What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ?

Posted by: newton

What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/04/13 02:26 PM

Michelson Morley experiment - everyone know famous zero

>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson%

I made in home simple and similar test
(everyone can repeat in home

camera -- 10 mm Air -- Bulb ----> 30 km/s


camera -- 10 mm Air -- Bulb <---- - 30 km/s

In my test camera see brightness different ( bulb not have the same power ) we also can measure 220 km/s and 1,8 ...
we have proportional different

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

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

exist two Idea why

a) air not give the same resistance for light ( reason is 30 km/s and air athoms )

b) we have apparent distance shift ( it was target for MM test to show that light speed C is not absolute

My question : How to get Nobel Prize for my test ?
a) or b) = revolution in fundametal rights !!!

who decide about this what we have in books ( physics )
where are people responsible for education ( Michelson Morley made test and get Nobel for famous zero - I made simple test everyone can repeat in home and what ???...)
Posted by: Orac

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/06/13 08:05 AM

There is no one there is nobody, there is no organization who decides this stuff but you are to ignorant and crazy to even realize that about science.

So how is it decided by falsification ... any theory that can not be logically falsified stands as true.


It requires only one falsification ... your garbage has multiple so no scientist would waste there time.

There was a very famous publication called "100 authors against Einstein" as he commented why one hundred it would take but one?

Almost all your so call errors you believe exist have been explained you won't listen because you are a crackpot.

We don't care if you think you are right, we wouldn't even care if you got a petition with 51% of the worlds population to say you are right ... you are not right to science and can never be right because your theory has been falsified.

You must either remove the problems we can show are false in your theory or remain a crackpot lunatic to science.

Straight forward choice.

Correct your theory so it can't be falsified or remain a crackpot lunatic .... which is it to be?
Posted by: newton

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/06/13 11:01 AM





Theory for above test :

Michelson Morley = Relativity
Without Michelson Morley relativity = NONSENSE !!!!

Classical mechanic and above test ? ( we have ZERO for old equations )

DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ? .... I'm crayzy Ignorant or people who read about my test and see my resoult are HIPOCRITE ?

HOW MANY PEOPLE WILL LOST JOB ? ( we have many nice story about black holes .... time change ... and .... )
Posted by: Orac

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/06/13 03:58 PM

Why would anyone lose there job even if you were right .. are you really that na´ve about how science works?

Science doesn't really care who is right or wrong they just care what can be proven ... hundreds of scientists get proved wrong every day of the year and they don't lose there jobs. The only reason a scientist would lose their job would be for acting LIKE YOU.

You can't fix classic physics it is falsified beyond repair by Quantum Mechanics alone that falsification thing again.

Your theory EITHER has to incorporate QM and the standard model with some fix or falsify them as well take your pick. Why because both incorporate special relativity.

Fail to do that and your theory is DEAD .. STONE DEAD.

You have to be able to answer each and every scientific challenge to what your theory shows which you refuse to discuss your problems.

You can't just avoid questions or problems .. answer them or your theory is rejected.

Einstein's theories have probably faced thousand of challenges over the years and passed them all, you fail to discuss what is even wrong with your garbage experiment.

That's how science works you don't get to choose what to answer .. answer everything or we throw the garbage out.
Posted by: newton

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/07/13 12:50 AM

right now I'm making 3 day test

one year ago inside air my camera saw 3-6 % different signal level
inside water 1,5 meter long I have 15 % ( I need wait for summer I will prepare 15 meters pipe +water )

Nikon 5000 and stative and LED ( in full dark )
can not give biger mistake than 3-5 %

after 3 days test I schould have 3 pictures from each new position of my tool ( I set camera time 40 minutes = 10 degree Earth )

I schould see periodical brightness

What mean my test for physics ?
I don't know

I saw in books that Michelson Morley = Important experiment
I hope that my test will be inspiration for next generation people
who like study problems

I'm engineer (why my test work better than michelson morley tool )

exist some rules:
rule 1 :
( please eliminate elements from tool that you are using for measure - mistake that You will make will be lower You will have better tool )

in My tool I not have mirrors and spliter , I have only one long arm, My arm not exist and is virtual - can not have any vibration
can be very long ( photocamera - camera obscura ( leonardo ) = huge tool exist many combination of time , dark filtres , )

rule 2 : square function
in Michelson Morley tool They are using only line function ( geometry ) in my tool we have strong relation distance and power of the signal

rule 3 : If You doing something it have to be usefull for people
engineer must solve problem not build machine to exlain theory

( we live in time where corporations and economy change all - we die inside cars or use fuel that is not ecology )
Exist people who like design each solution make them happy.

