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 (), 255 Guests and 4 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Is there anybody out there?
by True
01/07/20 09:26 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
True 1
Page 7 of 9 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >
Topic Options
#50333 - 11/12/13 04:25 PM Re: LUX says no to most dark matter [Re: Orac]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1209
GOOD TXT FROM YOUR LINK

The connection between the microscopic world of quantum physics and our everyday experience, which is concerned with much larger objects, still remains puzzling.

Top
.
#50334 - 11/12/13 04:33 PM Re: LUX says no to most dark matter [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
That is very very true.

We need to talk about that.

Quantum Mechanics is the most accurate theory we have but it is a description in rules and mathematics.

IT DOES NOT TELL US WHY IN ANY WAY !!!!

IT ALSO DOES NOT COVER GRAVITY!!!!

I have no idea why it behaves like it does I just now that if you give me any classic physics law (except one) science can devise a way to break it under QM.

The one classic physics law I can not break is the law of conservation of energy ... no perpetual energy machines in QM.

We keep testing our own 3 laws but as yet no one has been able to violate them.

But yes you can make weird things happen like materials expand under pressure and teleport stuff around when you understand how it all works.


Edited by Orac (11/12/13 04:36 PM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50335 - 11/12/13 04:40 PM Re: LUX says no to most dark matter [Re: Orac]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
So going back to the image of the atom what it was really showing was it was a wave thing the idea you could read any sort of shape or distortion out of it still sort of amuses me ... but you should know better by now.

Talking about the atom nucleus shape at all is very very tricky and certainly trying to imagine classic physics garbage affecting it is out of the question.
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50336 - 11/12/13 04:52 PM Re: LUX says no to most dark matter [Re: Orac]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1209
SORRY BELOW QUESTIONS ARE STUPID
zero target I joust think louder ... ( please not make nervous )

How long live athom ?

Machine ( slower engine will work longer )

twmperature ?

When engine is too hot it will work shorter )

Hot atom will live shorter ?

Electron period and temp ?
Electon period and motion >

e--C-----e -----------> c/2

e---C---e zero motion

Machine material not like vibrations !!! exist special vibrations
that can destroy Each material very fast ?

period and atom live time ?



Engine and temperature shift ( hot and fast cold )

can we desroy atom by hot/cold cycle faster ?


clasical piston engine exchange fuel to work

Photon = fuel for electrons

each engine have special nombers of cycles ( exchange fuel to work )

can we destroy athome by cycles give photon / work


can we evaluate efficiency

how many photon enerrgy will be exchange to work ?


engine efficiency 33% --66% (fast engine 33% slower engine 66%)

how much time need athom for fotoemision how many energy will lost
from single photon portion


atom1 ----atom 2 ---atom 3 ----atom4 <<< Light

athom = machine that help light change position how many energy cost transport process



atom1 ----atom 2 ---atom 3 ----atom4 >>> 10 km/s <<< Light

motion and energy cost for transport

direction and inertia ? efficiency ???

LIGHT >>> atom1 ----atom 2 ---atom 3 ----atom4 >>> 300 km/s


temperature and preassure ??? transport efficiency ???
how many energy cost transport ?


ABOVE MANY FACTS ???
EINSTEIN light = strait line and mathematica this mathematica always work ok and not important is many others problems !!!


Edited by newton (11/12/13 05:02 PM)

Top
#50337 - 11/12/13 05:21 PM Re: LUX says no to most dark matter [Re: Orac]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1209
Can we warm medium by light ?

Can we change capacity of medium by light ?

Top
#50338 - 11/12/13 05:42 PM Re: LUX says no to most dark matter [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
WOW you really do like going out on the edge.

Originally Posted By: newton

How long live athom ?


Totally dependent on the atomic structure

http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/the-process-of-natural-radioactive-decay.html

The electrostatic force is almost always significant, and, in the case of beta decay, the weak nuclear force is also involved.

