On the Motion of the Earth Relative to the Aether

jaquecusto
jaquecusto

September 9th, 2017, 12:32 pm #11










<font size="5">On the Motion
of the Earth Relative to the Aether
</font>





"Examples of a similar kind such as the unsuccessful attempt to substantiate the motion of the earth relative to the "Light-medium" lead us to the supposition that not only in mechanics, but also in electrodynamics, no properties of observed facts correspond to a concept of absolute rest; but that for all coordinate systems for which the mechanical equations hold, the equivalent electrodynamical and optical equations hold also, as has already been shown for magnitudes of the first order. In the following we make these assumptions (which we shall subsequently call the Principle of Relativity) and introduce the further assumption, —an assumption which is at the first sight quite irreconcilable with the former one— that light is propagated in vacant space, with a velocity c which is independent of the nature of motion of the emitting body. These two assumptions are quite sufficient to give us a simple and consistent theory of electrodynamics of moving bodies on the basis of the Maxwellian theory for bodies at rest. The introduction of a "Lightäther" will be proved to be superfluous, for according to the conceptions which will be developed, we shall introduce neither a space absolutely at rest, and endowed with special properties, nor shall we associate a velocity-vector with a point in which electro-magnetic processes take place":

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_the_E ... ing_Bodies_(1920_edition)









Yep . . .


Back to Einstein!










And that is because Colleague Ufonaut99; after 15 consecutive
months of defending Einstein's false notion of relative axial rotation and,
rigorously & vigorously, arguing for it, apparently, his case has, at last
& finally, run out of gas, completely:


http://www.network54.com/Forum/304711/t ... instein%21





























>>> Einstein was right until he starts looking out of the window...

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/XUcq04g4gio/maxresdefault.jpg

Very, very good example, Johannes!
Quote
Share

Joined: March 30th, 2013, 7:19 am

September 9th, 2017, 3:50 pm #12










<font size="5">On the Motion
of the Earth Relative to the Aether
</font>





"Examples of a similar kind such as the unsuccessful attempt to substantiate the motion of the earth relative to the "Light-medium" lead us to the supposition that not only in mechanics, but also in electrodynamics, no properties of observed facts correspond to a concept of absolute rest; but that for all coordinate systems for which the mechanical equations hold, the equivalent electrodynamical and optical equations hold also, as has already been shown for magnitudes of the first order. In the following we make these assumptions (which we shall subsequently call the Principle of Relativity) and introduce the further assumption, —an assumption which is at the first sight quite irreconcilable with the former one— that light is propagated in vacant space, with a velocity c which is independent of the nature of motion of the emitting body. These two assumptions are quite sufficient to give us a simple and consistent theory of electrodynamics of moving bodies on the basis of the Maxwellian theory for bodies at rest. The introduction of a "Lightäther" will be proved to be superfluous, for according to the conceptions which will be developed, we shall introduce neither a space absolutely at rest, and endowed with special properties, nor shall we associate a velocity-vector with a point in which electro-magnetic processes take place":

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_the_E ... ing_Bodies_(1920_edition)









Yep . . .


Back to Einstein!










And that is because Colleague Ufonaut99; after 15 consecutive
months of defending Einstein's false notion of relative axial rotation and,
rigorously & vigorously, arguing for it, apparently, his case has, at last
& finally, run out of gas, completely:


http://www.network54.com/Forum/304711/t ... instein%21





























Johannes: Here is my example. Einstein is driving a car on the road, a very common experience, right. Everybody have done this.
Jaquecusto: Very, very good example, Johannes!
Sure is Let's consider it closer, taking Alice standing by a tree and Einstein accelerating in his car. Both Alice and Einstein remain always at the origin in their reference frames (and of course Alice's frame is inertial whereas Einstein's isn't).

