Richard Clark wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
So Einstein is responsible for both setting the speed of light AND
time slowing down?
In a way, the answer is "yes".

And now that he has been dead for 50 years, is it safe to say years
given he was responsible for the speed of light AND time slowing down?

I addressed that very point in the part that you
deleted. So I must ask: What was your ulterior
motive in those deliberate deletions? Are you
unwilling (or incapable) of discussing the
actual subject of this "thread gone astray"?

Is this akin to your assertion that the reflection
from a piece of anti-reflective coating of glass
is brighter than the surface of the sun?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

On Fri, 02 Feb 2007 14:27:48 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:

So Einstein is responsible for both setting the speed of light AND
time slowing down?
In a way, the answer is "yes".

And now that he has been dead for 50 years, is it safe to say years
given he was responsible for the speed of light AND time slowing down?

I addressed that very point in the part that you
deleted.

Hmm, research reveals nothing of your having said anything about
Einstein's death. Nothing about his being responsible for the speed
of light, and certainly nothing about his being responsible for
slowing time down.

Instead of making bland exclamations, can you actually offer us facts
that Einstein is responsible for both setting the speed of light AND
time slowing down? This God-like quality that you have invested in
him and then taken some of it away with the equivocation of
In a way, the answer is "yes".
doesn't really say anything does it?

The world waits in wonder at your assertion of Einstein's ability to
set the speed of light and time - especially when it had been
investigated and quantified by many earlier workers, notably Michelson
and Morely.

On Fri, 02 Feb 2007 13:40:45 -0800, Richard Clark
wrote:

The world waits in wonder at your assertion of Einstein's ability to
set the speed of light and time - especially when it had been
investigated and quantified by many earlier workers, notably Michelson
and Morely.

Hi All,

Well it stands to reason there is nothing to be said in this regard

On Fri, 02 Feb 2007 18:40:10 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote:
One thing had to be nailed down and Einstein chose the speed of light.

as Einstein was never responsible for any such thing.

Fact of the matter was previous to Michelson and Morely's work, a
Scottish fellow by the name of Maxwell had already DEFINED the speed
of light. Michelson and Morely merely confirmed it in the absence of
a disturbing Æther. Their confirmation merely extended the
experimental resolution of a quantity already known.

Instead, Einstein took Maxwell's DEFINED speed of light, and observed
that it would be constant in any Inertial Frame of Reference. This
means that the same beam of light (whose source or origin is
immaterial) is measured in a fixed frame (nonsense of course, but this
is Einstein's thought experiment), it will be equally determined by a
moving frame.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
One thing had to be nailed down and Einstein chose the speed of light.

Fact of the matter was previous to Michelson and Morely's work, a
Scottish fellow by the name of Maxwell had already DEFINED the speed
of light.

I never said or implied that Einstein "DEFINED the speed
of light", only that he "nailed it down" in his equations
as the one universal constant - while all other parameters
are subject to relativity effects.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

On Fri, 02 Feb 2007 20:52:38 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:

I never said or implied that Einstein "DEFINED the speed
of light", only that he "nailed it down" in his equations
as the one universal constant - while all other parameters
are subject to relativity effects.

Let's face it, you never really say anything in the end. We can see
this in the guff like that above. "nailed it down," now there's a
charming non-sequitur. Maxwell preceded him by decades with the
definition of the speed of light - Einstein certainly nailed nothing
there. Maxwell's equations are nothing if not universally applicable,
Einstein didn't add anything that pounded any nail there either. And
to hail-Mary it with
while all other parameters
are subject to relativity effects.
contradicts Einstein explicitly in that he taught that "all laws of
physics are the same within all inertial frames of reference."
Einstein did not exclude anything.

Richard Clark wrote:
Let's face it, you never really say anything in the end. We can see
this in the guff like that above. "nailed it down," now there's a
charming non-sequitur. Maxwell preceded him by decades with the
definition of the speed of light - Einstein certainly nailed nothing
there.

Einstein was the first to nail down the speed of light
in free space as an absolute in his relativity equations.
You can verify that fact by Googling "relativity".
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

On Sat, 03 Feb 2007 03:29:38 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote:
You can verify that fact by Googling "relativity".

Sounds like Xerox logic. Appeal to the authority of Google pretty
much puts Einstein into the garbage can like a moldy rind.

Cecil Moore wrote:
Richard Clark wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
One thing had to be nailed down and Einstein chose the speed of light.

Fact of the matter was previous to Michelson and Morely's work, a
Scottish fellow by the name of Maxwell had already DEFINED the speed
of light.

I never said or implied that Einstein "DEFINED the speed
of light", only that he "nailed it down" in his equations
as the one universal constant - while all other parameters
are subject to relativity effects.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

permittivity of free space, permeability of free space, radian...

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On Sat, 03 Feb 2007 03:25:02 GMT, wrote:

I never said or implied that Einstein "DEFINED the speed
of light", only that he "nailed it down" in his equations
as the one universal constant - while all other parameters
are subject to relativity effects.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

permittivity of free space, permeability of free space, radian...

Hi Jim,

You are treading on Cecil's toes in this dance. Soon we may have to
reveal the Lorentzian transformation.

It was Lorentz that described time dilation (using the speed of light)
in 1887 and formalized in 1899, and it was Poincaré who introduced
this math in 1905, not Einstein.
he "nailed it down" in his equations
is an slur on Maxwell, Lamor, Lorentz, and Poincaré's contributions
that predate Einstein by decades.

But I am not surprised. Lorentzian transformations are alluded to
here in this forum in recent speculations; and they are thoroughly
botched because so few are even vaguely familiar with his work.

Cecil, your habit of hugging the corpses of intellectuals does not
raise your IQ.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark wrote:
It was Lorentz that described time dilation (using the speed of light)
in 1887 and formalized in 1899, and it was Poincaré who introduced
this math in 1905, not Einstein.

It was Einstein who first recognized that the Lorentz
transforms actually applied to reality and were not
just another useful set of purely mathematical
transforms. If Lorentz and Poincare had recognized
that fact, they would have gotten credit for the
theory of relativity but guess who got the credit?
Hint: The guy who nailed down the speed of light as
an absolute in his relativity equations. Nowhere have
I ever read that the mathematicians, Lorentz or Poincare,
ever suspected that the speed of light in a vacuum was
a fixed absolute. That concept was left to a physicist.

he "nailed it down" in his equations

is an slur on Maxwell, Lamor, Lorentz, and Poincaré's contributions
that predate Einstein by decades.

No slur intended or implied so it must be a mistaken
inference on your part. You obviously jumped to a wrong
conclusion and do not understand what I meant by "nailed
it down". If everything is relative, then nothing is
fixed. By declaring the speed of light in a vacuum to be
a fixed absolute, Einstein nailed down the cornerstone
of his theory. Relativity needed a reference nailed down.
Einstein nailed down the speed of light as that reference.
In my context, "set it in concrete" would be synonym for
"nailed it down". I do believe the speed of light in a
vacuum is set in concrete within the theory of relativity.

You are walking around a vacant lot and find a rope. You
want to experiment with waves using the rope. You "nail
down" one end of the rope and apply energy at the other
end. Are you slurring the inventors and/or manufacturers
of the rope? Please explain how.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com