- #211
PeterDonis
Mentor
- 46,951
- 23,385
I didn't say Bradley was assuming absolute motion. I said you were. Now you are not, since you correctly say "relative to the Sun". That means "in an inertial frame in which the Sun is at rest", which implies a simultaneity convention, just as everyone has been telling you.meekerdb said:Bradley was measuring the speed of light compared to the orbital speed of the Earth relative to the Sun. There's no assumption of absolute motion there.
No, the simultaneity of the inertial frame Bradley assumed, which, it appears from the above, you now correctly understand to be the inertial frame in which the Sun is at rest.meekerdb said:What simultaneity is relevant to Bradley's meausurement? The top and bottom of his telescope?