LUX says no to most dark matter

Posted by: Orac

LUX says no to most dark matter - 10/31/13 12:46 AM

Well it is a very subdued night in physics central with most just scratching there heads after the LUX report on dark matter.

From the detector and apparatus side LUX is operating at nearly twenty times the sensitivity of it's nearest competitor. It's calibrations and backgrounds are a spectacular achievement to those dedicated scientists who worked on the system.

Most expected it to see something for most types of dark matter the counts at this level should have been thousands of events instead LUX saw exactly 2.4 events which is more or less it's background sensitivity.

That means it has ruled out a lot of weakly interacting Dark Matter candidates (WIMPS) and light candidates from most popular theories.

I have no heard from any scientists that doubt the results because of the backgrounds that it is showing so most are factoring in a NULL result for dark matter.

Edit: The paper is out now
http://luxdarkmatter.org/papers/LUX_First_Results_2013.pdf

So we are left with either Dark Matter being very dark and hardly interacting with matter at all or it doesn't exist and both are a little unsettling to science.

Very dark matter with lack of any sort of interaction with matter means it is going to be very hard to do any sort of experiments at least with the limit of science at the moment.

On the other side if there is no dark matter then we need to mix up what we know exists in some form of Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND) and get a consistent theory. Almost every attempt at doing this so far has been less than successful.

You will get the usual nutcases that claim this shows there xyz crackpot stupidity is thus validated but the reality is LUX signed a death note to most of the testable most likely to be able to tested theories. In that sense the lunatics win because no theory left is going to be testable for a good many years unless we get a physics break through.

I guess it was too much to hope for a Higgs and Dark matter resolution within a short timespan but it would have been nice.

So there you have it ... roll out your theories that have completely Dark Matter or no Dark matter at all none of which can be tested anytime soon and try and convince people that yours is the best answer laugh

I see a few of the bloggers have put there thoughts up ... the usual suspects
http://resonaances.blogspot.com.au/
http://www.science20.com/quantum_diaries_survivor/lux_no_dark_matter_sensitive_direct_search-123473
http://motls.blogspot.com.au/2013/10/dark-matter-wars-are-over-lux-safely.htm
Posted by: paul

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 10/31/13 02:48 AM

Quote:
So we are left with either Dark Matter being very dark and hardly interacting with matter at all or it doesn't exist and both are a little unsettling to science.


Dark Matter never made any sense to me anyway , I just figured
that they needed a crutch and so they invented Dark Matter to
lean on.

so , now what happens to the space expanding faster than c
crutch?

wasnt that a result of Dark Matter or connected to Dark Matter in some way or form?

I forget or better yet its because I never looked into it , because I didnt think it was worth my time , because
I didnt believe that Dark Matter existed.

yep , I thought so.

http://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/focus-areas/what-is-dark-energy/

Quote:
Eventually theorists came up with three sorts of explanations. Maybe it was a result of a long-discarded version of Einstein's theory of gravity, one that contained what was called a "cosmological constant." Maybe there was some strange kind of energy-fluid that filled space. Maybe there is something wrong with Einstein's theory of gravity and a new theory could include some kind of field that creates this cosmic acceleration. Theorists still don't know what the correct explanation is, but they have given the solution a name. It is called dark energy.


take your pick.

expanding
https://www.google.com/#q=dark+matter+and+expanding+universe

acceleration

https://www.google.com/#q=dark+matter+and+the+acceleration+of+the+expanding+universe

and the walls began to tumble down.

the acceleration is due to a loss of mass , just like I
said in a earlier thread , or threads here on SAGG.



Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 10/31/13 04:05 AM

so , now what happens to the space expanding faster than c
crutch? ?


Below one picture

I see airplane but I can not hear it

what if I not see and not hear ???




Black Hole = Newton Action and reaction + new point of view for old problem





fashlight ----> C> ...... observer 1

observer 1 can not see light ( information about body position ) have lower velocity than body


observer 2..............flaslight -----> C>

observer 2 can not see light !!! light can not hit flashlight and back to his eyes !!!!


flashlight -----> C>
I
I
I
I
Observer 3

Observer 3 is abbel see very LOW LUX ( exist huge abberation that reduce brightness of this what is sending flashlight )

look below light made distance "a" after time T
How many meters made rocket during time T ?




Sensrs on opposite wall can register ENERGY / AREA
Energy is constant if electric power of laser is constant
what can change ? AREA !!! ( one point , or many points - line)



Wery important fact !!!

dark night You keep in Your hand Bulb ( edison )
if You are moving in space with Earth ( 30 km/s . 220...)
You are sending many 3d Ball Waves

Look below not NEW GENIAL THEORY !!! ( only doppler and !!! and !!! not red blue but INTENSITY OF SIGNAL SHIFT !!!

How work bulb in vacuum and what mean distance for bulb
Inverted Square Law



Doppler for light Bulb was in past in point 1 and started perfect 3D ball 1 .....



First Test Michelson Morley ( Intensity of signal version LUX )

[img:center]http:
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 10/31/13 04:20 AM

so , now what happens to the space expanding faster than c
crutch? ?


Below one picture

I see airplane but I can not hear it

what if I not see and not hear ???




Black Hole = Newton Action and reaction + new point of view for old problem





fashlight ----> C> ...... observer 1

observer 1 can not see light ( information about body position ) have lower velocity than body


observer 2..............flaslight -----> C>

observer 2 can not see light !!! light can not hit flashlight and back to his eyes !!!!


flashlight -----> C>
I
I
I
I
Observer 3

Observer 3 is abbel see very LOW LUX ( exist huge abberation that reduce brightness of this what is sending flashlight )

look below light made distance "a" after time T
How many meters made rocket during time T ?




Sensrs on opposite wall can register ENERGY / AREA
Energy is constant if electric power of laser is constant
what can change ? AREA !!! ( one point , or many points - line)



Wery important fact !!!

dark night You keep in Your hand Bulb ( edison )
if You are moving in space with Earth ( 30 km/s . 220...)
You are sending many 3d Ball Waves

Look below not NEW GENIAL THEORY !!! ( only doppler and !!! and !!! not red blue but INTENSITY OF SIGNAL SHIFT !!!

How work bulb in vacuum and what mean distance for bulb
Inverted Square Law



Doppler for light Bulb was in past in point 1 and started perfect 3D ball 1 .....



First Test Michelson Morley ( Intensity of signal version LUX )




LUX nombers and solar system ?



How I know that my own coordinatin system is moving ?




Exist zero montion ?




Why Michelson Morley is important test ?




Why Mr Mach Idea will never cooperate with Einstein

[img:center]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ad_XcIVcUpU/ULBdRibvFYI/AAAAAAAAARI/xC8MMjBBdDk/s1600/comparrrree.JPG[/img]

Mr Mach started think that we can use FAR FAR star as a ZERO
his idea is very good

I made in home my own small star * my test camera and bulb

I know electric power of the star
I know that this star is moving the same velocity like my own coordination system ( Earth )
I know distance bulb sensor

I have all datas to evaluate aberration !!!
power of beam or geometry of beam AND POSITION ON SESOR

not exist C + V or C-V
light started in point 1 ( past )
How far Earth is from point 1 ( I can measure Intensity shift )

point 1 ... point 2 ... point 3 ( Doppler drawing ) !!!



Everyone can do similar to me test.
Einstein made huge mistake !!!

he can not explain three facts that very good cooperate
doppler + aberration + LUX nombers ( Intensity shift ) !

WHAT IS VERY IMPORTANT !!!!

gravitation and light work very similar !!!

m--R----M ----> 220 km/s

m--R----M --------------------------C/2

mass m will feel different gravitation forces
(LUX for light Energy/ Area for gravitation )

distance and how far from place vere signal started mass m feel signal is very important for atoms and electrons !!!

below atom ( wodore ) do You see velocity ? ( ellipse )
microscope position and Earth velocity ?

[img:center]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-bTJ5b87JkLs/Uj8OWF0ZFdI/AAAAAAAABJw/CCqnyMkqC60/s1600/Atom+pictures.JPG[/img]

Why atomic clock showing different time ?

electron period is able be diffrend !!! it is natural that electron in absolute space is making ellipse around athom center
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 10/31/13 05:53 AM

Noone cares about your stupid images.

I respect your right to have an opinion but we don't need you same picture B U L L S H I T in every thread.

If you have something to discuss that's fine go ahead but mindless posting of the same image over and over again and I will complain and ask you be banned. We have seen that same image like 50 or 60 times .... oh you added a green bit laugh

You can have a view and I don't even care if it is different from mine but please interact and say something on the forum rather than post the same crap images which are meaningless.

BROKEN BAD ENGLISH WOULD BE BETTER THAN STUPID PICTURES


You could tell us what you theory says about dark matter if you feel you have something to say ..... say it!!!!

We already another LUNATIC who says you are apparently wrong because thus expert Dr Sorin Cosofret who apparently is a genius with two degrees and can answer everything

Look he even has a website and HE IS RIGHT so you go convince him about your theory.

I think whichever of you can convince the other I will believe ... so I will support whoever wins

Convince Dr Sorin you are right and I will support you .... deal?

HIS WEBSITE .... NOW GO CONVINCE HIM
http://www.elkadot.com/index.php/en/

You really need a website ... you aren't getting your genius out to a larger following.

If you want my real opinion of both of you here is my image



I am really praying natural selection selects against idiots because the idea of that much idiot gene progressing thru generations is more than I want to think about.
Posted by: paul

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 10/31/13 02:40 PM

newton

I understand there is a language barrier that prevents you
from communicating to the desired degree necessary to present
your opinions in a clear and understandable fashion.

the images that you post could do this for you if you clean
them up a bit , leave out the jokes , and add a summary of the message you are presenting in the images.

try to keep the images within a clear tolerance of each other
and maintain communication from image to image , to allow a
viewer to follow the opinion that you have.

you need to concern yourself with a viewers loss of attention
I know you can draw , and some of your comments are clearly understandable , therefore I know you can do it if you focus
on keeping a viewers attention.

capture the viewers curiosity , lock the viewers interest and
feed the viewer your opinion.

and keep it short but to the point.
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 10/31/13 04:51 PM

Paul has set a better tone than my last post so I am going to try one last time to show where this is going to end for you Maciej Marosz unless you change the way you are doing things.

You can keep your theory alive but you MUST ACT DIFFERENTLY.

I am going to use Sorin Cosofret to show you where you are headed unless you listen. I did some looking around old physic site archives (waiting for the lux broadcast) and Sorin comes up in posts dating back earlier than 2008.

In 2008 he was awarded an immortal gem title

http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Gems/IWorryAboutYou.html

It's rather childish game scientists play to see if we can identify posts of absolute stupidity that are so silly as the title says "I worry about you."

So Sorin has been putting up the same silly arguments for something over 8 years it's probably longer. He has been given the same answers and same details as I recently gave him from at least 20+ different science forums.

The response given back to him in 2008 is telling

Quote:

The life you waste defending this "work" is your own. Should you be interested in a real work of physics, you might find this interesting:


He has wasted 8+ years of his life posting the same rubbish which will never be accepted by science because it doesn't follow the guidelines of science.

I actually feel rather sad for Sorin to waste that much of his life and thoughts on such a futile exercise and all he got from it was to become the butt of a lot of jokes and get laughed at. Whether Sorin is aware or cares about what has become of his reputation is unclear to me but I feel embarrassed for him.

That will be you Maciej Marosz in 8 years if you continue down this path you need to act differently. You think I am bad now you better believe if you are still posting the same images 8 years from now I am going to be pretty hostile, I have already seen that image 60+ times.

First and foremost as per Paul has said above you need to communicate not post what appears to us as the work of a bad impressionist painter. It doesn't matter if your English is not good your pictures are even worse.

You are going to encounter criticism, you have to expect it and you will have to show slowly and methodically what you propose. If you fail to do this science will just ignore you like I currently do ... the point here is science doesn't care about your discovery. Unless science can get full answers so it can neatly join it in to a much larger physics there is nothing gained by accepting your physics. Everything is working perfectly fine at the moment so why break everything to put your idea in if all it does is break everything else.

So the key point here and it's worth making it clear

PHYSICS IS WORKING PERFECTLY FINE FOR MOST SCIENTISTS TODAY IT DOESN'T NEED YOUR CHANGE UNLESS IT HAS SOMETHING TO GAIN.

At the moment if it accepted your idea in to science in it's rather crazy form everything from the atom, cosmology, QM and chemistry .... all stop working.

IT WOULD NOT MATTER IF YOU WERE RIGHT ... NOTHING WORKS ANYMORE.

So what science will do is simple it will ignore you and eventually sometime in the distant future some other person will work out how to put the idea you thought of properly into science in a proper manner and they will get all the prizes and no one will even remember Maciej Marosz.

That is you fate Maciej Marosz, so now it's up to you, are you willing to learn and change or do you want to continue on to be the next Sorin Cosofret. Let's see where you end up 8 years from now and if you learnt anything and any of this sunk in.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 10/31/13 05:49 PM

Dear Orac thank You for Tip ( My discovery I made during I play camera witb my daughter ) camera west and east see different brightness



How You want to conect below facts in one ?

below I showing very good know definition from books (physics )


1 doppler




2 Iverted Square Law



Do You think That below is my own theory ? or test that I made in home and everyone can repeat ?


Please imagine that You are keeping hot bulb in Your hand

point 1 .... point 2 ......point 3....
3d signal 1 .....2............3....... ( please look on doppler drawing ) Your bub is in many new points


I want ask You why we have winter and summer ( 66.66 angle problem we have in books ) below my additional idea ( theaories ??? )


Your Bulb = Sun

Earth -----------Sun -------------Earth

light need 6 minutes for distance Earth SUN ??

Sun started singnal in point 1 where will be earth after 6 minutes please compare winter and summer position



below map made astronomers ( it is not my own map )



how You want to speak about physics without pictures ?

after above do You understand below Idea ?



IT IS NOT THEORY ABOVE I SHOWED LOGIC AND FACTS FROM BOOKS

below My own test in home

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


Right now I need repeat my test in prof. lab and with international team below test can be esy done in LIGO


what will happen with light between time 1/300 000 and
4/300 000 ???

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

I'm sory that I'm wasting time and public on forum bad english TXT below other stupid explain

Light made distance "a" how many meters made rocket ?



DO YOU LIKE MICHELSON MORLEY TEST WHY ? WHY THEY HAVE ZERO ??
WHO TOLD THAT MICHELSON MOLRLEY CONFIRMED MR EINSTEIN THEORY ?

what will register sensors on opposite rockets's wall ???

WHO SHOWING TRUE me or books ? please repeat my test in home why we can measure west east diferent brightness ???
diferent LUX orthe same ???

right now Hawking and many others speak about black holes like about somthing very unnatural for me it is only mass and action and reaction and motion

faster than light ?

Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 10/31/13 06:15 PM

Dear Orac in books doppler for light it is only RED / Blue shift

what You think do we have also Intensity shift

level of signal ( brightness shift ) ???





source --->V1 ----distance R ------ sensor---> v2


please compare to below sitiation

sensor ----->V2 -----distance R ------- source ----> V1


situation A V1 > V2

before see situation B please study below animation ( not my own but from books physics ) - not exist C+Vsource and please compare apparent point to point 1 from doopler picture

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6d/Aberrationlighttimebeaming.gif




situation B V1 = V2


I wiil ask You one more do You undderstand what mean above for physics ?

m -----R ----- M ----------> 30 km/s

m -----R ------M ---------------------------> 220 km/s


M ----R ---m ---------------> 30 km/s

...????

How big Intensity of signal will feel mass M ( gravitation )

Athomic Cloc ????????????

we have different time during trip ?

or electron inide atomic clock not feel the same forces ? ( the same intesity of signal that started form point 1 ...2 ...3...4 )


Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 01:57 AM

So basically you read nothing of what we wrote and learnt nothing ... you really are drop kick stupid.

So lets start counting ... 61

I see the images but I see no relevance I know how Doppler and inverse square law work I HAVE A SCIENCE DEGREE. If that is all that is about remove them I know how those effects work as will most on here because you are on a science forum.

I think it's the next bit you loose everyone because you start comparing objects with MASS to objects WITHOUT MASS. So can you clarify which type are we talking about?

I think that is where you need to start but be clear are you talking about light or objects with mass.