In My home I have new generation compass
it is first prototype of New GPS system
it is first prototype of new tool that will show velocity
( rocket , airplanes, other vehicles ... )

I made all my own hand without outside help

What about physics ?

people like me have huge imagination sometimes ( very often )
Imagination and first Idea looks stupid and is stupid.
Sorry for many stupid words or crazy theories ...it is natural part of creation process
Good engineer use crayzy and stupid ideas and fit this ideas to real tools My tool work and I don't know how ....
no problem imortant is that 30 km/s my camera see near 15 % different brightness
Posted by: Orac

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/07/13 01:24 AM

It is not the crazy theories that I object to newton all scientists do that it is the insisting of that theory to be true even though you have obvious proof that it does not work smile

The second thing I object to is you don't even understand the basics and are too lazy to read them ... they are not hard and can be put in layman description.

The problem in not reading the basics is there are relationships between some things and not others and theories can easily run foul of an observation.

Your problem somehow you got fixated on two words "Einstein" and "relativity". Unfortunately for you those two words appear in many different areas some are connected some are not.

So then you start trying to use a problem you think may exist in one area to disprove something in a totally unconnected area of science and you look like a lunatic.

So lets be clear there are two sorts of relativity


SR has connections and associated fields to QM, Particle physics, Nuclear physics and atomic structure. You start trying to play around with SR you better wear a flak jacket because you will get problems from areas of physics you haven't even probably studied.

Why because SR ties into 3 of the 4 fundamental forces that are known .. gravity the 4th one is speculative not proved.



The top paragraph explains it all but note the big relationships

=> For predictive success with QM's probabilistic outcomes, however, particle physics conventionally models QM events across a field set to special relativity, altogether relativistic quantum field theory (QFT).

=> Everyday matter is atoms, composed of three fermion types: up-quarks and down-quarks constituting, as well as electrons orbiting, the atom's nucleus. Atoms interact, form molecules, and manifest further properties through electromagnetic interactions among their electrons absorbing and emitting photons, the electromagnetic field's force carrier, which if unimpeded traverse potentially infinite distance. Electromagnetism's QFT is quantum electrodynamics (QED).

=>The strong interaction, whose force carrier is the gluon, traversing minuscule distance among quarks, is modeled in quantum chromodynamics (QCD). EWT, QCD, and the Higgs mechanism, whereby the Higgs field manifests Higgs bosons that interact with some quantum particles and thereby endow those particles with mass, comprise particle physics' Standard Model (SM).

=>Still, physicists widely accept the Standard Model as science's most experimentally confirmed theory.

You start playing around with SR the whole universe comes down around your ears ... so you want to make SR wrong you better be prepared to either fix the whole of the universe relationships back up and totally rewrite physics or face that you are wrong. You will have to explain millions upon millions of experiments that will undoubtedly contradict your theory not just one or two.

That is why science is never going to accept your attack on SR garbage without you explaining in detail your theory because it will be falsified by other experiments and any scientist will know some straight off the top of their head.

The gravity story with GENERAL RELATIVITY that's a whole other story with lots of possibilities and why science still does Michelson Morley experiments.

The problem for me is you easily get SR and GR testing confused and a Michelson Morley experiment positive result would not affect SPECIAL RELATIVITY because light and gravity don't interact in science they are different fields and different fundamental forces.

Yet Maciej Marosz somehow thinks that a positive Michelson Morley experiment has implications for SPECIAL RELATIVITY and prove it wrong but won't say how.

