 |
 |
 |
| BASIC DOUBTS ON RELATIVITY |
|
PROOF ; LIGHT SPEED IS VARIABLE (To observer) !! ¡ù¡ù¡ù¡ù¡ù Two stars are shining on the right and on the left. Two mirrors are set at a 45 degree angle (like letter V), and are reflecting star light down. Speed of two reflected lights is the same always. Therefore, when two mirrors move together to the right (or the left), wave length of two reflected lights is changed. In other words, "density of waves" (number of waves per unit length of light path) of reflected light is changeable by mirror's motion. But how about incident light ? Density of waves is not changeable by mirror's motion !! In short, density of waves of reflected light and incident light is different generally. The theory of constancy of light speed will be impossible to explain this situation. ¡ÔNote¡Õ light speed = frequency x wave length. * In a book, i found a word "wave number" (number of waves per unit length [1m or 1cm] ; in a beam). Meaning is the same as above "density of waves". It's inverse number of wave length. After this, it is written as "wave number". ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Wave number of visible light is between about 12,500/cm and 25,000/cm. ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Formerly, wave number (/cm) seems to be called "kayser" (not widely ?). Such as 25,000K. * To the above view, there was an opposition (in a forum in English ; to my post). "Wave length of incident light also changes". What ? Toward the star ? Toward the galaxy ? No, light wave is a transverse wave. So, compression wave (retrogrades [goes upstream] toward light source. against stream of light) cannot be formed. Moreover, wave number is unchangeable (by the mirror). Furthermore, on adjacent light (passes by the mirror), mirror's motion has no effect (on every part of light path). On incident light, it will be the same. Added on 11 Nov 06 (from mark *). * The speed of reflected light will be changed by mirror (from various and variable speed to constant speed c ; temporarily ; relative to the mirror). How far does this changed speed continue ? At least, it will continue to the moon. And to this extent, emission theory (in other words, ballistic theory ; proposed by Ritz, Walter 1878-1909) will be valid (true) ; Noted later again (¢Í Ritz). ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Mirror is a light source. * If this PROOF is true, the aether (the rest aether, the aether frame, the absolute rest frame) will exist (reason ; a situation as follows is possible ; relative to mirrors, speed of two incident lights is the same). Absolute space again. * ¡ÚIt's obvious¡Û When frequency of a light source (it's in an inertial frame) is constant, observed frequency at optional two points on a light path (distance between two points is fixed) is the same always. The reason is that if it is not the same, waves that exist between two points (wave number x distance) increases or decreases endlessly. It's impossible. In some books, this logic (a truism) is touched on. Similarly, observed frequency at two points before and after reflection (distances from the mirror are fixed) is the same also. Therefore, dense light must be slow, sparse light must be fast (just like in refraction). * ¡ÚLight speed relative to the aether¡Û Above two mirrors are moving together to the right or the left (in outer space). By this motion, it's possible to equalize the frequency of two reflected lights. In this situation, frequency of two incident lights is equalized also. Therefore, by the wave length of two incident lights, value of light speed relative to the aether will be found. Added on 10 Aug 10 (from mark *). ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ The sum of the speed of two lights will be below 2c (explained later. ¢Í phenomenon due to the aether frame). * Above phenomenon is not symmetrical (reversible) in the time flow. Added on 16 Oct 10 (from mark *)¡ÔP.S.¡Õ However, it will be common in wave phenomena. ¡ÚImportant¡Û Common view seems to say that propagation of light in air and in vacuum is the same fundamentally (speed is somewhat different). It is "TERRIBLE" and "INDESCRIBABLE" misunderstanding (in air, air is a "frame" [reference frame] of propagation of light waves !! the same as sound waves !! so, the result of M-M experiment is only natural !! explained later. ¢Í extinction ¢Í medium is reference frame !!). And it is related to not a few passages of this site. But to note every time is annoying. Therefore, in every passage of this site, please suppose that light waves are propagated in vacuum (please read so ; including on the earth ; excluded when there is special mention). In short, in vacuum of outer space (including on the moon's surface), almost all the passages will stand up (without any notes). In addition, uniqueness of propagation of light waves will be exposed only in vacuum. ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ In fact, there are phrases ; "in outer space", "on the moon's surface" (not a few) in this site. PROOF ; LIGHT SPEED IS VARIABLE (To observer) !! ¡ù¡ù¡ù¡ù Laser light is incident on a mirror at a 90 degree angle. Mirror and light source are at a standstill in an inertial frame. So, reflected light retraces (turns back) the path of incident light. The speed of these two lights relative to the mirror is the same. Light source's frequency is constant. Above these are premises (given conditions). An observer moves (at a constant speed) along this light path toward light source. He has an instrument. It's hollow tube. Incident light and reflected light are passing through this empty tube. The number of waves (of this two lights) that exist inside of this moving tube (wave number x tube's length) is the same always (reason ; the number of waves [of this two lights] that exist in full length of light path [wave number x from mirror to light source] is the same. the reason is that light speed [relative to the mirror] is the same). On the other hand, because of Doppler effect, frequency of two lights is different to observer. Therefore, speed of two lights will be different also (reason ; in the formula "light speed = frequency x wave length", wave length [inverse number of wave number] of two lights is the same). * Above result will be the same, when another laser light source (frequency is the same) is set as a substitute for mirror. * ¡ÚInvariant¡Û Waves each will be a cluster of photons. Like matters on a belt conveyer ! The number of waves (in the tube) will be invariable (to everyone). ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ In a book, i found a word "invariant" and a passage "The number of waves is an invariant".¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Relativity seems to say that length is not invariant (but this proof is independent of it). This PROOF is added on Mar 06. AETHER FRAME OR ABSOLUTE REST FRAME ¡ù¡ù¡ù¡ù How is spherical wave of star-light propagated ? It will be independent of the motion of the light source (differently from matter). So, the aether frame exists !! 1) Light of a planet (spherical wave from point source) expands as sphere (it's true and perfect sphere, because light speed is constant in space). If it expands like matter, the sphere's geometrical center will leave (separate from) the orbit (how visible is it from afar ?). 