Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 215 guests, and 0 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters(30 Days)
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
CHALLENGE TO NEWTON

You are into mechanics and engineering and you think your theory is all you need to explain everything.

If that is so you should be able to build a big version of a working atom like life size with basketballs.

I mean you think it looks like this




The electric charges all balance out so make me a huge working one of these please (not a drawing or models) but basket balls that spin around a central group of basketballs.

You aren't allowed to use wires or ropes etc because atoms don't use those and you can't argue you can't make it on earth because of gravity because atoms exist here on earth in gravity.

So make me a big working version of the model please because you think it is possible to do so.

If you can't make me a big version of your atom .. why not .. PLEASE EXPLAIN.

Last edited by Orac; 09/12/13 02:21 PM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
.
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
N
newton Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
N
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
VERY GOOD TEST THANK YOU FOR YOUR LINK DID YOU LOOK ON ALL PAGE (move mouse down of Your link ) !!



What time they made this picture ?
Where was the Earth and Sun during they take a picture ?

How look main angle microshope horizontal line and main velocity

->>> when You have two vectores You know how to add

Give me georaphic wide of the labolatory
I will show You important angle and we can ask them please take a picture on this direction and angle
You will have evidence !!!! that it is not circle !!!

CIRCLE ??? for my wife it is small ellipse We can prove or disprove circle




MORE INFO FOR YOU ABOUT ATHOM

TIME IS ABSOLUTE
MOTION CAN CHANGE ELECTRON PERIOD !!! Great idea the same electron jous make not the same way ( elipse rise up if velocity rise up )
longer or shorter way Important is apparent position and absolute montion = Huge speed time slown down ( not time but electorn period and way is bigger !!!)

IDEAL CIRCLE ? Exist only if atom is in stationary point in the universe and not take any energy form outside !!!

Atomic clock slown down during travel but not time !!!
time is absolute :):):) (

Thank You Your posts ARE VERY GOOD INSPIRATION

ABOVE TEST WE CAN ASK MICROSCOPE OWNER
PLEASE USE SPECIAL TIME AND SPECIAL MICROSCOPE ANGLE we schould see 24h period shift ( maximal point direction )






Last edited by newton; 09/12/13 04:15 PM.
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
So build me a model .. a big life size one.

Only 9 balls in the drawing above, I will even accept hydrogen model you need only 3 balls ... build me my model please.

Do you want me to send you the materials what is your preference marbles? What size do you want?

I think everyone can see the problem except you Newton, you lost your marbles laugh


Poor Newton whole theory collapsed by 3 little balls smile

Here I have your whole theory in the palm of my hand .. make it spin Newton ...... I believe .... I believe



Last edited by Orac; 09/13/13 03:50 AM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
N
newton Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
N
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209

Atomic clock and absolute montion

e--F2>--<F2-C--F1->----<F1----e ----------> 623 km/s

we have elipsce respect to apparent point
Center was in point 1 - electron period is longer around the center ( motion = long period ) F2>F1


Atomic Clock and gravitation time problem


e
i
i
i
i
C
i
i
i
i
i
i
e

Please take pendulum to high tower ( on mass m will work lover gravitation forces Period will be longer )

the same pendulum near ground ( stonger forces shorter period )

Imortant is DISTANCE to Center in example no 2 ( pendulum )
distance to Earth change forces in example no 1 ( motion )
important is apparent point

NEWTON MADE MISTAKE WE NEED REBUILD GRAVITATION EQUATION
and FAMOUS F= ma we need add INERTIA problem ( absolute motion )


I don't know how to build Your model but I must ask You did You saw in nature single atom

three or four atoms can give equal forces not single

Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
N
newton Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
N
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
Dear Orac Can we speak about Earth and Sun ( sky mechanic )

and not Use others planet around Sun and Earth

Your Problem is that You want to speak about sigle atom without information about many problems around athom !!!

Mr Mach learned Us that all bodies in the universe cooperate
small mass m motion can change huge mass M velocity
important is speed and inertia

( in the universe not exist friction ) Inertia rise up if velocity rise up

What Is it black hole ? Information about body is moving slower than body ? or we have huge abberation and very low signal level !!!!
( apparent point is important ? )

Not exist C+ V what if V is closed to C ????
apparent point it is very good tool for many facts NOT for SINGLE ATHOM ( not real teoretical example)

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-QDhADrDXABA/UVl_hphDVsI/AAAAAAAAAxc/skybrn6FqbQ/s1600/darkmaterr.JPG

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-7aNEnYJIEBU/UVRx1T-PBjI/AAAAAAAAAww/UVzA5j7ymfU/s1600/black+holes.JPG


Last edited by newton; 09/13/13 05:39 AM.
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
The planet problem is identical to the atom problem .... you want absolute space size doesn't matter.