In your discussion something put one picture ... and explain it in one post and then wait for response. Noone can put a whole theory in a page or a single post. Einstein started with a single thought E=MC2 he argues the rest out from there and he won every argument. So if you are going to do this start with the first idea don't tell us how it ends we don't care until we agree with the first fact.

So are we clear one fact and one picture in each post I will respond otherwise I will just ignore you.

My image of the universe I will copy it every time I see your bulk images I think my universe is prettier... lets see how fast the moderator bans us shall we or can you learn how to communicate.

Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 03:15 AM

Ok one Picture

Doppler Efect



source ---> V1 -----distance R ------- sensor ---->V 2

if V2 >V1 = sensor escape from the source ( distance R rise )

Intensity of signal is going down


above discovery I made in 2012 ( doppler made own idea 1842 )

Fact or False ?
before me nobody use Inverted Square Law in way how I did this and add Inverted squear law to doppler



We have one small problem Source and Sensor are inside medium or are inside Vacuum ?

If they are inside vacuum all what happen inside vacuum described J.Bradley ( astonomy aberration ) below very nice animation ( please imagine that the source and the sensor are moving in space I not like below animation but I use it to help You imagine the problem )

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6d/Aberrationlighttimebeaming.gif


If the source and sensor are inside medium ? for example air ?
this is other problem


Ok one post one topic ?
physics is not narrow EM waves = Gravitation waves

small mass m = sensor
huge mass M = source

m ----> V1 ----------distance R ------- M -----> V2

VERY NICE PROBLEM TO STUDY
WHAT IF V1 = V2 ?
where the signal started and where the signal will be register

we can make test in home ( I did it )

camera1 -----R ---- BULB -------R ----- camera2 ---> Motion

Brightness of picture = Inverted Square Law !!!

I'm sorry uppssss I cross one topic ?
or I speak about the same problem ?


m ------ R ------ M --------R ------- m -----> Motion

what about athoms on Earth ? athoms feel motion ?
upss I cross topic ???


What about atomic clock and motion ( m = electrom , M = center)
atomic clock ? do we have two different time and space ? or one atomic clock that have small problem during travel in airplane - motion change forces that work on electron ( not exactly forces but Intensity of signal from center )

Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 03:19 AM

And I have answered that question the answer is NOPE your expectation is invalidated by my laser lab.

Infact we can go futher a bunch of clever scientists have levitated a mirror to DIRECTLY measure the light force of a lasers power

http://phys.org/news/2013-10-laser-tripod-levitation.html



So if what you suggested is true they would have no chance of doing the experiment as the earth swirls around in space.

Remember for a laser the power is it brightness you measure a laser power by it brightness per square area of beam and they are measuring it DIRECTLY to extreme accuracy.

I am not sure where you want to go from there the idea is clearly wrong .. we call that a falsification.

So you can't just ignore that you have to either explain how we are seeing something totally different to what you idea says.

Now I know you have an experiment you say shows the effect but as scientists we always try and reconcile different experiments. So science has multiple universities all reporting a different result to your home experiment. The obvious and most likely conclusion is your experiment has something wrong in it's control conditions but you refuse to look at them.
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 03:41 AM

You actually put two ideas in your post ... NOT ONE AS ASKED .. but I will cut you some slack.

You took the problem into solids and we can answer that as well.

What was funny is you sort of jumped on the image of the atom saying it's not perfectly round. I found it funny because you have no idea how many times that image has been scaled and probably distorted yet you think it showed something.

However it does bring up another almost instant falsification of your idea because you realize the atoms would distort and that would be correct if your idea was true.

That has a massive implication because lengths of solids would change depending on there motion smile

So you could get a couple of meters of material and accurately measure it and move it around ... it should change under your idea right?

I want you to think about electrons in a piece of metal and we take that metal on a centrifuge ... what should happen under your idea? The electron has mass 9.10938291 × 10-31 kilograms and it's fairly loosely bound.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 03:41 AM


bulb ------150 000 000 km !!! --------sesor

please turn on bulb only for 1 sec. signal

light is going to sensor ( small one sec portion )


what if exist motion ?


sensor1 ------ Bulb ------ sensor 2 ------> motion

NOT EXIST C+ V or C- V
(fact from books many time confirmed for EM waves )

Where the signal startet ? where sensor 1 and sensor 2 will register signal (where will be bulb 5 - 6 minutes later )
( how far from point where light started sensors will register signal )

Please Use inverted square Law and C speed in vacuum


FALSE ? MY TEST IN HOME = FALSE !!!

WOW ...

WHY YOU HAVE WINTER AND SUMMER ( 66.66 is only problem no 1 ) do You see problem no 2 in above post ?

BUBL WAS TURNED ON ONLY FOR ONE SEC !!!
WHERE THE SIGNAL STARTED ?
WHERE THE SIGNAL WILL BE REGISTER ?
HOW LOOK BEAM SHAPE ?





Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 03:44 AM

That's not an experiment anyone can do ... I am not even going to bother arguing it. I know whats wrong with it but you wont listen lets stick to experiments scientists and if necessary you can do and test.

SEE WHAT YOU DID THERE IT IS BAD IN SCIENCE YOU ARE AVOIDING A PROBLEM TO YOUR THEORY.

The problem you are bringing is the bulb emits in 3D and we can't have sensors everywhere. So stay with a laser which travels in a nice straight line.

If have misunderstood your home experiment then that's fine we can come back to it.

I NEED TO GET RID OF THE INVERSE SQUARE PROBLEM BECAUSE IT MAKES ANY EXPERIMENT HARD ... I HAVE GIVEN YOU A SUGGESTION

It shouldn't change anything in your problem but means I can measure at one point and one point only I don't have to try and cover an entire 3D sphere with measurements and it removes the inverse square problem .. happy with that?

So we have a laser beam and it's power is simply the brightness in its cross sectional area. The beam will widen slightly as it travels distance it always does but for most usable distance you can ignore it.

If you agree with all that ... no more talk of inverse square law and stay with the laser beam.

So according to you the laser power will change depending if it is going with the movement or against it .. correct?

I am avoiding hypotheticals lets stick to facts we can check.
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 04:06 AM

I should actually add these days we can go smaller and more precise than even a laser beam we can go down to a single photon which there are methods to tag a photon with Quantum entanglement.

The process is call pre-heralding and so you can track an individual photon of light and detect it's arrival.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130520154251.htm

The initial detection rate was 84% I understand that has been improved lately.

So definitely no inverse square law for a single photon situation science basically can do anything to test your theory they would just need it to be viable to want to spend the money to do it.

I think we are getting somewhere near the misunderstanding and I guess we should ask and make sure you accept


For a single photon the inverse square problem doesn't and can't exist because it is a single item .. correct? Maciej Marosz doesn't exhibit inverse square law because he is a single item .. that's the simplicity of the logic.

Normally I would take it a person realizes and accepts that but I need to check with you that you understand what a photon is.

Ultimately the question we are after is Maciej Marosz or Einstein correctly predicting the behavior of a single photon of light and as that doesn't involve the inverse square law so we need to get it out of our experiments and discussion in some agreed way.


So are we clear I don't understand how you think the inverse square law gets involved, unless it has something to do with your home experiment and if that is the case lets ignore your home experiment for now.

My position is straight forward Maciej Marosz as a person doesn't exhibit square law behavior a photon of light also doesn't exhibit square law behavior because it is ONE item.

What I am starting to think is you think a photon of light spreads out in 3D like a radio wave it doesn't it is a particle called a gauge boson under electromagnetic theory.

Is that why we don't see the same answers .. I need you to tell me you understand what a photon is?

Does everything above make sense to you?


See I had not thought about this before because we sort of don't think like layman smile If you got confused and thought a photon did emit in every direction it's energy would get less and less by the square law laugh

Why no one would think about it like that is the photon is the emission ... a photon doesn't emit anything. It would be like telling me Maciej Marosz is emitting Maciej Marosz's. You see the directionality of a photon in the movies with the sniper red dot on the person to be shot. You can't see the beam in travel because the photons are directional you only see them when they hit a target and bounce off in all directions and hence you see the dot on the target.

Is that what has got you confused you got photons all mixed up?
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 07:42 AM

The problem you are bringing is the bulb emits in 3D and we can't have sensors everywhere. So stay with a laser which travels in a nice straight line.


hmmmmmm?????

WE CAN CHANGE TEST AND USE LASER ( Michelson Morley used hot Edison Bulb in first interferometer not important small joke that You can confirm in books - Gallileo made test with candle)

Laser and ideal strait line + doppler + vacuum

not exist C+V ( fact 1 )
light speed C ( constant fact 2 )
laser has got electric power P ( fact 3 )
( laser can sent X joules / sec)


below test we can made in space

during short time T light made distance "a"
during short time T laser emited for example 10 Joules energy

during short time T rocket made distance ????
how to evaluate ???
on opposite rocket's wall we have sensors similar to this what use photocamera ( can be also traditional old film )




DEAR ORAC CAN WE RECOGNIZE HOW MANY JOULES REGISTER POINT or NOT ???


We should know about teperature problem ( we can evaluate constant mistake that we will made in above test )
( hot diode is sending biger beam and more biger power ) producent always inform about +/- %





Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 07:49 AM

Ohh ..... one important info

Vo= 0 10 joules will work on one point
Vo= A sensors will register intensity B
Vo= 2A sensors will register intensity B/2


PLEASE ADD TO ABOVE ROCKET DOPPLER DRAWING

laser was in point 1 ...point 2.....point 3 ....point 4
and send wave 1 ....wave 2 .....wave 3 .....wawe 4...

laser and diode has got some Hz ( about 120 000 000 / sec )
so below picture very good describe exist signal not exist



WE ARE MAKING TEST INSIDE VACUUM NOT INSIDE AIR
MICHELSON MORLEY USE AIR ( MEDIUM )
MEDIUM IT IS SEPARATE PROBLEM



Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 08:05 AM

Forget all that I am pretty sure I have worked it out why we can't understand you.

You view a "PHOTON" like a mini light bulb don't you emitting in 3D and that's why you say we can't remove the problem ... found it.

I couldn't for the life of me work out why you kept going on about the inverse square law function but I am pretty sure I understand why you think that.

It also explains why in some of you examples with rockets that you couldn't work out they would never see the light.


THE PROBLEM I AM SURE IT IS BECAUSE YOU DON'T UNDERTSAND A PHOTON.

You need to understand what a photon .... that's the problem I am sure or it.

Haha that's why you make no sense to me and I make no sense to you ... sorry it wasn't obvious to me because I don't think like a layman ... so hard when you don't understand the other person.

SO DESCRIBE A PHOTON FOR ME THATS ALL I NEED YOU TO DO I AM SURE THAT IS WHERE THE PROBLEM IS


DOH I AM SUCH A SCIENTIST DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT A PHOTON IS?


I am sure once you understand a photon this will all clear up this is the so called particle behavior of light.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 08:18 AM

PHOTON = zero mass

PHOTON = energy portion



PLEASE STUDY ABOVE ROCKET PICTURE

electric power of laser we can describe other way
not Joules / sec but Photons / sec

I WILL ASK YOU HOW MANY ENERGY WILL REGISTER
OPPOSITE ROCKET'S WALL

NEXT PROBLEM HOW BIG AREA WILL FEEL ENERGY

can we measure velocity in this way ?
exist zero ? ( all energy hit only one point )

Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 08:22 AM

Originally Posted By: newton
PHOTON = zero mass

PHOTON = energy portion



Haha got it in one.

Nope not even close and there is the problem go and read "PHOTON" in Wikipedia.

It's the smallest unit of light as I showed you in the link we can tag the suckers and they are very directional and act like a particle or a solid object like you and I.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130520154251.htm

That's why you don't make any sense to us you lost the directionality bit which is the main strange part of there behavior.

There is probably nothing wrong with your definition if you add

PHOTON = zero mass
PHOTON = energy portion IN A LINEAR DIRECTION

You can't spread that energy out in 3D it doesn't work like that a laser beam wouldn't travel thru the air if it did it would act like a sound from a speaker or radio wave does from an antenna you couldn't make a real light beam like a laser forms.

One of the first problem your theory would face is HOW does a photon hold it's energy in only a linear direction. Einstein can answer that one you have got a problem.

You probably don't understand the problem so let me simplify it, if light could "PUSH" off space to go in a direction then light interacts with space and any movement of anything would bend a light beam. How many laser beam have you seen not travel in a straight line? The only option is light at creation point can "feel" and "push off" space but not ever again and sorry I don't know where to even go with that as you have something existing then not existing you might as well go with GOD as the answer then.

The good news is you are not a complete idiot your idea made sense when you have a wrong idea about the photon, the bad news is your theory is dead because we know far to much about photons to be wrong and you are not against Einstein you are against every experiment ever done on the particle nature of light.

If you bothered to read the wiki entry on photon you will note

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon
=> The photon concept has led to momentous advances in experimental and theoretical physics, such as lasers, Bose–Einstein condensation, quantum field theory, and the probabilistic interpretation of quantum mechanics. It has been applied to photochemistry, high-resolution microscopy, and measurements of molecular distances.

All of those things shouldn't work if we had the photon description wrong and the laser alone falsifies your description.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 10:37 AM

DEAR ORAC CAN WE SPEAK ONLY ABOUT BELOW TWO ILUSTRATIONS

please copy and pasate to Your PC and edit by MS Paint please show me Your version what will register sensors on rocket's wall ?

Light speed in vacuum is C only ! ( fact 1 )
not exist C+V or C- V ( fact 2)

I'm giving You simple questions please directly give me Your idea

EM waves ( radio , Light , gravitation ) made distance "a" during time T

how meny meters made during time T rocket ?
Vo = 0,3 C distnce between rocket walls 300 000 km !!!

T= 1/300 000 s

laser work only 1/300 000 sec ( please imagine that You can turn on / off laser for very short time

where is energy ? photons ?
rocket's wall = many sensors where beam will hit wall ?
how look signal ( it is triangle ? ) or I made mistake ( first line will wait for next line ? )




For test we can use also (HOT Edison's BULB ) below rocket has got two wings. Wings are long " distance Y " . at the end of wing we have the source.



Please evaluate below situation please use mathematica and real nombers )



situation A
distance Y = 1000 meters
Vo = 0,3 C ( rocket line vlocity )

situaton B
distance Y = 300 000 meters
Vo = 0,3 C ( rocket line vlocity

Where Light will hit rocket's wall

Vo respect to what ? respect to place where wave started ?
respect to point 1 .... if You are in point 2 !!!

I was in point 1 , I'm in point 2, I will be in point 3




WHAT IS IT X1 ( wave's head ) this is point that is more brightness for flat sensor this point will first hit the wall

You can imagine that laser = line point 1 ---- X1
or point 2 ----X2

sesor can measure
X1 ..distance ...X2 ...distance ....X3 ...

if distance is the same we have constant velocity





NOT RESPECT TO OTHER BODIES IN THE UNIVERSE !

MOTION IS ABSOLUTE AND SPECIAL FOR EACH COORDINATION SYSTEM WE NEED EVALUATE RESPECT TO LIGHT !!!




Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 11:05 AM

Pointless discussion ... talk about a single photon.


You can't avoid the issue discuss it like any scientist must act like a scientist instead of a lunatic crackpot.


So discuss a photon because that's the smallest unit of light.

I understand you argument now but it's built on a fallacy in some universe other than this one it might work.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 11:43 AM

in real live Stars = bulb ( 3d signal )

You ---> V1 -------R distnace ------- Star ---> V2



my model work or not ?
do You like astronomers or they are idiots ?

in my post I'm showing You pictures that made other people
( Inverted square Law ) and Doppler

below Map also is not my own



Why they are using rings ? they shoud always use single line
Star = many lasers line or many rings ???

Dear Orac it is very hard and too much problems for single person describe all aspects and applications for new discovery


below picture I'm 100%% sure ( please confirm in books why we have winter and summer - they speak only about 66.66 angle in book ) please remember who and how explain more problems



DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT 20 km/s and Time that light need for distance Sun --- Earth made huge different if we speak about Inverted square Law and Intensity of signal ?

Earth will not register different Hz ( different colour)
but winter / summer = different distance to place where signal started ( Energy / Area problem )

where the signal started ? where will be Sun and Earth after short time ?

