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
0 registered (), 217 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
welcome to the newly developing glaciation period.
by paul
10/24/19 03:23 PM
Potatoes on Mars
by paul
10/24/19 02:55 PM
Fishing , baiting the hook.
by paul
10/24/19 02:43 PM
F=mv ... mv=F
by paul
10/24/19 02:37 PM
Do we have a moderator?
by paul
10/23/19 12:30 AM
Is there anybody out there?
by paul
10/23/19 12:22 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
paul 13
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
#50008 - 10/08/13 11:33 PM Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
The fact you are getting 15% variation tells you something is really really wrong so it's hard to work out what to say about your setup. If a torch light changed by 15% while you turned around you would clearly see for example so it's obvious your result is badly wrong.

Using your own crazy logic the speed of light is 300000000 m/s the speed of earth is 30000 m/s (30km/s) so the difference using you crazy logic should be 30000/300000000 = 0.001 or around 0.1% assuming the photons bunched up to increase the brightness .... I think that math's and your logic is right.

Here let me give you some hints about what is known:

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

Quote:

A ring laser gyroscope (RLG) consists of a ring laser having two counter-propagating modes over the same path in order to detect rotation. It operates on the principle of the Sagnac effect which shifts the nulls of the internal standing wave pattern in response to angular rotation.


These gyros are used on most planes and many ships because they have no mechanical parts.


They work because of Sagnac effect

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


You can solve the Sagnac effect in your head either classically or via special relativity either mathematics gives you exactly the same result

Quote:

At non-relativistic speeds, the Sagnac effect is a simple consequence of the source independence of the speed of light. In other words, the Sagnac experiment does not distinguish between pre-relativistic physics and relativistic physics.



So do you understand ... Special relativity (Einstein) or not sagnac gives us the value of the deviation.


I can tell you it is nothing like 15% the exact amount depends on a whole pile of things about the setup like frequency, temperature, media etc but it's a percent or two at most.


If you look at the size of a standard gyro device it tells you even on small size if you are playing with light you can't ignore the effect




The key part about sagnac is you can solve it correctly without needing special relativity however because this is the case and many ignored special relativity something important gets missed the Wikipedia article picked it up

Originally Posted By: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sagnac_effect

The Sagnac effect has stimulated a century long debate on its meaning and interpretation, much of this debate being surprising since the effect is perfectly well understood in the context of special relativity. An essential point that has not been well-understood until recent years, is that rotation is not required for the Sagnac effect to be manifest. What matters is that light moves along a closed circuit, and that an observer is in motion with respect to that circuit. In Fig. 5, the measured phase difference in both a standard fibre optic gyroscope, shown on the left, and a modified fibre optic conveyor, shown on the right, conform to the equation &#916;t = 2vL/c2, whose derivation is based on the constant speed of light. It is evident from this formula that the total time delay is equal to the cumulative time delays along the entire length of fibre, regardless whether the fibre is in a rotating section of the conveyor, or a straight section. In addition, it is evident that that there is no connection between the total delay and the area enclosed by the light path. The equation commonly seen in the analysis of a rotating, circular Sagnac interferometer, &#916;t = 4A&#969;/c2, can be derived from the more general formula by a simple substitution of terms: Let v = r&#969;, L = 2&#960;r. Then &#916;t = 2vL/c2 = 4&#960;r2&#969;/c2 = 4A&#969;/c2.


This sets up the good old extended conveyer belt example which is the same as your line in an arc simplification you want to make




So in answering your question .... NO you can't ignore the effect even if you want to argue the arc movement is large and you are basically describing a straight line as an approximation because the effect still occurs in a straight line movement.


Now as I said these things are notoriously hard and catch even scientists out so no one in the science world is going to pay one bit of notice to you especially given the other evidence from multiple fields that special relativity is right.