If we look simply at the methematical view of the coordinates that are measured in each frame, we'll find that they are identical - both frames show the distance between Alice and Einstein increasing at an exponential rate. Physical reality, however, is different - as you say :
[Einstein] press the accelerator and feels the acceleration on his body. ... he trees on the road doesn't feel any bending force
In other words, two mathematically-identical frames result in Alice's body and Einstein's body experiencing far from identical physical experiences.

So, we can ask "why is this difference between the two bodies?"

Alternatively, someone might take your reference to "the acceleration on his body" as that being the ONLY effect you predict, and so talk about pendulums and gyroscopes as a counter-argument to your scenario.
Johannes: but the road might still be moving in the universe. The test for this is again to look out of the window,
Looking out the window still wouldn't help, since it would still show you ONLY movement relative to other objects.

Quote
Like
Share

Anonym
Anonym

September 9th, 2017, 5:04 pm #13










<font size="5">On the Motion
of the Earth Relative to the Aether
</font>





"Examples of a similar kind such as the unsuccessful attempt to substantiate the motion of the earth relative to the "Light-medium" lead us to the supposition that not only in mechanics, but also in electrodynamics, no properties of observed facts correspond to a concept of absolute rest; but that for all coordinate systems for which the mechanical equations hold, the equivalent electrodynamical and optical equations hold also, as has already been shown for magnitudes of the first order. In the following we make these assumptions (which we shall subsequently call the Principle of Relativity) and introduce the further assumption, —an assumption which is at the first sight quite irreconcilable with the former one— that light is propagated in vacant space, with a velocity c which is independent of the nature of motion of the emitting body. These two assumptions are quite sufficient to give us a simple and consistent theory of electrodynamics of moving bodies on the basis of the Maxwellian theory for bodies at rest. The introduction of a "Lightäther" will be proved to be superfluous, for according to the conceptions which will be developed, we shall introduce neither a space absolutely at rest, and endowed with special properties, nor shall we associate a velocity-vector with a point in which electro-magnetic processes take place":

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_the_E ... ing_Bodies_(1920_edition)









Yep . . .


Back to Einstein!










And that is because Colleague Ufonaut99; after 15 consecutive
months of defending Einstein's false notion of relative axial rotation and,
rigorously & vigorously, arguing for it, apparently, his case has, at last
& finally, run out of gas, completely:


http://www.network54.com/Forum/304711/t ... instein%21





























idiot.
Quote
Share

AAF
AAF

September 9th, 2017, 6:42 pm #14










<font size="5">On the Motion
of the Earth Relative to the Aether
</font>





"Examples of a similar kind such as the unsuccessful attempt to substantiate the motion of the earth relative to the "Light-medium" lead us to the supposition that not only in mechanics, but also in electrodynamics, no properties of observed facts correspond to a concept of absolute rest; but that for all coordinate systems for which the mechanical equations hold, the equivalent electrodynamical and optical equations hold also, as has already been shown for magnitudes of the first order. In the following we make these assumptions (which we shall subsequently call the Principle of Relativity) and introduce the further assumption, —an assumption which is at the first sight quite irreconcilable with the former one— that light is propagated in vacant space, with a velocity c which is independent of the nature of motion of the emitting body. These two assumptions are quite sufficient to give us a simple and consistent theory of electrodynamics of moving bodies on the basis of the Maxwellian theory for bodies at rest. The introduction of a "Lightäther" will be proved to be superfluous, for according to the conceptions which will be developed, we shall introduce neither a space absolutely at rest, and endowed with special properties, nor shall we associate a velocity-vector with a point in which electro-magnetic processes take place":

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_the_E ... ing_Bodies_(1920_edition)









Yep . . .


Back to Einstein!










And that is because Colleague Ufonaut99; after 15 consecutive
months of defending Einstein's false notion of relative axial rotation and,
rigorously & vigorously, arguing for it, apparently, his case has, at last
& finally, run out of gas, completely:


http://www.network54.com/Forum/304711/t ... instein%21































Hello; Ufonaut99 & Anonym:









Yep!