SPECIAL RELATIVITY is one of the few things in science almost accepted as a fact because it goes across to many fields and has been tested to death. It is not against science to suggest it is wrong but you better have exceptional proof and work out how your theory is going to be compatible with millions of other experiments because you will generally be dismissed by science and they won't waste their time.
Posted by: paul

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/07/13 12:43 PM

imortant is that 30 km/s my camera see near 15 % different brightness

that is because the light wave is entering your camera
at a higher intensity due to the cameras velocity.

as in the below image , the red light wave @ 680 nm would appear to increase in intensity
( decreasing wavelength )
with camera velocity if the camera were moving toward the light source , by increasing camera velocity the red light would appear to transition from 680 nm to 550 nm and to 410 nm and it would even appear to transition beyond the visible light spectrum if enough velocity is added to the camera in the direction of the red light source.

ie..the camera would no longer see the red light because
as the light waves enter the camera the waves are beyond the
visible light spectrum.

your camera would then need to be able to capture
ultra violet light , x ray light , gamma ray light, and beyond.

Posted by: Orac

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/07/13 05:32 PM

I am astoundingly impressed Paul !!!!

There is another problem he has overlooked there isn't one media there is at least 3 being water, air and glass and the different frequency will refract differently smile
Posted by: newton

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/07/13 08:49 PM

Dear Orac and Paul
finaly after many test we schould have below situation

link to above picture

Paul I think that it is not only RED/BLUE please look below
we have constant RED Hz ( level of the signal looks different)

link to above picture

Right now I wait for finish my test day no 2 smile
Posted by: newton

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/07/13 08:56 PM

Dear Orac there is Water from my home pipe + Air + glass !!!
( my eyes see only one big dark blue water )

camera see more better than my eyes ( on picture You can see white lines and many areas of brightness ) stative and very long time must eliminate any mistake

I see one more problem 220 Volts and LED ( but I will eliminate this probem ----> it is not logic that 220 V cooperate with Earth around own axis period smile
Posted by: Orac

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/08/13 12:44 AM

You have a lense in the camera = glass media
You have air between the camera lense = air media

With a camera these two media are almost unavoidable

Now you may be starting to realize the problem these experiments are notoriously hard to setup and interpret you have to look at the setup very very very carefully before making outrageous claims.

This is why you need understanding and discussion and why scientists publish papers so others can check claims.

What I was really impressed with was Paul as a layman could actually see the problem introduced by the media.

I warned you any media present changes everything and I could predict what was going to happen and apparently so can Paul smile
Posted by: Orac

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/08/13 01:12 AM

If you are ready to listen to what is happening it is obvious there is a Doppler shift because of the speed differential and Paul got it correct

The most common situation this is encountered is on an RF communication transmission from a plane


All jets and airports have to have adjustments in their electronics to allow for the doppler shift of the planes movement relative to the tower.

The doppler shift occurs because the speed of light is constant the very thing you are trying to argue against laugh

The Doppler shift will create havoc when you introduce media unless you think very carefully about such setups.

So rather than disprove Einstein and special relativity your setup actual proves it right because if you gave me or Paul now the exact experimental setup we could tell you the exact result. You just don't understand enough science to work it all out smile

So => Einstein 1 .... Maciej Marosz 0

I would suggest in future rather than make outrageous claims and look very silly discuss thoughts and setups with people calmly and rationally. As discussed Special relativity is so embedded in all sorts of fields most of us just assume it is correct but we don't discourage people testing it. What we ask is you don't make outrageous claims unless you are 100% certain of your setup.

We had a case recently where some scientists claimed Special Relativity was wrong


The setup was also flawed .. basically they had your problem.

They were not sacked but what they did do was lose their credibility and confidence of peers so they resigned. It sounds harsh but everyone knows Special Relativity crosses so many fields that if you want to claim it wrong you need to double and triple check everything because it costs millions of dollars and a lot of scientists time to check these things. The cause of their error was so basic it should have been checked and so basically they failed as scientists.
Posted by: newton

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/08/13 06:32 AM


My test
bulb -----pipe -----camera --------> 30 km/s

Your Example
airplane ----30 km/s + 100 m/s -->.......station -----> 30 km/s

bulb ( source ) and camera ( sensor ) are roped to the Earth
bulb and camera have got the same velocity 30 km/s !!!

We not have typical doppler shift

1 please see what is it apparent point

>>> click animation

Below imortant picture

Earth and Sun have got the same velocity . Sun started ring 1 wave in point 1 ( wave 1 is going C respect to point where signal started) after 5-6 minutes Earth and Sun Will be in new point 4
Earth will register signal that started in poin 1 ( in past )

link to above image

important info to above piture

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.


