Timeline for Is the propagation speed of light in the vacuum really an absolute? [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
23 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| yesterday | comment | added | m4r35n357 | @PatoGalmarini W-bomb detected; end of discussion! | |
| yesterday | comment | added | Pato Galmarini | @m4r35n357 I am not woke, I just don't see the point of being mean. It is your choice though. Being a jerk is not a crime, I am just sad that you chose to be one. | |
| yesterday | comment | added | m4r35n357 | @PatoGalmarini I realize it is common these days to focus on students' self-esteem over actual education, but in any case I am not a lecturer, I am self-taught, and this user is clearly in a position to know better than to claim SR is wrong! I remain unrepentant. | |
| yesterday | comment | added | Pato Galmarini | @m4r35n357 it is rude to say that to someone that is confused and trying to understand something. Would you say that to your students or children? The way he writes is a little pedantic, but still. | |
| Dec 10 at 18:13 | comment | added | m4r35n357 | @controlgroup yes, not especially proud of that comment, but re-reading the question I am not inclined to delete it, at least for now. | |
| Dec 10 at 15:37 | comment | added | controlgroup | I think m4r was referring to Markoul in this case, but of course I don’t know. | |
| Dec 10 at 15:26 | comment | added | Philip Wood | @m4r35n357 If I'm the high reputation user, I should point out that there was some irony in my comment. | |
| Dec 10 at 14:53 | comment | added | m4r35n357 | Sad to see such a high-rep user embarrassing themselves in this way . . . | |
| Dec 10 at 14:31 | comment | added | Philip Wood | @Markoul11 "MM experiment result is today overruled by QM and QFT of ZPE vacuum, dark energy, quantum foam and virtual particles." You mean by "overruled" that the experimenters made some mistake and that more careful repetitions would give a different answer? | |
| Dec 10 at 14:19 | comment | added | Solomon Slow | Do you understand that "constant speed of light" is not a result of the theory of relativity? It's an axiom. The entire point of the theory of relativity was to show what the laws of physics would be like *IF* the speed of light was a universal constant. | |
| Dec 10 at 13:37 | comment | added | Pato Galmarini | @controlgroup I am asking to the OP, not to you, lol | |
| Dec 10 at 13:28 | comment | added | Pato Galmarini | how do you explain time dilation then? | |
| Dec 10 at 13:24 | comment | added | controlgroup | Spacetime isn't a physical thing, it's just a way of measuring distance between events. You'll have a hard time convincing any relativist that spacetime is actually physical (i.e. a medium). | |
| Dec 10 at 13:13 | comment | added | Markoul11 | @PhilipWood Exactly my point! Then you have to accept that spacetime is a medium. MM experiment result is today overruled by QM and QFT of ZPE vacuum, dark energy, quantum foam and virtual particles. Thus, fabric of spacetime has medium-like properties. | |
| Dec 10 at 13:13 | comment | added | controlgroup | Moreover, what’s the question here? Surely someone with your rep would know what does/doesn’t constitute an on-topic post here. If your question is on a sound-light analogy, maybe drop all the other stuff criticizing “most professionals”, some of whom will likely be the ones who review your question and might otherwise answer. | |
| Dec 10 at 13:08 | comment | added | Philip Wood | The speed of sound relative to an observer is independent of the motion of the source, but is dependent on the motion relative to the observer of the medium carrying the sound. There is no such dependency for light (for which the notion of a medium has no explanatory value). Have you read about the Michelson-Morley experiment for light? | |
| Dec 10 at 13:06 | comment | added | Markoul11 | @controlgroup Yes, but it is often misinterpreted as speed of light being always fixed independent of frame of reference without stating the important condition of plane waves. | |
| Dec 10 at 13:01 | comment | added | controlgroup | That is not what SR describes. Have you read Relativity? Galilean relativity is quite different from Einsteinian/Lorentzian relativity. | |
| Dec 10 at 12:58 | history | edited | Markoul11 |
edited tags
|
|
| Dec 10 at 12:54 | history | closed |
my2cts Hyperon naturallyInconsistent |
Not suitable for this site | |
| Dec 10 at 12:44 | history | edited | Markoul11 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 18 characters in body
|
| Dec 10 at 12:37 | history | edited | Markoul11 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 108 characters in body
|
| Dec 10 at 12:31 | history | asked | Markoul11 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |