NoEinstein wrote:
> On Sep 8, 11:41 pm, "Spaceman"
> wrote:
>>> On Sep 8, 7:11 pm, "Spaceman"
>>> wrote:
>>>>> On Sep 8, 5:20 pm, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 08 Sep 2008 11:44:50 -0600, Malrassic Park
>>>>>>
hotmail.com> wrote:>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, 08 Sep 2008 07:28:21 GMT, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson)
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>> Photons don't "reach" C, they are already at C to begin with.
>>>>>>>>> Does that mean no protons have mass?
>>
>>>>>>>> Let's get that straight.
>>>>>>>> They initially move at c wrt their source and at c+v wrt an
>>>>>>>> observer moving at -v wrt the source.
>>
>>>>>>> Wow, you really are a bullshitter.
>>
>>>>>> Oh? Nobody has ever called me that before.
>>>>>> Where is the bullshit? Can't you understand plain physics?
>>
>>>>> Everybody who's smarter than a plate of fried Berkeley
>>>>> acid knows that it has been observed that c is the
>>>>> same regardless of the relative velocity of the source
>>>>> and the observer. That why Relativity came to be.
>>
>>>> Actually those that are "smarter than a plate of fried Berkeley
>>>> actually know c is a speed and can not be constant to all frames.
>>
>>> Remember, the quote was: "smarter than a plate of
>>> fried Berkeley acid." Everybody whose smarter than
>>> a bowl of organically grown E. Coli knows that more
>>> than a century ago, in those dark medieval days,
>>> someone thought of the bright idea of measuring the
>>> speed of light in different directions, to see just what
>>> the absolute speed of the Earth was.
>>
>> Actually,
>> They came up with the idea to see if there was an "aether"
>> and of course, it failed, and all the morons jumped up and
>> said.. oh my god.. light traveled the same speed in 2 different
>> directions.
>> And the morons still can not grasp that is only proof that
>> light travels at a constant "c" to all "at rest" frames only.
>>
>>> And, voila,
>>> they discovered it was the same in all directions.
>>
>> To only "AT REST" frames.
>>
>>> Imagine that. And this is in an accelerating frame
>>> of reference.
>>
>> The source nor the observer are accelerating towards
>> nor away from each other.
>> Read this part slow...
>> AT REST frames.
>> So...No proof of constant to all frames at all.
>>
>> All frames on Earth that are not moving wrt to the ground
>> are "at rest" frames on Earth.
>> No proof lightspeed is constant to all "frames" has been made
>> EVER!
>> And... will not be made because lightspeed can not break
>> the rule of "relative" speed.
>>
>> --
>> James M Driscoll Jr
>> Creator of the Clock Malfunction Theory
>> Spaceman- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Dear Spaceman: Great physics obeys common sense. But those favoring
> the counterintuitive are hard nuts to crack
