TA106 (Müller)


Commentary 18 (to R6)


by Peter Beamish
9 April 2008, posted 19 April 2008


Dr. Herbert Müller wrote: KARL JASPERS FORUM TA106 R6 to C12 by peter b.

Thank you for your answer concerning the speed of light. However, I have
a question: you say that: -- "The velocity of light in empty space is an
'absolute constant' of Nature and is independent of the motion of the
emitting body, AND/OR OF ANY SUCH SUBJECT." *** [Quote by peter beamish]

My question is: How do you support this opinion? - [Replies in "[xxx]".]

There is no reality without subjects;- [The "subjects" for light are the
photons forming "wave functions" travelling thro' a "sea" of neutrinos.]

-this fiction is only postulated in traditional metaphysics. - - - [Ok!]

There can thus be no such thing as a subject-exclusive speed-(of light
or of anything else)-in-itself;- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [Ok!]

-nor is this a mathematical constant like pi. ["c"=a physical constant.]

An operational definition has to specify how the speed of light is
determined. [Can use an interferometer as in the Michelson-Morley Expt.]

The speed of light is a quantifiable aspect, with a magnitude, of a
physical event (movement of light).- - [Rather a quantifiable velocity.]

My understanding is that it has been measured and was found to be equal
for light coming from a star whether the earth approaches it or recedes
from it. - - - - - - - - - [Yes indeed! Please see *** quotation above.]

That result was one of the reasons for Einstein to propose relativity
theory. [Yes, but based on Maxwell's Equations, not the above M-M Expt.]

But if it is measured by someone (on earth), the speed of the movement
is relative to, and not independent of, that 'observer';- [No! See ***.]

-s/he can only measure it in distance over time, as seen from where s/he
is now. [No, s/he can measure it in "displacement/duration" as M-M Expt.]
- - [See Glossary **** & Précis # 14051 for "time/duration difference".]

Einstein postulated that the speed is independent of the speed of the
emitting source, not that it is independent of the observer. - [No! "The
velocity of light in empty space is an 'absolute constant' of Nature." &
is independent of any other motion such as emitting source OR observer.]

I would much appreciate a wider debate by physicists, and by others too-
[Thanks for using the concept of debate, instead of "arguing emotions!"]

Statements by Dr. Herbert F.J. Müller 2 April 2008, posted 9 April 2008.
Replies by peter beamish, ph.d, physics (MIT), biophysics (UBC) 4/9/'08.
- - - - - - - [Please include these important references.] - - - - - - -
2 Page Glossary **** http://www.animalcontact.com/research/glossary.html
1 Pg. Side Précises http://www.animalcontact.com/research/abstracts.html
- - - - - - - - - - **"CETA" office closed 4/11-4/20 - - - - - - - - - -


Peter Beamish
     e-mail <
beamish (at) oceancontact.com>