POLAND 2012 amatore test 30 km/s

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 one more problem that right now is very important
medium and medium's inertia !!!


sensor----> 30 km/s ----- medium ----> 30 km/s <<< light

or

Light >>> medium ---> 30 km/s --- sensor 30 km/s ---->

I made my test inside air I wait for someone who can repeat my test inside vauum . We need also support ( astronomers )
we nee perfect set camera direction and eliminate Omega problem



( rotation forces and rotation doppler efect for example we can prepare table that have omega ideal opposite to Earth rotation we can make test in many place on globe and evaluate many parameters )
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 12:46 PM

Okay we are done.

I have nothing to say and I don't want to discuss it with you.

I understand your stupidity it is what we call a fine tuning problem there are 61 parameters of the universe that you can change that make things different and we have all looked at them and discussed them.

As attractive as some results are they do not describe our universe which is the only one I care about.

I am really not interested in discussing them with someone of you science level. If you wish to waste you time playing with this stuff the go for it.


For my part this discussion is closed I already know the answers and as you won't follow the logic so it is all pointless.

I would thus appreciate if you keep this rubbish out of my threads you are welcome to post it in your own although I fear nobody will care.

BTW my answer is most astronomers are idiots and incase you don't realize astronomy is not a science they give it a title "social science" or "natural science" that's like psychology and all the other social sciences. Not like you can test any of there rubbish is it, I am a starship short of being able to do that. Cosmologists I will cut some slack too because most of there work is on the cosmic background radiation and we can test all that.

I only trust what I can test and measure myself and photons in a lab do not lie and if you want to ignore that evidence because you like some LALA story that looks good on big space scale that you can't test then knock yourself out like all the other crackpots but please stay away from me.

I hate lunatic crackpots incase you haven't worked it out they waste hours of science time because they are too stupid to see the evidence thats right in front of them.

I love your and all the other dropped on there heads stupids that say all science has to do is give up Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, Quantum Field Theory, Quantum Electrodynamics and it will all be okay. YOU ARE ALL DROPPED ON YOUR HEAD STUPID LIKE SCIENCE WOULD DO THAT .... SORRY THERE IS NO NICE WAY TO PUT IT ... GIVE UP ALL THAT FOR SOME HALF ARSE IDEA WHICH MAKES ASTRONOMY WORK BETTER .... OH BUT YOU CAN'T TEST IT. THEN TO TOP IT OFF YOU WON'T LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE THAT SPACE STORY IS RUBBISH BASED ON EARTH EXPERIMENTS .... PLEASE GO AWAY!!!!

I have wasted enough time of this rubbish I will say goodbye and hope it all works out for you.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 02:49 PM

ORAC
What I am starting to think is you think a photon of light spreads out in 3D like a radio wave it doesn't it is a particle called a gauge boson under electromagnetic theory.



RADIO WAVES ?
we can speak about radio waves

MANY PEOPLE USE RADIO OBSERVTORY TO GET INFO ANOUT THE UNIVERSE

THEY WILL and CAN MEASURE NOT ONLY RED /BLUE SHIFT BUT ALSO INVERTED SQUARE LAW PROBLEM ( apparent distance shift )

What About Gravitation ? GENERAL EM waves ohhh .. sory

Light NO... it is hard topic for You Mr Einstein You want to separate and different rights
smile smile smile


Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 02:55 PM

Uppsss ... BULB it is not good example

For test we must use only lasers smile



if we want To understand ORAC for him Bulb it is PAST
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 02:58 PM



GENELALY KOPERNIK was IDIOT
he never know Quantum Mechanic
so who cary what he explained US


Dear Orac exist only quantum or in Your brain exist small place for
other knowledge and tools
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 03:00 PM


do You know what was in history ( physics )
master of light power

Hot platyne special temperature and size ( not laser !!!:)
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 03:06 PM

How Orac graduate university HE STADY QUANTUM ONLY !!!

do You know hot platyne master ?

HOT ENERGY IS GOING EXTRA SINGLE STRAIT LINE ? OR PERFECT 3D Ball

did You heard aboud Kopernik ?

Do You understand what is it RADIO ?

Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 03:40 PM

Enough please go away .. yes what you suggests violates Quantum Mechanics, so yes you are up against it as well as Einstein.

None of this matters you don't want to look at how a photon ACTUALLY behaves as we measure it in the labs so please go away and talk to the other idiots out there.

From a science prospective we don't care what you lunatics think if you won't study the evidence not some cock and bull story that can't be tested from space and won't be in anyones lifetime if we don't sort out the correct and evident science we work on.

I will not bother responding anymore it is all garbage and I really really don't care, I understand the rubbish you believe in and I know why it's wrong.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 03:49 PM

DO YOU LIKE OPTICAL TOOL

PLEASE CALIBRATE YOUR LABORATORY
(before each experiment where You are using light You need evaluate COSTNANT MOTION PROBLEM and ABERRATION and DOPPLER

position , angle , arrow

constant motion is inside each test on Earth and in space



Do You see ellipse or Circle

???
BR
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 04:18 PM

Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/01/13 07:00 PM

.... CAMERA OBSCURA Inverted Square Law ( Old Greece ...)
1730 James Bradley Astronomy Aberration
1842 Dopper



2012 Marosz Poland
Astronomy Abberation + Doppler + Iverted Square Law


First Michelson Morley but Brightness of Beam Version

First Idea about Gravitation and apparent distance

Frist expain why we have winter and Summer ( not only reason is 66.66 degrees angle )

First Idea How to solve very OLD PROBLEM
Constant Velocity and question "I'm moving or Stars"

First man who told that DOPPLER it is not only RED/BLUE shift
but also Intensity of Signal SHIFT

Firts Idea how to explain different period in atomic clock that is moving ( not exist different time only the same electron is making longer ellipse ) --> wodore atom

Inventor who explained how to build new generation compass
and measure West East or other directions ( constant astronomy velocity ) , first internal system for Airplane and rocket

First man who explained what is it black hole wiyhout SRT and GRT

First definition Dark matter (we need cross C limit )

COPERNIC stoped THE SUN MAROSZ stoped the space and time

BR

Maciej Marosz
Engineer and Inventor

( Up sky Beam Warning light - and
fly city vision electric FLY TRAM many new tools !!! )

my patents >>> http://tesla4.blogspot.com










Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/03/13 08:20 PM

.
.

Tolman surface brightness test 1930

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tolman_surface_brightness_test
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/04/13 02:59 AM

RIGHT NOW WE HAVE MANY LINKS IN WEB ABOUT DARK MATTERY

WHY ZERO LUX ?

What if below rocket has got velocity close C ???
what will register front sensor ?



Aberration problem ?

Can we be too far from place where signal started ?

look on below picture

light made during time T distance "a "
how long must be opposite wall to register signal ?
( we have sensors on opposite wall )

Posted by: paul

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/04/13 02:57 PM

Quote:
ORAC
What I am starting to think is you think a photon of light spreads out in 3D like a radio wave it doesn't it is a particle called a gauge boson under electromagnetic theory.


newton , light does spread out in 3D.

thats why we can see light at any angle.

laser light is different because the light is intentionally directed in a planned direction , light from a laser cannot
be seen from any angle unless the laser light is reflected off of particles as it travels through a medium.




we dont just see the rays of light that point directly at our eyes.

if we did we wouldnt even see the sun at all.

think of the sun as being a photon of light !

after all how could a photon be illuminated only
on one side?

LOL
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/04/13 03:38 PM

@ Paul very important fact is that we must study how is build laser

Laser is somthing very not natulral it is tool like each machine has got shape tolerance

Hot Laser bigeer angle of beam
( I think that single photon beam it is theoretical model we are very far to build so perfect tool )


One problem is Laser next problem is Motion and calibration

even if ( for example You will build perfect laser ideal shape zero material and tolerane problem )

How You want to calibrate laser every target is moving !!!
Your lab is moving

we can speak face to face I'm sure that I see Your apparent picture very close to Your fresh position but apparent !!!


I made in home test ( good /bad ) I'm hapy many people use brain right now !!!

thank You

Dear Orac person who speak about new can use books only for small help I'm happy that I found in web
1930 Tolman surface brightness test it is very similar to my own idea ( only similar )


Doppler it is RED /BLUE shift AND Intensity Of signal problem !

If we have situation like in michelson morley test

source --->V1 ----R -----sensor ---->V1

source ---> V1
i
i
R
i
i
i
Sensor ----> V1

We will never register fresh source position we have aberration ( 1730 J bradley ) light speed is only C !!!


Very Important problem is Gravitation Forces and Distance
gravitation started in point 1 after short time mass m and M will be in different position ( gravitation need time for start work )

M---R---m --------> 30 km/s

M---R---m -----------------------------------> c/2

mass m will feel apparent intensity of signal this is the real reason why atomic clock during trip inside airplane slowing down

We have many new facts to reaserch not only in optics !!!

clasical mechanic and above post = new live we must eliminate
Mr Newton mistake
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/04/13 03:44 PM

black Hole ---> V1 -------------R ---------------We ----> V2

if V2-V1 > C ??? we can not see signals form black hole !!!


Action and Reaction model !

back hole ----> F1 .... -F1 < ------ we

we can have very small mass but huge velocity ( kinetic energy)
( huge inertia help Us escape ) If we want to speak about our mass we must separate gravitation mass and inertia mass
gravitation mass is more biger We = many mass around US not only Earth this is how I understand gravitation mass

(Einstein is flat Mr Mach told him about above problem I don't know why Einstein forgot about Mach in SRT )


Dark matter ?

.........mass m -------> C/2
..........i
..........i
..........i
..........i
....R ( distnace 1 mld Light Years)
..........i
..........i
..........i
..........i
..........i
<--V2 observer ???

( I can not see mass m I only register gravitation forces ??? mass m was there in past right now is in other place ?



It is very important I feel this all my brain ( Nobody right now can be sure nothing I not speak about HAOS but we must test I joust wake up !!! I wait for Your own IDea !!! )


I'm not sure nothing about above
I showing hipotetical model but
above I explain only Idea how it works how it can be !!!

many astronomers will be able made huge work !!!
we need research ....


DEAR ORAC DRAWINGS = EQUATIONS
Drawings = Logica

( more easy is use drawings )
I'm sure that without problem we can describe all by mathematica




Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/04/13 04:21 PM



WOW ??????

Photonic molecules behave like light saber, say scientists

http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20130825204045data_trunc_sys.shtml
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 03:43 AM

At times I you make me cringe and I am not sure whether to laugh at your stupidity or cry .... in your native language I think the translation is "Glupszy niz ustawa przewiduje"

You have literally millions of science experiments against you and that is why I am ignoring you. Against my better judgement I will at least give you some more things to think about.

As scientists we don't draw pictures in ever increasing stupidity that could either be cartoons or porn depending on you bend ... scientist go out and measure things instead.


In 2002 the first single photon source was created using Quantum Mechanics by Toshiba. It was big news and carried by all science magazines the layman simplification of the work appears proudly on the Toshiba website

http://www.toshiba-europe.com/research/crl/qig/singlephotonled.html
(science paper: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/295/5552/102)

=> We have developed the world's first light emitting diode (LED) capable of emitting a stream of single photons


In 2004 those single photons could be effectively tracked in flight without destroying them by again using Quantum Mechanics

http://phys.org/news138.html

=> In a world-first, the path of a single photon can now be measured without destroying the photon in the process.



In 2010 Toshiba managed to compact both processes into one and Quantum Entangle the produced single photons so you could track the photons from creation to end

http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100602/full/news.2010.275.html
http://www.mdtmag.com/news/2010/06/toshi...-dot-within-led

By 2012 the technology had advanced to production status by Toshiba
http://www.toshiba-europe.com/research/crl/qig/entangledled.html




So perhaps stop with all the stupid claims and read science magazines ... the light saber article is an extension of the quantum work above.

So if you think you are against Einstein he is nothing compared to the thousands of Quantum Experiments that say Maciej Marosz = "Glupszy niz ustawa przewiduje".


What do you propose we do with all the thousands (that is not an exaggeration there are thousands now) of experiments that show you are wrong .... ignore them ???????

So make all the stupid claims you like and proclaim to the world how your great theory breaks all science .... SCIENCE AND I DON'T CARE what Maciej Marosz thinks.

Does you little brain understand why science and I will just ignore you because we can't ignore the thousands of experiments ..... EXPERIMENTS > Maciej Marosz stupidity

So enough I have nothing more to add ... YOU ARE WRONG END OF STORY ... if you don't want to accept that is fine by me.

Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 08:31 AM

Ok ORAC below Question for You

Exist only two options or You have option 3 ?



option 1

......Point 1 .......Source -------> V1
........i
........i
........i
.......single photon
........i
........i
........i
....................SENSOR --------> V1

single photon started in point 1 in past
after short time sensor and source have new position in space

single photon will never touch the sensor reason is V1 !


option 2
single photon has got mass
(inertia similar problem we feel inside car that is moving )

......Point 1 .........Source....-------> V1
........i
........i
........i
...................single photon --------> V1
........i
........i
........i
.......................SENSOR.. --------> V1


DEAR ORAC DO YOU HAVE ANY OPTION 3 ... ?

TOSHIBA LABORATORY ?
TOSHIBA ? IT IS INSIDE SOLAR SYSTEM ? ( 30 km/s ,20 km/s , 217 km/s

1 km/s = 1 000 000 mm /s !!



WINTER and SUMMER problem 150 000 000 distance and 5-6 minutes ?

DEAR SUN MR ORAC REQUEST PLEASE SENT TO US ONLY ONE SINGLE PHOTON smile PLEASE NOT SENT MANY PHOTONS
ONE MORE PLEASE NOT MOVE DURING YOU ARE SENDING PLEASE STOP
AND WAIT ...




GENERALY MAROSZ NOT DISCOVERIED NOTHING IMPORTANT !!!

MICHELSON MORLEY ?






Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 08:34 AM

Dear Orac

Thank You that You showed me single photon very good !!!

we can repeat my test inside very long pipe LIGO and use Single Photon

Option 1 or Option 2 ??? or other ???

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

LED = MANY SINGLE PHOTONS ???

WHAT IF THE SOURCE HAS GOT VELOCITY AND ROTATION ( OMEGA) ?

LED IS SENDING MANY SINGLE PHOTONS IN MANY NEW DIRECTIONS BECAUSE LED IS ON THE EARHT AND IS MOVING WITH EARTH IN SPACE !!!

Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 08:57 AM


DEAR ORAC MOTION
AND COSTANT ABOLUTE VELOCITY and experiment that You know it is nothing more than question about option 1 or option 2 .
...or option 3 If You have own idea :):):)




Where the single photon started ?
Where will be sensor ( screen ) after short time ?
Single photon can hit side wall ?
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 09:23 AM

EXIST MOTION ?

Earth is moving in space = that two slides are moving with Earth !!!

single photon ? has got mass ? or not ?


if not has got mass it mean that is not moving with Earth
if has got mass it mean that is moving with Earth

exist one more problem MEDIUM ? ( Water or Air or Vacuum )
we must make test inside VACUUM !!!

IF PHOTON HAS GOT MASS = THAT WE CAN CREATE MASS
we can start photon = that we create mass ?

always when I turn on my flaslight I create new Mass ?
it is very hard to imagine for me

Fhoton has got mass = that we can exchange energy and create mass
God exist or not ? ....

Where is MR Hawking above post is very good question ?

God exist or not .... ? If we can create mass ( exchange electric energy to photons that represent mass = That we can be a GOD ?


Right now we can chage Energy for Work or HOT or Motion

Photon has got mass = that we can change energy for mass !


ORAC DO YOU UNDERSTAND ABOVE PROBLEMS
YOU THINK THAT I'M similar to all this Idiots that speak abut universe ???

Realy ? PLease read posts study and use Logica !!!

Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 11:17 AM

GOD????? what has GOD got to do with this????

Lets see I can see an airplane fly .... Maciej Marosz says airplanes don't exist. I say look Maciej Marosz there is an airplane flying .... Maciej Marosz says no airplane can only fly if god exists?????

You are Idiotka (and yes I use the female version for you).


If you ever get in trouble and go before a court and in front of the judge they look at the evidence ... science works the same way.

I am sorry for you Maciej Marosz we can't just ignore evidence because you don't like it.


I could fill a book with what science knows about light and photons you could not even fill a single page.