What I would add is that at low speeds I personally doubt you could separate classic physics from special relativity they will always give the same result, sagnac sort of shows that .... your experiments assume you can but you don't properly understand special relativity. The real difference comes at very high speeds like in particle accelerators, the atom and QM when classic physics gets it all wrong and clearly wrong ... so I guess what I am saying no Nobel prize for you smile


Edited by Orac (10/09/13 12:58 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
.
#50010 - 10/09/13 03:38 AM Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? [Re: newton]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1209
Ok I understand

Please look on my last post

R1-------R2

distance between R1 and R2 is very important after I will finish my test I will see how look brightness of picture I will have time of picture and pipe position ( I will be able evaluate if 15% = mistake or step by step brightness rise up or go down - camera take a picture every 40 minutes = every 10 degrees)

distance how to get 25% or 30 % ( I need add to camer more darkness filtre and repeat my test )


anyway My tool must be tested inside Airpane + near to my tool we must use (Sagnac effect tool ) and compare two tools


inside pipe I can test other liquid ( oil ) and air


Edited by newton (10/09/13 03:39 AM)

Top
#50011 - 10/09/13 11:41 AM Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Can I tell you what is happening now you appear to be listening .... I call it duality disaster.

Ok I am going to give you a different example ... you are probably familiar with and may even use wifi connection or a mobile phone.

What I want you to do is imagine yourself locked in a cupboard with the door closed the question is how does the signal get there? The usual layman answer is the waves come under thru any gap because layman relate these two items with radio waves.

The problem is your visible light, a laser light, wifi signals and mobile phones are all the same thing just the frequency varies .. they are all electromagnetic waves.

Try explaining the cupboard reception problem if you consider wifi or the mobile phone signal as a particle ... what are the odds partciles would bounce under the door or thru gaps to give you receiption smile

Do you see the problem?

You problems you are having with light in your experiment is because you consider the light a particle ... IT ISN'T it is most definitely a wave.

As a wave it doesn't collapse to the silly classical image you draw of a particle moving +-30km/s .... that is what is leading you to completely crazy answers.

You will note that the moment Paul turned it to a wave it was immediately obvious to him the wave would Doppler something you were shocked at.

The only reason the particle story of light was ever told because it was thought light only moved in a straight line like you see in a laser but with science knowledge we now know that isn't true.

The weird part is if light truly were a particle there would be easily identifiable results which would be obvious such as no wifi and mobile phones not working in a cupboard smile

What I want you to do is go to all of your funny pictures and where you draw a photon of light draw concentric rings representing a wave ... does the story make more sense now!!!!

A funnier example is try and tell the story of how x-rays penetrate things if they are a particle as well ... see the problem laugh


Most of your problems stem from the fact you keep viewing light as a particle ... IT ISN'T .. stop drawing it as a particle in your pictures and see if it makes more sense!!!!

A funny related story you may find enlightening

http://phys.org/news/2013-08-orbital-angular-momentum.html


Edited by Orac (10/09/13 11:44 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50013 - 10/09/13 07:35 PM Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? [Re: newton]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1209
below animation explain that point where signal ( light ) started
is not moving with the source

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

It is not my own animation ( please see )

to above animation please add very old rule



Point source S is radiating light equally in all directions. The amount passing through an area A varies with the distance of the surface from the light.

Ok You know right now how looks light in space

below very good know doppler efect




And picture that explain You how work my test rocket 2 started radio or light wave in POINT 1

Point1 = apparent point for rocket 1

rocket 1 AND rocket 2 have got the same velocity respect to point 1

Problem for You ???? please evaluate intensity of signal that will register rocket 1

V1 = c/2
V1=0,9 c
V1=0

Do You understant that it is not doppler efect but it is Luminosity shift ( each wave has go Hz and amplitude )

do you understand different between signal's level and signal's Hz



link to above picture [url=http://2.bp.blogspo

Top
#50014 - 10/09/13 07:38 PM Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? [Re: newton]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1209
below animation explain that point where signal ( light ) started
is not moving with the source


It is not my own animation ( please see )


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


to above animation please add very old rule



Point source S is radiating light equally in all directions. The amount passing through an area A varies with the distance of the surface from the light.