2) Barnard's star is the fastest fixed star (it's moving on the celestial sphere). Ahead of the Barnard's star, there is a star and its planet. On this planet, there is an intellectual creature. They say, "Speed of light of approaching Barnard's star is the same as that of adjacent galaxy (reason ; the value of stellar aberration is the same)". From this, we (supposition ; we see just from the side) must say that light sphere's expansion is independent of motion of the light source (like water waves). 3) Aberration is caused only by motion of the earth. Motion of heavenly bodies has no effect. For example, binary star, rotating galaxy, and so on (only position on the celestial sphere is everything). Noted later again (¢Í relativity of motion is false). 4) Phenomenon ; light-time correction (noted later. ¢Í light-time correction). It's direct evidence. Thus, the aether frame exists. We find that aether again. But it's very rare (explained later. ¢Í mark ¢¡) !! No, dense enough (so, above phenomena are shown). 6 ADDITIONAL below are on light speed also. If you are new visitor, skip over please. ADDITIONAL (two light paths and light speed) ¡ù¡ù Two light rays are coming from a star. These are parallel (and adjacent). One is coming to observer A (moving at high speed ; along the light path), the other is coming to observer B (moving at low speed ; along the light path). Wave length of two lights is the same. But light speed will be different (therefore, frequency is different). ¡ÔNote¡Õ light speed = frequency x wave length. Added on 19 Dec 07 * There is a version (more certain). In this version, the effect of time dilation (i don't know it's true or not) is offset (canceled). ¡ÔAnother version¡Õ Between observer A and B, there is an observer C. C receives data of frequency (of this star light) from A and B. A and B are approaching (along the light path) C at the same (and at a constant) speed. To C (to view point of C), value of time dilation of A and B is the same. Added on 9 Jan 08 (from mark *) ADDITIONAL (prism and light speed) ¡ù¡ù From just above, a fine laser light is coming (frequency is constant). A triangular prism (set like pyramid) crosses (to the right ; at a constant speed) this vertical beam. Number of waves that enter both (right and left) faces of the prism will be different (reason ; it's possible to regard motion of pin-point of laser light [incident on the face of prism] as motion of an observer along the light path). ¡ÔNote¡Õ light speed = frequency x wave length. Added on 19 Nov 07 * It's a digression. Above mention will not stand up about star light (plane waves ; comes from just above). The reason is that the number of waves that reach optional two points on the both faces of the prism (per unit time) is the same always. It's unrelated to the prism's uniform linear motion (both horizontal and vertical. so, diagonal also). Look at the points. Not faces but points. Added on 20 Feb 09 (from mark *) ADDITIONAL (stellar aberration and light speed) ¡ù¡ù There are two stars. One star is at the upper left just 45 degrees. The other star is at the upper right just 45 degrees. On the ground, there are two telescopes, and these are pointed at two stars. The earth (ground) is moving to the right. Therefore, because of aberration, one telescope is erected somewhat. The other telescope is laid somewhat. Telescope's length is the same. So, when inlets (telescopes are supposed to be hollow tubes [without lens]. light passes as rain-drops) are set at the same height from the ground, height of outlets is not the same. Lights (wave) that enter inlets at the same time, go out of the outlets at the same time or not ? And lights reach ground at the same time or not ? It seems that in two telescopes, light speed is different. * ¡ÚSimpler illustration (seen from the aether frame)¡Û Inlets are line A, outlets are line B and C, ground is line D. Four lines are horizontal. To these, two star lights come from 45 degrees above (it's premise, given condition). Two lights that pass A at the same time will reach D at the same time. ADDITIONAL (Doppler effect and light speed ; principle of radar trap) ¡ù¡ù An observer is emitting a laser light (frequency is constant) to approaching mirror, and observes reflected light. And supposition is as follows ; speed of emitted light and reflected light is the same (to this observer). So, frequency of two lights is different and wave length is different also (reason ; blue shift is visible). But, what combination is possible about mirror's inertial frame (about incident light and reflected light) ? Only this combination (frequency is the same [as already noted, it's unquestionable !]. wave length is different and light speed is different also) will be possible. * If the emission theory is true, above supposition does not stand up. * Too late !! But i find that this ADDITIONAL will be principle of radar trap (or, speed trap ; a sort of Doppler radar unit ; used to speed limit enforcement) or radar speed gun (uses micro wave or laser light). Added on 4 Jul 07 (from mark *). * In a web site, the formula of radar trap is shown. There are that terms (c+v), (c-v). Added on 21 Jul 07 (from mark *). * A car is moving (at a constant speed) toward radar trap (working). On the path of both waves, imagine a fixed point F (close to the car). The number of both waves that pass this point (per unit time) is the same. So, if light speed is the same, wave number (wave length) is the same also. Therefore if light speed is the same (at inertial frame of radar trap), Doppler effect doesn't occur (will not be observable). Added on 29 Jul 07 (from mark *). ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ In air, it will be as follows. At inertial frame of radar trap (at a standstill in air ; and windless) ; Light speed is the same. Frequency is different and wave length is different also. At inertial frame of moving car ; Frequency is the same. Wave length is different and light speed is different also. ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ In vacuum (outer space), it will be as follows. At inertial frame of radar trap ; Light speed is different. At inertial frame of moving reflector ; Light speed is different also. This ADDITIONAL is partially rewritten on 14 Apr 06. ADDITIONAL (standing wave) ¡ù¡ù Standing wave (in other words, stationary wave) of light is formed by mirror (when incident light is coherent). Now, light is incident on a mirror at a 90 degree angle. So, if light speed is the same, distant observer will also observe it. Laser light is written that it keeps its coherency (ability of interference) within 2 or 3 km. How about direct star light ? It's formed intermittently ? ADDITIONAL (moving tube and light speed) ¡ù¡ù There is a tube. In the middle of it, a plate glass is fitted (like a lens). On the right, a star shines, and star light is passing through this tube (from the right to the left). When this tube moves (at different constant speed) to the right (or the left), in the formula "light speed = frequency x wave length", frequency and wave length will change in the left part of this tube. Frequency and light speed will change in the right part of it (at tube's inertial frame). Added on 12 Oct 06 (from mark *). ¡ÔExplanation¡Õ The aether is very rare. So, in the left part of the tube, the emission theory is valid (glass is a light source). Light speed is constant c (at tube's inertial frame). In the right part of it, speed of light (that comes from far away [far more than planets]) is constant in the aether. Tube moves at variable speed relative to the aether. Therefore, light speed is variable also. EVERYTHING IS VISIBLE AT ITS TRUE POSITION !! ¡ù¡ù¡ù¡ù¡ù The earth is moving in space. Therefore, if previously mentioned view (light sphere's expansion is independent of motion of the light source) is true, everything on the earth will not be visible at its true position. Emitted position (where the light was emitted) remains (is fixed) in space, and light sources are moving in space. Therefore, some gap (a sort of parallax) will occur to observer (and on the optical surveying instruments, evident effect will occur also). It's logical inference. But this gap seems not to be observable. ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ This problem is mentioned in some books (in Japanese). There is a hypothesis. Its sayings are as follows. This gap exists actually (on the earth). But we don't see it. The reason is that this gap is offset (canceled) fully by that aberration (aberration will also exist about everything on the earth logically). Yes fully, because this gap and aberration both are composed of only earth's speed and light speed. And we see everything at the position that Einstein says (light sphere's expansion is dependent on motion of the light source. the reason is that there is no absolute or privileged frame in space). This gap and aberration both are hidden in everywhere around us (but how tricky !!). * In an encyclopedia, i found a word planetary aberration. It is composed of two phenomena ; light-time correction (it's above "gap") and annual aberration. An illustration is shown. In it, the earth is passing an outer planet (in this situation, offset is partial). What !? It's unthinkable that such a phenomenon is peculiar only in the heaven. These two (namely planetary aberration) will exist and be hidden in everywhere around us. Thus, this hypothesis insists.¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Light-time correction is a phenomenon based on the absolute rest frame. So, common explanation (without the absolute rest frame) is complicated. * This hypothesis occurred from a thought experiment as follows. In outer space, there is a space ship. Its speed and moving direction are the same as those of the solar system. This space ship has several wings on its sides, and at the end of each wing, a light source is set (the length of wings is ten meters or a hundred million km). To an observer (he is in this space ship), both will be visible at the same position (just at the side ; at a 90 degree angle). * The same mechanism (full offset ; caused by solar system's linear motion) will exist about every heavenly body of the solar system. * Sorry, the above must be modified as follows. About earthly sights (and also, about nearby sights [anywhere of the universe]), Einstein (light sphere's expansion is dependent on motion of the light source. it's the same as matter) will be true. No, only Ritz will be true. Therefore, about the light sphere's expansion, there will be difference (in a law) between within earth-moon scale and over planet-planet scale (on the surface of water, waves that move at different speed coexist. it will be the same in space. thus, the aether is rare) ¢¡. If it's true, the result of Michelson-Morley experiment is quite natural (in addition, mirrors and half mirror will work as light source. these each will be light source that follows Ritz's emission theory). Added on 13 Sep 05 (from mark *).¡ÔP.S.¡Õ In short, by earthly light sources, the absolute rest frame cannot be found. Only by heavenly light sources, it can be found.¡ÔP.S.¡Õ If Michelson-Morley experiment is done in over planet-planet scale, result will exceed the expectation (result will reflect the motion of the solar system also). * Therefore, apparent position of the sun and the moon will be settled by different mechanism. And the outcome is the same. DOPPLER EFFECT ; RECONSIDERATION ¡ù¡ù¡ù In a space ship, an observer is observing a star. When this space ship moves (gas is jetted out ; at different constant speed ; along the light path), frequency of star light changes (change corresponds to gas jet). The following are reexaminations of Doppler effect. * In the above, change of wave number (it will be inevitable outcome of the theory of constancy of light speed) of the light path (from observer to the star) is unimaginable (In the first and the second PROOF, there are mentions). * Doppler effect will be caused immediately by relative motion between observer and light wave. Not light source but light wave (not an action at a distance. never !!). * When Doppler effect is caused by the motion (relative to the aether) of light source (it's far away [at least as far away as the planets]), wave number (of incident light) will be changed. On the other hand, when Doppler effect is caused by the motion of observer, wave number (of incident light) will not be changed (like moving train and railroad ties). Added on 26 Jan 06 (from mark *). * When distance between observer and light source is within earth-moon scale, Doppler effect will be caused by relative motion between both (strictly, between observer and light wave). And wave number (of incident light) will not be changed. Added on Dec 06 (from mark *). * Common view says that Doppler effect of sound and light is different. But basically, both will be the same. The reason is that sound and light are propagated in the medium (to light, the aether is one of media. these media are "frames" [reference frames] of propagation !!) at constant speed (explained later. ¢Í extinction ¢Í medium is reference frame !!). So, formula of light must be the same as formula of sound. Only in vacuum, and only in an instant (after emission from light source ; may be for a few second), Doppler effect of light will be unique (formula differs). Added on 9 Jun 09 (from mark *) * In a star light, there are two lines spectrum (peculiar to atom or molecule). The distance between the both will show the motion of this star (along the light path direction) relative to the aether. Therefore, by the frequency of a line spectrum, motion of the earth relative to aether will be shown also. Added on 12 Feb 10 (from mark *) * Because of the motion of a star (along the light path direction), wave length of star light is changed (shifted). But if an observer moves in the same motion as the star, what are observable ? Frequency becomes the same as the star. But wave length (distance of two lines spectrum also) is unchanged (by this observer's motion). This will show the motion of the both relative to the aether. Added on 13 Jun 10 (from mark *)¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Arago experiment (1810) is on the light speed (whether light speed [of a star] is changed by orbital motion of the earth or not). After discovery of Doppler effect (1842), why the experiment based on this effect isn't done ? * ¡ÚDifference of colors¡Û Common view says, colors of visible light are caused by the difference of wave length. Really ? Frequency is also different. ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Into water and into air, two light rays (emitted from the same source) are incident. So, in the two media, frequency is the same and wave length isn't the same. How about color development of color films that were exposed in two media ? ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ If color is caused by difference of wavelength, observer's motion doesn't vary color. AETHER FRAME OR ABSOLUTE REST FRAME (Part 2) ¡ù¡ù About relativity of motion, there is a passage (in a book in Japanese) as follows. "An observer on the moving earth is able to say that he is at a standstill. It also gives a clear explanation for Doppler effect or aberration of star light (without inconsistency)". What !? Then, how about binary star ? Each star's orbital motion has no effect on the value of aberration. Motion (star's and earth's) is not relative. About Doppler effect, it's the same (as mentioned above). * ¡ÚRelativity of motion is false¡Û The value of aberration of a fixed star observed on each planet of the solar system differs. Added on 30 Oct 07 (from mark *). * ¡Údo.¡Û To explain annual aberration (a 365 day cycle) by relative motion will be impossible. "Einstein-Ptolemaic system" !! Added on 19 Feb 08 (from mark *). * ¡ÚAether is real¡Û Star light is propagated in the aether. Emitted position (where the light was emitted) is fixed in the frame (coordinate) of the aether (in every medium, it's the same. like water waves). Emitted position (where the light was emitted) is also fixed on the celestial sphere. * ¡ÚAether is measurable¡Û A space ship (mother ship) is at a standstill in outer space. Close by the mother ship, plenty number of probes are standing by (at a standstill also). To each probe, a star is assigned (scatteringly on the celestial sphere). On each probe, telescope that is pointed at the assigned star is loaded. Now all the probes begin uniformly accelerated motion toward the assigned stars at the same time. States of acceleration are the same. Because of aberration, star will disappear from the field of view of the telescope at certain point in time. This data (time and disappeared direction) are sent to the mother ship. Then, the motion (direction and speed ; vector) of the space ship relative to the aether (and also relative to the celestial sphere) will be disclosed. Added on 4 Feb 08 (from mark *). ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Later on, a few simpler versions are shown (¢Í aether is measurable). OTHERS (Related to SR) ¡ù¡ù¡ù¡ù¡ù In a book, i saw a name E.Mascart and his findings (any effect caused by the motion of the earth isn't detected on 7 optical phenomena [reflection by mirror and so on]). For these findings, he was awarded the prize of Paris academy of sciences in 1873. There will be many other phenomena and experiments that are connected with Einstein's postulate (constancy of light speed to observer). However, many books on relativity are talking about M-M experiment only. Bad dream (to a poor amateur).¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Word "wave number" seems not to be in books on SRT. Can SRT explain Doppler effect by this word ?? There may be many other irrational matters. * ¡ÚPhenomenon due to the aether frame¡Û Allow me to show a hasty inference. The speed (relative to aether) of expansion of light sphere (its scale is over planet-planet) will probably be slower than c (if two kinds of light sphere's expansion [noted before] is true). Roemer's value is 214,000 km/sec. It's written in a book, reexamination has not been done. Added on 25 Feb 07 (from mark *). * ¡Údo.¡Û By Roemer's method of measurement, value will fluctuate somewhat. Reasons are uniform linear motion of the solar system (relative to aether) and light-time correction (true distance to Jupiter will be different from the value that is found by triangular surveying). Added on 1 Sep 08 (from mark *). * ¡Údo.¡Û A tube is rotating like propeller. In the middle of the tube, a light source is set. When the rotational speed increases, light will be impossible to leave the tube. This will be the phenomenon "Newton's bucket" also (light version). Added on 24 Sep 07 (from mark *). * ¡Údo.¡Û In outer space, a mirror is reflecting a ray of star light. The angle of incident light and reflected light will not be the same generally. The reason is that speed of incident light is variable. Added on 21 Jul 10 (from mark *) ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ On the angle of refraction, it will be the same.¡ÔP.S.¡Õ It will be an effect of mirror's motion relative to the aether. * ¡Údo.¡Û Dark matter is the aether ? Not dark but transparent. * ¡ÚExtinction¡Û i found a word "extinction" in a book Special Relativity by French, A.P. 1968. It's written as follows (original text ; in 5-2). "Thus, for example, with visible light, a thickness of about 10-5cm of glass or 0.1mm of air at atmospheric pressure is almost enough to erase any possible memory, as it were, of the motion of the original source" (10-5cm is 0.0001mm ; quoted from "Google book"). What ?? Is the light speed equalized in the medium ? If so (from frequency or from wave length, "memory" is not erased), what about Fizeau experiment ("Fizeau effect" or "light drag effect" [effect on speed] by a moving medium isn't partial !? Imagine an observer and a medium that move together) ?? Added on 24 Jan 09 (from mark *) ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ In a forum (in English), i was shown a web-site below (there is a heading "Optical Extinction"). Light speed seems to be equalized (in a medium). i am grateful to cincirob (anti-relativity.com). http://www.edu-observatory.org/physics-faq/Relativity/SR/experiments.html * ¡Údo.¡Û Above passage says that 0.1mm of air is enough to "extinction". It will be "the trick (or gimmick)" of Michelson-Morley experiment.¡ÔNote¡Õ In encyclopedias of physics, there is this word "extinction". But it's written on other matter. Added on 24 Jan 09 (from mark *) * ¡ÚMedium is reference frame !!¡Û In a book Theory of Relativity by Pauli, W 1958, it's written as follows (English version ; in 1-6). "Rather should one say that for an observer moving with the medium, light is propagated as usual with velocity c/n in all directions". Extinction ensures it. Also it seems to be the "very and true explanation" for M-M experiment !! ¡ÔNote¡Õ About vacuum, the emission theory. Added on 2 Feb 09 (from mark *) ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ There is Einstein's passage the same as above Pauli's. Therefore, probably, he said that he didn't know M-M experiment (And he mutters, "popular explanation for M-M experiment is nonsense and I have no obligation to point out it"). * ¡Údo.¡Û In a forum, i wrote about M-M experiment as follows. "If air moves at the speed of 30km/sec relative to the apparatus, expected result will be found. But air was at a stand-still. Null result is only natural". In air, propagation of light wave is natural (the same as that of sound wave). But we still don't understand it. * ¡Údo.¡Û Wind will be influential in radar trap (or, speed trap ; a sort of Doppler radar unit ; uses micro wave or laser light) or radar speed gun. * ¡Údo.¡Û The aether will be one of media also. For "extinction", thickness of several hundred thousand km may be. Added on 3 Feb 09 (from mark *) ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ If there is any heterogeneity or flow (partial) of the aether, are these detectable or not ? * ¡ÚMere appearance¡Û On the moon's surface, there is a passenger car (railway carriage). The roof is flat plate glass. From just above, light waves (plane waves) of a star are entering this roof horizontally. These plane waves reach floor horizontally too (it must be so geometrically). According to Einstein's "right triangle", when the passenger car moves, number of waves that exist in the car will increase. And it will be the same also to an observer who is in the car (it's irrational. so, speed of light ray in the moving car must be appearance). Added on 1 Feb 10 (from mark *) ¡ÔP.S. ; 3 Feb 10¡Õ Apparent speed of light ray is variable (to an observer who stands on the moon's surface). But how about the speed of wave front ? It is invariable (reason ; number of waves [in the passenger car] is an invariant). * ¡Údo.¡Û From the roof of a passenger car, light ray is emitted down diagonally (to the right at a 45 degree angle). One passenger car is moving to the right, the other passenger car is moving to the left at the same speed. To an observer who stands on the ground, the length of two light rays is different. Added on 17 Apr 09 (from mark *) ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Einstein's theory does not stand up on diagonal light ray ? * ¡Údo.¡Û From the roof of a passenger car, several light rays are emitted down radially (at intervals of ten degrees). How does Einstein's theory explain this (passenger car is moving to the left or to the right) ? Added on 27 Apr 09 (from mark *) * ¡Údo.¡Û From the roof of a passenger car, a light ray is emitted down vertically. The car is moving to the right. When the car is filled with water, diagonal of light ray is gentler (to an observer who stands on the ground). And the diagonal (depends only on c/n and v) will be simple appearance. It will be the same about air or vacuum too. Added on 17 Apr 09 (from mark *). ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Galilean transformation seems to stand up about all. * ¡ÚAether is measurable¡Û If some angle (not 90 degrees) of light ray to the wave front (of a star) is detected in outer space, it will be an effect of observer's motion relative to the aether. Added on 6 Feb 09 (from mark *).¡ÔP.S.¡Õ When an observer is moving relative to a medium, this phenomenon will be common and natural. * ¡Údo.¡Û On the moon's surface, there is a passenger car. To the roof, waves of sun-light (plane waves) are coming horizontally. In the roof, there is a small hole. When the passenger car moves to the right (or the left), whether projection (spot-light on the floor) moves or not ? Added on 7 Sep 09 (from mark *) ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Moon's motion will have an effect (on the spot-light) also. The angle of light ray (in the passenger car) will not be 90 degrees. * ¡Údo.¡Û On the moon's surface, there is a pillar made of glass (section is square ; laid horizontally ; we see a long side). From the upper right and the upper left, two star lights are coming. Wave number of both waves is supposed to be the same. Now this pillar moves to the right or the left (at different speed). Frequency and light speed of the incident lights (before incidence ; seen from view point of the inertial frame of the pillar) will be changeable. And in the glass, frequency and wave number (refraction angle also) will be changeable. These changes will be the effect of the motion of the glass relative to the aether. Added on 12 Dec 09 (from mark *) ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ In the above, angle of wave front (in the glass) will be changed also. This will be the mechanism of aberration (occurs on the upper atmosphere). * ¡ÚReview of aberration¡Û On the moon's surface, there is a pillar made of glass (section is square ; laid horizontally ; we see a long side). Light waves of a star (plane waves) are entering the upper face horizontally. These plane waves reach bottom face horizontally also (it must be so geometrically). This pillar is moving from the right to the left because of the motion of the moon. Now, imagine light rays. In the glass, these light rays must be bent (from view point of the aether frame). Reason is as follows. From view point of inertial frame of glass, light rays are at a 90 degree angle to the wave front always (reason ; if it's not 90 degrees, speed of both in the medium differs. it's impossible). In short, "dragging" (effect on direction) by a moving medium occurs and it will not be partial. Added on 30 Jan 09 (from mark *) ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ No book seems to touch on this problem (except a few unorthodox books in Japanese ; touched by Kubota, T and Goto, M). For the time being, allow me to regard this problem as one of Fizeau effect ("dragging" by moving medium).¡ÔP.S.¡Õ There will be three kinds of motion of medium. Relative to light source, to other media, and to the aether. * ¡Údo.¡Û Stellar aberration will be caused by mechanism as follows. From outer space, a light ray of a star is entering atmosphere of the earth. The angle of incident light ray will be changed by the motion of the earth (it's "light drag effect"). So, the result of Airy experiment (aberration with a telescope filled with water ; 1871) is natural. Analogy with rain-drop is unsuitable. Added on 4 Feb 09 (from mark *) ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ This "dragging" will not be partial (reason ; the value of aberration depends on the light speed and the speed of the earth's motion). * ¡Údo.¡Û In outer space, the object lens of telescope will "drag" (as a moving medium) the ray (path) of star light. So, aberration will occur. In outer space, aberration will occur about hollow tube also (photons pass through like rain drops). Added on 18 Feb 09 (from mark *) ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ The value of the former will be larger (we find that Airy's telescope !), and the value of the latter will be nearly usual. * ¡ÚFizeau experiment (with flowing water ; 1851)¡Û There is a pillar made of glass (section is square ; laid horizontally ; we see a long side). A light ray (emitted from a light source that is set at the upper face of the glass) is propagated in the glass like letter V (at a 30 degree angle ; reflected by a mirror ; from the left to the right). One pillar is moving to the right, the other pillar is moving to the left at the same speed. To an observer (stands on the ground), how about the light speed (in the glass) ? Added on 28 Oct 09 (from mark *) ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Galilean transformation will stand up. ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ How about, when another light ray is retrograding (on the same path) ? ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ In the above pillar, two laser lights (come from above) are crossing like letter X. The appearance of interference fringes (interference pattern) will be the same to all (including the one who is moving relative to the pillar). * ¡Údo.