jack has committed a monumental error in his derivation.
Of course, nothing else could have been expected of him.
He practically threw out the most basic requirement of the Sagnac effect.
What is the center of rotation for the orbit of the earth?
Here is the equation.
∆t = 4πRv / ( c² - v²) = 4Aω / ( c² - v²)
Where A = πR² and v = ωR
So, it is easy to calculate the orbital sagnac is more than 60 times that of the rotational.
But, A is based on R and according to mathpages, "
circular loop of radius R".
http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s2-07/2-07.htmMathpages says you must use the center of rotation which is the sun.
Are there situations where the location of the center of rotation can be overlooked? Sure, but the rotational Sagnac and the orbital Sagnac are not among them.
In fact, the rotational Sagnac is calculated exactly as described above: using a circular loop.
But the same requirement is to be fulfilled in the case of the orbital Sagnac.
http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s2-07/2-07.htmIt is a loop and the earth is moving along the loop in its orbit around the sun.
If light travels at one speed c, then as the earth supposedly moves in it's revolution loop at 30k/s, while light moves c through space, the unit at the equator at noon would move with the earth' rotation and the earth's revolution cutting the distance the signal must travel to meet the unit.
"Let's say the unit is at the equator and the satellite is low on the horizon in the east at noon.
That means the unit is traveling at the orbital speed of the earth at 67,000 MPH.
The satellite emits at one speed c in space. While the light travels through space toward the unit at c, the unit moves with the earth at 67,000 MPH. The unit cuts the distance that the light must travel.
This is not being seen by any experiements nor GPS."
Yet, this same logic applies and works with the earth's supposed rotation.
jack does not understand this very basic fact of science, and has proceeded to construct his very own version of the Universe.
Let us see what happens when one disregards the basic facts of science.
jack's own words:
And thus:
dto/dtr=k*wo/k*wr=wo/wo=1/365.
Just like I said.
I also backed up this formula with my own derivation.
jack claims that the orbital Sagnac is 1/365 of the rotational Sagnac, and that, read carefully:
"I also backed up this formula with my own derivation."Using his own very words, jack is telling us that his derivation leads directly to this figure: 1/365.
Here is another quote now:
This is the correct calculation:
Δto/Δt r=[4Aiωo/( c² - vo²)] / [4Aiωr/( c² - vr²)]
Note, the area here has nothing to do with the area of Earth's orbit or radius of it or the radius of Earth. It is the area of the interferometer, as my derivation.
No where in any derivation did the area of Earth's orbit come into it.
So to continue:
Δto/Δt r=[4Aiωo/( c² - vo²)] / [4Aiωr/( c² - vr²)]
Obviously, ( c² - vo²) and ( c² - vr²) are very close to the same number, so let's lave them off.
=4Aiωo/ 4Aiωr
Then to simplify:
=ωo/ ωr
And would you look at that? It ends up being just like what we claim.
You have ωo/ ωr.
As Earth rotates roughly 365 times for each orbit, ωr=365*ωo.
Thus we get:
Δto/Δt r=ωo/ ωr
=ωo/ (365*ωo)
=1/365
Just like we claim.
A very clear claim based on jack's derivation.
These are his own very words.
He claims that the derivation, as shown above, leads to the figure 1/365.
And he says that he bases his entire derivation on this:
Note, the area here has nothing to do with the area of Earth's orbit or radius of it or the radius of Earth.This hypothesis, in turn, jack claims leads to this conclusion:
=1/365
Just like we claim.jack simply threw out the basic requirement that the orbital Sagnac is a circular loop, and reached the conclusion that the orbital Sagnac is 1/365 of the rotational Sagnac.
Let us put jack's claims to a real test.
Published by the BULLETIN OF THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY, one of the most prestigious journals in the world today.
C.C. Su, "A Local-ether model of propagation of electromagnetic wave," in Bull. Am. Phys. Soc., vol. 45, no. 1, p. 637, Mar. 2000 (Minneapolis, Minnesota).
http://www.ee.nthu.edu.tw/ccsu/
Anyway, the interplanetary Sagnac effect is due to
earth’s orbital motion around the sun as well as earth’s
rotation.
Based on the local-ether model, the propagation is entirely
independent of the earth’s orbital motion around
the sun or whatever and the velocity v for such an earthbound
experiment is referred to an ECI frame and hence
is due to earth’s rotation alone.
In the original proposal,
the velocity v was supposed to incorporate earth’s orbital
motion around the sun. Thus, at least, v^2/c^2
=~ 10^-8. Then the amplitude of the phase-difference variation
could be as large as π/3, when the wavelength is
0.6 µm and the path length is 10 m. However, as the velocity
v is the linear velocity due to earth’s rotation alone,
the round-trip Sagnac effect is as small as v^2/c^2∼ 10^-12 which is merely 10^-4 times that due to the orbital motion.
The Sagnac effect is a FIRST ORDER effect in v/c.
Even in the round-trip nature of the Sagnac effect, as it was applied in the Michelson-Morley experiment, thus becoming a second order effect within that context, we can see that the ORBITAL SAGNAC IS 10,000 TIMES GREATER than the rotational Sagnac effect.
The author PROVED that the orbital Sagnac is 10,000 times greater than the rotational Sagnac, and the peer reviewers agree totally.
It was published in one of the most respected journals in the world.
Both claims cannot be true at the same time, right?
The derivation's conclusion is that the orbital Sagnac is 1/365 of the rotational Sagnac.
The mainstream papers published by these respected journals prove that the orbital Sagnac is 10,000 greater than the rotational Sagnac.
That is what is totally wrong with your derivation.
You are off by a factor of 3,650,000!
Why are you off by such a huge factor?
Because of the wrong application of the Sagnac formula.
∆t = 4πRv / ( c² - v²) = 4Aω / ( c² - v²)
Where A = πR² and v = ωR
But, A is based on R and according to mathpages, "
circular loop of radius R".
http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s2-07/2-07.htmMathpages says you must use the center of rotation which is the sun.
Our friend jack brushed aside this requirement to impose his will on everybody else:
Note, the area here has nothing to do with the area of Earth's orbit or radius of it or the radius of Earth. (jack's own very words)
In this particular case, the orbital path of the Earth, YOU MUST USE THE CORRECT RADIUS IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE A CORRECT RESULT.
jack's dismissal of basic scientific facts led to this monumentally erroneous conclusions, using his own words:
=1/365
Just like we claim.In the original proposal,
the velocity v was supposed to incorporate earth’s orbital
motion around the sun. Thus, at least, v^2/c^2
=~ 10^-8. Then the amplitude of the phase-difference variation
could be as large as π/3, when the wavelength is
0.6 µm and the path length is 10 m. However, as the velocity
v is the linear velocity due to earth’s rotation alone,
the round-trip Sagnac effect is as small as v^2/c^2∼ 10^-12 which is merely 10^-4 times that due to the orbital motion.
PUBLISHED BY THE BULLETIN OF THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY, one of the most respected journals in the world.
Dr. C.C. Su proves that the correct figure is at least 10,000.
jack's catastrophic interpretation of the Sagnac effect leads to a figure of 1/365.
Let us see by how much jack went wrong.
10,000/(1/365) = 3,650,000
A huge margin of error, just what we would expect of someone like jack: he practically disregarded the most basic requirement of the Sagnac effect applied to the orbital case.
There is nothing else to discuss here.