Ok You know right now how looks light in space

below very good know doppler efect




And picture that explain You how work my test rocket 2 started radio or light wave in POINT 1

Point1 = apparent point for rocket 1

rocket 1 AND rocket 2 have got the same velocity respect to point 1

Problem for You ???? please evaluate intensity of signal that will register rocket 1

V1 = c/2
V1=0,9 c
V1=0

Do You understant that it is not doppler efect but it is Luminosity shift ( each wave has go Hz and amplitude )

do you understand different between signal's level and signal's Hz



link to above picture >>> big size picture

I not showing nothing NEW ? please find above problem inside books

Below why we have winter and summer ( it is not doppler red/ blue shift but luminosity shift




MY TOOL IN HOME

bulb ----------photocamera ------> 30 km/s

if

bulb -----------photocamera ----------->220 km/s

I see proportional different of brightness

it is very natural that

bulb ----------phtocamer -> 0 km/s = that camera will see more brightness piture

please think that You can use two cameras

cam 1 ------- Bulb -------- cam2 -------> 30 km/s

cam 1 and cam 2 can register first light signal in the same time but distance to apparent point ( point where signal started is different )

Photoghraphy and distance ?

bulb -----5 meters ---- camera

the same bulb and the same camera

bulb -----------------10 meters ------------camera

10 meters = that camera will register 4x lower brightness of picture ( compare to 5 meter distance )


DO YOU UNDERSTAND ABOVE FACTS ? IT IS NOT MY THEORY BUT FACTS
THAT WE ARE USING !!!Please confirm each my word in books

( photoghraphy , aberration , doppler - not exist C+ Vsource )
it is very Funy why nobody before me explain that Luminosity is different if velocity is different - it is very natural fact !!!


Edited by newton (10/09/13 07:43 PM)

Top
#50016 - 10/09/13 11:10 PM Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
I understand everything you have shown I just don't see anything unusual at all and apparently nor does anyone else in science only you seem to think there is a problem ... only you?

We gave you the answer there will be a slight brightness change because you have media and the doppler effect will refract .. stop the refraction the brightness won't change. The effect is however tiny like you would have to go looking for it depending on setup probably a lot less than 1%.

YOU CLAIM THE CHANGE IS 15% WHICH IS RIDICULOUS WHICH YOU FAIL TO ADDRESS ... DO YOU AGREE 15% IS A STUPIDLY HIGH VALUE.

Again take a 100 watt light globe it apparently is only 85 watt depending which way you face ... yo do realize you would easily see that ... like it would stand out visually just turning around holding a light ... IT DOESN'T HAPPEN laugh

Maybe you cant trust your eyes so I know get a photographic light power meter and hold it out at arms length and hold the 100W globe next to your chest now turn slowly around. Apparently at some point the meter power is going to drop down 15% to 85W laugh

Okay enough picking on your crazy ideas lets get scientific smile

The problem with all the stuff above is you again compare the light to solid objects being planes and rockets ... STOP DOING THAT.

Okay I want you to write you argument carefully out and give me the example using waves on the ocean which is much more appropriate for light.


LIGHT IS NOT SOLID IT IS A WAVE IT LOOKS LIKE THIS




The above is why you keep getting the relativities confused because you think of solid objects and gravity as somehow related to light.


SO WE NEED TO STOP YOU MAKING LIGHT SOLID TO STOP THE ERROR.


So got it I want you to show me your discussion above but shown me with a wave on the ocean please because I am sure this is the problem and why I can't see your issue.

Don't add anything extra just redo you discussion above with ocean waves.




Show me what you mean using these waves please because there is certain no reason to expect light to move faster than c just because something is moving the speed of sound likewise is the speed of sound it doesn't change just because things move and it is the same with light I am not sure why you expect light to move faster just because things are moving it's not a solid object ... it isn't a plane or a rocket don't expect it to act like one and don't compare it to them.


Edited by Orac (10/10/13 02:07 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50017 - 10/09/13 11:31 PM Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? [Re: Orac]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
I am giving you this in a different post because I want you to do the above exercise as a separate post.

Newton I want you to tell me what happens when I talk facing the direction of the earth movement which is 30km/sec as you said.

SOUND only has a speed of 340 m/s which is 0.34 km/sec so according to you depending on which way I face apparently the sound I speak at 30.34 km/s versus 30.0km/s

So how come sound doesn't change depending which way I face on earth Newton????