( frequency Hz and Amplitude of the signal it is not two the same problems --- if the source and sensor have got the same velocity we will register only !!! amplitude of signal shift (graph shape )!!!)

link to above picture

ELECTRIC TEST ZERO ( resistance of wire /or /and signal shape )

link to above picture
Posted by: Orac

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/08/13 11:35 AM

There is nothing apparent about the distance shift

The earth spins about its axis (1662 km/h at equator), the earth spins about the sun (108,000 km/h), the sun and earth spins about the galaxy centre (72,000 km/h).

DRAW the path that's a lot of movements .. this bit you seem to get part of but not all.

For example at the poles the earth spin about it's axis is almost 0 km/hr if your imagine 1 meter out from the orbital pole it covers the 6.28m circle in 24 hrs versus the 12800 km the equator must travel in that time.

We often simplify classic problems and say there is no relative motion but when you are trying to test what you are you can't have that simplification.

You are launching a beam of light which is an electro-magnetic wave it is exactly the same as a radio transmission from a jet fighter pulling a complicated turn in a 3D space sense.

Surely you see there is nothing different here ... if there is please explain what is different.

I assure you we understand the problem ... you haven't got a clue which is obvious.

A few days ago some clever scientists used all the atomic clocks around the world to map the shape of the earth because an atomic clock can measure the force of gravity and that is it's height from the centre of mass of the earth to 30cm


You will note the reason they did all of that


For that purpose, our colleagues in Australia do not want to compare frequencies over 2000 km, but over approximately 4000 km which is, of course, making things even more complicate.

They are trying to get a baseline of the frequency shift of two points on earth 4000km apart so they can do tests sort of along the lines of yours but even more interesting.

So 30 cm is easily measurable ... so your challenge is to get your tube perfectly flat to all the spins or you will get a frequency shift of the different speeds of launch to receive position and hence it will doppler. That doppler will be refracted thru the different media ..




When a ray of light is incident on any surface, it gets refracted, transmitted and reflected. So some of the incident ray's energy is lost in transmission and reflection. So a refracted ray is less bright than the incident ray because it has lost energy.

So contrary to your claim refraction will change the brightness and you have to stop it or at the very least control it to a known.

So if you want to do brightness tests your setup experiment will need to stop the refraction by (a) having no media changes or (b) you need to stop the frequency changes which means stop the earth from moving ... choose a or b smile

I will say your 15% seems very high to me so I suspect there is another problem with your setup which we haven't yet identified perhaps air in the tube or some such thing.

Your electrical wire test is ridiculous you don't understand how electricity works if you believe that garbage as you wont measure a difference.

I will give you a better electrical analogy take you water hose out lay it out for 10 meters with the spin of earths direction do you really think you will be able to measure a difference of flow between an alignment of earth and against it .... you are a lunatic if you think you can the resistance against the walls of the hose will exceed any difference.

Even in a gold wire and at absolute zero the effect will be lost and you will measure nothing. You can measure coriolis effect on some things but not that.

This stuff is not hard smile
Posted by: Orac

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/08/13 01:16 PM

I added this as a separate reply .... could you please read this paper


The Japanese scientist who wrote it is Masanori Sato and installs absolute space in a way compatible with special relativity.

That's about the only way to get back absolute space if that's what you really want.

It's a useful teaching idea but the problem with the idea is you can falsify it under quantum mechanics because of it's use of Broglie-Bohm theory.

However it is about as close as you can get absolute space to meeting all science observations so it may interest you if you really want to continue your idea.
Posted by: newton

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/08/13 01:23 PM

Dear Orac

Thank You for post ( I understand that
Earth self rotation
earth around sun rotation
earth and sun around galactica center can make doppler )

Each Omega = V/R

V - line velocity
R - radius

before my test I schould measure each radial forces and set my pipes ideal perpendicular to radial acceleration vector ?

pipe ----> V
R( distance )
rotation center

V = constant sum V1+V2+V3 ( vectores )

Thank You for post

right now I wait my camera will finish
3 day test ( for perfect test I schould use one bulb and minimum 8 cameras ( 3d ball sensor )



220 KM/S


Posted by: Orac

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/08/13 01:53 PM

You really can't calibrate it except against an atomic clock and that already assumes you accept special relativity smile

I fear you are wasting your time and trust me 15% is way off we would have trouble with our laser labs if it was that much.

