A Good Question for the Relativist Rabble.

Discussion:

(too old to reply)

k***@erinet.com

2009-07-26 12:37:48 UTC

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 21:36:43 -0700 (PDT),

A light source is accelerating at a constant rate. It
emits
periodic pulses of
light at the rate of, say, 1 per second.
S->a....................................P3........P2.........P1

Note: I have reversed the order of the pulses because the
original
one was
confusing.

What would a relativist have to say about the distances
between
the emitted
light pulses?

A knowledgible SRian or aetherist like myself would say that
the
distance between the pulse would increase because the
distance
between
successive emission points has been increased due to
acceleration.

OK I think you are talking about the initial situation. In
aether
theory, P2
would be closer to P3 than to P1.

No.....The distance between P1 and P2 is L_12 and the distance
between
P2 and P3 is L_23.
L_23 is larger than L_12.
Why? Because the average velocity from P2 to P3 is greater than
the
average velocity from P1 to P2.

I'll clarify the question?
S is constantly accelerating to the right and emitting a pulse
every
second,
its clock time.
You might claim that the interval between pulse emissions
depends
on
S's
speed
through the aether. Normally one would think that, in aether
theory,
P32
is <
P12 since all pulses move at c wrt the aether and S is closer to
P2
when
P3 is
emitted than it was wrt P1 when P2 was emitted. But with time
contractions,
that effect could be decreased, even reversed.
I'm not going to work it out because it could become quite
complicated
and I
don't subscribe to aether theory anyway....but the fact remains
that
in
aether
theory, those distances once established, are absolute and don't
change
with
time.
Do you agree

1. S emit P1 and one second later it emits P2. The average
velocity
is
V_12. The distrance between P1 and P2 is 1*V_12.
2. S emits P3 one second later after it leaves the location of
where
P2 was emitted. The average velocity of the source is V_23. The
distance between P2 and P3 is 1*V23.
3. S emits P4 one second later after it leaves the location of
where
P3 was emitted.. The average velicty of the source is V_34. The
distance between P3 and P4 is 1*V34.
1*V34>1*V23>1*V12
Why? Because the average speed of the source is kept on increasing
after each emission.

Oh dear!
...and I thought you were an aetherist....

Seto is an idiot. "average speed" is fucking nonsense.

Hey idiot....the source is accelerating from the emission point of P1
to the emission point of P2. The distance between these emission
points is the average velocity of the source times 1 second.
Hey runt of the aetherialists,
A car climbs a hill for one mile, taking 2 minutes. How fast must it
go downhill for the next mile to have an average speed of 60 mph
for the complete two mile journey?

Hey idiot.....this is a stupid and irrelevant analogy.
===================================
Hey runt of the aetherialists,
It's not an analogy, it's a question, answer and it was you that used
the idiotic term "average speed".
What's the answer, fuckwit?

Initial speed = 0
Final speed = 481.9 Km/h
1.609344 km = 1 mile, so 299.4 mph, call it 300 mph.
Distance travelled 1/4 mile.
Time taken 4.76 seconds

Fucking idiot where do you get the 1/4 mile and 4.76 seconds from?
Standard distance for drag race. Too dumb to watch the movie,
shit-for-brains? Don't have a fast enough computer or don't know how
to click?

Hey idiot how does 1/4 mile AND 4.76 second related to the source
accelerated from zero velocity to the final instantaneoure velocity of
300 mile/sec after one second? You are almost as stupid as Gisse and
whoever. So fuck off.

Ken Seto

http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.

Runt's calculation: Average speed (300+ 0)/2 = 150 mph?
Correct calculation: speed = 0.25 miles/4.76 seconds =
0.05252100840336134453781512605042 miles per second = 189 mph.
Conclusion: The runt of the aetherialists hasn't got a fuckin' clue,
a total moron.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

k***@erinet.com

2009-07-27 12:20:17 UTC

Permalink

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 21:36:43 -0700 (PDT),

A light source is accelerating at a constant rate. It
emits
periodic pulses of
light at the rate of, say, 1 per second.
S->a....................................P3........P2.........P1

Note: I have reversed the order of the pulses because the
original
one was
confusing.