PLEASE REMEMBER IN THESE DISCUSSIONS THE SPIN IS QUANTUM MOMENTUM DON'T MAKE IT CLASSICAL .. YET AGAIN

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




Originally Posted By: newton

Hot atom will live shorter ?

Electron period and temp ?
Electon period and motion >

e--C-----e -----------> c/2

e---C---e zero motion


No decay rate of atoms or electrons is unaffected by temperature but you can change the rates by playing around with the electrical structure in the correct way or by using the weak force.

In 1992 a group used good logic and created a shift of 0.9% in the decay rate of beryllium by firing specially prepared electrons at it.


Originally Posted By: newton

can we desroy atom by hot/cold cycle faster ?


Nope the process is simply changing quantum spin and that process can be done repeatedly and as far as we know indefinitely.


Originally Posted By: newton

can we destroy athome by cycles give photon / work


Not destroy you can excite them by sending in the right frequency photon and it will absorb the photon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absorption_(electromagnetic_radiation)

Quote:

In physics, absorption of electromagnetic radiation is the way in which the energy of a photon is taken up by matter, typically the electrons of an atom. Thus, the electromagnetic energy is transformed into internal energy of the absorber, for example thermal energy.[1] The reduction in intensity of a light wave propagating through a medium by absorption of a part of its photons is often called attenuation. Usually, the absorption of waves does not depend on their intensity (linear absorption), although in certain conditions (usually, in optics), the medium changes its transparency dependently on the intensity of waves going through, and saturable absorption (or nonlinear absorption) occurs.



Originally Posted By: newton

can we evaluate efficiency


It is 100% efficient something you can't have in classic physics smile

I have seen lots of idiots try and claim it violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics .. it's a quantum effect and yes it violates the classic law and that's ok laugh


Originally Posted By: newton

how many photon enerrgy will be exchange to work ?


One smile

If you want to take it to the quantum extreme you can store that single photon inside the absorbing atom. The record for doing that scientifically stands at 60 seconds

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/16228...-quantum-memory



Originally Posted By: newton

how much time need athom for fotoemision how many energy will lost from single photon


Times of the exchange vary depending on atom but they are all very fast but you can't get an exact time.

That same old quantum problem all we can calculate is the probability to find the electron in a given state and the same for it's reaction with the photon.

So all you can do is use semi classical physics and mix in probabilities and what you get is a thing called Rabi frequency probability

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

So if you pick a probability level you are happy with you get a time smile

The answer you really need to know however is fast very very fast.

A easy to understand guide to both processes is here

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mod5.html
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50339 - 11/12/13 05:46 PM Re: LUX says no to most dark matter [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

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

Can we warm medium by light ?


Of coarse you can haven't you ever sat out in the sun to warm yourself .. your skin is a media to light smile


Originally Posted By: newton

Can we change capacity of medium by light ?


Capacity ... that is just a measurement of scale of many different properties under science ... you have thermal capacity, electrical capacity, stress capacity ... thousands of different types of capacity

So capacity of what fundamental property?
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50340 - 11/12/13 05:57 PM Re: LUX says no to most dark matter [Re: Orac]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1209
WOW you really do like going out on the edge.:) :):)

person who lerned me in secoundary school oready made polish memframe ( computer ( "Odra" ) 1960 this computer was faster than pentium 133 Mhz

I never forget his style He was able explain how works enigma machine by hamer.

ABOVE ONLY FREE QUESTIONS ....

Top
#50341 - 11/13/13 02:27 AM Re: LUX says no to most dark matter [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
The difference is you probably listened to him and did not insist something he knew was wrong was correct .... in other words you learnt because you listened smile

You have covered a fair scope of QM and as you have probably found out unlike GR which there are only hand full of experiments, try and tell us QM is wrong is a whole other sort of argument.

So you have seen the strength of QM lets look at its weaknesses.

