It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Cyberbian
Reason dictates that we should laugh when someone suggests we are so "lucky" as to be just the right distance and period from the first light to be able to witness it.
I believe in little c in accordance with the parameters of the theory which is in respect to frames of reference relative to a rotating sphere. And only to frames of reference relative to a rotating sphere. In fact it is the rotation of the sphere which causes the frame dragging.
c remains constant but the frequency red shifts. Consider the difference.
I appreciate that most physicists jeer at such notions. However a few at the highest levels of the profession sometimes say things which make me think they may be closer in agreement with me than the others. Unfortunately they mostly speak in mathematics and I in logic.
Originally posted by Cyberbian
Ok, so how does accepted physics deal with light "passing" an observer at c when the observer is moving at half of c, therefore necessitating it's premature arrival to a second observer farther on, who is moving faster and yet perceives it once again to be passing at c?