If the speed of light is variable as per Newton https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-f10f1c25528a4e5edc9bae200640f31c-pjlq, then the wavelength is invariable (depends only on the emitting substance).theory is Isaac Newton. In his corpuscular theory Newton visualized light "corpuscles" being thrown off from hot bodies at a nominal speed of c with respect to the emitting object, and obeying the usual laws of Newtonian mechanics, and we then expect
If the wavelength of light is invariable (basic axiom of future, Einstein-free physics), then the frequency and the speed of light ALWAYS vary proportionally, in accordance with the formula (speed of light)=(wavelength)(frequency).
"Emission theory, also called emitter theory or ballistic theory of light, was a competing theory for the special theory of relativity, explaining the results of the Michelson–Morley experiment of 1887...The name most often associated with emission
"Moreover, if light consists of particles, as Einstein had suggested in his paper submitted just thirteen weeks before this one, the second principle seems absurd: A stone thrown from a speeding train can do far more damage than one thrown from a trainat rest; the speed of the particle is not independent of the motion of the object emitting it. And if we take light to consist of particles and assume that these particles obey Newton's laws, they will conform to Newtonian relativity and thus
Pentcho Valev https://twitter.com/pentcho_valevFor a comparison of relativity Doppler and classical Doppler please see Radwan Kassir's newest book.
If the speed of light is variable as per Newton https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-f10f1c25528a4e5edc9bae200640f31c-pjlq, then the wavelength is invariable (depends
only on the emitting substance).
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 1:32:14 PM UTC-6, Pentcho Valev wrote:No, Gary. That is an irrational interpretation dictated by relativity. It's a petitio principii assuming what one wants to conclude.
If the speed of light is variable as per Newton https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-f10f1c25528a4e5edc9bae200640f31c-pjlq, then the wavelength is invariable (dependsSimple laboratory experiments demonstrate that wavelength is variable, so it's irrational to
only on the emitting substance).
pursue this foolishness.
Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:It's not that light does not have different wavelengths. It's that its wavelength does not change due to relative velocity. It's frequency does.
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 8:54:40 PM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote:so homodyne and heterodyne laser scattering are fake, cannot be used to anything. Read the papers, fucking stupid.
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 1:32:14 PM UTC-6, Pentcho Valev wrote:No, Gary. That is an irrational interpretation dictated by relativity. It's a petitio principii assuming what one wants to conclude.
Simple laboratory experiments demonstrate that wavelength is variable,
If the speed of light is variable as per Newton
https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg- f10f1c25528a4e5edc9bae200640f31c-pjlq,
then the wavelength is invariable (depends only on the emitting
substance).
so it's irrational to pursue this foolishness.
It's not that light does not have different wavelengths. It's that its wavelength does not change due to relative velocity. It's frequency does.
On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 12:56:46 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
It's not that light does not have different wavelengths. It's that its wavelength does not change due to relative velocity. It's frequency does.You do not understand that tens of thousands of textbooks are filled with things that you do not know!
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 8:54:40 PM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 1:32:14 PM UTC-6, Pentcho Valev wrote:
If the speed of light is variable as per Newton https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-f10f1c25528a4e5edc9bae200640f31c-pjlq, then the wavelength is invariable (depends
only on the emitting substance).
Simple laboratory experiments demonstrate that wavelength is variable, so it's irrational to
pursue this foolishness.
No, Gary. That is an irrational interpretation dictated by relativity. It's a petitio principii
assuming what one wants to conclude.
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 8:54:40 PM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 1:32:14 PM UTC-6, Pentcho Valev wrote:
If the speed of light is variable as per Newton https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-f10f1c25528a4e5edc9bae200640f31c-pjlq, then the wavelength is invariable (depends
only on the emitting substance).
Simple laboratory experiments demonstrate that wavelength is variable, so it's irrational to
pursue this foolishness.
No, Gary. That is an irrational interpretation dictated by relativity. It's a petitio principii
assuming what one wants to conclude.
t's not that light does not have different wavelengths. It's that its wavelength does not change
due to relative velocity. It's frequency does.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 300 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 33:48:55 |
Calls: | 6,707 |
Files: | 12,239 |
Messages: | 5,353,263 |