I am sorry Maciej Marosz this is simply beyond your ability to argue it .... it is the same as airplanes they exist whether or not Maciej Marosz believes it.


I will tell you one last funny thing Einstein didn't like where science eventually took his idea into Quantum Mechanics. He spent the last 30 years of his life trying to disprove his own idea.


Science won't let the owner of a theory change it what chance do you think we have of letting some Idiotka, Maciej Marosz on the internet change it?

Sometimes in life you have to accept the inevitable truth .. airplanes can fly ... and Maciej Marosz theory is wrong.

For my part all I can do is tell you the truth that light behaves exactly as science says it does.

Thus ends the story .... THE END.
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 11:25 AM

I will discuss one last person .... Stephen Hawkings.

Lots of people thought he was a genius only he also made the mistake of taking a spaced based argument back here to earth.

It is a classic argument around black holes it has a name the information paradox.

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

He lost the argument with Quantum Mechanics scientists as well and conceded he was wrong in 1997.

=>When announcing his result, Hawking also conceded the 1997 bet, paying Preskill with a baseball encyclopedia "from which information can be retrieved at will."

So to layman like yourself he is still a genius to me and many Quantum physicists he is just a funny little man in a wheelchair wrong like all the others before him.

THE LESSON HERE IS BE VERY CAREFUL BRINGING ARGUEMENTS FROM SPACE WHICH YOU CAN'T TEST AND INSIST THEY ARE RIGHT AGAINST THINGS THAT CAN BE TESTED HERE ON EARTH.

Science took on Einstein, it took on Stephen Hawkings do you really think it cares about the stupidity of Maciej Marosz.

The answer is clear you were all wrong!!!! ... science only cares what is right not who promotes it.

To his credit Stephen Hawkings worked out he was wrong, Einstein never made the realization and wasted the last 30 years of his life ... which group will Maciej Marosz be in?

And you answer to the double slit experiment above:
http://phys.org/news/2011-06-quantum-physics-photons-two-slit-interferometer.html

=> With this new experiment, the researchers have succeeded for the first time in experimentally reconstructing full trajectories which provide a description of how light particles move through the two slits and form an interference pattern.


That work won most of the science awards for 2011
http://mag.digitalpc.co.uk/Olive/ODE/physicsworld/LandingPage/LandingPage.aspx?

=>The 2011 Physics World Breakthrough of the Year has been awarded to Aephraim Steinberg and colleagues from the University of Toronto in Canada, who have, for the first time, tracked the average paths of single photons passing through a Young’s double-slit experiment. It was previously thought that individual photons cannot be tracked as they travel through the slits to create an interference pattern. However, Steinberg and colleagues used an emerging technique called “weak measurement” to know which way the photons went (Science 332 1170).

I did warn you there are thousands of experiments science have done with light smile

Surely it has to have sunk in that science knows a hell of a lot more about light than Maciej Marosz is ever going to know.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 12:18 PM


IN MY ABOVE POST I SHOWED YOU

[b]Option 1


or

Option 2


what Is Your Opinion ?

STOP WRITE MANY WORDS ABOUT NOTHING !!! I wait for arguments and opinion that You choice !!!
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 12:23 PM

option 1

......Point 1 .......Source -------> V1
........i
........i
........i
.......single photon
........i
........i
........i
....................SENSOR --------> V1

single photon started in point 1 in past
after short time sensor and source have new position in space

single photon will never touch the sensor reason is V1 !


option 2
single photon has got mass
(inertia similar problem we feel inside car that is moving )

......Point 1 .........Source....-------> V1
........i
........i
........i
...................single photon --------> V1
........i
........i
........i
.......................SENSOR.. --------> V1
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 12:25 PM

Originally Posted By: newton

IN MY ABOVE POST I SHOWED YOU

[b]Option 1


or

Option 2


what Is Your Opinion ?

STOP WRITE MANY WORDS ABOUT NOTHING !!! I wait for arguments and opinion that You choice !!!






There is NO OPTIONS ONLY THE ANSWER:

And you answer to the double slit experiment above:
http://phys.org/news/2011-06-quantum-physics-photons-two-slit-interferometer.html

=> With this new experiment, the researchers have succeeded for the first time in experimentally reconstructing full trajectories which provide a description of how light particles move through the two slits and form an interference pattern.


That work won most of the science awards for 2011
http://mag.digitalpc.co.uk/Olive/ODE/physicsworld/LandingPage/LandingPage.aspx?

=>The 2011 Physics World Breakthrough of the Year has been awarded to Aephraim Steinberg and colleagues from the University of Toronto in Canada, who have, for the first time, tracked the average paths of single photons passing through a Young’s double-slit experiment. It was previously thought that individual photons cannot be tracked as they travel through the slits to create an interference pattern. However, Steinberg and colleagues used an emerging technique called “weak measurement” to know which way the photons went (Science 332 1170).

NO OPTION ON HOW YOU THINK IT WORKS .. YOU CAN TRACK HOW IT WORKS.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 12:27 PM


Dear Orac In Your LINK we have

"Observing the Average !!! Trajectories of Single Photons in a Two-Slit Interferometer"


PLEASE USE CONSTANT MOTION V1 and build in Your brain model NOTHIG IS AVERAGE

AVERAGE ? F.... WHY AVERAGE NOT ABSOLUTE
temperature oscylation , mechanical shape tolerance ?

+/- how many mm slite they USE F.... AVERAGE



2+2 = 4 average 3,5 or 4,5 ?


BELOW MORE QUESTIONS ABOUT AVERAGE ?
WHERE WAS LAB time of the test ?

------> 30 km/s ( average reason )

------> 220 km/s (more biger average reason )

---------------------------------> 627 km/s ???




Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 12:29 PM

It doesn't work anything like how you think.

That's why I can't answer question I gave you the answer.

Stop being a drop kick and read.
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 12:32 PM

Here do you want me to show you how stupid you question his

ITS CALLED WHEELER DELAY CHOICE EXPERIMENT

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheeler's_delayed_choice_experiment

=>Wheeler's delayed choice experiment is a thought experiment in quantum physics proposed by John Archibald Wheeler in 1978.[1] The results Wheeler predicted have since been confirmed by actual experiment


Wheeler's experiment is a variation on the famous double-slit experiment. In Wheeler's version, the method of detection used in the experiment can be changed after a photon passes the double slit, so as to delay the choice of whether to detect the path of the particle, or detect its interference with itself.

I can change the result of your experiment later in time.


Get it the result of the experiment can be changed long after the photon passes through the slit.


There is no easy way to explain this all to you I am afraid ... it's called Quantum Mechanics.


It doesn't work anything like what you think so your question is sort of stupid.
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 12:42 PM

Hopefully you will have read and realized the drawing you are showing on screen may on may not happen.

The pattern will collapse to a very different one if you try and measure anything.

It's one of the weird things about Quantum Mechanics that measurement itself can change things.

That is the most tested experiment in science and there is no easy answer I can give you without talking about Quantum Mechanics.

The image you have put on screen is only one of two possibilities and it will only occur if you aren't measuring anything.

So me trying to answer at your level of layman physics .... I can't answer it because lots of weird things can happen in that picture.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 12:46 PM

........SOURECE >>>> V1 motion
........
........
........
........
........
........ 150 000 000 km distance
........
........
........
........
........
........
........ TWO SLITS >>>> V1 motion


DISTNANS AND V1 MOTION NOT WORK ?

WHERE ARE TWO SLITS
WHERE IS SINGLE PHOTON

AVERAGE I CAN TELL YOU F... IT WILL NOT HIT TWO SLITS

AVERAGE THEY HAVE RIGHT

MANY AVERAGE INTELIGENT PEOPLE GRADUATE STUDY LIKE YOU !!!

STOP STOP F... ABUT OTHER OLD EXPERIMENTS and USE YOU BRAIN NOT AVRAGE DATA !!! 150 000 000 km ? average single photon will be in two slits ? How far from place where photon started
are slits ????


Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 12:53 PM

Do you understand that the pattern will change just by you observing it?

That is why you wont find a photograph of it other than on a reflective screen.

Want to know something weirder you can do the same trick with electrons, protons and any other particle

here:
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2013/mar/14/feynmans-double-slit-experiment-gets-a-makeover


>>> Electrons travelling through two slits and a single slit <<<

I am sorry this is going to get all a bit beyond you all particles do the trick and interfere with themselves.
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 12:58 PM

The usual response is like this

http://www.highexistence.com/this-will-mindfuck-you-the-double-slit-experiment/

There is no easy way to explain all this to you and that is why we don't try. Quantum Mechanics involves all complex mathematics because we really do have to deal with this stuff.

However Quantum Mechanics is built on thousands of experiments not a pile of mathematics.

The universe really is a lot different to how you imagined it and the childish physics we teach you at school smile
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 01:01 PM


Quntum Mechanic ( two slits ) work only in LAB

LARGE DISTANCE ??? we can not use QUANTUM MECHANIC ?

DEAR ORAC DO YOU SEE HOW NORROW IS PHYSICS WITHOUT CONSTANT MOTION PROBLEM ?
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 01:04 PM

Go to wheelers delayed choice experiment it was done with light from a star many many light years away laugh

See the problem Quantum Mechanics holds across space that was Stephen Hawkings problem too smile
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 01:06 PM

If you learnt nothing else you learnt what Quantum mechanics is about ... your immediate dislike of it you probably understand why Einstein didn't like it.

However it appears to be a truth about the universe one no experiment has ever shown to be wrong.

NONE of us like Quantum mechanics but we can't ignore it just because we don't like it.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 01:07 PM

Do you understand that the pattern will change just by you observing it?

In CHINA live few miliards peolpe !!!

Ok please imagine that we kindly ask
DEAR ALL PEOPLE please Look on SUN !!!

AND SUN JOUST STOP EXIST

after they will close eyes AND SUN START WORK
they open eyes and SUN NOT WORK ?

OK PEOPLE LETS KILL OTHER STARS ?

I LIKE QUANTUM I NEVER THINK IT CAN BE SO FUNY :):)




Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 01:08 PM

So the answer to your slit question I can not answer they had to draw that because if they tried to photograph it they couldn't if they can see the slits at the same time as the interference pattern it will stop.

You can build one and try and take a photo of it yourself ... it's like trying to find the end of a rainbow smile
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 01:11 PM

Originally Posted By: newton
Do you understand that the pattern will change just by you observing it?

In CHINA live few miliards peolpe !!!

Ok please imagine that we kindly ask
DEAR ALL PEOPLE please Look on SUN !!!

AND SUN JOUST STOP EXIST

after they will close eyes AND SUN START WORK
they open eyse and SUN NOT WORK ?


That is an Einstein quote and it was the moon.

The answer is quite clear things exist even when not observed because there is a universal observer which is the universe itself.

So yes the sun exists but it is sort of phasing in and out of the universe ... nothing is really solid like we imagine it.

The reason for all this stems back to our initial problem you never got to the bottom of ... how does an atom stay together.

Remember you never could get the balls to spin and build an model of the atom and there is a reason for that ... Quantum Mechanics.

As I said no one likes Quantum mechanics unfortunately the universe has a sense of humour and doesn't care.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 01:14 PM

PHOTON HAVE ENERGY OR NOT

PHOTON STARTED IN PAST

EXIST ENERGY = ENERGY CAN BE SPLIT

I NO SEE ANY SPECIAL INFORMATION AND FACTS
DOBEL SLITS EXPERIMENT nothing special nothing magic !!!


Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 01:24 PM


Sorry for My english This wors for me are uncleare ?


****
Remember you never could get the balls to spin and build an model of the atom and there is a reason for that ... Quantum Mechanics.
****

I very like classical mechanic You want to build model

I can not Understand problem ?

how many balls ? why it is impossible ?
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 01:24 PM

I have no actual problem with you initial start points as I said originally.

There is nothing wrong with that statement.

The problem came with everything in between .. you have seen the problem Quantum mechanics throws up with things not being solid do you really think there could be an ABSOLUTE SPACE in such a situation ... nothing is solid so absolute to what smile

So my basic objection is absolute space .. if you want absolute energy that's fine by me but not space.

We opened you eyes and showed you the real physics as it is in all it's horrible detail ... things never seem quite the same. You never need to know any of that to live and work each day you can assume the world is solid but you have to not look to deep smile
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 01:30 PM

Originally Posted By: newton

I very like classical mechanic You want to build model

I can not Understand problem ?

how many balls ? why it is impossible ?


The problem is the positive charges in the nucleus.

How are you going to get them so close together try doing this with magnets try and stick a whole pile of the same poles together.

Short of getting out rope and binding them all together they are never going to stay there.

To get the protons squeezed together like they are in a classic physics atom you need a force to push them together or pull them together smile

Now that force can only push or pull against space itself .. remember the charges repel laugh

Ok you probably don't get the problem ... so reach down grab your ankles and pull your feet up off the ground please laugh

See the problem gravity is outside the forces you can't do it gravity would always win and the atom would collapse.

Ok give me a minute and I will simplify down and show you how an atom really works.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 01:32 PM

I try read about spin I not understand definition

what is it spin ???
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 01:41 PM

Okay that is indeed very difficult.

Initially because of the history it was thought particles were solid and as you have seen that simply isn't true.

However as you deduced you have energy and the energy itself can move around or spin.

So you need to not think of it like a solid ball spinning but I guess more like a liquid ball in space spinning .. I seem to remember there were some images of water droplets drifting around the space station.

That is why not all spins can be equated to normal momentum spin like spinning a ball for example in a liquid ball you can simple have a vibration backward and forward across the ball of liquid.

So the short answer is a spin is something that is different between two particles and we are now trying to call it quantum information as opposed to spin because it confuses.


So spin = quantum information = energy
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 01:49 PM

This is a reasonable image to show you to not think like normal spins ... think a lot more complex

Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 01:50 PM

You will understand why they are complex in a second when I show you the atom.
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 01:53 PM

This is the standard way we fix up stuff these days.

Spin is an intrinsic property of elementary particles, and its direction is an important degree of freedom. It is sometimes visualized as the rotation of an object around its own axis (hence the name "spin"), though this notion is somewhat misguided at subatomic scales because elementary particles are believed to be point-like.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 01:54 PM

QUANTUM FOR ME IS SOMHING THAT I WILL NEVER FEEL AND UNDERSTAND

Bozon Higgsa is moving or not ?

bozon higsa -----> V1 ?

bozon higsa > zero motion ?


My experiment ( source (LED) emited photon )
single photon is going to Source ( why You ask me about quantum mechanic ? ) distance source -- double slits exist photon need time to touch the doble slits what if V1 = C/2 what if V1 = C

Where will be double slits short time after photon started trip ?

we speak about one single photon or photons ?

photon is rise like ballon ? ( not have one direction ) ?

what if the distance source/double sits will be very long ?

what if the distance source/double sits will be very short ?

how one photon can be inside two slits what if it will not touch any slit ( below picture HUGE V1 and HUGE distance !!! )

.......source -----> V1
.........i
.........i
.........i
....single photon
.........i
.....double- slit ----->V1
.........i
.......Sensor ----->V1

shorter distance ?

.......source -----> V1
.........i
....single photon
.........i
.....double- slit ----->V1
.......Sensor ----->V1


In my test I ask my self only about constant Earth motion
I made test on the Earth source, double slits and sensors are moving V1 velocity

Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 02:02 PM

Very hard to know if the higgs boson is moving or not our understanding is too early as yet.

Interaction of matter with it gives some mass what we call relativistic mass but it does not create the mass we attribute to gravity. So some otherwise massless particles gain mass by interaction with the higgs but not all.

So again it's not simple the story of the higgs mass depends on what type of object you are talking about.
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 02:06 PM

Originally Posted By: newton
QUANTUM FOR ME IS SOMHING THAT I WILL NEVER FEEL AND UNDERSTAND


You can if you try just follow the experiments.


Quote:

how one photon can be inside two slits what if it will not touch any slit ( below picture HUGE V1 and HUGE distance !!! )


The question you didn't ask which is the one most students immediately ask .... is the photon real?

The point above is important and you will probably have less problem with it than many students because you haven't wanted to make the world solid again .. that does not seem to bother you.
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 02:10 PM

Now getting back to the atom I need to see if you understand this bit

http://education-portal.com/academy/less...rgy.html#lesson

This explains the mass that goes missing as energy that is used as the force to bind the nucleus together.