The biggest problem with QM is we don't understand why it behaves like it does and this can lead to wrong assumptions.

I have spent a long time convincing you about light and it is built up of photons and how those photons behave and interact.

The problem is that is the laws of QM as they are expressed and it doesn't say that photons can't have group properties and by omitting this it sorts of misleads you.

If you think about it you have certain laws that effect you and solely you but when you go to work or hang out in an organized gatherings there are often another set of rules that can be imposed on you. Those work place or gathering laws never violate the laws that cover you but cover behavior of the group.

With light there is some recent work to show you that you need to be careful with QM because it doesn't cover groupings.


Here is the image that will show you the problem where scientists turn light into something resembling bullets and the article

http://phys.org/news/2013-11-scientists-bullets-high-intensity-optical-applications.html



So what is going on here, well QM doesn't say that photons can't have group properties it really covers only the individual. The individual photons are waves and they have characteristics so you can organize a group of photons to mix there waveforms together and do really weird stuff and you are in no way violating QM laws. Gravity for example may work exactly like this it is a large scale group effect that has nothing to do with QM itself.

In human terms its the equivalent of organizing a protest march or organize a large group of people to do something on a large scale. There is no law on you being an individual that says that can't happen and in fact many great adds on TV are of large groups doing things. A few weeks ago in your homeland you had this



No law about you as an individual stops that from happening and from a scientist with QM perspective we need to be always careful because QM has really nothing to say about grouped behaviour.

So the light in the example above is an airy wave it's actually a classic physics an dates back to 1892.

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

QM doesn't cover it or remotely have anything to say about it because it is a theory about tricking a group of light photons to work together to create an effect.

So here we have a classic physics theory that is not understood or explained by QM and isn't a simplification of QM process.

There are not many group physics theories or laws so the issue is largely ignored but I am showing one weakness with QM.

It may also help you understand how gravity could be a very independent effect about which QM is silent. So if gravity worked in this independent way it would not change the way QM worked at all but some grouped behaviour may arise that QM was completely ignorant of and airy waves show that possibility beautifully.

Some of your theory falls into that category as possible but some is completely and stupidly wrong because you violate QM. As I said if you want to play around with gravity knock yourself out but don't for one instant think gravity will change QM results because they can't unless gravity is itself a QM effect and then your whole theory is dead anyhow because it is classically based theory.


Edited by Orac (11/13/13 02:55 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50342 - 11/13/13 04:02 AM Re: LUX says no to most dark matter [Re: Orac]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1209
You have many nice links in Your head ( Thank You )

http://phys.org/news/2013-11-scientists-bullets-high-intensity-optical-applications.html

Your Power = that You can use this liks at right moment

People similar to me = Creative work = please write many wodrs
many questions without sense - and please try find sense.


Originally Posted By: newton

can we evaluate efficiency ?


Orac
It is 100% efficient something you can't have in classic physics smile


Originally Posted By: newton

how many photon enerrgy will be exchange to work ?

Orac
One smile


Can we warm medium by light ?

Of coarse you can haven't you ever sat out in the sun to warm yourself .. your skin is a media to light smile


ABOVE QUESTIONS and YOUR ANSVERS
BELOW MODEL ( real probem for Engineers )

I WANT TO LEARN WITH YOU not LEARN YOU !!!

Physics = that we can describe where is energy
and how energy is exchanged



***********************************************************
(Tesla opinion about machine + Radio waves + electric analogy)
+ eclipse of the sun Idea ( photon ---> electron --- athom )

************************************************************

at first I want to learn You very simple fact ( camera obscura)
I will back to below example later ...

