilson.

Why is the creative output of one SRian equal to the total produced by one million of them?

See my animations at:
http://www.users.bigpond.com/HeWn/index.htm