Now again they are avoiding discussing how energy binds something together because they are deliberately avoiding having to discuss quantum mechanics.

So just checking you understand that there is a lot of energy required to hold those protons together in a nucleus of an atom ... and I do mean a lot like atomic bomb size a lot.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 02:17 PM

Thank You that You like to show me more ?
I need go to libary and read.

Sorry I need do this step by step there is many new Name and definition ( at first look )

above link look ok
THX
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 02:23 PM

You are welcome ... you are now realizing how much more complex this is.

You however are on the right track there is one thing to always follow it doesn't change from classic physics to quantum mechanics .... ENERGY ... follow the energy
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 02:27 PM

E= mC^2

what is it mass ?

Inertia mass or gravitation mass ?

M----R --scale-m ----> Motion ???


please put small mass m on scale and measure weight
distance M---m = R is constant but exist motion !!!

m-scale-R--M ------------------------> Motion ???


Gravitation Intesity and mass m ?

Inertia mass m not equal gravitation mass m .
( motion change gravitation intensity )







Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 02:39 PM

See you are getting it because you are asking the right questions smile

And because of the way the higgs was proved it is both and I am sure you are starting to see something a lot of students don't get till much later.

You probably guessed technically now you have to rewrite E=MC2 a little differently want to have a go at it?

That itself leads to an interesting question doesn't it .. why do they share the same relationship to light.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 02:45 PM

What is it photon ?

Energy portion ? or mass portion ?
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 02:45 PM

I will give you the short form answer

These reactions have to be relativistically invariant otherwise they would vary ... the chances of two unrelated things sharing the EXACT same relationship to light is incredibly unlikely.

So again we see it is almost requirement for gravity mass and inertia mass to co-exist with exactly the same relationship to light we require relativity.

So I stayed with almost there because you can't exclude that there was some incredible fluke and the two happen to be the same weird value but lets just say it is unlikely.
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 02:48 PM

Originally Posted By: newton
What is it photon ?

Energy portion ? or mass portion ?


Again the right question it is the energy portion and it gains it's mass because of it's energy.

You probably also worked out the answer to my question above now how real it is depends upon how you look at things ... is a rainbow real or not laugh
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 02:57 PM

Okay back to the atom so we saw in the link above we are missing a pile of energy that is somehow binding the nucleus together but they never discussed how.

I am sure you know the nucleus is made up of neutrons and protons and at school you probably dealt with the protons because they carry charge and largely ignored the neutrons.

The neutrons being in the nucleus is not an accident smile

So the quick version the neutrons and the protons are themselves made up of sub atomic particles called GLUONS and QUARKS. Those subatomic particles have reactions of attraction like magnetism and charge but different to either and they have 3 different types we call them colors

Here is what the interaction looks like



This is the force that holds the atom together and you will note it isn't a steady force it requires things to change states all the time for it to work.

You can read more of the background here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong_interaction


You are probably now seeing why the universe is quantum in it's nature and matter isn't quite as solid as it seems smile

All matter as far as we have ever been able to determine is built on this rather continually changing process. The missing energy is that energy that is in the constantly changing process above it never stands still so it took quite a bit of science to work it out ... but that's another story.


If you want to take it to electrical analogy the above is very similar to 3 phase AC power as opposed to DC power for the electron - proton interaction.
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 03:06 PM

Now let see if you are really getting it.

What quantum property makes the U and D and the colors different above?

You probably see the danger now of taking stuff from space and bringing the argument back to earth ... if you find it doesn't work for Quantum Mechanics then it is almost certainly wrong.

Quantum Mechanics is all about information or energy whichever you want to call it, how it moves and why it moves. As far as we know it is in all the particles and atoms in the entire universe and now you understand why Quantum Mechanics is important and science can't just ignore it.

You should also now see how careful you need to be about changes with special relativity it has relationships to almost everything in science. Even Einstein didn't like where it ended in Quantum Mechanics and we didn't let him change it.

Gravity and general relativity you can play around a lot before things break. So make sure you have it clear which you are playing with. So if you have proposed changes in space, science has limited ability to test so go for it see where it goes. Those changes suggest something other than what we measure here on earth you are almost certainly wrong as Quantum Mechanics doesn't obey classic rules it makes it's own as the atom shows you.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/05/13 07:50 PM

You prepare nice material ( a lot of work )


I want kindly ask You about one problem


--------> Earth Motion ( 30 km/s + 217 km/s +....)


We have closed box full of athoms inside

Exist any test experiments ( history that You know )

Anyone try find relation between / direction / arrow and Energy exchange inside athom ???

Photons has got direction ?

You showed animation many facts joust happen ( exist some special orientation , special direction )
and relation with Motion >>>> ?


can we use double slits test to recognize motion ?

we can have one single photon = ( fact )

I would like to measure airplane velocity and not use outside bodies ( satelites, stars )

Full dark box on board airplane
athoms inside dark box and EM waves source + EM sensors ?


If we can solve airplane problem
next step we will be able build ultra precision Navigation system
+/- athom size mistake


It is very hard in very short time generate new theory
that was not target for me when I made test.

after I made my test ( camera bulb ) I know that everyone in home
can see west east different . Question why ? and how ?
next problem is Michelson Morley ? Why ?

Quantum Mechanic it is huge tool outside my brain right now


DARK BOX PROBLEM INIDE AIRPLANE = VERY IMPORTANT AND OLD QUESTION .

I'm moving or objects around me ?

Newton want to solve this question and he can not ? Gallileo also give up ! Einstein not solve problem he joust described what see observers .

CAN WE RECOGNIZE >>> MOTION ARROW ,
DIRECTION , INSIDE QUANTUM WORLD ,


EM waves need Medium ?
No ( we have right now in books )! Yes ?

Medium = for me Athoms
Vacuum ? not exist or exist Vacuum ? what is around US in space ?









Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/06/13 06:09 AM

Dear Orac Do YOU remember my question about option 1 or 2

below I add option 3 and more problems
Question about double slits shape/geometry

option 1

......Point 1 .......Source -------> V1
........i
........i
........i
.......single photon
........i
........i
........i
....................SENSOR --------> V1

single photon started in point 1 in past
after short time sensor and source have new position in space

single photon will never touch the sensor reason is V1 !


option 2
single photon has got mass
(inertia similar problem we feel inside car that is moving )

......Point 1 .........Source....-------> V1
........i
........i
........i
...................single photon --------> V1
........i
........i
........i
.......................SENSOR.. --------> V1




above picture I showed 3 options and dual slits experiment
right side of picture = typical Engineer problem ( geometry and shape tolerance please add temperature to have full point of view for deformation )

important is distance ( source ---- Sensor )
for doble splits test ?
please think about 30 m/s and 217 km/s


Constant velocity special LINE velocity is very Important
We all know that we can recognize Earth's Omega ( solar system omega )

Omega + Line velocity =====> these two info can give us R(radius)

Omega = V/R ===> R = V/omega

R --- it is very important info for astronomers
above test can also solve many question about expansion


Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/06/13 03:41 PM

Originally Posted By: newton

We have closed box full of athoms inside

Exist any test experiments ( history that You know )

Anyone try find relation between / direction / arrow and Energy exchange inside athom ???


From a QM point it doesn't see the motion at all, it it arguable if it even sees space especially in the sense you and I see it.

Quantum effects can't be contained by space or matter you can't put it in a box .. here these will show you the problem.

1) It can jump instantly any distance .. we know no limit

Current record is 143 km (http://www.zdnet.com/quantum-teleportation-over-143km-smashes-distance-record-7000003883/)

That will be extended to around 400km in 2015 by using the space station
(http://www.nbcnews.com/science/space-sta...tance-1C9271087)


2.) You can't hold it in a box because of Quantum Tunneling

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

=> Quantum tunnelling or tunneling refers to the quantum mechanical phenomenon where a particle tunnels through a barrier that it classically could not surmount.

No way you are going to hold it in a box


Quantum Mechanics really is about time it isn't about space and motion and it does not seem to care about it. It is also why QM is silent about gravity there ideas that you could bring gravity under QM but they are only ideas by scientists and they are along way from even what I would call believable.

So really at the moment you have GRAVITY+SPACE and QUANTUM MECHANICS+TIME and so events are usually taken into the frameworks as either spacelike events or timelike events.

Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/06/13 03:45 PM

Answering your questions.

Originally Posted By: Newton

can we use double slits test to recognize motion ?


It doesn't matter how fast you move the double slit remains the same .... observation is all that matters. They have actually done experiments with particle accelerators at different speeds thru the slits no difference and they have tried spinning the experiment very fast on a centrifuge platform.

There is no way to understand the double slit that is why it confuses and annoys everyone it is such a simple test but it makes no sense in classic physics.

Originally Posted By: Newton

we can have one single photon = ( fact )


Definite fact you can buy it on a chip these days from Toshiba or many other semiconductor manufacturers.


Originally Posted By: Newton

I would like to measure airplane velocity and not use outside bodies ( satelites, stars )

Full dark box on board airplane
athoms inside dark box and EM waves source + EM sensors ?


Science says it can't be done if General Relativity is correct.

From a Quantum Mechanics it can't be done because all of Quantum Mechanics obeys special relativity it's that problem that QM really doesn't care about space at all so there is no way into the problem.


Originally Posted By: Newton

Quantum Mechanic it is huge tool outside my brain right now


DARK BOX PROBLEM INIDE AIRPLANE = VERY IMPORTANT AND OLD QUESTION .

I'm moving or objects around me ?


I understand the issue unfortunately QM isn't going to help it is rather silent on the gravity and motion issues.

Somehow QM and gravity must meet but it is unclear exactly how they do at the moment we are still looking for it .. but gravity is the problem, we know a lot more about QM than we do about gravity.

Originally Posted By: Newton

EM waves need Medium ?
No ( we have right now in books )! Yes ?

Medium = for me Athoms
Vacuum ? not exist or exist Vacuum ? what is around US in space ?


Oh wow you really do like asking the big questions.

If I answer this it opens up a whole new area of quantum mechanics and experiments .. are you sure you want to do this?

I will give you a link to read and tell me if you really want to discuss a new bit of Quantum mechanics ... I am sorry QM has a lot to say about many things smile

http://phys.org/news/2011-11-scientists-vacuum.html


I am not sure if you really want to open up a whole other area of Quantum Mechanics ... you head is going to explode laugh
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/06/13 05:10 PM

quantum teleportation
147 km
400 km

I want ask You WHO KNOW REAL DISTANCE ???

147 km or 147 + 1 mm

30 km/s = 30 000 000 mm /s

C speed 300 000 km/s


Earth -----> 30 km/s


Where they started teleportation ?

Where they finished teleportation ?



NEXT PROBLEM IS GRAVITATION ?

1930 Tolman surface brightness test
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tolman_surface_brightness_test

Gravitation Waves = LIGHT = EM waves ?

Doppler we know
Inverted square Law also we Understand

Two mass on table in Your room
( Sir Newton not showed below problem it is my own Idea)

m--R---M --------> 30 km/s

m--R--M absolute stationary situation

m ---> V1 ----R ------ M ------> V2

V1>V2 , V1 < V2 , V1 = V2

distance R = R but Motion ??? and apparent position (1930 Tolman surface brightness test for light ) mass m will not register the same Intensity of signal !! ( fact )

Why nobody in books explained above problem ?

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

WE DON"T KNOW NOTHING ? we are like small baby Exist many problems !!! Nobody Saw this problem ?


Dear Orac I'm alone or You small understand me ?

Who will start clean this situation nobody ? I can not made test in Home nobody trust simple test !!!

camera1----- Bulb ------ camera2 >>>> 30 km/s or 220 km/s

camera 1 can not see the same brightness of picture like camera 2

( Evidence = 1930 Tolman surface brightness test)



NOBODY CAN SPEAK ABOUT SIZE OF THE ATHOM OR ANY OTHER SIZE

IF WE WILL NOT MEASURE EARTH MOTION

BELOW SENSOR IS GOOD START ( I hope other people will make better)
We must study motion problem !!!

I USE VODORE BECAUSE I BELIVE THAT EXIST MEDIUM INERTIA



We Are moving ! YES

RESPECT TO WHAT ?

I was in point 1 I'm in point 2 I will be in point 3 ...

if distance between points is the same I have constant motion

not exist C+ V so I can use C to evaluate own velocity !!!

picture idea explain


The universe = dark lake
Lampions explain apparent points ( my own coordination system was in past in that point




camera can register different brightness and geometry ( position )




Dear Orac I'm sure that we can measure velocity without words
respect to other body only respect to apparent position ( our own apparent position )

Airplane A and B were in Point where signal started after short time front sensor will be in new position ( source also ) but sensor feel apparent position not fresh !!!


Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/07/13 02:09 AM

Originally Posted By: newton
quantum teleportation
147 km
400 km

I want ask You WHO KNOW REAL DISTANCE ???

147 km or 147 + 1 mm

30 km/s = 30 000 000 mm /s

C speed 300 000 km/s


Earth -----> 30 km/s


Where they started teleportation ?

Where they finished teleportation ?


I understand what you are saying but there are two things against you in the quantum case

The teleportation is instant like impossible to measure fast. The best they can calculate is 10,000 times faster than the speed of light and that is based solely on the accuracy we can measure time

http://www.livescience.com/27920-quantum-action-faster-than-light.html

=> Spooky! Quantum Action Is 10,000 Times Faster Than Light

Theoretically it really should be instant otherwise other effects we should have seen will occur.

The distance really doesn't matter to Quantum Mechanics it could be the other end of the universe from what we can work out .... it would still do it.

That is why it isn't going to help you with your problem it won't see the motion and distance it really doesn't behave like our classic physics world.



Originally Posted By: newton


NEXT PROBLEM IS GRAVITATION ?

I USE VODORE BECAUSE I BELIVE THAT EXIST MEDIUM INERTIA


I understand what you believe and I even understand the implications I am a scientist after all.

You keep posting the same images and repeating the same argument but most of your arguments have fatal flaws from what I can see.

My problem is you seem to be grasping at straws and to me what seems almost silly desperation at times.


Here is a simple example .. so lets look at this claim
Originally Posted By: newton

NOBODY CAN SPEAK ABOUT SIZE OF THE ATHOM OR ANY OTHER SIZE


From a quantum mechanics point of that that statement is totally wrong because the atom does not obey your classic laws, so let me give you the facts on this item

1.) The binding energy holding the nucleus alone in place is massive like on a whole other scale to forces of motion. Atoms survive the entire pressure of the weight of the earth pushing on them and if you don't accept that even think of the deepest mine we have done and the atoms at that point have all the weight above them pushing on them. No pathetic motional forces would distort or change an atoms shape even if it could feel them.

2.) We pick protons up in particle accelerators and take them from whatever speed they are doing here on earth. The calculation on the LHC collider spinning a proton goes like this

http://journal.batard.info/post/2008/09/12/lhc-how-fast-do-these-protons-go

With E = 7 TeV speed of the proton is 99.9999991% times the speed of light.

If the proton changed shape in any way the magnets holding it off the wall would not work. If the proton elongated it would start corkscrewing and quickly slam into the walls.

The LHC alone tells you that at least those parts of an atom in the nucleus are never going to change size or shape by any motion.


3.) So what about the electrons. Well same story JLAB accelerates electrons and it has the same story as LHC.

http://education.jlab.org/qa/experiment_06.html


4.) Okay so the bits of an atom don't change but can a whole atom. Well science has a magic tool called a diamond anvil cell and it can create pressure which are around the same as the centre of the earth and the answer is even at those pressures nothing changes

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


So my problems with your views on the atom size and measurement is that the science firmly says the Quantum Forces involved are so massive that the sorts of effects you get from motion would be impossible to measure small.


We are actually theoretically sure as we can be that quantum mechanics survives a black hole that was the argument that Stephen Hawkings conceded on.


So while I understand your view and what you are trying to challenge in science you need to be careful because motion forces like gravity are pathetic forces as forces go.

Look at the table of strengths of the 4 different fundamental forces in this link

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

Strong force .... 10E38
Electromagnetic .... 10E36
Weak force .... 10E25
Gravity force .... 1

The Quantum forces are 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times bigger.

That is why even if there is an effect (which I doubt) you will never be able to measure it would be incredibly small that you would never pick it from background noise.