So lets not even worry about planets or atoms which are too hard to test for you and I ... we have 3 marbles.

Set the 3 marbles into your model we can both easily do it and test things.


You can't do it can you .... you are a mechanical/electrical guru why can't you do it?

Why Newton?

Atom/planet or marble they all work it's the same universe.

YOUR PROBLEM IS CLASSIC PHYSICS IS WRONG and you are stuck ... I know it, you know it as does everyone.

It's called the collapse of Newton's universe ... PLOP .. universe all gone



Here is the best model anyone has ever been able to make for a museum and it's not very good even children have trouble with it



SO WE HAVE A GOOD SETUP WE CAN BOTH TEST CALLED 3 MARBLES AS CAN ALL THE READERS

WE CAN MAKE IT 2 MARBLES IF IT HELPS

SO LETS TEST ... COME ON NEWTON





The best bit is we haven't even got to the hard bit of stacking atom models on top of atom models which we should be able to do to build a solid and then apply pressure .... oh the problem gets a lot worse Newton.

Are you feeling rather silly yet Newton?

Absolute space is dead absolutely marbles tells me so!!!!!

Last edited by Orac; 09/13/13 06:24 AM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
If you decide to actually discuss why you can't make the marbles look like an atom I am more than happy to take you thru how people tried to solve it historically and what the problems are so you can see the problems from different angles.

However I suspect you will respond with the usual wall of garbage about your great theory smile


I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
N
newton Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
N
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
Dear Orac You speak about NEwto

below Galileo His problem was main
inspiration for modern physics ( my test with light solve below problem ) it is fact that we can measure different brightness
of picture ( Ok I and You don't know why and how ... above I already showed my point of view .... )

below paragraph is right now in each books physics for me t is not only about Newton !!!

" Galileo postulated his relativity hypothesis: any two observers moving at constant speed and direction with respect to one another will obtain the same results for all mechanical experiments (it is understood that the apparatuses they use for these experiments move with them).
This idea has a very important consequence: velocity is not absolute. This means that velocity can only be measured in reference to some object(s), and that the result of this measurment changes if we decide to measure the velocity with respect to a diferent refernce point(s). Imagine an observer traveling inside a windowless spaceship moving away from the sun at constant velocity. Galileo asserted that there are no mechanical experiments that can be made inside the rocket that will tell the occupants that the rocket is moving .
The question ``are we moving'' has no meaning unless we specify a reference frame (are we moving with respect to that star'' is meaningful). This fact, formulated in the 1600's remains very true today and is one of the cornerstones of Einstein's theories of relativity."



Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
And we showed Galileo wrong all it took was those same 3 marbles



You have to be able to make the atom stable otherwise the world can't exist.

So consider what Galileo thought it still doesn't solve the problem.

Ok so to stabilize an atom there are a number of problems Galileo and you have.

Lets deal with the first you need a repulsive force but that alone won't solve Galileo and your problem.

Do you know what the repulsive force in the atom is called and how it works?


I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
N
newton Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
N
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209

You showed 3 marbles

traditional helicopter has got two propellers

exist hexacopter

trio copter !!!

Nine marbles I don't know but what about 900000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 marbels

Speak about one atom = nonsense
Gravitation = many palnets cooperate ( motion ??? )
Dark mattery ??? darkk mattery can be apparent points
milion years before very far far from Earth some bodies were in that point and send gravitation signal that we can measure but body is far far away from point where we look




Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
N
newton Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
N
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
CAN we START speak ABOUT
Michelson Morley test ?

Wiki
"Special relativity is generally considered the solution to all negative aether drift (or isotropy of the speed of light) measurements, including the Michelson–Morley null result. Many high precision measurements have been conducted as tests of special relativity and modern searches for Lorentz violation in the photon, electron, nucleon, or neutrino sector, all of them confirming relativity"

Hey my simple test is here
( You need photocamera + bulb )

very cheap and simple test ( problem is that to many persons like to be more satrer than others They are "Elite"

They like use mathematica that nobody understand
and take money from goverments
for test that nobody understand !!!! )


http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=49729#Post49729

Last edited by newton; 09/14/13 11:20 AM.
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Again you are just changing subject ...

Even if I was to accept there was a problem with SR/GR we know your theory is dead.

Whatever theory is correct must be relative you can not have absolute space

That is why you can't make marbles into an atom here on earth not even using magnetism or any other technique you lack something which is a repulsive force and worse it has to have special properties of how it works at distance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong_interaction


That is why even as good as you may be with mechanical and electrical things you can not build such a model.


