REVOLUTION IN EINSTEIN CRIMINAL CULT

On 9 Nov, 20:54, Tom Roberts wrote in
sci.physics.research:
Doug Sweetser wrote:
The Michelson-Morley experiment shows
that the speed of light is constant, but the frequency and wavelength
are not.

The Michelson-Morley experiment (MMX) actually shows nothing of the
sort.

Bravo Roberts bravo Tom bravo Albert Einstein of our generation
(Hawking is no longer the Albert Einstein of our generation)! Your
brother John Norton says something similar:

http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/arch.../02/Norton.pdf
John Norton: "Einstein regarded the Michelson-Morley experiment as
evidence for the principle of relativity, whereas later writers almost
universally use it as support for the light postulate of special
relativity......THE MICHELSON-MORLEY EXPERIMENT IS FULLY COMPATIBLE
WITH AN EMISSION THEORY OF LIGHT THAT CONTRADICTS THE LIGHT
POSTULATE."

But there is a problem Roberts Roberts, an awful problem. See again
what brother John Norton says: "....later writers almost universally
use it as support for the light postulate of special relativity..." So
not only zombie Doug Sweetser is misled Roberts Roberts - all zombies
believe that the Michelson-Morley experiment confirms the constancy of
the speed of light and will continue to believe so in the 21st
century. Even the former Albert Einstein of our generation, Hawking,
has been misled:

http://www.hawking.org.uk/lectures/dice.html Stephen Hawking: "Both
Mitchell and Laplace thought of light as consisting of particles,
rather like cannon balls, that could be slowed down by gravity, and
made to fall back on the star. But a famous experiment, carried out by
two Americans, Michelson and Morley in 1887, SHOWED THAT LIGHT ALWAYS
TRAVELLED AT A SPEED OF ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY SIX THOUSAND MILES A
SECOND, NO MATTER WHERE IT CAME FROM."

So Roberts Roberts you and brother John Norton should perform a
REVOLUTION IN EINSTEIN CRIMINAL CULT - cheating should stop and the
truth should be taught. Then, in 100 years, all zombies will believe
that the Michelson-Morley experiment confirms the variable speed of
light obeying the equation c'=c+v and predicted by Newton's emission
theory. Zombies should know the truth shouldn't they Roberts Roberts.

Pentcho Valev

On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 23:46:17 -0800, Pentcho Valev wrote:

On 9 Nov, 20:54, Tom Roberts wrote in
sci.physics.research:
Doug Sweetser wrote:
The Michelson-Morley experiment shows
that the speed of light is constant, but the frequency and wavelength
are not.

The Michelson-Morley experiment (MMX) actually shows nothing of the
sort.

Bravo Roberts bravo Tom bravo Albert Einstein of our generation
(Hawking is no longer the Albert Einstein of our generation)! Your
brother John Norton says something similar:

http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/arch.../02/Norton.pdf
John Norton: "Einstein regarded the Michelson-Morley experiment as
evidence for the principle of relativity, whereas later writers almost
universally use it as support for the light postulate of special
relativity......THE MICHELSON-MORLEY EXPERIMENT IS FULLY COMPATIBLE
WITH AN EMISSION THEORY OF LIGHT THAT CONTRADICTS THE LIGHT
POSTULATE."

Einstein's view that light travels at the same speed c in all frames means that
all the light in both paths of the MMX apparatus move at c wrt all of its
components. This is exactly what the BaTh says...and obviates the need for the
LTs altogether.

Einstein and others at the time obviously still believed that an absolute
aether existed. He then modified that theory so that, in effect, every observer
carried around his own personal aether. Once again, this is exactly compatible
with BaTh, which says, "LIGHT MOVES AT C WRT ITS SOURCE AND EVERYTHING AT REST
IN THE SOURCE FRAME".

No experiment has yet tested whether or not light moves at c-v wrt an observer
moving at c wrt the source.


Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)

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

"There is no doppler shift in BaTh." -- Wilson


"Light doesn't have a 'frequency'. It has a wavelength." --Wilson.
ups.com


"SPINNING OBJECTS HAVE A FREQUENCY, NOT A BLOODY WAVELENGTH." -- Wilson
news
"Light doesn't have a particuar 'frequency' in the normal sense.
Frequency is the inferred rate at whichABSOLUTE wavecrests leave the
source" -- Wilson.


"THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT IN GENERAL, THE 'WAVELENGTH' OF AN OSCILLATION IS
THE
SAME IN ALL FRAMES." -- Wilson




"Anyway, this now fits in perfectly with my 'intrinsic oscillation
frequency' idea.
Thankyou Jerry for helping me develop my theory...." -- Wilson,
October 26, 2007 1:03 PM



"That's the kind of argument I'd expect from a desperate
person....completely out of ideas... ahahahaha!" -- Wilson.


"For one ray, ct = 2piR+vt , for the other ct = 2piR-vt. This gives t =
2piR/(c+v) and 2piR/(c-v)" -- Wilson.
...
"That's for the nonrotating frame, dopey." -- Wilson.
.


"There is NOT the same number of wavelengths between the STARTPOINT and
the detector" -- Wilson


"plonk" -- Wilson (faced with his own words)




You don't use emission theory and don't know what it is, your
crackpot theory is BaTh; you've been whining that for 6 years, you
invented it when I was in hospital in Florida with a shattered ankle
and I've been in Britain 4.5 years while you've gotten gradually more
senile. In all that time you've only learned to write "Dr" in front of
your name which nobody believes.
You blew it with denying Doppler and your tick fairies, senile old fart.