¡Û It's a variation of the Fizeau experiment. A pillar made of glass is laid horizontally (we see a long side). Two laser lights are passing through this glass (from the left to the right). One light source is at a stand-still (distance between the glass is fixed). The other light source is approaching the glass at a constant speed. The frequency of two incident lights (after incidence ; in the glass) is the same (thus arranged). From the above, what can we say ? If the speed of two incident lights is the same, speed of lights in the glass will be the same also. Therefore, if the speed of two lights in the glass is not the same (however slight it be. recall extinction), the emission theory seems to be true. Added on 4 Dec 08 (from mark *) * ¡ÚLight clock¡Û A light clock is working in a moving train. Light path of light clock is illustrated vertically (in books and the like). But this light clock leans somewhat to the right (or to the left). So, to an observer who stands on the ground, zigzag of the light path (saw-tooth like) warps. Common view says that the diagonal (slant) of the light path shows delay of time (time dilation). Two kinds of dilations ? And if two clocks work, and if these lean differs ? Added on 25 Jun 07 (from mark *). * ¡ÚTime dilation¡Û There are two light sources (frequency is the same). To an observer, both are visible adjacently. One is at a standstill. The other is in a reciprocating motion (approaches and recedes ; relative to the observer). Number of waves that this observer receives per given time (supposition ; per 100 reciprocating motions) will be the same. In short, phenomenon time dilation is unthinkable. ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Another version (effects caused by acceleration and deceleration are excluded) is possible (pass a baton to a source that comes from opposite direction at the same speed [frequency is the same]. and it's repeated). Added on 7 Oct 10 (from mark *)¡ÔP.S.¡Õ There are many space ships. These are moving in the Brawnian motion like. Time dilation seems to be unimaginable.¡ÔP.S. ; A simpler version of "jumbo jet experiment" 1971¡Õ At a spot N near the north pole, there are some atomic clocks. Now, half of these are moved to a spot E near the equator. And after enough time, the other half are moved also to the spot E. It will be simpler than "the jumbo jet plane experiment" (but i have never heard that in accordance with latitude, time gains or loses. a common view [relative motion or gravity causes time dilation] will be a product of fancy). * ¡Údo.¡Û They are crying, "GPS ! GPS !" (and are silent about radar trap or speed gun) in Japan. But how about that satellite ; the moon ? Is time dilation detected ? GRAVITY & INERTIAL FORCE ¡ù¡ù¡ù¡ù Not a few mentions (the following) on gravity and inertial force seem not to be sure (differently from previous mentions). If there are errors or meaningless mentions, forgive, please. * ¡ÚSpeed of gravity¡Û In Encyclopaedia Britannica 1969, there is a passage as follows (in item "Gravitation" ; original text). "If the action of gravitation were not absolutely instantaneous"(omission)"All experiments and observations were, however, consistent with the law, from the short distances employed in laboratory experiments to the long ranges used in interplanetary calculations". It says, action will be instantaneous. * ¡Údo.¡Û If the speed of gravity is not infinite (the same as light speed), orbit of a planet seems to be influenced characteristically by the sun's gravity. The sun is moving in a uniform linear motion. Suppose that this straight line crosses the orbit (supposed to be true circle) at two points A and B (like Greek letter ¦Õ). If propagation of gravity is independent of the motion of the sun (follows the frame of the aether [as light]), strength of gravity at A and B will be different. Then, the orbit will warp. Added on 11 Jan 11 (from mark *)¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Imagine the surface of water. Wave source and points A, B (distance from the source is the same) are moving on it (along a straight line). At A and B, wave height is different (imagine a circular wave, only one wave).¡ÔP.S.¡Õ On orbit of comets, it will be more obvious. * ¡Údo.¡Û There is a space ship. It is at a standstill in aether. Therefore every aberration (including secular aberration) doesn't occur on the loaded telescope. The sun (distance from the space ship is 1.5 hundred million km) is passing at the speed of 400 km/sec (imagine letter T). Because of "light-time correction", apparent position of the sun is the position where the sun was 8 minutes odd before. Therefore if gravity comes at infinite speed, "emitted position" is different. But difference is slight. Nearly a 0.1 degree angle (apparent diameter of the sun is about a 0.5 degree angle). Can we distinguish it ?¡ÔP.S.¡Õ From the earth, this measurement will be possible logically. The reason is that the motion of the earth relative to the aether is measurable. Added on 7 Jan 11 (from mark *) ¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Suppose that speed of propagation of gravity is the same to light speed and propagation follows aether frame (like light-time correction). If so, it's conceivable that because of the motion of the solar system, direction of gravity (at the earth's surface) deviates from the center of gravity of the earth (and direction of deviation changes because of rotation of the earth). If speed of the solar system is 400km/sec, deviation is nearly a 0.2degree angle (at maximum). It may be detectable. * ¡ÚSeeliger's paradox¡Û If there is a certain minimum limit (like quantum) in gravity, above paradox (version of Olbers's paradox ; on gravity) will not stand up. * ¡ÚRelativity of accelerated motion¡Û Causes of accelerated motions are apparent usually. If an accelerated motion is relative, what about this cause (its position, its role) ? Added on 7 Mar 11 (from mark *).¡ÔP.S.¡Õ For example, elevator, building and motor.¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Equivalence principle seems to ignore momentum, the law of inertia, the law of causality (causal relationship) and so on. If so, matters that are brought must be meaningless.¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Relativity is too deified (even Galileo's principle of relativity also). Relativity must be reexamined from its origins. * ¡ÚEquivalence principle¡Û There is a hypothesis. "Inertial force will be caused by the motion (excludes uniform linear motion) of bodies relative to the aether frame". If it's true, equivalence principle is wrong. And every difficulty will be dispelled.¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Gravity and inertial force act independently (usually different in direction, in operating time, in strength). Both are different effects of different physical causes.¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Gravity is not isotropic. Inertial force is isotropic. Added on 1 Mar 11 (from mark *)¡ÔP.S.¡Õ On guide rails of elevator, graduations are marked. Momentum (potential energy also) of an elevator cabin in free fall is changing (graduations will be the proof of change of momentum). Change of momentum cannot be relative.¡ÔP.S.¡Õ In air, an elevator cabin is in "free fall". Eventually, falling speed reaches the terminal speed (at the same time, inertial force fades). In this "free fall", gravity and inertial force will not be equivalent.¡ÔP.S.¡Õ In Cavendish experiment, only gravity will occur. In rotating disk, only inertial force will occur.¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Can all of gravity be explained with inertial force ? Can all of inertial force be explained with gravity ?¡ÔP.S.¡Õ The truth of gravity and inertia is not known yet. However, both seem not to be equivalent.¡ÔP.S.¡Õ In an elevator cabin in free fall, g is increasing (in a deep hole [underground], decreasing). In non gravitational field, g is zero. * ¡Údo.¡Û By accelerated motion, no change of gravity will be (caused). If it's true, equivalence principle is wrong. Added on 14 Mar 11 (from mark *)¡ÔP.S.