According to you everything is absolute space and time smile

I guess we shouldn't have sound on earth because it is moving at MACH 100 so all we should hear is a deafening roar because I CAN'T HAVE RELATIVITY ACCORDING TO YOU laugh

SO maybe that's the problem .... I can't hear you Newton because the noise is too loud slow down below mach 100 and we can talk.

Sorry I am making fun of you but that's the problem even for sound on earth you are going to have to install some form of relativity because otherwise that above problem would exist.

That my friend is EXACTLY the same problem as your light example and why I can't understand you because nothing you say makes any sense at all.


Edited by Orac (10/10/13 12:42 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50019 - 10/10/13 07:33 PM Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? [Re: newton]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1209
Below I show facts ( please write me in You post where You see mistake ) ???

example


Rocket1 ---- 1000 meters -------Rocket 2 ------->V1
100 Watt....................... sensor
bulb

Rocket 1 and rocket 2 have got the same velocity V1
there is no doppler efect ( R1 and R2 have got the same CONSTANT V1 ) there is no doppler ( ORAC ???)


between rocket exist distance 1000 meters ( light need 1/300 000 sec for distance)

WHAT DURING 1/300 000 s are doing rockets ? waiting for light ?

What we are sure

fact 1
not exist C+ V1

fact 2
apparent point = point where Rocket 1 was in past and started in that point light ( this point exist in space rocket1 was in that point in past )

fact 3 if V1 = 0 rocket2 will register bulb 1000 meters distance from place where signal started

fact 4 if V1>0 rocket 2 will register bulb 1000 meters + L

V1 - speed respect to apparent point

what is it L ? ( light need 1/300 000 sec. for 1000 meters
during light is traveling rocket 2 will escape L distance

Above example explain that there is no doppler efect because not exist different velocity

If person inside rocket 1 and rocket 2 will have information
about bulb's power and distance 1000 meters they will be able measure distance L and V1

Light speed C is absolute and constant if we will be abe evaluate L distance without any probem we can say We know absolute V1 ( V1 we can measure directly respect to light's speed)


ORAC PROBLEM ( 15 % ) I'm using dark filtre and long time of picture camera have got HUGE HUGE DISTANCE TO BULB ???

100 watts ?

What if V1= C/2

how far from place where signal started will be rocket2 during register signal ( How big L we have ??)



What if V1 >C person inside rocket 2 will never see light

DEAR ORAC when I was small boy I think that SEA = VERY HUGE WATER

THIS UNIVERSE not like LIMITS C for me = virtual theoretical problem

YOU KNOW WHY NOBODY SAW BODY MORE FASTER THAN LIGHT ??

ORAC this body not exist !!! ( YES small boy )

Marosz

even if this body exist You can not see it !!!!
why ?
because You want to see this what is impossible to see !!!
If body moving faster than information about body You can not see it

How You know that exist that body ? after long time You can feel gravitation forces that was staarted in apparent point

Look on sky think Your self ...


Edited by newton (10/10/13 07:44 PM)

Top
#50020 - 10/10/13 07:47 PM Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? [Re: newton]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1209

Body fatster than light ? = dark palce in space !!!

nobody can see so huge aberration
nobody can have so many energy to escape from coordination system faster than light


We can imagine and evaluate many problems

bulb --------camera and test in home can give us many new information

Top
#50021 - 10/10/13 08:09 PM Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? [Re: newton]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1209


m1-----M------m2 -----------> 220 km/s


m1 = m2

What about gravitation forces ?

Importantis apparent point gravitation and brightness of picture = the same problem

m1-M forces > m2-M forces

the reason is apparent distance !!!

m1-M forces = m2-M forces
( only if We have absolute zero motion)


BELOW PARAGRAPH IS RIGHT NOW IN EACH BOOKS ( PHYSICS )
ORAC( You hve right it is not so important smile??? )

It is only doppler and relativity

" 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."


Edited by newton (10/10/13 08:11 PM)

Top
#50022 - 10/11/13 12:08 AM Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: newton
Below I show facts ( please write me in You post where You see mistake ) ???

