Invariance of the speed of light.

Everyone knows that the observable speed of light (Vo=c in Hachel
notation) is invariant under a change of Galilean reference frame.

It is also affected by a change of accelerated frame of reference.

It is obvious that if we consider the accelerated medium as a series of
small Galilean reference frames placed end to end, in each of these
reference frames the speed of light is constant.

What will change is the metric of space, and the observable path of the
light ray.

But not the speed of the photon on this new curve.

Well, in saying that, I know that I alienate all relativists and all
non-relativists.

But hey, I'm just stating the things I think are right.

R.H.

On 3/15/22 1:34 PM, Richard Hachel wrote:
> Everyone knows that the observable speed of light (Vo=c in Hachel
> notation) is invariant under a change of Galilean reference frame.

Actually, NOBODY "knows" that, because it is simply not true.

The (vacuum) speed of light is invariant under a Lorentz transform, not
a Galilean one.

You can't get very basic things like this correct. How sad.

Tom Roberts

On Tuesday, 15 March 2022 at 21:10:05 UTC+1, tjrob137 wrote:
> On 3/15/22 1:34 PM, Richard Hachel wrote:
> > Everyone knows that the observable speed of light (Vo=c in Hachel
> > notation) is invariant under a change of Galilean reference frame.
> Actually, NOBODY "knows" that, because it is simply not true.
>
> The (vacuum) speed of light is invariant under a Lorentz transform, not
> a Galilean one.

In the meantime in the real world, however, forbidden by
your insane religion TAI keep measuring t'=t, just like all
serious clocks always did.

Le 15/03/2022 à 21:09, Tom Roberts a écrit :
> On 3/15/22 1:34 PM, Richard Hachel wrote:
>> Everyone knows that the observable speed of light (Vo=c in Hachel
>> notation) is invariant under a change of Galilean reference frame.
>
> Actually, NOBODY "knows" that, because it is simply not true.
>
> The (vacuum) speed of light is invariant under a Lorentz transform, not
> a Galilean one.
>
> You can't get very basic things like this correct. How sad.
>
> Tom Roberts

Well.

Merci Tom.

This is the very basis of the 1905 theory of relativity.

"The speed of light is invariant by change of inertial reference frame".

But it is just as valid for accelerated repositories.

In an accelerated reference frame, one can consider (let us admit a
reference frame falling in a gravitational field), that the reference
frame is fixed, and that it is the space all around which accelerates in
the other direction (even if this is the subject who suffers the physical
effects)

In this case, it is obvious that the speed of light is just as invariant
as if the external inertial medium did not accelerate, and remained in
uniform mobility.

In short, the observable speed of light is, for me, not only an invariant
in any inertial reference frame, but also in any accelerated reference
frame.

It's the same for the equation I gave in 1986: To²=Tr²+D²

This remains correct in accelerated environments as explained in previous
posts.

It is a basic equation of the theory of reality.

The square of the observable time is equal to the sum of the square of the
proper time and the square of the time taken by the light to travel the
distance considered.

Works every time.

Still it is necessary to use the correct equations, because I noticed that
the one given by Jean-Pierre Messager (Python) was wrong for the proper
time Tr.

You must apply:
Tr=sqrt(2x/g) simply.

On the other hand the equation
To=D.sqrt(1+2c²/gx) given by scientists for observable time to get
observable time is absolutely correct.

R.H.

Le 15/03/2022 à 21:43, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
> On Tuesday, 15 March 2022 at 21:10:05 UTC+1, tjrob137 wrote:
>> On 3/15/22 1:34 PM, Richard Hachel wrote:
>> > Everyone knows that the observable speed of light (Vo=c in Hachel
>> > notation) is invariant under a change of Galilean reference frame.
>> Actually, NOBODY "knows" that, because it is simply not true.
>>
>> The (vacuum) speed of light is invariant under a Lorentz transform, not
>> a Galilean one.
>
> In the meantime in the real world, however, forbidden by
> your insane religion TAI keep measuring t'=t, just like all
> serious clocks always did.

Attention, there are two errors for the researcher who wants to understand
the theory of relativity.

Accept everything stupidly and benignly.

Denigrate everything.

When you do not stretch the string of your guitar enough, the instrument
makes a serious and unpleasant sound.

But if you stretch it too much, it breaks.

There are a lot of things to criticize in this theory, because they are
false or abstract.

But you shouldn't denigrate everything.

Otherwise, we enter into provocation which no longer has any meaning.

R.H.

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 11:34:37 AM UTC-7, Richard Hachel wrote:
> Invariance of the speed of light.
>
> Everyone knows that the observable speed of light (Vo=c in Hachel
> notation) is invariant under a change of Galilean reference frame.
>
> It is also affected by a change of accelerated frame of reference.
>
> It is obvious that if we consider the accelerated medium as a series of
> small Galilean reference frames placed end to end, in each of these
> reference frames the speed of light is constant.
>
> What will change is the metric of space, and the observable path of the
> light ray.
>
> But not the speed of the photon on this new curve.
>
> Well, in saying that, I know that I alienate all relativists and all
> non-relativists.
>
> But hey, I'm just stating the things I think are right.
>
> R.H.

The constant speed of light is why light can always get out of any maximum
gravity. BHs don't exist. We have observed their look a likes.
Light has never obeyed escape velocity gravity slowdown. Only the atom will slow down
under gravity... not EM.

Mitchell Raemsch

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 4:12:47 PM UTC-7, Richard Hachel wrote:
>
> Attention, there are two errors for the researcher who wants to understand
> the theory of relativity.
>
> Accept everything stupidly and benignly.

False.

> Denigrate everything.

Not "everything". Just ignorant rants by idiots.

--
Jan