The problem for you Newton is such a force CAN NOT EXIST WITHOUT EINSTEIN BEING RIGHT.


So even if I accept there is another explaination of Michelson–Morley experiment WHICH I DON'T ... your theory is as dead as ever.


The universe couldn't work with your rubbish theory it would collapse in on itself .... NO REPULSIVE FORCE !!!!!


So you need a repulsive force it must be measurable and detectable and experimentally verifiable by science and somehow you have to get the universe to still behave as it does.


TRY MAKING A REPULSIVE FORCE IN YOUR THEORY AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS laugh


Any theory that wants to replace Einstein's must ultimately actually work ... yours fails that test


So here are your 3 marbles again think how to make it work


I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
N
newton Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
N
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
Hey I not have any my own theory

1 appatent point is inside books
2 aberration and fact that not exist C+V is inside books
3 Luminosity and distance/Area Square functon is inside books
4 Doppler we have two bodies different velocity we also
see apparent position not Real and Actual position of the source

I see huge problems inside Fundaments
I not like or dislike Einstein
but please explain me
what is it apparent point for You ?

Point 1 -----You are in point 2

You were in point1 ( point one not exist but it is stationary point "frozen motion " )

You can not change past ( fact that You were in P1)

FACT that YOU were in P1 is absolute
also for others observers
( They will be able evaluate Your actual position
they can see red/blue shift and more they can see lower
and become more brightness picture
( similar is with black holes after many years
who know ? ---> we can see that blackholes
are more bright )

My discovery ?
observers can measure brightness and Hz not only Hz
( Level of signal is important )

Dear Astronomers You can see red blue AND MORE

You are able measure Intensity of the signal SHIFT
( You can feel more hot light = you register the light more closer apparent point below Solar system please see below animation and picture )

animation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Aberrationlighttimebeaming.gif

below SUN and Earth model
and 20 km/s ( winter distance is different if You compare to summer distance ) reason is apparent point and motion respect to apparent point ( Important is where the signal started not where right now is the sun and the Earth )



if You are sending master signal of light from each new point where You are in space LED can have 120 mln Hz

Led ------- camera ----->30 km/s
point1.......point1

after short time led will be in point 2 ( camera escape from light ( first signal started in point 1 )

"********"Led ------- camera ----->30 km/s
point1..Point 2........point2

please add to abve picture doppler





Not exist C+ V so You are sending rings
point 1 ----ring 1
point 2 ---- ring 2
point 3 ---- ring 3
.....

lets speak about Michelson Morley
( please stop speak about Newton I know and You know that NEWTON is incorect he didn't find absolute zero )

http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=49729#Post49729

Last edited by newton; 09/14/13 01:27 PM.
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
The problem is Newton as I have shown you the universe would not exist if what you say was true.

I have shown you the problem you can't decide just to ignore it

There has to be something very close to Einstein's relativity in play, if it's not exact it is very close ... the problem is called fine tuning.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuning


Quote = In theoretical physics, fine-tuning refers to circumstances when the parameters of a model must be adjusted very precisely in order to agree with observations.


I am sorry Newton .. we are here the universe exists so you are wrong.


Repeating silly things over again and again won't make it right.


So I will repeat until your idea can make the atom model spin the marbles it is dead ... I have 3 here if you want to play smile



I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
If you are in the mode to stop being silly and want to actually learn you need to see how deeply relativity is in the universe.

Lets start explaining first there are two sorts of relativity and you get them confused and even mix them up. At a layman level Special Relativity is actually the easiest which involves inertial frames or moving frames and General relativity involves gravity as a rough guide.

Many of your comments don't distinguish between the two but it is important you isolate which you are talking about.

Special relativity you have almost no chance of proving wrong ... good luck with that.


Theories that Special Relativity forms the basis for:


1.) Electromagnetism

You are the mechanical/electrical person well none of your fields would work without SR.

Reference to read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_electromagnetism_and_special_relativity

Electromagnetism with the advent of Quantum Mechanics was corrected from its classic physics to a single framework called Quantum Electrodynamics (QED).

Reference to read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_electrodynamics

NOTE THIS POINT:
In essence, it describes how light and matter interact and is the first theory where full agreement between quantum mechanics and special relativity is achieved.




2.) Quantum Mechanics and Atomic structure

You did part of this exercise above with the marbles

There are formal mathematical proofs that special relativity comes out from the frame work of quantum mechanics. Atomic structure and forces require special relativity to be correct or else the atom falls apart you found that problem.

This is the problem Einstein was playing around with when he discovered the idea.


