Michael V wrote:Goldminer, Aardwolf,
Goldminer wrote:If the receding part of one cycle gets viewed along with the approaching part of another cycle, who can tell?
I think you can tell, because one star is on the left and the other is on the right, or the other way round if you stand on your head.
No, you are wrong again. The receding star is always on one side and the approaching star is always on the other. Each star alternately becomes the receding star and when it is receding, it is always receding on the same side of the approaching star. On the half cycle the receding star on the left is A, on the last part of the cycle, B is receding on the left.
Michael V wrote:Goldminer wrote:If the light were emitted in pulses, the pulses will be closer together,
Stars that shine in pulses?, really?
Wrong yet again. Do you have some sort of brain impediment? I said
"If." In discussing any of this Einsteinian clutter, one becomes confused about where the light pulse/ "photon" is when thinking of a continuous train of waves/"photons". How many times have I explained this? If you think I am wrong about this, explain how you think I am wrong.
Michael V wrote:As you have demonstrated, there is no easy way to contest the de Sitter type data. The overwhelming evidence is that the motion of the emitter does not affect the velocity of light. Photons propagate at c relative to empty space and their point of emission in cosmic empty space.
What I explained is that the view is ambiguous. Without seeing the same photos he used, I will not capitulate. The overwhelming evidence is that light propagates at c, spherically away from an unaccelerated source, centered upon the source. A light pulse from a relativistically moving source has never been measured over a one-way speed trap, unless you want to count the radar ranging experiments of the planets, in which case the only logical interpretation of the data was that the speed is c+v approaching, and c-v receding.
Michael V wrote:spaceship 1.jpg
When Aardwolf gets his spaceship and conducts this experiment he will find that the laser pulse arrives at Y, because the light is travelling through space independently of the "material source body", i.e. the emitter.
So far you have a perfect record of being wrong. He will find that the laser beam will hit the far side of the ship at a spot directly opposite the beam coming out the end of the laser. It will not angle away from the collinear end of the laser, regardless of how fast any other matter may be going.
Michael V wrote:I am not in 100% agreement with everything this chap has to say, but his description of light propagation is in very close accord with my own and perhaps he explains it a little better than I have so far managed to do.
http://relativityoflight.com/Chapter22.html
If that's the case, good luck to the pair of you. For about the fifth time I will explain to you that it is only in the
at rest with the source frame, where all detectors are fixed with respect to the source, that
no Doppler shift is detected in the spectrum of the source. If the speed of light is the same at all detectors, then it is c for all of them in the
at rest with the source frame. You and your buddy leave this fact out of your "theory." That makes it incomplete, eh?
Michael V wrote:In particular, I am not aware of any evidence that shows conclusively that a single photon event propagates spherically. Most light sources that we are familiar with emit multiple photons. Even the tiniest spark is thousands if not millions of photons. I am not entirely against the possibility of spherical emission, but I am presently more inclined to think of photons as a uni-directional "bullet". I would be interested in your thoughts on the subject.
On further consideration, the spherical emission is probably a non-starter. You may disagree, but do you have evidence and/or logical reasoning?
Michael
Why would I ever imagine that a single "photon" ever propagates "spherically?" It is a projectile, as imagined. Projectiles just travel in rectilinear motion unless acted upon by a force. The laser output is a wave. A collimated wave. The ones I work around are about 3/8ths of an inch at the laser, and about 2 1/2 feet in diameter at about a half mile. Light diverges. That is the evidence. Projectiles shouldn't diverge. Light does. That should give you a clue.
Do you have any evidence that the Sun does not emit its light in an expanding sphere? Are you listening to what you say?
I sense a disturbance in the farce.