A] bulb ( 4 watts) -----5 meters ------ camera

B] bulb ( 1 watt ) -----5 meters ------ camera

camera in situation A registered brightness of picture X
picture time = 1 sec. ( camera open/close)

camera in situation B registered brightness of picture X
picture time = 4 sec. ( camera open/close)


/////////////MAIN IDEA AND TEST AREA ///////////

...LIGHT
(energy ) >>>>>> MEDIUM

Medium = machine that we use to transport energy (conveyer )

How much time we need for one single step ( one athom step)
( average we can evaluate how many athoms we have per one meter )

How much energy we will lost for single step (one athom step )
( Orac - how many joules will be exchange for Hot )

Signal Hz and (Medium and conveyer efficient ) ?
We all know EM Radio waves ( long and short )

Lower Hz schould have lower power lost and longer distace ( electric energy A portion ) !

High Hz (the same electric energy A portion ) distance and power lost problem ?

VACUUM ideal zero or very close to zero lost conveyer model ?

///////////////////////////////////////////////

Dear Orac right now I must go to work I will back

above post is not finished

important is below picture
If You have time please read aboud radio waves
( it is EM wave but only different Hz )



*****************.........

Top
#50343 - 11/13/13 06:36 AM Re: LUX says no to most dark matter [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
before you bother posting anything I want you to stop and think hard and read this carefully.

All electromagnetic waves are covered by QM it is under a theory called quantum electrodynamics (QED).

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

It covers EM waves of all descriptions including light from the classic field of classical electromagnetism.


So put simply your classic electromagnetism is a simplification of QED ... so please don't try and use it to say QM has somehow got it wrong it is the other way around classic physics has got it wrong.


QED is the most tested accurate theory in science.

You can't argue this Maciej Marosz because anything you are going to use from classic EM theory is a simplification and stupidly wrong at some level.


I want you to type this so I know you realize it to be true


Classic EM theory is a simplification of the quantum electrodynamics and sometimes it will give really bad results if you take it too literally.


Where you seem to be going is one of those really bad simplifications because actual classic radio wave theory is slightly wrong as any good radio engineer knows.


So clear you can't argue this using classic electromagnetics because it is wrong ... it is a really bad simplification.


LET ME SHOW YOU HOW STUPID CLASSIC ELECTROMAGNETIC THEORY IS

To actually launch radio waves through space under you classic electromagnetic theory you need a medium only there isn't one?????? So what does a radio wave travel in when it's in space laugh

Here read the classic description for EM waves it's actually funny if you think about it hard

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

Quote:

As an electromagnetic wave, it has both electric and magnetic field components, which oscillate in a fixed relationship to one another, perpendicular to each other and perpendicular to the direction of energy and wave propagation.


Here you even draw it funny




Surely it has struck you the electric and magnetic dimensions are where??????? They are imaginary we skip over that fast at school if you are lucky students get confused and think it is a normal 3D drawing and accept itlaugh

Every now and again you get a really bright school kid who works out the other stupidity in that representation you have a magnetic and electric field being created between two empty points in space or coming up out of one, they usually think its a normal 3D drawing and then you have to try and explain well actually the points are imaginary they don't even really exist .. that usually goes down well cry

You get the odd student that works out the final problem when a radio wave spreads in actual 3D how the hell do the electric and magnetic fields spread out in 3D because they are drawn relative to the wavefront moving in 3D. So now you have energy jumping across space in classic physics which trying to explain is interesting laugh

Want some real fun try and draw the above waveform expanding in 3D, the magnetic and electric field are already making it 3D. So what is you drawing skills of 5 dimensions like? smile

Usually the smart students end up asking the question it almost always goes like this ... I love how the scientist answered it without discussing QM.

http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/3359/visualizing-electromagnetic-waves-in-3d-space

Do get the students problem he has worked it out our simplification is really really bad at this level.

Originally Posted By: student

I do not understand how a wave would move in 3D space. Can someone show me some animation or something? I can understand it in 2D space (ie on a graph) but not 3D. I also read somewhere that they do not oscilate in space, but in electromagnetic field strength and direction? Is this true?