They aren't facts they are stupidity .. repeated over and over again because you have mental issues.
Originally Posted By: newton

Rocket1 ---- 1000 meters -------Rocket 2 ------->V1
100 Watt....................... sensor
bulb

THERE IS DOPPLER IN THAT YOU IDIOT the spaceships are moving at V1. The difference of V1 movement between the top and bottom lines means there will be Doppler, which way and how much depends what observer position we take in the problem.

HERE LET ME DRAW IT FOR YOU

NO DOPPLER because V1 is the same for both
Rocket -> V1
Light Bulb -> V1

DOPPLER because V1 is the NOT same
Rocket -> V1
Light Bulb

The why it happens is obvious once you realize light is a wave just like sound.

It's not hard for normal people.


Ignoring your rather absurd logic, you then want unlimited speed and I think I can actually help you.


HERE LET ME MAKE YOUR EXACT ARGUMENT WITH SOUND, I CAN PROVE YOU RIGHT laugh

Science says the speed of sound is 340 m/sec in air.


Marosz having been dropped on his head as a baby and suffering slight brain damage says NO that's not true I can prove it. The earth is moving at 30km/s so the speed of sound on earth is actually 30km/s + 0.34km/s = 30.34 km/s which is 30,340 m/s the whole of science is wrong.

Science says no Marosz you can't take a reference point of space for sound because although that is true no observer would ever see that it is a zero frame for sound one that doesn't exist. So you couldn't develop any experiments with sound or any useful science from doing that the speed of sound has to be relative not absolute.

Marosz says no I don't care if you had a spaceship with air the the speed of sound is the speed of the rocket + 340m/s.

Science goes but framing sound in that way will make all your formula's wrong to what you observe it's completely stupid and will make no sense. I guess we are lucky but because in space no one can hear us scream at the shear stupidity of Marosz.

That is what you are doing EXACTLY see we don't talk about it often but sound also has RELATIVITY because it doesn't often confuse people. Although usually at school it is taught about seeing the flash of lightning before hearing thunder etc.

You are doing the same thing above but with light you are trying to create what we in science call a zero frame which is absolute space only that observer doesn't and can't exist because it is outside space and time and is completely imaginary so why not just get religious an invoke GOD at that point.

I understand what you are doing Marosz it just doesn't work and you don't care that your idea is flawed. You can prove you idea much more easily with sound by the way because it is much slower relative to normal speeds and yes I agree using your stupidity there is no speed of sound it too is unlimited but now try and make any sense of sound.

See using your exact idea there is now also no speed of sound. I can prove that using your logic by using a spaceship full of air and a person talking so clearly there is no speed of sound. Good luck framing anything useful about sound from an absolute non existing point in space .. imagine trying to write the equations of sound moving between two points on earth .. haha the mind explodes at the thought.

Anyhow your first argument needs to be the speed of sound on earth is 30,340 m/s not the 340 m/s that science says because that's easy to prove although not very useful . Good luck smile

Marosz you truly are a nutcase and I am going to ignore you because I will never convince you and as a scientist I really don't care about your whole stupidity now I understand what you are proposing.


So I will say goodbye ... I really can't help you and you have nothing useful for science .. so no sorry no NOBEL prize for you.


Edited by Orac (10/11/13 02:35 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50025 - 10/11/13 02:34 AM Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? [Re: newton]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1209
Dear Orac even children know that SOUND need medium for travel

If You are inside Airplane and You speak with Your friends


F1 ---Orac---F2 ----> airplane 340 km/s

F1 and F2 will register the same level of sound ( medium is moving with air inside airplane ) !!!!


Doppler efect for Light ??? or Gravitation ?

The same airplane ( above exampe ) can have bulb ( outside airplane ) how will look the signal from bulb inside the universe

See below picture ( point 1 --circle 1 , point 2 - circle 2 ....



( it will be many 3D balls that rising with C speed respct to point where rocket was in past ... point 1 , point 2,point 3

NOT EXIST C + airplane speed ( it is huge different You can not use sound for my test) light have only one point where started and this point = centrum for 3D light's ball ( please imagine LED turn on/off 1/120 000 000 sec )


DO YOU HAVE PROBLEM TO IMAGINE BELOW SITUATION

R1--300000 km---R2(bulb)--300000 km--- R3 ---->V1 constant

How far from apparent point will register signal R1 and R3
V1= 0,1 C or V1 = 0,7 C ( THE SAME DISTANCE ????)

