28 Aug 2005 [To Steuard Jensen]

Your response of a week ago required some think time. Still does, as  
a matter of fact. But I've honed the question a bit and wonder if  
this makes any difference? You may have answered this in your  
message, but if so I haven't figured that out yet.

Let's assume the same space ship with the same single-photon-wide  
light beam. Also assume everything is from the point of view of an  
observer on that space ship.

The space ship is not in acceleration or deceleration. It is in  
uniform motion.

The observer tunes the light clock so the narrow beam bounces off the  
very tiny mirror and returns to a very tiny receptor at the bottom of  
the light clock.

Okay so far??

Now, suppose the spaceship (including the light clock and the  
observer/technician) accelerates rapidly in a direction that is  
roughly perpendicular to the light beam. Will the light beam still  
bounce back to the receptor...

1.    During acceleratiion?

2.    At the end of acceleration (once again in uniform motion but  
without deceleration)?


For the sake of argument, let's say it is a very fat spaceship with a  
very tall light clock. The key point here being that the top mirror  
is far enough away from the emitter and receptor to allow the  
recording of significant elapsed time and the top mirror accelerates  
in concert with the base of the light clock with no change in tuning  
adjustments.



Does this remove some of the ambiguity?  Basically, now we are not  
concerned with wether the beam is exactly perpendicular. All it has  
to do is hit the receptor in the initial state of uniform motion.





So, why does all this seem to matter to me?


If the photon beam misses the mirror during or after acceleration,  
that supports the previous idea of the light pulse from one space  
ship reaching the other space ship even though the two ships are  
receding from each other at 120% the speed of light. But then, it  
also seems to support some kind of stationary spatial concept  
(similar to but not identical to the ether idea), doesn't it?

If the photon beam hits the mirror during or after acceleration,  
doesn't that support the idea that the travel of the light is somehow  
related to or influenced by the acceleration or deceleration of the  
emitter?



Thanks for your interest in this. It seems to be a sticking point  
that keeps me from understanding other stuff.