What would a relativist have to say about the distances
between
the emitted
light pulses?

OK I think you are talking about the initial situation. In
aether
theory, P2
would be closer to P3 than to P1.

Oh dear!
...and I thought you were an aetherist....

Seto is an idiot. "average speed" is fucking nonsense.

Hey idiot...if the source at the initail point has a velocity v_i=0
and it accelerated to the final point and it has an instaneous
velocity of V_f. The averAGE SPEED to cover the distance is (V_f +V_i)/
2.
=========================================
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
And you call other's idiots!
Let's see...
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Initial speed = 0
Final speed = 481.9 Km/h
1.609344 km = 1 mile, so 299.4 mph, call it 300 mph.
Distance travelled 1/4 mile.
Time taken 4.76 seconds

Fucking idiot....you said:
Initial speed = 0
Final instaneous speed after 1 second = 481.9 Km/h
1.609344 km = 1 mile, so 299.4 mph, call it 300 mph.

How does this related to your assertion that:
Distance travelled 1/4 mile.
Time taken 4.76 seconds.

Is there no limit to your stuppidity? I am begining to think that you
are as stupid as the Gisse and whoever. <shrug>

Ken Seto

...Henry's scenario is as follows:
A source is in a state of accleration and it emits a light pulse every
second. You said that: if the inital velocity is zero, and the final
instanteous velocity is 300 mph.

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

k***@erinet.com

2009-07-27 14:15:54 UTC

Permalink

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 21:36:43 -0700 (PDT),

A light source is accelerating at a constant rate. It
emits
periodic pulses of
light at the rate of, say, 1 per second.
S->a....................................P3........P2.........P1

Note: I have reversed the order of the pulses because the
original
one was
confusing.

What would a relativist have to say about the distances
between
the emitted
light pulses?

OK I think you are talking about the initial situation. In
aether
theory, P2
would be closer to P3 than to P1.

Oh dear!
...and I thought you were an aetherist....

Seto is an idiot. "average speed" is fucking nonsense.

FUCKING IDIOT....Henry's situation is: the accelerating source emits a
light pulse every second. Your 4.76 seconds and 1/4 mile is not
related to the situation as described by Henry. You are as stupid as
Gisse and Whoever. So fuck off.

Ken Seto

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

k***@erinet.com

2009-07-27 21:52:35 UTC

Permalink

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 21:36:43 -0700 (PDT),

A light source is accelerating at a constant rate. It
emits
periodic pulses of
light at the rate of, say, 1 per second.
S->a....................................P3........P2.........P1

Note: I have reversed the order of the pulses because the
original
one was
confusing.

What would a relativist have to say about the distances
between
the emitted
light pulses?

A knowledgible SRian or aetherist like myself would say
that
the
distance between the pulse would increase because the
distance
between
successive emission points has been increased due to
acceleration.

OK I think you are talking about the initial situation. In
aether
theory, P2
would be closer to P3 than to P1.

No.....The distance between P1 and P2 is L_12 and the
distance
between
P2 and P3 is L_23.
L_23 is larger than L_12.
Why? Because the average velocity from P2 to P3 is greater
than
the
average velocity from P1 to P2.

I'll clarify the question?
S is constantly accelerating to the right and emitting a pulse
every
second,
its clock time.
You might claim that the interval between pulse emissions
depends
on
S's
speed
through the aether. Normally one would think that, in aether
theory,
P32
is <
P12 since all pulses move at c wrt the aether and S is closer
to
P2
when
P3 is
emitted than it was wrt P1 when P2 was emitted. But with time
contractions,
that effect could be decreased, even reversed.
I'm not going to work it out because it could become quite
complicated
and I
don't subscribe to aether theory anyway....but the fact
remains
that
in
aether
theory, those distances once established, are absolute and
don't
change
with
time.
Do you agree

Oh dear!
...and I thought you were an aetherist....

Seto is an idiot. "average speed" is fucking nonsense.

