On Einstein's explanation of the invariance of c

You assume light has a constant velocity, and that the wavelength of a fixed frequency is also constant and doesn't change for an observer in the same frame of reference as the fixed frequency.

But since you don't know what a frame of reference is, you can't understand this.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I understand what a frame is. Do you understand objects travel relative to light, like a bus travels relative to a car?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The meter was first defined as the length traveled by a 1/2 second pendulum. No reference to light used.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

So what? The current definition is defined by light travel time. I use light travel time to measure distance of light travel, do you?

 

Do YOU understand that an observer can be next to an atomic clock and not change the distance between them and the clock? So they and the clock are in a "stationary" frame of reference?

So that means they have a way to measure time and distance relative to their frame of rest? They're free to choose any number of transitions of the clock to define distance, but not free to choose the velocity of light, which is constant?

That if they do change the distance between themselves and the clock, the frequency will also change?

 

Arguing with a crank is absurd and usless.

 

Distance is measured by light travel time, it is the distance light travels, not the distance the object travels. Do you understand that if cars always traveled a constant velocity on a road, say 60 MPH, that the car could take 1 minute to traverse a mile long train, or it could take 30 seconds to traverse a mile long train??? The car's speed is always 60 MPH, but the train can also have motion, affecting the time it takes the car to traverse the train. Do you understand that? Evidently not, because it is exactly the same using a constant speed of light and meter sticks that can be in motion.

 

Is the wavelength of the light an object, does it have a physical existence?
Is distance DEFINED by a number of fixed wavelengths (yes, it is) of a chosen atomic transition, which is of an isotope of Cesium? Does the distance between wavelengths change as you move towards or away from an atomic clock (yes, it does)?

 

How do you know the wavelength of the light if you haven't defined the meter using light speed?

 

How do you know an atomic clock has a fixed wavelength?
Do atomic clocks define a fixed timebase, or not? Are they used as a time reference or does this depend on the definition of a metre?

The question was: is the wavelength of light an object, does it have a physical existence? Do you understand the question? Can you answer it?

 

Your argument is as circular as it gets!

 

Do you understand clocks measure time, and not distance?

 

Do you understand what a wavelength is? Are you going to keep avoiding the question I asked about wavelength being a physical object because you have no argument and you have to keep deflecting from this by repeating the same stupid questions?

 

A wavelength is a distance. Distance is defined by light travel time.

 

I believe that's incorrect, the metre is also defined by the wavelength of atomic transitions of atomic clocks; each wavelength is a constant fraction of "the metre".

Another fail.

 

No it is exactly correct. You can not define the meter using wavelength measured in meters. You are chasing your tail. You always measure the speed of light. Who cares, the speed of light is defined! You are traveling in circles my friend.

Do I need to post the definition of a meter for the 876th time?

 

How is the speed of light defined? How do atomic clocks manage to oscillate at a fixed frequency so that EXACTLY n wavelengths correspond to a metre of distance?

How come a metre of distance can be measured in space, across "nothing"? Why don't you need to use rulers made of wood or metal or "something" rather than "nothing"?

 

The speed of light is constant. We use light travel time to define the meter, which, by definition, defines the speed of light. You don't measure the speed of light by measuring the time it takes to travel a meter stick (which is undefined), the speed of light is already defined by the very nature of defining the meter as the distance light travels in a specific amount of time.

Clocks don't measure distance, they measure time!!!

Because light always travels at a constant speed, so if you measure the time of light travel, and define the meter to be the distance LIGHT TRAVELS in space in a specific amount of time, the speed is already defined.

 

How do you measure the time of light travel? What kind of clock is used?

 

It doesn't matter what kind of clock is used, as long as it is consistent, and it is calibrated to the proper standard second. A second of duration does not change just because you have a cheap watch. A specific duration of time is just that! Watches measure duration. Do you know what a duration of time is?