What do you mean by speed?

On Jul 28, 2011 1:12 AM, "johnlawrencereedjr" <thejohnlr...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Light has no acceleration or decelleration. It is always at speed. If
> you view light as traveling linearly in a straight line, much as we
> travel to traverse distance, this would be like you getting into your
> car and going from zero to 60 in no time. You would either travel at
> 60 or 0 with no speeds in between. In other words light is at speed
> and is in fact defined at speed.
>
> So light must already be at speed when it is released. It would appear
> then that light obtains its speed in place. Spinning objects obtain
> speeds in place. A merry go round attains a speed in place. If one of
> the carousel horses suddenly flew off the merry go round it would fly
> off initially at the speed of its rotation. If it were in free and
> empty space it would continue at that speed until or unless it
> encountered something that changed it.
>
> WE could measure the carousel horse's speed because we could see it as
> it passes by. If a horse flew off at every revolution of the merry go
> round we could also measure the speed by the number of horses
> traveling by per unit time. We could say 1 horse per second or two
> horses per second etc. Then if a horse was 8 feet long from nose to
> tail we could say it's speed is 8 feet per second. 1 horse per second
> would be its frequency. 8 feet would be the partial length of one
> complete cycle it traveled. It would also be the length between cycles
> or what we call wavelength.
>
> The idea that light travels at a single speed has caused much physical
> error. We have the belief that images of objects must travel to our
> eyes to be seen. Like sound must travel to our ears to be heard. There
> is a great distinction between the two. Sound requires a medium. Light
> travels best in a vacuum. Where sound is a vibration on a medium,
> light displaces itself to travel. Once the source of the sound ceases
> the sound will still travel through the medium independent of its
> source. I say that light will cease to travel immediately as soon as
> its source ceases to emit.
>
> We can put this to a test. For example we could conduct an experiment
> using a large array of mirrors or perhaps ordered reflection points
> inside a molecule or atom where I say the pulse of light will travel
> only the distance allowed by its timed duration. Any observer will
> fail to detect the light pulse at any greater distance. This may be
> true for mechanical detectors of EMR as well, but that is a different
> case.
>
> The measure of the speed of light in free space is independent of the
> motion of its source and of the motion of the observer. A consequence
> of this is the postulate that all observers will measure lightspeed
> the same, regardless of their motion or of the motion of the source.
>
> While we can say that all observers will measure lightspeed the same,
> we cannot say that they will each measure the same frequency and
> wavelength, all conditions as above. In fact the motion of the source
> and detector is accounted for by the variance in the respective
> observers measure of frequency and wavelength.
>
> Einstein used this or never considered it when he declared that
> traveling to an object is identical to an object traveling to you.
> Therefore it can be defined either way. This is the basis for his
> uniform gravitational field which heralded many expansion of matter
> theoiies thereafter. In other words the reason all objects fall at the
> same rate is because the planet expands to meet the object at a
> specific rate. Combine this with the idea that light speed is measured
> the same by all observers and you have a core of the present day
> physics intellectual mire.
>
> Consider the foolishness these notions have spawned. We believe that
> if the Sun stopped emitting EMR we would still see the Sun for the
> time it took the EMR to get here. I say that we are only measuring the
> speed of emission. Because we detect 4 horses per second does not mean
> we are viewing the horses being emitted at the Sun 8 minutes after
> they were emitted. If the Sun stopped emitting the horses no more
> would travel by us. The horses are being displaced by the horses. EMR
> is being displaced by EMR. We measure the frequency of emission at the
> source or at the destination. Further, the act of local measure
> destroys or reflects the arriving light. Stop the displacement and you
> stop the motion.
>
> On the other hand you can aim a burst of energy at the moon and time
> its distance of travel to the moon and back and so base your theory on
> groundless comparisions. When we send such a signal it must have a
> duration to allow it to reach the moon and perhaps the journey back to
> the source.
>
> Lightspeed is a misnomer anyway. Light is a sensory quantity.
> Electromagnetic radiation or EMR is the physical quantity. Just
> because the speeds are the same does not mean that they are the same
> and interchangeable in meaning. The functionality of the Lorentz
> transformation equation results from the ceiling on lightspeed and not
> from the constancy of lightspeed measure.
>
> A postulate is an assumed truth.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Epistemology" group.
> To post to this group, send email to epistemology@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Epistemology" group.
To post to this group, send email to epistemology@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.

Reply via email to