Hey idiot....the source is accelerating from the emission point of
P1
to the emission point of P2. The distance between these emission
points is the average velocity of the source times 1 second.
Hey runt of the aetherialists,
A car climbs a hill for one mile, taking 2 minutes. How fast must it
go downhill for the next mile to have an average speed of 60 mph
for the complete two mile journey?

- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 21:36:43 -0700 (PDT),

A light source is accelerating at a constant rate. It
emits
periodic pulses of
light at the rate of, say, 1 per second.
S->a....................................P3........P2.........P1

Note: I have reversed the order of the pulses because the
original
one was
confusing.

What would a relativist have to say about the distances
between
the emitted
light pulses?

A knowledgible SRian or aetherist like myself would say
that
the
distance between the pulse would increase because the
distance
between
successive emission points has been increased due to
acceleration.

OK I think you are talking about the initial situation. In
aether
theory, P2
would be closer to P3 than to P1.

No.....The distance between P1 and P2 is L_12 and the
distance
between
P2 and P3 is L_23.
L_23 is larger than L_12.
Why? Because the average velocity from P2 to P3 is greater
than
the
average velocity from P1 to P2.

I'll clarify the question?
S is constantly accelerating to the right and emitting a pulse
every
second,
its clock time.
You might claim that the interval between pulse emissions
depends
on
S's
speed
through the aether. Normally one would think that, in aether
theory,
P32
is <
P12 since all pulses move at c wrt the aether and S is closer
to
P2
when
P3 is
emitted than it was wrt P1 when P2 was emitted. But with time
contractions,
that effect could be decreased, even reversed.
I'm not going to work it out because it could become quite
complicated
and I
don't subscribe to aether theory anyway....but the fact
remains
that
in
aether
theory, those distances once established, are absolute and
don't
change
with
time.
Do you agree

Oh dear!
...and I thought you were an aetherist....

Seto is an idiot. "average speed" is fucking nonsense.

Hey idiot....the source is accelerating from the emission point of
P1
to the emission point of P2. The distance between these emission
points is the average velocity of the source times 1 second.
Hey runt of the aetherialists,
A car climbs a hill for one mile, taking 2 minutes. How fast must it
go downhill for the next mile to have an average speed of 60 mph
for the complete two mile journey?

Initial speed = 0
Final instaneous speed after 1 second = 481.9 Km/h
1.609344 km = 1 mile, so 299.4 mph, call it 300 mph.
Distance travelled 1/4 mile.
------------------------------------------------------------------
That's the distance for a drag race, worthless cretin. <shrug>
Time taken 4.76 seconds.
====================================
That's the time it takes a top fuel dragster to travel 440 yards,
accelerating all the way, fucking imbecile. <shrug>
0 to 300 mph in under 5 seconds, stupid cunt. <shrug>

Fucking idiot.....that got nothing to do with a constant accelerating
source emits a light pulse every second. You are so fucking stupid I
suggest that you go off to a coner and commit suicide. Also you are
even more stupid than Gisse and Whoever.

Ken Seto

====================================
Is there no limit to your stuppidity? I am begining to think
========================================
Fuckin' hell, a miracle!
LOOK EVERYBODY, SETO IS BEGINNING TO THINK!
Keep it up, Seto, you may get there someday.
that you
are as stupid as the Gisse and whoever. <shrug>
Ken Seto
Never been to a drag race, Seto?
Oh right, they don't exist on your http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q

Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.
http://youtu.be/lm5RkeuKC1Q
Click on the link, you moron.

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Henry Wilson, DSc

2009-07-30 01:28:47 UTC

Permalink

At last you are getting the picture. ....very unusual for a
relativist...
But your faith is still causing you to make silly statements like the
last
one.
Unification HAS NOT been ruled out. It is fully supported.

But emission theories have been ruled out by Sagnac despite your
continual
lies to the contrary.

Idiot...the BaTh explanation of sagnac is simple and correct.

And there you go again with the lies. Though it is simple .. it is not
correct. I've pointed out its flaws before.

It is perfectly straightforward. It merely uses the nonrotating frame

"A rotating frame is not a 'rotating frame'...

I'm glad you remember these great words of wisdom....

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

........the broad picture specialist.