A-wal wrote:Of course you can show that light relative velocity isn't affected by the velocity of the source and the observer relative to each other, by measuring it when the moons moving away from us and towards us and then comparing the results. If the velocity of the light was affected by the velocity between the source and the observer the orbit of the moon would appear to spedd up when it's moving towards us and slow down as it's moving away from us. That's not what happens.
Actually that's misleading. The orbit of the moon does, er spedd, speed up when it's moving towards us and slow down when it's moving away from us because of Doppler shift, but that's only because the distance the light has to travel is decreasing or increasing. If the speed of light wasn't constant then it would appear to speed up sooner and slow down progressively later.
Aardwolf wrote:So you mention a paper that as far as anyone is able to tell, doesn't exist yet I have to find this non-existent paper.
There's quite a good online search engine you might want to try, gaggle, guggle, or something. Search for it.
Aardwolf wrote:I'd love to refute it. Unfortunately I have no way of finding it. I tried all your search terms.
I just searched for 'speed of light moon Jupiter' and there's tons of stuff. You lie!
Aardwolf wrote:There's the time reference again. Maybe I would be able to find the paper if you could drop a hint as to which organisation placed the clock(s) required on said moon(s) to determine the time the signal left. Unless you can propose another way of determining how long a signal can take to travel from A to B with a clock placed at B only.
You don't need to measure it both ways to show the consistency of the speed of light. If the relative velocity between the earth and the moon being observed made a difference then you would expect to see the moon at an earlier point in its orbit when it's heading towards us and a later point when it's moving away from us.
Aardwolf wrote:Do have a link to a paper that shows that this is "not what happens"? Is it even possible to determine? Io orbits at 17 km/s which is about 0.0057% of the speed of light so the moon would appear to be sped up by about 17*0.0057% = 1 m/s. Over half an orbit this equates to roughly 70km (half of this really because 17km/s would be the max with the min at 0 but lets leave that for now). The diameter of Io is 3,630 km so we're looking for a difference in a half orbit position of 1.9%. I would be interested to know how they determined the position of the moon during the experiment to this degree. It may be possible, I'm not sure, but a link to the paper would be beneficial.
Why are you using Io? Titan's bigger and I think it has a bigger orbit.
Aardwolf wrote:The "proof" of your argument only appears to exist in your head and I would hope most members here would agree that makes a pretty weak argument.
Do you really think that the only proof of the constant velocity of the speed of light exists in my head?