¡Õ In non-gravitational field, there is a space ship (mother ship). Now, two probes separate from the mother ship and begin accelerated motion to opposite direction (at 2g and 1g. by gas jet). No gravitational field will occur on the mother ship (and it will be the same on every local field). * ¡Údo.¡Û There is a small space ship (regard this as an elevator cabin). In this space ship, a crew man is standing and he is feeling 1g. Now he starts a jet engine (jetted out downward ; power is weak). If 1g is caused by gravity, the space ship doesn't move (reason ; power is weak ; at a standstill on the ground). But if 1g is caused by an accelerated motion, 1g will be increased. Equivalence principle will be wrong. Added on 9 Mar 11 (from mark *)¡¡ * ¡Údo.¡Û There is a small space ship (regard this as an elevator cabin) in free fall. A crew man doesn't feel gravity. But if this space ship is in non-gravitational field and moves in an accelerated motion (by 1g ; by gas jet), he feels "gravity" 1g. In spite of the same accelerated motion (momentum is changing) !! Equivalence principle will be wrong.¡ÔP.S.¡Õ On the ground, gravity acts onto the floor. In an accelerated space ship, acceleration acts from the floor. Added on 13 Mar 11 (from mark *).¡ÔP.S.¡Õ There is a space ship in an accelerated motion (upward ; non-uniform accelerated motion). A body is hung by an elastic string from the ceiling. Motion of the body will not be the same as the motion caused by the change of gravity (if two bodies are hung by each string [length is different], it will be more apparent). It's the same at a beginning of a uniform accelerated motion.¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Two small space ships are in free fall. But one of them was decelerated (by gas jet ; downward), and then, was accelerated (by gas jet ; upward) for a while. During the deceleration and acceleration, a crewman would feel a and -a. Equivalence principle will be wrong.¡ÔP.S.¡Õ On slanting rails (at a 45 degree angle), an elevator cabin is in "free fall" (without friction). And 60, 70, 80, 90 degrees. There will be no mystery. Equivalence principle will be wrong.¡ÔP.S.¡Õ On the ground, there are slanting rails (45 degrees). On this rails, an elevator cabin was accelerated upward at 1g and then at 2g. Can equivalence principle explain the change of resultant force (by inertial force and gravity) ?¡ÔP.S.¡Õ On non-uniform accelerated motion, does general relativity say anything ? * ¡ÚMach's bucket¡Û A thought experiment Mach's bucket will be invalid. The reason is that it doesn't stand up about plural rotating bodies. Added on 11 Jul 10 (from mark *).¡ÔP.S.¡Õ A hundred disks are rotating at the same (and a constant) speed. Now one of these increases the speed (by man act). Effect will be limited to this disk only (as action-reaction).¡ÔP.S.¡Õ In Andromeda galaxy, there is a scholar who proposes a thought experiment the same as Mach's bucket. How does the universe rotate ?¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Asteroid Toutatis is rotating (cycle is 5.41 days and 7.35 days) on two axes (mentioned in a journal). It's difficult to imagine Mach's bucket.¡ÔP.S.¡Õ On an axis, there are three disks A, B and C. A is rotating clockwise, B is rotating counterclockwise and C is at a standstill. Centrifugal force of A and B is the same, and that of C is zero. How does "Mach's bucket" say ?¡ÔP.S.¡Õ About revolution (on ellipse orbits) of planets, how does "Mach's bucket" say ? It's written that gas like matter (origin of planets and the sun) was "rotating".¡ÔP.S.¡Õ From viewpoint of kinetic energy, rotary motion will be absolute also. * ¡ÚRotary motion and equivalence principle¡Û On a space station (on every atom), gravity and centrifugal force (an inertial force) is acting independently. Free fall is caused by gravity (not be offset by centrifugal force). Clearly, the space station (space debris also) is in a gravitational field. Equivalence principle will be wrong. Added on 16 Mar 11 (from mark *)¡ÔP.S.¡Õ The moon is in free fall also.¡ÔP.S. ; 27 Mar 11¡Õ Imagine gravity and centrifugal force that act on every point of a rotating blade of windmill (also imagine change of gravity or change of rotational speed). There will be no mystery. Equivalence principle will be wrong.¡ÔP.S.¡Õ A windmill (four bladed) is rotating. Mass of the blades is the same, but shape is different. So, centrifugal force that acts on the bottom of the blades is different. How does the equivalence principle explain ?¡ÔP.S.¡Õ There is a space elevator. Strength of gravity and centrifugal force (act at each point of the cable) is different. How does the equivalence principle explain ? * ¡ÚTwin paradox¡Û One is in a gravitational field. The other is in an accelerated frame. How does relativity say ? * ¡ÚFree fall and a light ray¡Û An elevator cabin is at a standstill in non-gravitational field. In the side wall (supposed to be the left wall), there are five holes (at regular intervals ; vertically). The sun light is coming and is passing through the holes. Then, on the right wall, there are five projections (spot-lights ; don't move). But, if free fall of this elevator cabin starts (downward), projections will move upward (however, relativity says these don't move).¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Are there any errors in the following passage ? There is a tall steel tower. Along this tower, imagine an elevator cabin in free fall. On this tower, light sources are set at intervals of ten meters. Lights are emitted horizontally and pass through a hole in the side wall of this cabin (supposed to be the left wall ; timing is synchronized). Light will reach somewhat upper point on the right wall. It will not be the same phenomenon that occurs in non-gravitational field (even if light sources are supposed to be accelerated upward). * ¡ÚBending of light by gravity¡Û Many books explain bending of light with an elevator cabin in free fall. Now, two elevator cabins are falling before an observer's eyes. Falling speed of the two is different, because starting points of falling is different. Does the observer observe different bending of light (gravity g is the same) ??¡ÔP.S.¡Õ In many books, light ray (horizontal) is coming from the outside of the elevator cabin. In some books, light source is set on the inner wall of the cabin. In the former, falling of the cabin will have no effect on light ray (imagine a cabin without side walls). In the latter (if the emission theory is true), behavior of light ray will be easy to imagine. * ¡ÚGravitational redshift¡Û In many books, a thought experiment (an elevator cabin is accelerating upward ; uniformly ; in non-gravitational field) is shown. And it's written that frequency at light source (set on the roof) and at the floor is different. Now, it's altered as follows. A star light (coming from just above) is entering a hole in the roof and is reaching the floor. Frequency at the roof and at the floor will be the same.¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Books say, difference of frequency is dependent on the distance between both (roof and floor) also. Disproof ; On the roof, there are two light sources (frequency is the same). At the midpoint of one light path, imagine a relay point. Frequency at the relay point is the same to the frequency of the other light path (at the midpoint). And it will be possible to regard this relay point as a new light source (and it's possible to move relay point toward the floor limitlessly).