Get it the forces trying to hold the atom shape round are massive compared to the motion forces ... it would be like saying a bug hitting a car windshield deflects the car ... I don't doubt the car does get deflected by the bug physics says that, I just doubt you could ever measure it.


Do you now understand why I laughed when you tried to tell me the image of the atom I showed you was not perfectly round and you tried to claim it proved your idea ... I found it incredibly funny laugh

Do you finally see an atom is never going to deform it's shape based on motion ... not ever well at least not in this universe the forces of motion are too pathetically weak.

So in our universe the atom shape and size you can be very confident about
smile

Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/07/13 10:28 AM

Dear Orac I very respect You knowledge ( I started study )

Quantum is chalenge for me I see many question

below my first step how look


About classical Mechanic
Below I will explain You step by step how 1+1 =1 !!!

below animation = doppler for sound ( 1,4 Mach speed - source is faster than sound )

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dopplereffectsourcemovingrightatmach1.4.gif

C limit for me not exist
I like hear that theleportation is faster !!!
The Universe not like limits !!!


Please imagine two masses

m1 -R- m2 --------------------> 1,4 C

m1 = m2

if velocity = 1,4 C and we have special distance R

m1 + m2 = M !!! You have two masses that are one M

one M ?
apparent position mass m2 = actual "fresh" position for mass m1


ATHOM ??? CENTER OF THE ATHOM

I think that exist huge OMEGA ( Vx/r) very small radius "r" below I showing only two masses
we can have more small parts of the center ( the small parts can have different sign "+" / "-" /"neutral" ( three masses double "+" and one "-" + OMEGA = "+"

Vx
I
m1..r...m2
...........I
...........Vx


Vx > C m1 +m2 = (M) one mass apparent mass


Energy E = m1Vx^2 / 2 + m2Vx /2

If m1=m2 wehave famous E= mVx^2


More faster than light = many secrets
it is very fresh but
It is very strong tool
how to conect in one two different bodies

+ and - can be in one point !!!

We need many new facts about
Gravitation Froces and Very Low distance (
( very low distnace = ZERO apparent distance
it is similars colours mix
RGB and we have 24 milions combination in TV )

m-r-m ------> motion

mathematica not like div by zero ( physics told me that apparent distance can be zero )


QUANTUM ? YES I SEE HUGE FUTURE
( this dyscipline will be more stronger than any other for next 20 Years ) I don't know nothing about quantum I need study many facts

Thank You for Dialoge
( I wake up today above post I made during I sleep -:) many of my patents and ideas Joust bourn in dream


centrifugal force problem F= mVx^2 / r


DEAR ORAC PLEASE TRY PUSH APPARENT POINT !!!
CAN YOU OR NOT PUSH SOMETHING THAT NOT EXIST ??

Forces can not push apparent point ( Your finger can not push mass m that is moving faster than >C "
mass m not exist in apparent point but exist "info about mass m"


HUGE ENERGY INSIDE ATHOM
( if You will give energy to body that have got rotation You will change radius r and You can brake balanced situation )

m1-r-m2 and omega + wake up energy = that r will change You will destroy conection Vx1<----m1 m2 ---> Vx1



Above picture ( we know well that old tool- slingshot)
explain huge energy m1 ----> Vx1 + m2------->Vx1

if m1=m2 we have E=mVx^2












Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/07/13 03:34 PM

Originally Posted By: newton



centrifugal force problem F= mVx^2 / r


DEAR ORAC PLEASE TRY PUSH APPARENT POINT !!!
CAN YOU OR NOT PUSH SOMETHING THAT NOT EXIST ??

Forces can not push apparent point ( Your finger can not push mass m that is moving faster than >C "
mass m not exist in apparent point but exist "info about mass m"




I want you to think about what you just said very carefully and think about centrifugal force.

It has to be resisted by something otherwise it just moves.

So when you swing a weight on a string the string has to withstand the centrifugal force otherwise it breaks ... get it the force sees the string.

There is a great demonstration done on the space station take the time to look at it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bs2orRFuolk

Space itself never sees centrifugal force as you see in the video the thing that is spinning sees the force.

So contrary to what you are saying there is clearing a force arising from an apparent point and you see it clearly in the demonstration in space smile

So you need to be a bit more careful ... it also doesn't prove you are wrong just shows you were actually slightly inaccurate in that thought.


As for the atom rotating like you see in classic physics, no you are correct it would be catastrophic and why it doesn't happen. You know a lot more about the atom now and you know it isn't rotating like the silly simplification we sometimes use to teach children.


I should also warn your atom bomb explosion is very apt for one of your suggestions.

Imagine the atom did change shape and elongate with speed, eventually you could reach the point it actually got so elongated it became unstable and broke apart .. just by moving laugh

So under Maciej Marosz idea the atom shape gets changed by motion you could get



JUST BY MOVING TOO FAST ... SEE YOU NEED TO THINK CAREFULLY.

That was part of the reason I laughed at the time.


Anyhow I am very pleased you are discussing things now Maciej Marosz you are no longer acting like an idiot. You language is not that bad, I understand what you are saying and trying to get across. What was hard before is you weren't really listening to what we were saying you just insisted on a proof something I could see was flawed.

Some of your space ideas are untestable at the moment and I have no real data to disagree with you because you are just inverting the movement reference.

Some parts of your argument I disagree with others I can see cause no real issue and that is why it is important you interact with science.

You have made a start and you probably learnt a lot more than you ever thought you would and I am glad it is pushed you to study .... it is not as hard as it seems and you will always find scientists happy to answer questions if you get stuck.

Good luck with it and let me know if I can help if you get stuck.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/07/13 04:23 PM

I must tell You True

today I wake Up with great or total stupid Idea

1,4 Mach and 1,4 C speed

I must read and Imagine many problems that I never touch


but I'm sure if exist 1,4c

m1--r --m2 ------> 1,4 C

m1+m2 = M ( one mass ) observer can not see or feel different


apparent poit mass m2 = ideal fresh position mass m1

weak forces and strong forces ?

I understand small / big

but above example = distance r = 0

if we div by zero for mathematica everything can happen zero logic !!!

Thank You for Your post not all what is inside my brain is ready to see forum's page

generaly
I found in web Important test

1930 Tolman surface brightness test
Tolman in past describe how cooperate doppler and apparent position and Inverted Square Law


We realy don't know how big velocity I measured in my test in home ( Nobody before made better test )

----> 30 km/s
-------------------- > 500 km/s ???

I'm very hapy that You not think that I'm Idiot 100 %
( I must keep my imagination in my own head smile - sometimes I wake up with very not cleare idea )

below I made special graph
E front / E rear =1 rocket is absolute stationary

E front = 0 rocket velocity C or >C

Efront / E rear = zero




above rocket is full of Vacuum if Exist Vacuum ?

Vacuum = zero Quantum Mechanic ? no!!! aftre Your post I think NO!

ELECTRON position and Motion ???

center ---- electron >>>> motion

Electon can change power consumption for fotoemision efect ?


center----- electron ----> 30 km/s <<<< Light

camera1 -----Bulb----- camera 2 -----> 30 km/s

for camera 1 light is going opposite to AIR
for camera 2 light is going the same ARROW like AIR

???

Thank You



Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/07/13 04:29 PM


I very good Understand Ytube ( from space )

the same rules we use to separate "Dust" form Oil on earth
( rotatary filtration = more light weight will be more close to midle pint )
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/07/13 04:44 PM

I know it is crayzy but What if ???

velocity >C


m --------> 1,4 C


apparent point -----------------m ( fresh position ) -->1,4 C


centrifugal force problem F= mVx^2 / r

OTHER IDEA !!!! very low distance for Newton Equation
= Ultra strong gravitation force !!!


below picture is very important !!!

APPARENT TORUSE = APPARENT TUNEL ??? ???






please understand my drawing !!!
apparent toruse


DEAR ORAC YOU TOLD ME THAT
ATHOM'S center has got zero rotation

I'm 100 % sure that if mass has got huge omega for observer this mas has got zero rotation ( observer mistake )

If something move very fast You can see huge aberration
Bicycle and wheels ?



Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/07/13 05:42 PM

if mass m1 is very close to mass m2

m1---m2 so... gravitation forces = INfinity !!



for classical mechanic ( Old ) mass m1 has go size and mass m2 has got size 2 so distance m 1 --- m2 can not be zero


apparent position and velocitity >C = New Classical Mechanic

apparent distance m1 ----m2 -------> 1,4 C can be zero !!!
weak forces can become strong

Newton gravitation can be INFINITY for zero distance between mass m1 and m2


During rotation ( Omega ) makes that we have a tunel
( APPARENT center points tunel APPARENT TORUSE !!! )
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/07/13 05:52 PM

Sorry for big font ! I think it is good model right now smile
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/08/13 02:19 AM

I am not sure where you are going with your model but be careful when dealing with the atom even the nucleus is a bit tricky.

background reading

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nuclear/nspin.html


The problem was in science we expected the proton spin to balance exactly to the opposite of the electron spin ... science got a big shock when it wasn't. The bigger shock was that neutrons had a big magnetic moment.

Proton: g = 5.5856912 +/- 0.0000022
Neutron: g = -3.8260837 +/- 0.0000018


As the article discuss now we understand the quark model of the neutron/proton interactions it makes sense but you need to be careful when trying to do any calculations using classic physics.

So you need to break the problem down sort of like this if you want to use classic physics







AND ALWAYS REMEMBER THIS IS A SIMPLIFICATION TO BE ABLE TO USE CLASSIC PHYSICS BE CAREFUL WITH ANY CONCLUSIONS
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/08/13 05:20 PM



"I am not sure where you are going with your model but be careful when dealing with the atom even the nucleus is a bit tricky."


Dear Orac above only my own Idea "Free Idea "
without any knowledge about athom ( I like small children they Use own idea before read - It is very creative )

Thank You for showing facts


What I'm 100 % sure

Airplane can croos sound velocity !!! please look very nice page with nice animation ( all important situation somone explain by 3 animations )
[img:center]http://www.acs.psu.edu/drussell/Demos/doppler/doppler.html[/img]


Physics it is Not Einstein
wave = wave ( if we speak about sound important is medium velocity if we speak about light in vacuum important is only info where light started )

PLEASE USE THE SAME ANIMATION FOR LIGHT WAVE and VACUUM !!! ( please free Your brain )

IF YOU WANT TO EVALUATE PROBLEM I'm Moving or objects

Or You want to recognize Your own coordination system LINE CONSTANT VELOCITY

You must Use Doppler and Inverted Square Law (brightness ) and
aberration ( 1730 J Bradley - apparent position ) + Fact that not Exist C+ V !!! exist C speed respect to point vhere signal started ( space not change Size time not slowing down - only main beam angle and brightness is important )

you can made similar to My test ( camera and bulb / hot and sensor / ... electric resistance ... ) I very sorry but classical mechanic is not so precission to show 30 km/s and inertia different by experiment we can have huge problem !!!

for classical mechanic we can use very old equation ( scoundary school level ) but please use zero ( earth it is not zero )



mass m can cross Light speed !!!
THEORY ( SR, GR ) can not block Classical Mechanic ( chiken was first not egg )


About my athom model I think that huge problem is question
Can You use forces to stop body more faster than light or this mbody must Hit other body to stop or slown down ?

How to inform mass m -----> 1,4 C " HEY dear mass I'm force do You remember me few km in past I pushed YOU ???"
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/08/13 05:39 PM




Dear Orac Vx ( line velocity )
is very big >C it is perfect mixer

Omega direction ( I marked red colour CCW direction but it can be
CW direction all can finaly give ZERO !!!


We can have different ball mass and size ( above picture I shoved Fife equal mass but it no need have the same mass ) when You change in car somone change mass position to give zero )

Radius can be different for each ball separate

Above model will have 3 D rotation or Not ( 3d = left / rigt own rotation not only one omega like I showed )

Generaly all can give ZERO ( apparent position = mixer )


Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/08/13 05:55 PM

Abut my test
exist also full digital ( 0/1 ) method

camera 1 ----R ---Bulb ---R --camera 2 -----> 30 km/s



0 - signal not exist
1 - signal exist

R distance i vacuum light need time To

we can set in tow ideal symetry cameras time To
( please open /close sensor only for time To )

If exist motion ! during time To light will not touch the sensor inside camera 2 and will touch !!! sensor in camera 1

http://youtu.be/PNYiejnl0t0
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/08/13 07:44 PM

Mass m faster than light = that not exist classical mechanic rules ( mass m will never get iformation about past - gravitation can not stop mass m faster than C> )

Omega and mass m faster than light ? ( right , upper, corner )
rotation can be very fast mass m can hit own apparent position and can feel OWN gravitation from past !!! mass m faster than light can make work and not lost kinetic energy !!! ( planets will feel old apparent position points and go to this points but nobody can inform mass m please stop You made in past work You must lost energy !!! )



Dear Orac In my brain exist many more strange facts
please use Your imagination if mass m will slown down You will be able see mass m and stop mass m by gravitation .

TELEPORTATION ?

Mass m apparent position can change position many bodies in the universe at one and the same time ( mass m faster than light = JOKER this is why teleportation is faster than light Newton gravitation not exist it is past for mass m - nobody can inform mass m please stop You made in past work !!!)

What is it teleportation for me my imagination (I never read about teleportation )

mass m + Huge energy


point 1

mass m exist in point 1
p1 =( apparent point )

very fast travel

p2

How they give so many energy to small body in so small time ?
they = people who made teleportation ( from Your links ) 147 km
400 km ?
biger distance = more bigger energy portion to mass m ?

it is huge energy to mass m and very fast trip !!!
not dematerialization but velocity >C = that body lost mass

I You will travel >C You will not exist for Universe ?
NO
Universe will feel Your old apparent position but Universe will not be able inform You ( Newton Action and Reaction will work only in one direction You ---> Universe not Universe ---> You

Universe can inform You only if You will hit other mass m
other type comunication not exist ( huge aberration outside signals not exist for You )


Build rocket faster than light
it is target for people ( for Engineer )
mass m faster than light lost mass m can not recive information
about observer and other problems work that mass m made in past

how we can stop mass m faster than light ? this mass must hit
other mass to stop or slown down .

147 km .... 400 km... I think that they not register the same mass m only other mass m1 that feel apparent position mass m
and change own position ( they register mass m1 mass m1 joust feel apparent position mass m )

( it is very hard stop mass m faster than light and not destroy this mass )

Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/08/13 08:25 PM

I You like physics please read about MR Mach

for Mr Mach the universe = many bodies conected ( roped ) by gravitation please push mass small mass m on table in Your room
the universe will feel what You did ( will feel new position of mass m )

Mach was first person who like use apparent position to measure velocity ( his ide is very close to my experiment camera bulb )



Mach FAR FAR star apparent position = My Bulb apparent position

bulb ----- camera >>>>> 30 km/s


WHAT IF MASS m will go more faster than C> ( this mass exist has huge kinetic energy ) but nobody can see mass m we only can register apparent position mass m.

Mass m faster than light lost conection with universe ( grvitation information can touch only past apparent signal that already made mass m > C )

"lost conection with universe " = that mass m faster than light
will not register that You made move small mass m on Your table

Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/10/13 06:39 PM

Please look how works dark matter model

I have evidence that energy can not finish !!!

sorry I started new topic to special explain only this problem
what if mass m go faster than gravitation (own gravitation signal )

http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=50311#Post50311


Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/11/13 09:44 AM



Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/11/13 05:50 PM

This is one of those I did warn you about taking the spin analogy too classical and too far laugh

Ready for this because it's a bit hard to work in a classical sense

http://phys.org/news/2013-04-success-nuclear-quantum-closer.html

Quote:

They can rotate both clockwise and counterclockwise (equivalent to 1 and 0), and in both directions simultaneously (a mix of 1 and 0) – something that is completely unthinkable in the traditional, "classical" world.


You can't take the classical spin too serious it's a simplification smile

So you need to put in option 4 with it spinning both ways simultaneously laugh

Yes it's sort of hard to imagine but it does it and it is testable, only when you measure it will it take on a definite value ... that observation thing again smile

I am sorry you can only bring QM into classical world to a simplistic and sometimes erroneous level.
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/12/13 12:29 AM

I am not sure if this is going to help or make things worse for you it depends how you have gone with accepting quantum mechanics and abandoning your classic world.

This is a really interesting discussion about using very "weak measurements" or observation and then essentially restoring the spin back to it's proper unobserved or uncollapsed state.

http://phys.org/news/2013-11-physicists-uncollapse-partially-collapsed-qubit.html
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/12/13 08:00 AM

Dear Orac

below post ---> Important for Quantum Computers and Spin?

how looks athoms in laboratory ( localization small mass m )
please compare to big mass M


BEFORE STUDY BELOW PLEASE SEE LEFT SIDE OF PAGE (below link)
( 4 situations, ZERO , 0> , =, INFINITY )

http://www.acs.psu.edu/drussell/Demos/doppler/doppler.html


Laboratory localization and Quantum ?

1 http://youtu.be/iHMYfYo9cXg

Do You Undrerstand that not exist III Newton's Law

I know You not like speak about cosmos I also
but it is explain why They HAVE zero LUX ( main topic forum )

2 http://youtu.be/H8ER7Rr3tvU

Athom for me = Infinity rotation

3 http://youtu.be/-_DPoFJadyk
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/12/13 08:52 AM

Originally Posted By: newton

Athom for me = Infinity rotation


Unfortunately that is not even close it's so badly wrong it's as we say stupid and you are reverting back to your old stupid where you are ignoring science facts on how things we know work.

This stuff is beyond you to challenge because Quantum Mechanics makes many thousands of predictions al of which are shown to be true.

I can show you thousands of tests on quantum spin to show you it is nothing like the rubbish you just wrote.

CLASSIC PHYSICS IS DEAD ... IT IS WRONG AND A BAD SIMPLIFICATION.

There is no infinities in Quantum Mechanics and your error is thinking that a quantum spin is remotely like a classical spin we have told you time and time again to stop that rubbish.

So you have a clear choice.

Accept you are wrong about the atom and learn or go off on the stupid nutcase path.

You have made steps to stop and learn I hope you continue to make that choice rather than go off on more stupidity.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/12/13 09:28 AM

OK You Like study problem

In My links ( Ytube ) I showed that Your
laboratory can be in two place :

( please imagine that You have Quantum Laptop )

place no 1 ( small mass m )
place no 2 ( big mass M )

Quantum Mechanic not feel different places ( laboratory location ) QM is absolute the same ? why low temperature help keep spin ? What is it temperature / preasure ?

Ok I don't know nothing about athom
( no problem I can learn I will learn )

What about Orac who like QM how You want to add
constant velocity problem to athom ???

Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/12/13 01:47 PM

It's a Quantum Problem movement is irrelevant to QM ... remember it can jump from one end of the universe to the other instantly if it needs to.

See the problem your classic movement rubbish mean nothing to a quantum problem.

Things in the quantum domain don't play by our silly little classic rules ... as I said learn the Quantum rules or look like a complete idiot your choice.

I am sorry you silly little motion and mass rubbish means NOTHING and you are completely lost and you can't make any sort of argument about it.

You can't wipe QM out in a black hole, at the start of the universe in a big bang ... DO YOU REALLY THINK IT GIVES A TOSS ABOUT MASS AND MOVEMENT?

Stop and learn or just keep dribbling more rubbish and go back to being a LUNATIC ... choose A or B.

This stuff is all well known and we build bombs and all sort of weird electronic stuff around it ... stop and learn instead of trying to make up more and more stupid answers smile

Occasionally when you stop dribbling ever more stupid things and actually just follow the evidence of all the experiments a great many very smart scientists have done you make progress.

Lets face you are not the cleverest person in the world I don't get what makes you think that you somehow can solve the workings of the universe. You realize you haven't got a clue how QM works and still you want to insist you can answer these problems ... that is classic stupidity.

Anyhow so we are clear there in no spin in a classic sense, any motions and mass you want to somehow make an argument about are irrelevant because the Quantum Information won't see it doesn't care one bit about it ... it has it's own rules it obeys and those are very different to your silly classic rules.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/12/13 02:59 PM

Dear Orac You did'nt wach my link

Things in the quantum domain don't play by our silly little classic rules ...


I already proved that not exist III Newton Law


I already proved that if mass m not exist = that mass m can make work !!!

please see again ? ( How big work made mass m ? why mass m will not slown down after pull mass M big ? )

it is only 5 minutes

http://youtu.be/iHMYfYo9cXg

after above You Tube I will ask You again

Your lab can be near big mass M or near small mass m .

Position of laboratory where You test Quantum Computers is not importnat for QM ? so why temperature is impotrtant for keep spin ( in lower temp Quantum computers work better )


You not understand what I did in abve Ytube
for classical mechanic it was impossible recognize constant velocity ( in my You tube constant velocity is important ? )


For Mr Einstein also not exist any special coordination system
he also not recognized constant motion problem

For QM exist velocity or not ? below picture it is joke ?
why it is ellipse not perfect circle ?



above picture made nice microscope

problem is that in Lab nobody think before picture where is
Earth Constant Velocity Arow and where is Lab

Laboratory ----> 30 km/s ? ( angle ? )

lab position is important or not for QM ?

Story of the image => http://io9.com/the-first-image-ever-of-a-hydrogen-atoms-orbital-struc-509684901
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/12/13 03:40 PM

I am going to take a leap of faith and assume you might actually want to learn something rather than keep inventing garbage ... so you may ask what are the rules of Quantum Mechanics.

1) Particles are waves, and waves are particles .. with one possible exception. All matter and most known energy in the universe exhibits this weird property that they are not solid like classic physics used to imagine. The one big exception here is gravity which only has a proposed particle the graviton and as it has never been verified gravity remains the one big item outside the scope of Quantum Mechanics. So nothing in the universe we know of is truly solid it all phases in and out of existence and the nucleus of all atoms have to do that or the strong force could not work.

Implications: For really large objects made up of billions of atoms the phasing in and out is dwarfed by the sheer number and so is not noticeable. So at large scales classic physics works as a pretty good approximation and for most layman it is all they will ever need. You start playing around down at the atom level you need to understand Quantum Mechanics.


2. The quantum waves oscillate in discrete states. However, unlike classical states (which are discrete), a two-state quantum system can actually be in a superposition of the two states at any given time.

However the oscillation of QM states create it's own weird behavior

1.) A quantum state cannot be read without the state becoming the measured value ... in layman terms locked to reality.

2.) As the quantum state can not be determined with measurement and measurement locks the quantum state you can not clone quantum information. It is actually impossible to clone a quantum wave because you can't measure or observe it or it locks.

3.) As a quantum state is a superposition waveform you can't possibly lock or collapse both states because that would require you to be in two realities at the same time. This is called the Quantum no deletion theory that Quantum Information can not be deleted

Implication: You can never be sure about a quantum state without measurement all you can do is go on probability. The problem is making a measurement seems to lock the quantum state and create a fixed reality. The problem from a classic physics point of view is that it makes an assumption a universal reality exists. That is why the double slit experiment with light drives people crazy because it shows you reality is created by observation you can't assume you can work out which slit the photon went thru without observation.

Implication: This create one of the strangest and most important consequences of quantum mechanics that of “entanglement.” When two quantum particles share a superposition state they interact right way, their states will depend on one another, no matter how far apart they are in space.


3. Everything not forbidden is mandatory.
A particle moving from point A to point B will take absolutely every possible path from A to B, at the same time. Classic physics describes only the most probable path which for large objects turns out to be almost always correct but you can't assume it when looking at small individual particles.

Implication: Initially as weird as it sounds the prediction is the only way to create the interaction between an electron and a magnetic field correctly. All electronics ultimately relies entirely on this understanding.

Implication: It is why weird effects like quantum tunneling happen and get exploited in electronics. In the quantum world there is a probability things will pass straight thru barriers that under classic physics they shouldn't.


That is the 3 rules of QM .. some people break rule 3 apart to measurement creates reality, no-cloning and no-deletion and have 5 rules but the result is the same.


You will note non of that cares anything about mass or motion, temperature or any other classic physics stuff it's a totally different set of rules they are simple and all encompassing EXCEPT GRAVITY.


QM describes several key things about the universe that the conservation of energy in the classic physics sense is guaranteed. Quantum information can't be created or destroyed (that should sound familiar) and QM explains why that law exists for classic physics because classic physics is a simplification of QM for large objects.


So are we clear nothing in Classic Physics is ever going to challenge QM because classic physics is a dumbed down version of large scale QM ignoring weird effects. To challenge QM you would have to violate one of the central tenants of QM above.


So will you please accept that all your silly stupid classic physics garbage above is wrong when you are dealing with the atom and just learn rather than that make up stupid rubbish that seems to make sense to only you. When you get down to the atom you have to throw your classic physics away it does not work at that scale.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/12/13 03:50 PM

Dear Orac athom have mass m or zero mass ?
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/12/13 03:50 PM

Originally Posted By: newton


lab position is important or not for QM ?




READ THE ABOVE.

POSITION, MOTION, MASS, TEMEPRATURE NONE OF THAT MATTERS.


WHY???

THOSE THINGS ARE BUILT OF QUANTUM INFORMATION THEY ARE LARGE SCALE EFFECTS YOU MEASURE.



QM is a waveform fluctuation in space and time and it is only affected in the ways described above ... those rules create classic physics as a simplification for large objects.

Your classic physics is a simplification of QM for very large objects.


The atom is not a very large object you can't use classic physics and you certainly can't apply large classic effects to them.

Surely this has to be sinking in!!!!!!!

NO ALL YOUR DETAILS ABOVE ARE RUBBISH ... COMPLETE RUBBISH.
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/12/13 03:56 PM

Originally Posted By: newton
Dear Orac athom have mass m or zero mass ?




The better question you need to ask is do they really exist at all.

They are continually phasing states to hold them together.

How the hell does something that is phasing in and out of the universe care about mass.

Specifically you measure a quantum momentum because they are quantum in nature you can't lock it's position and speed.

That little quantum problem again called uncertainty principle.

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

So in chemistry we allow you to have atomic mass etc because in normal situations at large scale solutions it's a reasonable approximation but they are approximations make no doubt.
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/12/13 04:01 PM

So contrary to your garbage above the shape of the atom in the real world is rather vexing because it would change and morph over time as it phased states.

So in many ways the whole idea is beyond stupid and the idea that some classic physics was having an effect is even more retarded.

Does it really have any shape at all is probably the better question. It's charge potential would be spherical, it mass would be a quantum spin anywhere and everywhere and most of its interactions would be from the center point in space. That's probably as best you could describe it with accuracy.

Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/12/13 04:01 PM


Below link You showed me it is about Quantum Computer

http://phys.org/news/2013-04-success-nuclear-quantum-closer.html


I'm sorry I'm not a partner to speak with You about all problems

I want to ask You about words that I already found in link

Dynamic nuclear polarisation via conduction electrons has, however, not yet been demonstrated at room temperature – which is crucial for the method to be useful in practice for the development of quantum computers. The main problem is that the spin orientation in the electrons can easily be lost at room temperature, since it is sensitive to disruptions from its surroundings.

Temperature ? can You explain me temperature problem ?
Why the can in lover temperature and have problem with high temp?
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/12/13 04:16 PM

Temperature is a composite quantum mechanics effect.

The history of it goes like this temperature was measured because a liquid expanded up a tube when you heated it.

So a whole pile of garbage classic physics rubbish was built around this effect and measurements on it ... you learnt them all at school no doubt.

The bigger question is what is temperature in classic physics and they eventually worked it out that it is energy.

And you end up with whole piles of garbage classic physics built around energy and work.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_(thermodynamics)


The question that's not answered in all that was what is why does the liquid in the thermometer expand in fact not all substance behave that way .... in fact ice expands when cools smile


Long story short ... energy is quantum information and what it does in certain molecules is make the quantum spins faster. In some molecules but not all the faster spinning bonds makes them expand.


So what the problem is with temperature for a quantum computer is it represents random quantum information in a computer trying to store quantum information.

In an electrical sense it would be like asking you 5 volt computer processor to deal with a baseline of 110 volts AC running thru all its circuits.

I should have asked you to try and come up with a description of temperature in your classic physics .. it's actually quite funny watching people try and work out what temperature is.

This is what temperature really looks like
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130909092835.htm

Now if you want to see something really weird under quantum mechanics how about a material that expands under pressure. See once you understand the rules of QM you can break many classic physic simplifications.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/07/130718161353.htm
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/12/13 04:25 PM

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.
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/12/13 04:33 PM

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.
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/12/13 04:40 PM

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.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/12/13 04:52 PM

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 !!!
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/12/13 05:21 PM

Can we warm medium by light ?

Can we change capacity of medium by light ?
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/12/13 05:42 PM

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
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/12/13 05:46 PM

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?
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/12/13 05:57 PM

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 ....
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 02:27 AM

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.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 04:02 AM

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 )



*****************.........
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 06:36 AM

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.
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 09:46 AM

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.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 11:45 AM

************************************************************
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 )

********************************************************
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 11:56 AM

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 ..

Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 12:05 PM

PLEASE WAIT I WILL GIVE ANSVER FOR YOUR POST
I WILL USE YOUR OWN WORDS ..
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 12:48 PM

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.
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 01:36 PM

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.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 02:16 PM

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






Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 02:25 PM

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.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 02:34 PM

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
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 02:48 PM

Ok I know You understand My idea !!!

we must made test in ligo after 5 - 6 years ARMY will use above in secret Navigation systems


for about 20 - 30 years people will use above idea in mobile phone

I'm sorry for this picture ( somone who read only last posts must see )







Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 02:59 PM



LIGHT >>>> MEDIUM ---- sensor

One Photon Enery Porion PROBLEM

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



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 )


Camera 1 ----R---BULB ---R----CAMERA 2 >>> 220 km/s


Distance R = R light for distance R need Time T
during time T Camera 1 and Camera 2 moving with Earth


How many meters more will make Light inside medium ?

how many hot more will be lost ?

R=10 meters
R = 2500 meters ( ligo Pipe )


TEMPERATURE PROBLEM AND MEDIUM

what if CAMERA 1 ------CAMERA 2 will be perpendicular to 220 km/s

How many meters more will make Light inside medium ?
perpendicular situation


Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 03:13 PM

The answer is easy for science

In a perfect vacuum 100% makes it the distance wont matter light makes it from stars billions of light years away.

In air totally different problem because air attenuates the energy that is why ligo is done in a vacuum tube.

I am not sure what your point is all that is known and obvious .. you say you are an engineer call it what it is attenuation that is it's proper engineering name

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

There is no attenuation in space or we wouldn't see light from stars .. do the maths yourself if you can see the light from a star several billion years old the attenuation coefficient has got to be like really really small and you see the stars constantly so most likely the attenuation coefficient is 0 dbm. Given how long light travels from a star and there are no gaps in it I am not sure you could argue the attenuation coefficient is anything other than zero.

So using your classic physics or best engineering physics explain to me how you want to argue space attenuation is anything other than zero.

That's why I can't work out where you are going with this all you are going to see is the attenuation coefficient of earths atmosphere you aren't going to learn anything about space because the attenuation coefficient of space is already blatantly obvious even to crazy classic physics.

I can't for the life of me work out what you think the problem is.

In your drawing of the plane above I really doubt it will work because attenuation thru a media involves more than just the movement of the media.

Look carefully at the attenuation reference for air in the link

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

Air 1.64 (20°C)

See we had to quote the air temperature and I am afraid it is worse the pressure will also change it. I am pretty sure those effects alone on a plane are going to drown the signal you are after and I am still thinking if the change in gravity may also cause a problem ... I don't doubt the signal exists I just doubt you will be able to get an easy stable measurement on it as it's going to be tiny.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 03:28 PM

This what You write = lost


pipe --- > water

each meter and water will lost small energy portion

(Kinetic energy -- each meter water will lost )


PERFECT VACUUM ??? I'm engineer not perfect engineer !!!

plese imagine that there where is Earth right now many years ago was other Star ? mass ? planet ?

below picture Sun were in past in point 1

exist any polution ? sun left some polutions ?





I think that in each place we have electromagnetic polutions




how work polutions ? if polutions are isotropy they can be medium ?


above picture I can not explain right now by classic mechanic ?

Light >>> medium

please imagine that in one time many sources want to send light
and use one and the same medium ( many directions )

HOW WILL WORK ATHOMS INSIDE MEDIUM

IN ONE TIME THEY WILL MAKE THE SAME SAME JOB WITHOUT POBLEMS ?