3.) Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD).

The atomic problem from above made it clear that you need more forces to hold the atom together and make a repulsive force.

In 1973 the concept of colour as the source of a “strong field” was developed into the theory of QCD by European physicists Harald Fritzsch and Heinrich Leutwyler, together with American physicist Murray Gell-Mann.

In QED there is only one type of electric charge, which can be positive or negative. To explain the behaviour of quarks in QCD and hold the atom together, here need to be three different types of colour charge. The three types of charge are called red, green, and blue in analogy to the primary colours of light but there is no connection whatsoever to actual colour.


QCD holds the position as the most tested and precise theory in science.

Reference:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precision_tests_of_QED

That theory has it it's core to make it work special relativity.


4.) Standard Model and the Higgs

The standard model extended QCD to cover all particle interactions except gravity. The model predicted the existence of an unseen particle which was creating relativistic mass of particles.

Again note the theory is fully compliant to special relativity and would not work without it.


CONCLUSION
Special Relativity has to be correct because those 4 high complex theories rely on it. No other theory or idea even comes close to surviving in those 4 wildly different and complex theories.

See those 4 big items they tell you that absolute space does not exist at least for fields

You can't talk your way around it the universe would not be in existence if space was absolute to light, electromagnetism or particles.



DISCUSSION:


That is why you get treated like a lunatic Newton because some of your idea is beyond silly.


Gravity is the one effect as scientist we don't have a good grasp on however you can not disprove special relativity using gravity effects you can only disprove General Relativity.

Lunatics don't stop to realize this point that no universe space observation can make special relativity wrong it is a different field and a different theory.



At best anyone could do is prove Einstein half wrong that is general relativity is wrong absolutely no chance of proving special relativity wrong.

Hopefully you will bother to read and learn.


If anyone tells you they have effects that involve light or electromagnetism that they think proves special relativity is wrong and want absolute space they will have made a mistake ...... that is an almost certainty from point 1-4 above.


If you want to make claims about gravity and GR being wrong well fine there is a little ground to discuss things.

So do you understand that many of your claims in your posts are beyond stupid because they require Special relativity to be wrong which means the universe ceases to exist. Some ideas above are slightly feasible because they oppose General Relativity and as we have gaps in gravity are ok to discuss.

So if you want to use Michelson Morley to talk about gravity effects fine but you try and start making Special Relativity wrong and I really am going to call you a lunatic.


So choose very carefully what you think you can show Newton because your answer may blow the universe up in your face.

That ends the lesson for today.

Last edited by Orac; 09/14/13 05:14 PM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
N
newton Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
N
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
I'm very simple person if someone use laser and repeat Michelson Morley he will not be able measure West East different I without any outside help made in home very simple tool (everyone can repeat my test and build compass in home ) [img:center]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-PqEJjEZQisM/UKjVcJCGp9I/AAAAAAAAALs/0XOxA_hceK4/s1600/wwwwwwwwwwwww.JPG[/img] [color:#FF0000][b]Apparent point [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Aberrationlighttimebeaming.gif]click! >>>wiki def.[/url] and Airplane A and B [/color] [/b] in one and special moment two airplanes are in one and the same point (in the same point bulbs started the same ring ) [color:#FF0000][b]not exist C+V !!! [/b][/color] light's signal is isotropy respect to apparent point ! light need time "t" for distance : ( bulb ) ---- ( front of airplane) light is traveling from apparent point to sensor during this time A

Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Unfortunately for you I suspect there will be a terrible child error in your setup which I haven't wasted my time to look for because you will simply ignore me and invent 5 new pieces of junk because for some reason you think you can somehow rewrite the whole of physics.

You freely admit

Originally Posted By: Newton

I'm very simple person


yet for some inexplicable reason you feel you are gifted enough to rewrite the entire physics of all science even though you clearly don't even understand more than a small fraction of physics.

There is a reference perhaps you need to read Newton
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delusional_disorder

That being said science has a long list of Michelson–Morley done in recent years (2003-2009) to much higher tolerance than your setup with laser and masers and all are negative.

The ultrahigh precision of the new experiments is quoted as delta c/ c and stand at less than 10E-17 or 0.00000000000000001 if you want it long hand.

The full details are give in wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson-Morley_experiment

Every Michelson–Morley experiment ever done comes back with the same result speed of light is constant in all directions.


So no Newton I don't believe your result and as you continue with five new claims every time I show you the error in one of your so called experiments I don't intend to waste my time on yet another.

Last edited by Orac; 09/15/13 01:12 PM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
N
newton Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
N
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
Dear Orac

Below very very logical argument water VS air test ?