The smart little student has work it out he needs 5 dimensions and it's not sitting well with his classical physics world laugh

I still really love the scientists answer just imagine them as little arrows he of coarse doesn't point out the problem the arrows can't point into any of the 3 real dimensions of space ... shhh go fast and the student might not see the problem he gave him the same stupid simplification with a different trick laugh

Ok it's a really bad simplification we use but it's the best most of us can come up with and most layman buy the story.

When we teach you this stuff we make simplifications to not have to talk about QM. We do that simplification at school levels to avoid discussing QM because you are unlikely as a layman to ever need it and its complicated.

What is funny is then watch and odd idiot layman try and use our simplifications back against us.


Please don't be an idiot you can't use our stupid simplifications EM waves don't really work the way we taught you at school they are QM in nature.

If that was where you were going with your post don't bother you should know and have learnt enough not to make that mistake you understand at least the basic nature of QM now.

If you want to discuss something different then fine continue on and ask away and lets see if I can help answer it .. I just don't want to waste time with silly classic physics stuff that we already know is wrong.


Edited by Orac (11/13/13 08:38 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50344 - 11/13/13 09:46 AM Re: LUX says no to most dark matter [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
I will assume you aren't being silly and tell you I already have problems with this setup.

Originally Posted By: newton

at first I want to learn You very simple fact ( camera obscura)
I will back to below example later ...

A] bulb ( 4 watts) -----5 meters ------ camera

B] bulb ( 1 watt ) -----5 meters ------ camera

camera in situation A registered brightness of picture X
picture time = 1 sec. ( camera open/close)

camera in situation B registered brightness of picture X
picture time = 4 sec. ( camera open/close)


Looking at your proposed experiment I already have massive issues and concerns that I will be able to answer anything.

Electrical power is measured in watts not light energy ... no 4 watt globes you buy will actually put out the same amount of light and they have horrible efficiency conversions like 2% most of your 40 watts in a incandescent light bulb is going out as heat it is something like 95% to heat. Modern fluorescent lights are better but still bad.

So lets get to specifics have you actually measured the light with a light power meter or do we have even a basic manufacturer specification of the amount of lumens of light we get per watt of your bulbs.


The 1 watt globe is going to be totally different to the larger wattage.

Here you can see the problem on normal incandescent globes

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


40 W tungsten incandescent 1.9% efficiency 12.6 lumens per watt

60 W tungsten incandescent 2.1% efficiency 14.5 lumens per watt

100 W tungsten incandescent 2.6% efficiency 17.5 lumens per watt


Generally with light bulbs the bigger the globe the higher the efficiency and the more lumens per watt it will put out.


In general if you did you test above a 4 watt bulb on for a quarter the time for a smaller bulb you will always expect the bigger bulb to show more brightness if measured over time just based on incandescent globe physics it puts out more light energy.

We haven't gone into spread angles which ideally you would control by putting the bulbs in a reflector and then bring the light out thru a long metal pipe so all light energy is forced out down the tube in the same way. Essentially you are making the bulb setup act like a laser which is the easier way to do this test.


So done properly I would expect the bigger bulb to show more brightness over time (more light energy) but a lot depends on the bulb type here you really need to calibrate the light energy properly.

So that's my first advice measure the globes properly otherwise the test is really meaningless smile

Next lets talk about the camera as a detector of brightness it is really really terrible .. to show how bad.

Take a 1 second exposure on the 4 watt globe now open the exposure to 4 seconds. Now do the same two exposure for the 1 watt globe and look at all the images.

How do you quantify 4 times the light energy on a camera once it goes white as fully exposed it goes white and no additional arriving energy does anything. You can't meaningfully calibrate any of these 4 exposures.

So the camera is useless for any time or energy based measurement it is worse than non linear it suffers saturation when it goes full exposed and can't go any whiter.

So all in all the experiment is totally pointless and will tell you absolutely nothing meaningful you might as well go to a psychic and ask what it all means because a scientist sure as hell can't tell you anything with that terrible setup smile

If you were a scientist or really were an engineer you would know the drill assume nothing measure and control everything in an experiment Maciej Marosz, that setup is disgusting at all levels.