Think about it our lasers would vary 15% depending which way we pointed them are you really stupid enough to think we wouldn't notice that .... really come on grow a brain.

I have a 1 Kilowatt cutting laser to manufacture parts which according to you is only 850 watt depending on which direction I use it .... sure I would never notice the difference laugh

You have done things in your setup to make the problem worse but it won't be that much because otherwise the effect would be seen daily in lights, laser and anything that emits light.

You don't see that do you ... so clearly 15% is wrong.

Almost any scientist with access to an optics lab will have done a laser ring setup at some stage and know that you are stupidly wrong. A 4m square laser ring can pickup movements in the order of 10E-10 rad/s/sqrt(Hz) so given a typical red or green optical laser you can measure seismic events in the earth ... that's how precise we know the problem.

This is part of your problem, you have so many errors which you are totally ignoring (even stupidly obvious ones), it's hard to work out exactly what you are measuring at all.

Personally I am not really interested in working through it all because you just never answer questions or walk systematically through objections, you just publish ever more stupid posts.

Anyhow I have done as much as I can with you being as crazy as you are.

Hopefully you sort of understand now why you will get pretty much ignored by science and why ... it has nothing to do with science preferring or defending Einstein it is simply your ideas make no sense.

Anyhow I will leave you to it ... let me know when you win a Nobel prize laugh
Posted by: Orac

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/08/13 03:53 PM

As a final challenge to you I will give you a problem I would like you to think about.

If earth were covered completely in thick black clouds and you couldn't see the sun or any stars ... could you detect it was moving.

The obvious answer with its rotation is yes because we can see coriolis effects in many things.

Now the harder one could you detect that the earth was rotating about the sun even though you couldn't see it.

The answer is yes ... your challenge is to work out how smile

If you want a bonus challenge from there would it be possible to work out the sun and earth were rotating about the galactic centre smile

Good luck let me know if you need hints how to do it.
Posted by: newton

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/08/13 05:30 PM

Dear Orac

Below only One picture and One animation

How big intensity of the signal (3d radio ball)
will register rocket R1

a )V1 = absolute zero
b) V1 = C/2
c) V1 = 0,9 C

Can I calibrate my tool ?

>>> click link - big size above picture

>>> VERY IMPORTANT ANIMATION ( not my own - books )

***post author
my test in home

Led ----1,5 meter pipe --- camera -------> 30km/s

1,5 meter pipe = dark filtre for camera = Virtual distance between R 1 and R2

Do You see similar situation ?

Can I calibrate my tool ?

What is wrong with my picture ? or animation ?

to evaluate problem please use distance R1--R2 = 300 000 km ( I can set in home power of Led and dark filtre ( camera will see light after 1 sec. shooter time )
Posted by: newton

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/08/13 05:44 PM

each engineer that like make drawing know that strait line = small part of huge circle ***

in tool in my home I set picture time 8 sec.
150 000 000 km radius and 8 sec I'm sure that it is not so big mistake that I will imagine that it is strait line Can I ignore small doppler efecte ( rotation doppler ???)
( I'm not NASA I'm amatore I can ignore small mistake smile
Posted by: Orac

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/08/13 11:33 PM

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:



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


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


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
Posted by: newton

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/09/13 03:38 AM

Ok I understand

Please look on my last post


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
Posted by: Orac

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/09/13 11:41 AM

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

Posted by: newton

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/09/13 07:35 PM

below animation explain that point where signal ( light ) started
is not moving with the source


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

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
Posted by: newton

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/09/13 07:38 PM

below animation explain that point where signal ( light ) started
is not moving with the source

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

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


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


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 )

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 !!!
Posted by: Orac

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/09/13 11:10 PM

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%.


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.


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


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.
Posted by: Orac

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/09/13 11:31 PM

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.
Posted by: newton

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/10/13 07:33 PM

Below I show facts ( please write me in You post where You see mistake ) ???


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

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


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


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 ...
Posted by: newton

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/10/13 07:47 PM

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
Posted by: newton

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/10/13 08:09 PM

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)

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."
Posted by: Orac

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/11/13 12:08 AM

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

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.


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.


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.
Posted by: newton

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/11/13 02:34 AM

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 )


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 !!!