ORAC one rocket is moving opposite to ligh (R1 ) and escape from LLight ( R3 ) but they have the same velocity it is impossible to change Hz ( R1 and R3 will see the same colour but lower brightness !!! ) each man who like photography know this fact ( it is not doppler ) but Square LAW for signal and different distance !!!




Marosz can You show me above model in books ?
Yes 1730 James Bradley and Aberration ( many years ago )

ORAC can You imagine that rocket 2 ( BULB ) is in apparent point ( see below animation ) observer and the source are moving in space in my exaple below only source is moving or only observer is moving respect to source !!!

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








Edited by newton (10/11/13 02:44 AM)

Top
#50027 - 10/11/13 02:40 AM Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: newton
Dear Orac even children know that SOUND need medium for travel


So what does light travel in smile

As scientists we spent many years trying to get rid of the space as an aether from layman but we have a dirty dark secret we only tell people who won't get confused laugh

So I am curious what does an EM wave travel in your universe?

I sort of created a whole thread where some of us discussed transmission but you just came in an put up the same garbage.I swear I don't want to see those same stupid images again they are meaningless try answering questions or go away.


Try answering the question .. what's the wave travelling in .. that is what is the vacuum of space and matter constructed of.

This is why your whole idea goes off the rail we aren't in the dark ages anymore we know a lot about space and matter.


Edited by Orac (10/11/13 02:48 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50028 - 10/11/13 02:46 AM Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? [Re: newton]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1209
Dear Orac thank You very much Your problem with doppler efect was inspiration for me to prepare new tool

I wish You nice read ( My You tube is also very good .. many people very natural understand that apparent point is not moving only ight has C speed respect to point where started )

http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=50024#Post50024

Top
#50029 - 10/11/13 02:50 AM Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
So what is the light wave moving in and how?

Oh we have apparent points now as well so I guess I better ask where is the absolute point then .. how would I find it?

You try to dismiss the sound problem but it's not that easy LIGHT and SOUND are both waves they are the same thing yes we got rid of the aether but in a very special way you can't just dismiss the problem.


Edited by Orac (10/11/13 03:00 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50030 - 10/11/13 02:59 AM Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? [Re: newton]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1209
Water inside pipe in my test give camera more time for escape

15% it is not deviation from zero
3-6% inside air also is not deviation

step by step when Earth is making rotation around own axis
camera see ( brightness ) step by step how change angle ( pipe angle to velocity arrow 30 km/s )

it is close to zero velocity ( perpendicular direction to 30 km/s ) and also it is close to maximal volume ( parallel direction to 30 km/s)

deviation of my camera ( NIKON 5000 ) can be near 5-6 % it is NIKON on stative and I'm using not natural LIGHT ( picture time is very long 8 sec. exposition ISO 200 , F 29 )
PLEASE INFORM NIKON THAT THEY HAVE DEVIATION IN CAMERA ( but not forget about special astronomy time , special direction , and geographic wide - I'm sure that NIKON will like Your story and they will like eliminate mistake form CAMERA smile




Edited by newton (10/11/13 03:01 AM)

Top
#50031 - 10/11/13 03:02 AM Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
I am not interested in your experiment it is total garbage and not worth discussing as you won't listen anyhow... flawed experiment is a flawed experiment what more can I say. You can falsify the result trivially and we do every day by billions of people around the world.

Lets talk about your theory smile

I am interested in you explaining how light waves move in the universe please?

STOP AVOIDING THE QUESTION .. I SPENT WHAT SEEMS LIKE YEARS GOING THRU YOUR RIDICULOUS CLAIMS AND EXPERIMENTS.


Edited by Orac (10/11/13 03:06 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50032 - 10/11/13 03:11 AM Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? [Re: newton]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1209


source ----> V1 .............. sensor ----->V2

V2-V1 = doppler reason


in my test

Bulb ----> V1 .............. sensor ----> V1

V1- V1 = zero ( YES ORAC IT IS NOT DOPPLER I'M SURE smile

THERE IS NO ANY MY THEORY ( please open book and find definition what is it apparent point )


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

On above animation authore is using blue ARROW
for Each photorapher on the earth signal look like I show below



please look where the signal started and where observer register light and where is the source ??

