Replies

But when there is a third body in motion (for example, light) then we can measure and calculate angles and distances between all three -- and now being orbited and spinning are no longer indistinguishable.

Light is not a third body, that was Einsteins point. You can't use light to determine your absolute velocity, there is no aether (or fixed velocity for that matter). Did you miss my example of the people floating in space with radar guns?

The use of a third body for reference only changes the point of reference, which can be very helpful and it can simply be an arbitrary point, it doesn't have to be a 'body'. Did you not look at the Merry go Round animation that I linked to?

Said LeGrande:Light is not a third body,...

Now wait a second! You previously said "Light, is the moving part in the LRG" ! Early on in the discussion when you said that there was no difference between spinning and being orbited in a two body model I said "But if you bury a Laser Ring Gyro 10 feet deep on earth it'll tell you whether you're spinning or being orbited" and you said "The Gyro, LRG and pendulum are essentially the same thing and if you add them in you are adding in a third body and unnecessarily complicating the model."

And now you say that light is not a third body? Did you change your mind? or what? You, my friend, have contradicted yourself most brilliantly this time, have you not?!

I did see your example the people floating in space with radar guns but that's not an angular equation, which the lag of the sun is. I also saw your example of the merry go around and the football players (or whatever those creatures were.) They demonstrated 3 bodies in motion - the ground, the go around, and the ball. And it was obviously absurd to say that the merry go around was being orbited because look at the spiral the ball took! I mean maybe it was a foot ball, and I know they don't bounce nicely and they may not fly straight, but they don't fly that badly in a spiral!

The question at hand is not about frames of reference but whether, for an observer on earth, at a point in time, the sun appears 2.1 degrees behind its actual position or Pluto 102 degrees or a 12-light-hour planet, 180 degrees, or if an observer on the north pole on a merry go around turning at the rate of 180 degrees per 8.3 minutes would see the sun appear in one direction while its actual and gravitational position were the exact opposite direction -- all, of course, at an instant in time.

And since we're discussing the earth, the sun, and the light that travels from the latter to the former on a course reasonably uninfluenced but either the sun or the earth, we must consider there to be 3 bodies in motion if we are to be able to discuss how far lagged the sun might or might not appear to be.

By the way, if you still think that "appear" and "see" are the same thing, here's an illustration that shows the difference:

Let's say I reported to you that "I saw a man coming out of a bank with a mask on and his pockets full of money. It appeared that he had robbed the bank."

See difference? What I saw was certain fact - I did see the man and so on and so forth in this example. Now whether he actually had indeed robbed the bank or not I do not know, only that in my judgment it appears that he had robbed the bank. But it could be that he just likes masks and had withdrawn money from his account.

To take it further, if I had then called the police and said "I saw a man rob a bank" or "I see a man who robbed a bank" I'd be lying since I didn't see it, and didn't even know for certain that he did rob the bank. The only honest thing I can say is that I saw him, and it appeared to me that he had robbed the bank.

Does that help?

-Jesse

The Red question - 12 light hour away planet:

For an observer on earth who is looking at a bright and stationary planet that is 12 light hours away and is above the earth's equator, at the instant that said planet appears in the east will it really be in the west? Will its gravity be pulling in the opposite direction of where the light appears to come from at that instant?
LeGrande's Answer: None yet to this question.

The Green question: Pluto

For an observer on earth who looks up and sees Pluto when it is overhead and when it is 6.8 light hours away, at that instant in time, will Pluto really be about 102 degrees away from where it appears? Will it really appear directly overhead at the moment it is really below the horizon?
LeGrande's Answer: None yet to this question.

The Blue question: if the sun were 10 light days away

If the sun were 10 light days away, and the earth was suddenly stopped, do you believe that the sun would continue to appear to rise and set for another 10 days?
LeGrande's Answer: None yet to this question.

The Yellow question: Turntable at north pole tracking the sun

Let's say that you are standing on a turntable at the North Pole. Lets also say that the turntable (and its pointer) is tracking and pointing at the Suns gravity field (its actual position). Will the pointer on the turntable be pointing at* the light that you see or will it be leading or lagging that light by 2.1 degrees? (*Note: by "at" I mean "within about 20 arcseconds")
LeGrande's Answer: None yet to this question.

The Lavender question: 17 minute merry go around tilted toward Polaris

Let us say that I tilted up my merry go around so that it's top pointed directly at the north star (Polaris to be specific) and furthermore let us say that I got it spinning at exactly 180 degrees per 8.3 minutes with reference to the position of the sun -- at the instant that the sun appeared almost exactly in my face, would it really be behind my head? In other words, would the light be coming from about the exact opposite direction from where the sun's gravity would be pulling - at any instant in time?
LeGrande's Answer: Just asked, Awaiting answer....

The Purple question: 17 minute merry go around on north pole

Let us say that I had a merry go around on the North Pole furthermore let us say that I got it spinning at exactly 180 degrees per 8.3 minutes with reference to the position of the sun -- at the instant that the sun appeared almost exactly in my face, would it really be behind my head? In other words, would the light be coming from about the exact opposite direction from where the sun's gravity would be pulling - at any instant in time?
LeGrande's Answer: No answer yet.

The Aqua question: 17 minute day vs 17 minute merry go around revolution.

You said that If the earth were turning at the rate of 180 degrees per 8.5 minutes, the sun's optical image would be lagged 180 degrees from its real position.

But then you say that if I was on a merry go around that was turning at the rate of 180 degrees per 8.3 minutes, and the sun appeared on the horizon, the sun's apparent position would not be 180 degrees displaced from its actual position.

So how come, by your theory, would the earth's hypothetical rotational rate of 180 degrees per 8.3 minutes, for an observer on earth at an instant in time, cause the sun's gravitational pull and light to come from opposite directions from eachother, when for an observer on a merry go around turning at the same rate, it would not?
LeGrande's Answer: None yet.

PS. Sorry.

Said LeGrande:You can't use light to determine your absolute velocity,...

But you can use light to determine your absolute angular velocity! That's why the Laser Ring Gyro works. And that's why Foucault and Michelson were able to use the spinning mirror method.

So can you at least give me one good reason why you won't answer any of my color-coded questions?

-Jesse