Posted by: Orac

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/11/13 02:40 AM

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.
Posted by: newton

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/11/13 02:46 AM

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 )

Posted by: Orac

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/11/13 02:50 AM

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.
Posted by: newton

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/11/13 02:59 AM

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

Posted by: Orac

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/11/13 03:02 AM

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?

Posted by: newton

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/11/13 03:11 AM

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

V2-V1 = doppler reason

in my test

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


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


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 ??? )


Posted by: Orac

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/11/13 03:25 AM

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.


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 ...

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.
Posted by: Orac

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/11/13 11:05 AM

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.
Posted by: newton

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/11/13 07:19 PM


EARTH's own omega in PPoland 1,8 km/s
15 % for 30 km/s is true
for 1/8 km/s I can not measure so small brightness problem

Earth's angle to ellipse around sun = 66.66 degrees

When I made test inside air ( one year ago ) I move up camera on the special table 24 degree
the brighntnees of picture was and is and will be proportional to angle

66.66 degrees and ideal flore leve = that camera has got 24 degree angle to 30 km/s

I move up camera near 24:00

camera ( 24:00 ) Poland
ERARTH's CENTER -----> 30 km/s

66.66 angle and erth self rotation = that my camera measure many angle to 30 km/s in all 3d direction

SELF ROTATION = rotation but radius is very big
the same 220 km/s

very nice test = ideal perpendicular aberration

The Rocket has got two arms at the end of each arm we have source of signal (source is sending electromagnetic waves - for example Edison's Bulb )

I'm waiting to see #3D image ( velocity image of the earth in micro world below single athom )
Thea same athome we shoud measure in all 3d dirction microscope WE WILL SEE 3d ELLIPSE

below picture explain "theoretical example system for rocket"
two cameras measure rotation ( omega)
one camera can measure line velocity

EACH LINE VELOCITY CAN EXPLAIN EACH OMEGA ( we must know only radius )
Posted by: newton

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/11/13 07:28 PM


link t above picture

NOT EXIST C+ V earth
Posted by: Orac

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/12/13 03:20 AM

Wow you really answered the questions didn't you laugh

So I take it you accept the idea is falsified .. that makes what 8 false tests to your theory ... science doesn't allow one.

So you theory is dead and buried to science smile

Oh look new pictures ... like why would I bother even discussing more garbage, 8 is enough I think.

Bye lunatic.
Posted by: newton

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/12/13 04:10 PM


below animation = fact ? ( Orac it is fact for You ? physics books please study )


What it is apparent point ? Is that point moving with the source or it is stationary point ?

Blue arrow represent one single radial 3D ball wave
( below picture = fact for You or mistake ? )

Beam's shape ( not exist source of light that is sending ideal one line beam )

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.


What if we will have full information about the source
( electric power + light power + real colour of light )
Person with very good camera can read Apparent distance he can see new position each waves

between bulb and rocket exist distance Y during ligh from bulb is going to touch the rocket's wall ( sensor )

Rocket is moving or not moving ?

We have two type of aberration ( perpendicular ) and parallel

Light signal that SUN started 6 minutes ago we see on the Earth ( What Earth and Sun Are doinng durning these 6 minutes

below winter distance what will be after 6 months

Can we measure above efect in home
Yes good photographer can simulate any distance it is only few sets on camera or dark filtre



light ---> medium ( air ) -----> 30 km/s <----Light

In my test air ( or water can give not the same resistance for light - absolute medium's motion is important ) ( air is moving with Earth 30 km/s and can block the light

Inside vacuum I already showed solar system WE CAN IGNORE STUPID PERSON but not many years of photography and very simple test

First Michelson Morley tool was also not perfect it is very natural for NEW tools - My tool use light and Is able explain West -East direction ( special astronomy time is important -that is not Deviation from zero for water I see 15% different volume of brightness )

I wait for people who will help test my tool we wil create alternative for All what is right now inside books ( it will be revolution )

Thank You
Maciej Marosz
Engineer and Inventor
Posted by: newton

Re: What to do to get NOBEL prize for amatore test ? - 10/27/13 12:36 PM

Doppler we can measure Red/Blue and !!! Intensity shift !!!


more simple explain

Perpendicular test version

Gravitation and apparent distance problem !!!