Edited by Orac (11/13/13 11:40 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50345 - 11/13/13 11:45 AM Re: LUX says no to most dark matter [Re: Orac]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1209
************************************************************
Thank You that You posted above info ( I already know above facts )

below picture explain my old patent
( UP SKY BEAM LIGHT - BLOKED BY BMW INOVATION COMPANY smile
one led cost near 5 USD ( police fireman )




EXIST TWO TYPE O SIGNAL :

A) POLICE - LASER LIGHT: ( see : 54 sec.)

http://youtu.be/LUGck9mNMDA

B) 55 Watts bulb CIVIL ?

http://youtu.be/4_Zt0cyFft0

************************************************************

One what we should add to above is that we have to use AMM and Voltage ( electric power calibration )

And for right calibration of the camera's sensor
we better will be use old candela definition
( Hot Platyne master )

********************************************************


Edited by newton (11/13/13 11:46 AM)

Top
#50346 - 11/13/13 11:56 AM Re: LUX says no to most dark matter [Re: Orac]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1209
PLEASE LET ME CONTINUE MY POSTS

ALL is in my head

BELOW TOOL NO NEED CALIBRATION !!!

IN ONE PICTURE I CAN MEASURE ALL 3d DIRECTIONS ( earth have 66.66)

constant mistake we will be see on each picture
this what we will look will moving ( this moving will be coopeate with Earth position )

[img:center]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Lmrl0-JUnvM/UmRrzQathpI/AAAAAAAABOw/TgIMawa9fCs/s1600/Marosz's+tool.JPG[/img]

JPG > FULL PAGE


***** YOU ARE NOT READY RIGHT NOW STEP BY STEP ... I WILL USE SIMPLE QUESTIONS and WAIT FOR YOU ... I MADE ABOVE TOOL ONE YEAR IN MY BRAIN !!! ...I'm not smarter than You but all need time ..



Edited by newton (11/13/13 11:59 AM)

Top
#50347 - 11/13/13 12:05 PM Re: LUX says no to most dark matter [Re: Orac]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1209
PLEASE WAIT I WILL GIVE ANSVER FOR YOUR POST
I WILL USE YOUR OWN WORDS ..

Top
#50348 - 11/13/13 12:48 PM Re: LUX says no to most dark matter [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Maciej Marosz I am a scientist I can see exactly what you are trying to do and test and it won't work you can't calibrate it.

Here let me save you the effort I can tell you what you are trying to see.

What you are thinking is that the light will be brighter on one side because of the motion and are trying to prove it.

The setup is terrible and you won't be able to calibrate it and worse you have air involved so you have refraction so even if you measured something you have no way of isolating what is moving the media or the light.

You have issues with lenses which have there own refractive indexes at different points each corner of a standard image has totally different characteristics ... I have discussed this with you.

You are never going to be able to make any of this work and any results you get is almost certainly going to be random chance.

Ok I can think of a fairly easy way to test your idea it would be easy to setup give me a second I will draw it.
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50349 - 11/13/13 01:36 PM Re: LUX says no to most dark matter [Re: Orac]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Build a laser power meter for under $50 USD here are the instructions

http://laserpointerforums.com/f42/diy-thermal-lpm-under-50-a-51129.html

This stuff is basic electronics and it uses the energy absorbed to be converted into an electrical voltage which gets displayed up on a normal voltage meter.


Here is what you end up with



Okay now mount a laser pointer on one end of a metal beam and mount the detector on the other say around a meter long. Now nothing can move so you can walk around and face it any direction you want and if science is right nothing will change if you are right the measurement will change depending on your direction.

Okay we can take the whole idea further and calibrate it .. make and L with two pieces of metal.

