Message from discussion New gas mode ether-drift experiments proposed

From: "harry" <harald.vanlintelButNotT...@epfl.ch>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics
References: <x_OXj.2529$hJ5.2432@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com> <47mv24p2fo0uo4b9d4fp30odd123d4st77@4ax.com> 	<78rYj.9215$nl7.6985@flpi146.ffdc.sbc.com> <4lt434pgdo10a5r85j4hb8i1dbk054lf1c@4ax.com> 	<JU_Yj.37$Ti2.9@flpi148.ffdc.sbc.com> <bf9934dkt7sdeq1qf4koe4a4e4lq0ulrf0@4ax.com> 	<eb416425-4fa6-49d2-8197-c8b382bf4502@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com> 	<as3a345omuiugh3h3t6bphegcbpr2r378g@4ax.com> <03a68663-109b-4de3-b8eb-4a1a86923332@y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com> 	<klcc34p0dg47crrbjp8gcnb3rrudmk6o5l@4ax.com> <0aa41391-852e-4c9e-abeb-0aa492888dd2@26g2000hsk.googlegroups.com> <99BZj.108$uE5.87@flpi144.ffdc.sbc.com> <4837e477$1_5@news.bluewin.ch> <RQRZj.103193$AN7.87552@newsfe23.ams2>
In-Reply-To: <RQRZj.103193$AN7.87552@newsfe23.ams2>
Subject: Re: New gas mode ether-drift experiments proposed
Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 13:21:18 +0200
Lines: 87
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6000.16480
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6000.16545
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 080427-1, 27/04/2008), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
NNTP-Posting-Host: 85.0.134.36
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 85.0.134.36
Message-ID: <4837fa4b$1_6@news.bluewin.ch>
X-Trace: news.bluewin.ch 1211628107 85.0.134.36 (24 May 2008 13:21:47 +0200)
Organization: Bluewin AG
Complaints-To: abuse@bluewin.ch
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 127.0.0.1
Path: g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.glorb.com!wn11feed!worldnet.att.net!164.128.36.58!news.ip-plus.net!newsfeed.ip-plus.net!news.bluewin.ch!not-for-mail


"Androcles" <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics> wrote in message 
news:RQRZj.103193$AN7.87552@newsfe23.ams2...
>
> "harry" <harald.vanlintelButNotT...@epfl.ch> wrote in message
> news:4837e477$1_5@news.bluewin.ch...
> |
> | "Tom Roberts" <tjroberts...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> | news:99BZj.108$uE5.87@flpi144.ffdc.sbc.com...
> | > Jerry wrote:
> | [...]
> | > Imagine that one selected a different group of ten men. The average 
> for
> | > this second group is almost surely not 162 lbs. Consider a third,
> fourth,
> | > fifth,... group of ten men, and plot the distriution of the averages 
> for
> | > the different groups. The AVERAGES will display a variance, and that
> | > variance is related to the variance of the weights of the individual
> men.
> | > THIS is what statistics does: it tells you what the variance of the
> | > average will be, given the variance of the individual measurements 
> (here
> | > mens' weights).
> | >
> | > For the case (like Miller's) where you have only one group of ten men 
> to
> | > consider, honesty precludes one from claiming the average is 162 +- 
> 0.5,
> | > and one must claim 162 +- sigma, where sigma is determined from the
> | > distribution of the ten mens' weights. In the language of statistics,
> the
> | > mean of those ten mens' weights is the best unbiased predictor of the
> true
> | > average, and the sigma is the best unbiased predictor of how 
> accurately
> | > the average of those ten weights reflects the true average. Note these
> are
> | > "predictors", because one does not know the true values, one only 
> knows
> | > the ten values one measured.
> | >
> | > To learn how to compute that sigma you need to STUDY. If
> | > those ten men's weights are randomly but uniformly
> | > distributed between 131 and 245 lbs, the sigma (errorbar
> | > on the average) will be about 10 lbs, not 0.5 lbs.
> | >
> | > That's PRECISELY what I did for each run of Miller's data: For each of
> his
> | > eight orientations he averaged 40 data points. I computed the variance
> of
> | > those eight averages from the variance of the 40 points that went into
> | > computing each one. Those variances (errorbars) GREATLY exceed the
> | > variation among the eight averages, showing that the variation Miller
> used
> | > to make his result is not significant. This, in turn, makes any
> conclusion
> | > based on his results be insignificant: Miller concluded the average is
> 11
> | > km/s, but the errorbar on that average is something like 100 km/s;
> Miller
> | > determined an average direction, but the errorbar on that direction
> | > includes all possible directions.
> |
> | Well explained this time! :-)
> |
> | Harald

> Consider why did Einstein say
> the speed of light from A to B is c-v,
> the speed of light from B to A is c+v,
> the "time" each way is the same,

Easy: he did NOT say that.

> and tell us what the fucking errorbar is,

Also easy: in such theoretical approaches there isn't any. And no need to 
curse - that won't help you to understand it!

> you handwaving ignorant arse-kissing prat.

If you had the slightest reading ability, you would not say such silly 
things. :-)

Harald