It is not Hurricane Irma that will hit the state of Florida.


It's the state of Florida that will hit Hurricane Irma:


https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather- ... n/70002657









Quote
Share

Amigo
Amigo

September 9th, 2017, 8:54 pm #15










<font size="5">On the Motion
of the Earth Relative to the Aether
</font>





"Examples of a similar kind such as the unsuccessful attempt to substantiate the motion of the earth relative to the "Light-medium" lead us to the supposition that not only in mechanics, but also in electrodynamics, no properties of observed facts correspond to a concept of absolute rest; but that for all coordinate systems for which the mechanical equations hold, the equivalent electrodynamical and optical equations hold also, as has already been shown for magnitudes of the first order. In the following we make these assumptions (which we shall subsequently call the Principle of Relativity) and introduce the further assumption, —an assumption which is at the first sight quite irreconcilable with the former one— that light is propagated in vacant space, with a velocity c which is independent of the nature of motion of the emitting body. These two assumptions are quite sufficient to give us a simple and consistent theory of electrodynamics of moving bodies on the basis of the Maxwellian theory for bodies at rest. The introduction of a "Lightäther" will be proved to be superfluous, for according to the conceptions which will be developed, we shall introduce neither a space absolutely at rest, and endowed with special properties, nor shall we associate a velocity-vector with a point in which electro-magnetic processes take place":

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_the_E ... ing_Bodies_(1920_edition)









Yep . . .


Back to Einstein!










And that is because Colleague Ufonaut99; after 15 consecutive
months of defending Einstein's false notion of relative axial rotation and,
rigorously & vigorously, arguing for it, apparently, his case has, at last
& finally, run out of gas, completely:


http://www.network54.com/Forum/304711/t ... instein%21





























>>>It is not Hurricane Irma that will hit the state of Florida.

The Principle of Least Action demands ------> the assignment of motion to the smaller one =======>>> ]http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_19.html] ------> so the car must be moving & the road at rest ----> also, Irma must be moving & Florida at rest.

Quote
Share

Amigo
Amigo

September 9th, 2017, 9:01 pm #16










<font size="5">On the Motion
of the Earth Relative to the Aether
</font>





"Examples of a similar kind such as the unsuccessful attempt to substantiate the motion of the earth relative to the "Light-medium" lead us to the supposition that not only in mechanics, but also in electrodynamics, no properties of observed facts correspond to a concept of absolute rest; but that for all coordinate systems for which the mechanical equations hold, the equivalent electrodynamical and optical equations hold also, as has already been shown for magnitudes of the first order. In the following we make these assumptions (which we shall subsequently call the Principle of Relativity) and introduce the further assumption, —an assumption which is at the first sight quite irreconcilable with the former one— that light is propagated in vacant space, with a velocity c which is independent of the nature of motion of the emitting body. These two assumptions are quite sufficient to give us a simple and consistent theory of electrodynamics of moving bodies on the basis of the Maxwellian theory for bodies at rest. The introduction of a "Lightäther" will be proved to be superfluous, for according to the conceptions which will be developed, we shall introduce neither a space absolutely at rest, and endowed with special properties, nor shall we associate a velocity-vector with a point in which electro-magnetic processes take place":

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_the_E ... ing_Bodies_(1920_edition)









Yep . . .


Back to Einstein!










And that is because Colleague Ufonaut99; after 15 consecutive
months of defending Einstein's false notion of relative axial rotation and,
rigorously & vigorously, arguing for it, apparently, his case has, at last
& finally, run out of gas, completely:


http://www.network54.com/Forum/304711/t ... instein%21





























Oops =====>>>http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_19.html
Quote
Share