¡ÔP.S.¡Õ It is not frequency but wavelength and light speed that differ depending on distance (if the emission theory is true).¡ÔP.S.¡Õ In an elevator cabin, behavior of every wave will be the same. So, difference of frequency at the roof and at the floor will be impossible (in an elevator in a gravitational field, it will be the same). * ¡Údo.¡Û Anyway, number of waves that exists in an elevator cabin is unchangeable. Number of waves that appears and vanishes (per unit time) must be the same. So, frequency at the roof and at the floor will be the same. * ¡Údo.¡Û Imagine a unit time u second (the time needed for a light wave to reach the floor). In this accelerated cabin, one light source is switched on. And after 99u second, the other light source (frequency is the same) is switched on. At the moment (the latter light reaches floor), number of waves that exists in both light paths will be the same. Thus, phenomenon difference of frequency (books say, it is not appearance) is unthinkable. * ¡Údo.¡Û i confess, this problem (on accelerating elevator cabin) must be considered under Ritz's emission theory. As the source (on the roof) recedes, speed of waves (relative to the cabin) will increase. And wavelength becomes longer. Though, in the cabin, state (number of waves also) will be unchanging (reason ; acceleration is uniform).¡ÔP.S.¡Õ When acceleration is not uniform, frequency is not the same.¡ÔP.S.¡Õ In an elevator cabin in free fall, perhaps it will be the same (light source is set on the floor).¡ÔP.S.¡Õ How about when a light source in free fall is observed from above ? Light speed will become slower, wavelength will become longer and frequency will decrease. * ¡Údo.¡Û In many books, an experiment (done at a tower at Harvard University [height is 22.6 meter]) is shown. Now, a mirror is set at the top of the tower. From the ground (just below ; point G), a light ray was emitted to the mirror, and reflected light was observed. Emitted light and reflected light at point G seem to be the same (in frequency ; interference fringes is observed during enough time). How does relativity explain ?¡ÔP.S.¡Õ No book seems to touch on difference of atmospheric pressure (a tube [set vertically] was filled with helium).¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Are there any errors in the following passages ? From non-gravitational field to gravitational field, a light ray is emitted. When two waves (from the start of emission, n+1th and n+2th [in these turn]) are emitted, the second light ray (frequency is the same) is emitted. Behavior of four waves (two are the front waves of second ray) in gravitational field will be the same. Phenomenon time dilation will be impossible.¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Frequency of a light ray in a medium A and a medium B is the same. In above tower experiment, it will be the same. * ¡Údo.¡Û Several books (e.g. Einstein's Legacy by J Schwinger) say, ¡ÈFrequency that an observer receives is the same to the frequency that a light source in a different gravitational field (at a standstill) emits. But it's not the same to the frequency that the same source at hand emits" (gist). If it's true, by interference of this two lights (in a medium ; one waves pass the other waves), gravitational redshift will be proved (after enough time ; rather by earthly experiment). * ¡Údo.¡Û If phenomenon gravitational redshift is true, explanation (quantitative) as follows seems to be possible. On the ground, an elevator cabin is at a standstill. Light speed is slower in a gravitational field. So, speed of light emitted upward becomes faster and wavelength becomes longer. Then, redshift occurs.¡ÔP.S.¡Õ In an elevator cabin in a uniform accelerated motion (upward), this change is contrary. * ¡ÚD'Alembert's principle¡Û When a body is accelerated by force 1 mg, inertial force is -1 mg (D'Alembert's principle). By the above, the role and effect of gravity (one of external forces) in free fall will be explained. But, gravity act on every atom directly. So, there is no internal force (zero-weight). There will be no mystery. Equivalence principle will be wrong. * ¡ÚGravitational mass and inertial mass ; a monolog¡Û Are there any errors in the following passage ? A body (gravitational mass m) is hung by a string from the roof. Because of gravity of the earth, the string is tightened in a constant strength (tension) mg. Now, above all are turned to the left a 90 degree angle. So, the roof is on the left and the earth is on the right (and suppose, gravity is 1/100g). Here, the string is cut, the body begins to "fall" to the right. To continue drawing from the right by a string (drawing force is 1/100mg ; the earth vanishes) will be the same situation (if gravity is 1/99g, force 1/99mg will cause the same acceleration as fall). The same acceleration (will be) by the same force. In short, the sameness of gravitational mass and inertial mass (of this body and of every body) will be natural. Added on 22 Feb 11 (from mark *).¡ÔP.S.¡Õ Newton's second law (F = ma) will stand up on gravity also. And this formula will stand up not only on a falling body but also on a body on the ground (it will be possible to regard it as the origin of a free fall). So, in falling and on the ground, the value of F and a (g) will be the same. Then, m is the same. Therefore, gravitational mass and inertial mass will be the same. Thank you for visiting. i also thank Yahoo (geocities) and forums (that admitted my posts). i am thankful to administrator CCC (anti-relativity.com) for his precious help. i am thankful to a site ; www.crank.net/einstein.html and to persons who wrote favorable reply in forums. i am thankful also to google directory (disappeared in Jul 11. for about three years, this site had been included). Feel free to link or cite. Former title was MYSTERY OF LIGHT. ¡ÔKey word¡Õ wavenumber, extinction, aether or ether, rest aether, aether frame, absolute rest frame, absolute space, light sphere, planetary aberration, light-time correction, radar trap, radar speed gun, Ritz's emission theory, invariant. * ¡ÚA pending question¡Û The direction of aberration (occurs in refraction telescope) seems to be opposite (to the direction of rain-drop model) ?? Added on Mar 09 (from mark *)¡ÔP.S. ; on light speed¡Õ We must say that our consideration on light speed of the past is irrelevant (extinction is overlooked !!). Except Ritz's emission theory, is explanation impossible ?¡ÔP.S. ; on light speed¡Õ Now, photons are emitted from a rotating source (at high speed). If the emission theory is true, in vacuum, speed of photons will be various (for a few seconds ; some of these exceed c). * All doubts of this site are derived from Kubota,Takashi's writings. i saw 2 books of his own, 4 joint work books (6 books were published from 1993 to 1997) and his web-site. Shown below is his web-page (written in English). http://www.d1.dion.ne.jp/~kubota_t/treatise.html/ * Allow me to grumble a little, please. Number of visitors to English page is fewer (often under 20 per month) than that to Japanese page (below). For what reason ?? http://www.geocities.co.jp/Technopolis/2561/lig.html |
¥á¥¤¥ó / ¥³¥ß¥å¥Ë¥Æ¥£ / ¥¢¥Ù¥Ë¥å¡¼ / E-List / ³¹³Ñ¹¾ì
¥¤¥ó¥Õ¥©¥á¡¼¥·¥ç¥ó¥»¥ó¥¿¡¼ / ¸¡º÷ / ¥Ø¥ë¥× / ¥¬¥¤¥É¥é¥¤¥ó