Camrea1 --------BULB ----------CAMERA2 ------>30km/s

how far from bulb (OLD position not fresh - apparent position ) will register light camera 1 and camera 2

what mean distance for picture ??? ask any phtographer but more far = more darkness picture !!!

If You want to have big model ( no problem 150 000 000 km distance ) GOOD OR BAD example ?

Winter and Summer ???




NOT EXIST C+ V exist only C


I not have any new theory I'm using facts

The same what above I showed for light we can measure for gravitation ( please remember I'm first person who inform You about this - Today I wake up 3:15 in POLAND before me HADR DAY IN JOBE 6:00 AM )

Keep weel and please read my post

before You tube please see description
many very important details are on forum please read my 3-4 last post ( I'm on formum NEWTON Mr Orac have huge problem with me ??? )

http://youtu.be/DUW3zDAUksc







Edited by newton (10/11/13 03:24 AM)

Top
#50033 - 10/11/13 03:25 AM Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: Newton

in my test

Bulb ----> V1 .............. sensor ----> V1


If that was the case you wouldn't have Doppler

BUT you don't have that

Bulb ----> V1 .............. sensor ----> V1 +-small amount

The two points on earth are spinning about the centre of the planet.

CAN YOU GUARANTEE ME THE TWO POINTS ARE EXACTLY THE SAME DISTANCE FROM THE AXIS POINT OF EARTH OTHERWISE THE TWO POINTS SPIN AT DIFFERENT VELOCITIES.

It gets worse the earths spin has a wobble to it which is called chandler wobble (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandler_wobble) so actually no point on the planet holds it's exact distance to the axis point so you can't even try and create that situation on an experimental setup.

Get it stupid ... that drawing is a very tall order on planet earth on any experimental setup.

We don't talk about it because the effect is small you can usually trivially ignore it but it is a real problem.

However saying that it is trivial I can easily pick up the effect on a 1 meter laser table in the right setup .. so 1 meter is enough to easily measure it.

Scientifically we use it large scale ...
http://phys.org/news/2011-12-earth-rotation.html

Incase you haven't realized it even in your own body you head and feet are doing different speeds and people living up near the poles are doing different speeds to those on the equator but no one really notices it because the effect is trivial .... but it is really there and can be measured.




Normally most layman and science can ignore these effects but if you really are trying to measure the fundamental behavior of light you need to discuss the reality of trying to setup any experiment and that's what I have done.

So now lets look at Marosz claim:

The effect of which way you point on the earth changes light is by 15%. Problem any idiot with a torch at night can simply rotate around a room and see it changes brightness by 15% ..... LIKE YOU WOULD NOTICE THAT ONLY NO ONE HAS. Light power would have to have a disclaimer 100 watts when facing towards the north pole smile


So yes the Doppler variation due to earths movement is REAL because of variation of speed of any two points on earth and has been measured by SCIENTISTS.

Marosz variation due to earths movement is GARBAGE and has been measured by MAROSZ.

Oh look more of the same images ... yeah I am convinced .. oh but my laser lab says NO.

The best bit was then Marosz made the speed of light infinite but yet almost all navigation on the planet uses SAGNAC which only works because the speed of light is finite whether you believe in relativity or not ... that's right you just ignore these sorts of problems.

So I answered your question YET AGAIN .... You still haven't answered mine ... what is light travelling in please?

Did you notice MAROSZ I answered the question/point from start to end leaving out nothing ... now your turn to try the same please.


Edited by Orac (10/11/13 04:37 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50034 - 10/11/13 11:05 AM Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? [Re: Orac]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
I should actually add that whenever you are doing lab experiments and at places like Ligo to combat the earth movement you gate the measurements to as small a time window as possible.

If you can make an instant measurement the movement of the earth will be negligible the longer the measurement takes the worse the movement error becomes because the more the drift you get.


Edited by Orac (10/11/13 11:06 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

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

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