My first test Imade inside AIR ( below my first prototype)



first test
> http://youtu.be/XF_npmQ8kGY

first pictures different West and East ( brightness - photoshop 10 histogram) west ( -30km/s ) and East (+30 km/s )
> http://youtu.be/O9k-zidfJZg


Question for You If I will use water and made the same test light will slowndown ( 1,33)

what about Earth ? ( Earth will not slown down )


You and Me know that that below test will give more better ( bigger ) different of brightness West and East pictures
( please compare to my first test inside AIR )






( air VS water ) eaven simple person like me feel different!

My test and Michelson Morley ?
( I think that my tool = only one and very long ARM + more simple build ( zero mirros ) )

Why very long ARM ?
( zero vibration problem and mechanical construction ) !!!

please read how work dark dark filtre ?

(below lady look on The Sun how far her eyes feel SUN (brightness is lower what about "virtual" distance???)



On My camera in my home I can use dark filtre
and very Easy simulate 150 000 000 km I'm able change
many parameters ( power of bulb -- distance to camrera )

I can simulate any Star distance to Earth !!!!

I think that above post explain
You why my tool look very simple
but it is HUGE MACHINE for many new test

DISTANCE and BRIGHTNESS = square relation function
( M-M are able measure olny line function )



PLEASE STUDY MY POST ?

RESPECT TO WHAT ?
I CAN MEASURE WEST and EAST DIRECTION DIFFERENT BRIGHTHNESS ???


RESPECT TO SUN ?

RESPECT TO EARTH ?

RESPECT TO SUPERMAN or BIRTHS ?

SIMPLE QUESTION RESPECT TO WHAT ?

WEST EAST line = 30 km/s
220 km/s direction I see more biger brightness different!

RESPECT TO WHAT ???

Wake up !!!
please compare water and air and camera test

I destroyed modern physics = respect to what I can see different brightness ?

How much money cost experiment ?
( it can not be too cheap for NOBEL ???? -
exist some rules about prize )

I like people who have money they think that
1000 000 dolars award for Mr Hawking make
that he is right person on right place !!!

I have many Fun right now
I not represent any universitet and company I showed above
huge precision tool
( I made first prototype alone in my home without NASA lab I know how To use new knowledge for navigation )... I wait for brave people who are able open speak about relativity ( without old experiments balast )

BR
Maciej Marosz ( engineer and inventor - my test not cost
1000 000 dolars but are more good and more precision

below many of my design vision ( city can fly vision it is not stupid drawing please evaluate hexacopter forces , silent and think ??? ( I'm not idiot I love simple design )

http://tesla4.blogspot.com/








Last edited by newton; 09/15/13 05:03 PM.
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Originally Posted By: newton
Dear Orac

Below very very logical argument water VS air test ?


Wake up !!!
please compare water and air and camera test

I destroyed modern physics = respect to what I can see different brightness ?



The only thing you destroy is your credibility and other peoples time that read this garbage. You are beyond stupid with this sort of nonsense, as I said scientists will just ignore your garbage.


The joke was I shredded your theory enough to make it blatantly obvious it was wrong to anyone reading according to all levels of science and then the best part was you stated the exact thing ... the whole of science is wrong to make you correct laugh

I am sorry Newton you probably don't get it but everyone else willsmile


Now you can lick your wounds and retire from the debate or else continue and answer questions and we get to play how to make Newton look silly part 2.


If you want to play HOW SILLY IS NEWTON V 2.0 start with next question.


DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW LIGHT SLOWS IN A MEDIA SAY WATER !!!!


Very basic question since you understand all physics.

Last edited by Orac; 09/16/13 08:28 AM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
N
newton Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
N
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209

test 1
Bulb ---AIR ( 100mm ) ---- camera ----->30 km/s

test 2
Bulb ---Water( 100mm) -----camera -----> 30 km/s


I don't need to speak how water slowdown air I know one
light need time
Ta - distance 100 mm inside air
Tw - distance 100 mm inside water


During Light is going to camera camera and Earth escape from light
How far from lihght will escape Earth please compare Ta and Tw
Earth speed = constant and we know that exist around Sun

please evaluate distance A and B
A) 30 km/s = 30 000 000 mm/s and time Ta
B) 30 km/s = 30 000 000 mm/s and time Tw

if A not equal B and Vearth = constant we can calibrate camera
( brightnes of picture inside air and inside water and in vacuum )


What about Michelson - Morley ??? My test very easy is able show East West 30 km/s and 220 km/s and others

THANK YOU

Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

Link Copied to Clipboard
Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact UsokĀž»­¾W
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5