Now get a beam splitter the cost of these optical units is not very expensive you can buy them from an optics supplier for a few dollars ($5-$10)

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


http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/569788137/light_beam_splitter.html

The cube ones cost a little more but are easier to mount normal cost is around $20

http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/1217585649/cube_beam_splitters.html


Just make sure you tell them the color of your laser pointer which I am guessing will be red the most common.

Now you can measure the power in two direction simultaneously in two different directions from the same laser source so any temperature or voltage changes are removed because the beams are being generated from the same source ... but yeah it will need two laser power measuring units.

If you know you electronics you can even setup a difference signal between the two units and now rotate the whole setup hell you can walk around with it if you want.

If you can't measure a difference with this setup there is no way a camera will see a difference it is a much more accurate test.

If you get stuck let me know and I will send you the parts if it helps.

If the effect is real that setup will at least give you a chance to see the effect and it isn't prone to refraction problems in the media and lenses etc because it is directly measuring the energy of the light.

Understand there is an absolute guarantee in that setup that the results are consistent and you can be sure if there is a difference the power and energy of the light is the cause. I certainly would accept that if you could show it.


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

Top
#50350 - 11/13/13 02:16 PM Re: LUX says no to most dark matter [Re: Orac]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1209
I already study Your idea I see small problem

I , You , WE - must set laser perfect near END of EDGE of beam ( neutral parallel direction to 30 km/s

END of EDGE ?


Laser must be hot !!! and stable !!!
Test Must be done In Vacuum ! we need eliminate medium problem

We calibrated all in Parallel direction ( End of Edge beam in paralell direction )

We wait 6 h ... ( not touch nothing Earth will made own rotation

after 6 h we will see new position / different power

I call above test ( Sun rise experiment )


Very nice test will be if sensor will have huge quality

During time T light can made distance "a"
during time T laser can be in many new positions ( Vo = 30 km/s
= 30 000 000 mm /sec



laser led Hz about 1/128 000 000 sec ( laser on / off time )
each red line = new earth position ( 1/128 000 000 )

to rise distance between red lines we can use
also 220 000 000 mm /s


below velocity we can use
map

to rice distance between red lines we can use 30 km/s
and change distance sensor ( opposite rocket's wall ) ---laser








Edited by newton (11/13/13 02:26 PM)

Top
#50351 - 11/13/13 02:25 PM Re: LUX says no to most dark matter [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
The peltier module you can buy in Poland from

Transfer Multisort Elektronik

There part number is PM-15x15-9.5

http://www.tme.eu/en/details/pm-15x15-9.5/peltier-modules/stonecold/#

It's only 6.5watts so it will be very sensitive to 0.3watts from a typical laser pointer you will get quite a voltage from it.

Try it first but you can also paint it black with matt black paint so it absorbs maximum energy smile

You don't have to keep showing me the same image I promise you I understand what you think it isn't that hard to understand.


Edited by Orac (11/13/13 02:26 PM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50352 - 11/13/13 02:34 PM Re: LUX says no to most dark matter [Re: Orac]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1209
VACUUM ?

UNDERGROUN ? ( zero wibration )

4 Km Long Pipe

____________________________________________________________

...................light bulet -----> C
____________________________________________________________

pipe is full of VACUUM

what will happen If You will take in hand pipe
( pipe long 300 000 km ) and You will move pipe perpendicular
to C speed !!!

On earth pipe velocity 30 km/s ( your hand can give pipe 1 m/s )

what You think can You change bulet position
bulet started in past

You can push pipe make rotation
inside pipe only vacuum and light !!!

Perfect Place for test LIGO interferometer

http://www.ligo.caltech.edu/


We can call to Them and ask Dear Ligo staff please test above because it look ok

please repeat below test

but before start please use inverted square law and please find edge of beam during parallel pipe position

below more details

http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=50121#Post50121


Edited by newton (11/13/13 02:42 PM)

Top
Page 7 of 9 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >



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.