AAF
AAF

September 9th, 2017, 9:50 pm #17










<font size="5">On the Motion
of the Earth Relative to the Aether
</font>





"Examples of a similar kind such as the unsuccessful attempt to substantiate the motion of the earth relative to the "Light-medium" lead us to the supposition that not only in mechanics, but also in electrodynamics, no properties of observed facts correspond to a concept of absolute rest; but that for all coordinate systems for which the mechanical equations hold, the equivalent electrodynamical and optical equations hold also, as has already been shown for magnitudes of the first order. In the following we make these assumptions (which we shall subsequently call the Principle of Relativity) and introduce the further assumption, —an assumption which is at the first sight quite irreconcilable with the former one— that light is propagated in vacant space, with a velocity c which is independent of the nature of motion of the emitting body. These two assumptions are quite sufficient to give us a simple and consistent theory of electrodynamics of moving bodies on the basis of the Maxwellian theory for bodies at rest. The introduction of a "Lightäther" will be proved to be superfluous, for according to the conceptions which will be developed, we shall introduce neither a space absolutely at rest, and endowed with special properties, nor shall we associate a velocity-vector with a point in which electro-magnetic processes take place":

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_the_E ... ing_Bodies_(1920_edition)









Yep . . .


Back to Einstein!










And that is because Colleague Ufonaut99; after 15 consecutive
months of defending Einstein's false notion of relative axial rotation and,
rigorously & vigorously, arguing for it, apparently, his case has, at last
& finally, run out of gas, completely:


http://www.network54.com/Forum/304711/t ... instein%21

































<font>"...Irma must be moving & Florida at rest."</font>




Hi; Amigo:









That would be true, in the reference frame, in which Florida is at rest.


However, as observed in the reference frame, in which the Sun is at rest,
Hurricane Irma is drifting eastward, because it's moving from lower geographical
latitudes to higher geographical latitudes.

And at the same time, Florida is spinning eastward from the west towards
Hurricane Irma with a tangential speed equal to about:

1670 kilometers/hour x cos(27.6648°) = 1479.08399 kilometers/hour.











Quote
Share

Bill Geist
Bill Geist

September 10th, 2017, 9:13 pm #18










<font size="5">On the Motion
of the Earth Relative to the Aether
</font>





"Examples of a similar kind such as the unsuccessful attempt to substantiate the motion of the earth relative to the "Light-medium" lead us to the supposition that not only in mechanics, but also in electrodynamics, no properties of observed facts correspond to a concept of absolute rest; but that for all coordinate systems for which the mechanical equations hold, the equivalent electrodynamical and optical equations hold also, as has already been shown for magnitudes of the first order. In the following we make these assumptions (which we shall subsequently call the Principle of Relativity) and introduce the further assumption, —an assumption which is at the first sight quite irreconcilable with the former one— that light is propagated in vacant space, with a velocity c which is independent of the nature of motion of the emitting body. These two assumptions are quite sufficient to give us a simple and consistent theory of electrodynamics of moving bodies on the basis of the Maxwellian theory for bodies at rest. The introduction of a "Lightäther" will be proved to be superfluous, for according to the conceptions which will be developed, we shall introduce neither a space absolutely at rest, and endowed with special properties, nor shall we associate a velocity-vector with a point in which electro-magnetic processes take place":

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_the_E ... ing_Bodies_(1920_edition)









Yep . . .


Back to Einstein!










And that is because Colleague Ufonaut99; after 15 consecutive
months of defending Einstein's false notion of relative axial rotation and,
rigorously & vigorously, arguing for it, apparently, his case has, at last
& finally, run out of gas, completely:


http://www.network54.com/Forum/304711/t ... instein%21





























http://sciliterature.50webs.com/Coverup.htm
Quote
Share

AAF
AAF

September 11th, 2017, 3:00 am #19










<font size="5">On the Motion
of the Earth Relative to the Aether
</font>





"Examples of a similar kind such as the unsuccessful attempt to substantiate the motion of the earth relative to the "Light-medium" lead us to the supposition that not only in mechanics, but also in electrodynamics, no properties of observed facts correspond to a concept of absolute rest; but that for all coordinate systems for which the mechanical equations hold, the equivalent electrodynamical and optical equations hold also, as has already been shown for magnitudes of the first order. In the following we make these assumptions (which we shall subsequently call the Principle of Relativity) and introduce the further assumption, —an assumption which is at the first sight quite irreconcilable with the former one— that light is propagated in vacant space, with a velocity c which is independent of the nature of motion of the emitting body. These two assumptions are quite sufficient to give us a simple and consistent theory of electrodynamics of moving bodies on the basis of the Maxwellian theory for bodies at rest. The introduction of a "Lightäther" will be proved to be superfluous, for according to the conceptions which will be developed, we shall introduce neither a space absolutely at rest, and endowed with special properties, nor shall we associate a velocity-vector with a point in which electro-magnetic processes take place":

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_the_E ... ing_Bodies_(1920_edition)









Yep . . .


Back to Einstein!










And that is because Colleague Ufonaut99; after 15 consecutive
months of defending Einstein's false notion of relative axial rotation and,
rigorously & vigorously, arguing for it, apparently, his case has, at last
& finally, run out of gas, completely:


http://www.network54.com/Forum/304711/t ... instein%21



































Thank you, Bill Geist, very much
for this great reference:

http://sciliterature.50webs.com/Coverup.htm


It seems, to me, there is nothing wrong with
the experiments of Dayton C. Miller.


However, these guys think that Miller’s data reduction
algorithm is faulty:

https://arxiv.org/vc/physics/papers/0608/0608238v2.pdf


And they're, probably, right; since it's, extremely, hard
to obtain, experimentally, the same result as the one
obtained & published by Miller.











Quote
Share

AAF
AAF

September 13th, 2017, 3:00 am #20










<font size="5">On the Motion
of the Earth Relative to the Aether
</font>





"Examples of a similar kind such as the unsuccessful attempt to substantiate the motion of the earth relative to the "Light-medium" lead us to the supposition that not only in mechanics, but also in electrodynamics, no properties of observed facts correspond to a concept of absolute rest; but that for all coordinate systems for which the mechanical equations hold, the equivalent electrodynamical and optical equations hold also, as has already been shown for magnitudes of the first order. In the following we make these assumptions (which we shall subsequently call the Principle of Relativity) and introduce the further assumption, —an assumption which is at the first sight quite irreconcilable with the former one— that light is propagated in vacant space, with a velocity c which is independent of the nature of motion of the emitting body. These two assumptions are quite sufficient to give us a simple and consistent theory of electrodynamics of moving bodies on the basis of the Maxwellian theory for bodies at rest. The introduction of a "Lightäther" will be proved to be superfluous, for according to the conceptions which will be developed, we shall introduce neither a space absolutely at rest, and endowed with special properties, nor shall we associate a velocity-vector with a point in which electro-magnetic processes take place":

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_the_E ... ing_Bodies_(1920_edition)









Yep . . .


Back to Einstein!










And that is because Colleague Ufonaut99; after 15 consecutive
months of defending Einstein's false notion of relative axial rotation and,
rigorously & vigorously, arguing for it, apparently, his case has, at last
& finally, run out of gas, completely:


http://www.network54.com/Forum/304711/t ... instein%21




































If the aforementioned prediction of Maxwell's theory is based neither on the idea
of light medium, nor on the notion of aether, nor on the concept of absolute rest,
as Albert Einstein claimed in the above passage of his, THEN the Maxwellian
theory has predicted the practical possibility of measuring the speed of the earth,
in its orbit around the Sun, on the basis of what?


Maxwell's theory of electromagnetic radiation has predicted the feasibility of measuring
the exact numerical value of the orbital speed of the earth, around the barycenter of the
solar system , on the basis of nothing else beside this major
one of its basic assumptions:


The speed of light is independent of the speed of the light source.


That is the only basic requirement for predicting and computing the precise numerical
value of Earth's orbital speed, around the stationary center of the solar system,
within the framework of Maxwell's theory of electromagnetic radiation.













Quote
Share