ALL PHOTONS WILL BE DELIVERY ON TIME ?


ATHOMS WILL BE MORE TIRED AFTER 8h shift

WHAT ABOUT ATHOMS LIVE LONG ?


LIVE IS PERFECT ONLY FOR FLAT PEOPLE !
NOT FLAT PEOPLE SEE MORE BUT NOT ASK ( we not like work and fight with many others around US - Einstein and I have many friends Marosz ???? and ... )


DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH MONEY THEY INVEST IN LIGO
300 mln USD

call to LIGO and ask about help YOU WILL HAVE MANY FRIENDS
( they want to confirm GRAVITATION PROBLEM SRT , and GRT efect for space and time ) few mistake and nobody will understand them they will inform NOBEL comission and next NOBEL for EINSTEIN :):):)


Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 03:48 PM

Oh man this is that stupid astronomy garbage

Here is this the stupidity you are asking?

http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/of8pf/when_a_photon_leaves_a_star_what_are_the_odds/


You wonder why I think astronomers are dropkick stupid when they ask this sort of question.


The whole problem with the question is it is built on garbage of how attenuation works in a media.

Then you try to add dust into space and claim it is now a media


RUBBISH .... DUST IN SPACE DOES NOT MAKE A MEDIA


A media is defined as something that changes the speed of light not a collision with something.


I am sorry I am not doing this stupidity it is one for people who are drop kick stupid and believe in classic physics.

It's a really stupid argument and you have to first believe classic physics is really true and we didn't lie to you and tell you a pile of half truths ... which itself is not true we did that we lied to you.

The attenuation calculation from classic physics already tells you the coefficient is zero but yet here the dropkicks are trying to turn space into a media ... seriously people learn. If space really was a media it would have an attenuation and you would have no chance of seeing any star light not after billions of years not even in classic physics.

The answer is NO IT IS COMPLETE GARBAGE and if you spend the time to go through the proper science you can learn why.

The bit that makes me laugh with the whole stupidity is people actually want a 5 dimensional object interacting with a 3 dimensional absolute space and produce a result ... and that makes sense to them .... please save me laugh

Anyhow I am out of here I don't do classic physics garbage I have told you that before if that's your theory .. good luck laugh
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 04:09 PM

You not understand my idea


..........L2.....L3....L4
laser 1...................sensor


Laser 2 and laser 3 and laser 4 are sending ideal perpediculal
signal to laser 1


Can we change beam's power of laser 1

we have L2,L3,L4 what if we will use more stronger lasers than L1

what will do athoms ( test in medium L1 beam inside air/water )
hot /cold medium

what will do vacuum ( test in vacuum L1 beam is in vacuum )

What will hapen with beam's power (L1 ) if in one and the same time two photons want to exite one and the same athom
what if three .
what if four ....
what if six ...

at one and the same time
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 04:16 PM


25 September 2013
Photonic molecules behave like light saber, say scientists
by Will Parker

????
http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20130825204045data_trunc_sys.shtml
????
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 04:46 PM

Oh I understand alright it's the same stupid argument as above in a different way you just can't see why.

You want to measure it fine go ahead and measure it I already know what the experiment must show because there really is no other option.

Please don't bore me to death with great explaining of what it means if you are right it's like idiots that want to discuss if you could go faster than light.

Show me that you can go faster than light first and I might be remotely be interested in discussing it other than that you are wasting my time because I have pretty strong proof that you can't.

I showed you what happened to the last scientist stupid enough to make that claim based on a stupid experiment he should have known was wrong and checked.

I am not the least interested in discussing your actual theory from above because I already have pretty solid evidence it is wrong like thousands of experiments that say it is.

However science is a free society we allow people to test ideas no matter how stupid they are and I have even helped you with how to do it.

What I don't have to do is waste my time on this stupidity and discuss it's implications when you have no evidence or data that it is even possible and I have thousand of experiments that say you are wrong.

So do your tests and if you can show something we can discuss ... come back when you have some results I could actual believe and trust.
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 05:01 PM

Originally Posted By: newton

25 September 2013
Photonic molecules behave like light saber, say scientists
by Will Parker

????
http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20130825204045data_trunc_sys.shtml
????



I am not sure what you find puzzling about that article?

The light saber from starwars is a bit over the top what they are doing is making a different form of matter here are less going for headlines reports of the same thing

http://phys.org/news/2013-09-scientists-never-before-seen.html

So again what they are doing is playing with QM to break classic physics rules

Here is what they do

=>What we have done is create a special type of medium in which photons interact with each other so strongly that they begin to act as though they have mass, and they bind together to form molecules. This type of photonic bound state has been discussed theoretically for quite a while, but until now it hadn't been observed.


Understand it is a theoretical thing that QM says will happen something classic physics would never expect .. NOT EVER UNDER CLASSIC PHYSICS.


Are you understanding this it is proof of QM being right because it predicted the effect.

UNDERSTAND???????

Now here is the explaining for classic physics to try and make sense of it

=> "When the photon exits the medium, its identity is preserved," Lukin said. "It's the same effect we see with refraction of light in a water glass. The light enters the water, it hands off part of its energy to the medium, and inside it exists as light and matter coupled together, but when it exits, it's still light. The process that takes place is the same it's just a bit more extreme – the light is slowed considerably, and a lot more energy is given away than during refraction."


AGAIN BE CAREFUL IT IS AN ATTEMPT TO SIMPLIFY QM FOR LAYMAN (and some dropkick astronomers who only understand classic physics) smile


Now the reason

=> The reason they form the never-before-seen molecules?

=>An effect called a Rydberg blockade, Lukin said, which states that when an atom is excited, nearby atoms cannot be excited to the same degree. In practice, the effect means that as two photons enter the atomic cloud, the first excites an atom, but must move forward before the second photon can excite nearby atoms.


HERE SO YOU FINALLY GET IT

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

=>A Rydberg atom is an excited atom with one or more electrons that have a very high principal quantum number. These atoms have a number of peculiar properties including an exaggerated response to electric and magnetic fields.

=>The only truly stable state of an atom is the ground state with n = 1. The study of Rydberg states requires a reliable technique for exciting ground state atoms to states with a large value of n.


NOT EXACTLY SOMETHING YOU ARE GOING TO FIND IN NATURE YOU WILL FIND SOME IN SPACE BUT PLASMA PROCESS... WE CREATED THESE THINGS USING QM IN A LAB.

=>The density within interstellar gas clouds is typically many orders of magnitude lower than the best laboratory vacuums attainable on Earth, allowing Rydberg atoms to persist for long periods of time without being ionised by collisions or electric and magnetic fields. As a result of this longevity and the abundance of hydrogen it is particularly common for astronomers to observe radiation from the heavens at a frequency of 2.4 GHz, now known to correspond to the hydrogen n = 109 to n = 108 transition. Such a highly excited hydrogen atom on Earth would be ionised almost immediately as the binding energy would be significantly below thermal energies.

See the problem classic physics can't make these on earth because they can't build a vacuum remotely as good as space.

=>Strongly interacting Rydberg atoms also feature quantum critical behavior, which makes them interesting to study on their own


That's why they were playing with it and created it by using QM under very cold conditions.


So is it clear the whole process start to end is playing with QM to break classic physics I warned you about this you give me any rule I am pretty sure we can break it except conservation of energy.

HOW ANY OF THAT HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH YOUR THEORY IS BEYOND ME.

IT'S SOMETHING WE MAKE IN A LAB AND IT SHOWS SCIENCE UNDERSTANDS A HELL OF A LOT.
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 05:32 PM

By the way your favorite experiment has put out an update

http://phys.org/news/2013-11-coherent-states-shown-optimal-gravitational.html

Still no gravity wave at LIGO however laugh

I shouldn't laugh but some science is amusing they remind me of you so certain they will see something and they convinced a funding grant body no less smile

They did however convince people that a discovery was imminent no less

=> http://www.technologyreview.com/view/507...tational-waves/


Is that like your results are they imminent ... that's the new term apparently ... you can use that if you like as well.

Tell everyone your proof from your experiment is imminent it's all the rage in junk science.

My suggestion is contact these guys with your suggestion because they have fast dug themselves into a hole by looks and need a new idea about right now.

I am afraid none of that is science it is something to do with cows and there backsides.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 05:59 PM

I aready destroyed classical mechanic !

I like only Energy and I trust only Energy
Forces made people like many others definition ( energy is natural)

PLEASE LOOK ON BELOW Ytube

if small mass m will go faster than own grawitation waves = that this mass not exist for classical mechanic rules !!!


mass m = perpetum mobile motion !
this efect is real and very natural

mass m will not slown down because you can not stop mass m by blocking apparent position of mass m

IT IS REVOLUTION !!! III Newton rules not work for huge mass

1 http://youtu.be/iHMYfYo9cXg
2 http://youtu.be/H8ER7Rr3tvU


Velocity can change also III newton rules for small speed

30 km/s .... 220 km/s


IF QUANTUM MECHANIC NOT RECOGNIZE RIGHT NOW MOTION
PEOPLE NEED ADD MOTION PROBLEM TO QUANTUM , QUANTUM COMPUTER IS USING ATHOMS !!!

You can ask any astronomers mass M from Ytube 2

I never studied Hubble observations resoults but mass M from my You tube accelerate step by step like I showed ( step by step to next apparent positions velocity rise up )

Hubble also saw red shift and know that galactics accelerate right now

Universe is Infinity above evidence


Above idea and rotation ( ultra fast rotation )
ulttra fast rotation can eliminate all Newton's forces


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_DPoFJadyk

Below picture will be bridge between new physics and athoms
we need add motion problem to ATOMIC CLOCK

( not like Einstein
there is now different time inside airplane

only electrons feel not the same forces during trip it is very natural that they made longer way arund center respect to absolute space and they have different position below energy graph )






I already CLEAN UP in classical mechanic
I also Cuted Einstein Head

QM I must study to understand

I'm sure that double slits experiment = stupid exaple that we very easy can eliminate One photon can be cut by slits on two parts
two different energy portion ( please add to below picture ) two slits




YOU HAVE RIGHT QM = NICE MAGIC BUT ENERGY YOU CAN NOT CREATE !!!
TWO SPLITS can ONLY DIV one and the same PHOTON !!!

photon has got angle ( Inverted square law )
ABERRATION 1730 it is very old fact ( aberration = that energy never will go to one point like in my rocket Vo = 0 )
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/13/13 06:06 PM

ROFL good luck ... please don't bother telling me all the wonderful detail, really not interested.

When you have done it come back and show me .... LOL

Sorry that was all very funny like stupid child who hasn't got a clue moment.
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/14/13 12:22 AM

By the way you never answered the question what was the significance of science making the light sabers?

I still don't get the relevance to your theory if anything I actually thought it pretty much told you that science was right and you were badly wrong in a single article.

You usually just ignore any experiments that basically tell you that you are being an idiot ... I mean I count 11 or 12 problems so far you just want to ignore everything from atom binding energy, quantum effects thru to basic heat transfer mechanisms.

So I did sort of expect you to just ignore the light saber article or is it now that you understand it properly you now want to ignore it?

In Maciej Marosz language we say YOUR THEORY HAS BEEN DESTROYED ... that is how it goes doesn't it laugh

I still think your best bet is talk to the LIGO people because they need a miracle about now. They were told the machine was almost certainly too small to see a gravity wave but still they were convinced they would ... coincidently they are Polish from Warsaw university as well.

So I have a theory that there may be something in the water in Poland smile

Is your discovery "imminent" like there's is laugh

Anyhow I am away from tomorrow for bit over two weeks for work so I will look forward to you results and nobel prize results when I get back I guess smile
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/14/13 05:20 AM

DOPPLER + INVERTED SQUARE LAW

Below Idea invented Mr Tolamn in 1930

1930 Tolman surface brightness test
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tolman_surface_brightness_test1930



MAROSZ- constant motion and Tolman test

WHY WE HAVE WINTER AND SUMMER SOLAR SYSTEM FEEL CONSTANT MOTION PROBLEM



MICHELSON MORLEY BRIGHTNESS OF BEAM VERSION NEW TYPE OF COMPASS
- constant motion problem


camera1 ----R-----BULB ----- R-----Camera 2 ------> 30 km/s

Cameras register apparent distance to Bulb ( signal started in past NOT EXIST C+ 30 km/s !) . Camera 1 is more close to point 1 more close to point 2 ...3...4. Camera 1 will register higher brigntness of picture if we compare to Camera 2









first test in POLAND 2012 ( first prototype )

http://youtu.be/XF_npmQ8kGY

first pictures
( brightness - photoshop 10 histogram)
west ( -30km/s ) and East (+30 km/s )

http://youtu.be/O9k-zidfJZg


ANISOTROPY RESISTANCE OF MEDIUM FOR LIGHT /FOR ELECTRIC ENERGY

PHOTOEMISSION ENERETIC PROBLEM AND MEDIUM MOTION DIRECTION



LIGHT >>> MEDIUM ----> 30 km/s <<< LIGHT

how many energy cost light trip inside medium that is moving ?

Elec. Energy .......wire......... ---> 30 km/s


AIR AND EARTH MOTION AND ELECTRONS POSITION ?



Story of the above image => http://io9.com/the-first-image-ever-of-a-hydrogen-atoms-orbital-struc-509684901

ELECTRIC VERSION MICHELSON MORLEY TEST (wire resistance)



THE UNIVERSE EXPANSION MODEL CONFIRMED BY BIG BANG THEORY

DARK MATTERY MODEL AND MACH IDEA ( SUPERSONIC SPEED , MAROSZ SUPERGRAVITATION SPEED )

PERPETUUM MOBILE FIRST TYPE / INFINITY MOTION PROBLEM
MORE WIDE CLASSICAL MECHANIC !



Mach
- first engineer who describe Supersonic Speed problem

( please look on 4 animations left side of page below link )

http://www.acs.psu.edu/drussell/Demos/doppler/doppler.html


Marosz- first person who showed people what will be if mass m will cross Supergravitation speed

Mach's equations can describe below problem ( idea owner is Marosz )

1 http://youtu.be/iHMYfYo9cXg

2 http://youtu.be/H8ER7Rr3tvU

3 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_DPoFJadyk



NEW TYPE OF DOPPLER SHIFT CONSTANT MOTION AND SIGNAL LEVEL
APPAENT DSTANCE TO SOURCE PROBLEM





WHERE I SEE FUTURE FOR MY DISCOVERY ?

NEW INTERNAL GPS TYPE

WE NEED ONLY THREE CONSTANT VELOCITY
AND ASTRONOMY TIME ALGORITMS

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-DYWc_0NfHZg/UanNFZgUMoI/AAAAAAAAA8A/6-XEoqsqy4U/s1600/333.jpg

ZERO GPS SIGNAL PROBLEM ?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-0mRKHtmH-YM/UK8pzwJ6TmI/AAAAAAAAAP0/FHh7T5UvNNY/s1600/gps2.JPG

BIG FISH ( whales ) has got inside head big empty chamber inside chamber small source of signal that is able travel without air

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-tMjoAujRQ5o/UK8pspZUQQI/AAAAAAAAAPs/87K5muMoS7Q/s1600/gps1.JPG


WHY WE HAVE WINTER and SUMMER ?

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-sCSMCFPwLR8/UK8qPXCcAEI/AAAAAAAAAQE/8GD8vR83VIg/s1600/hot.JPG


http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-agRtwFCVnPE/UYndx-VIeVI/AAAAAAAAA3c/lvRaonCImP4/s1600/WSM.JPG


NEW SYSTEM FOR AIPLANE /ROCKET

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-AdDum0dDSQY/UK...66666666666.JPG


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-PqEJjEZQisM/UKjVcJCGp9I/AAAAAAAAALs/0XOxA_hceK4/s1600/wwwwwwwwwwwww.JPG


http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-xCq4esIpFmw/USouSs6D9-I/AAAAAAAAAqo/AMikzS7lwxU/s1600/xxx.JPG



EXPLAIN DARK MATTER PROBLEM AND BLACK HOLES MODEL

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

I SEE AIRPLANE BUT I CAN NOT HEAR AIRPLAIN ?
WHAT IF I NOT SEE AND NOT HEAR AIRPLAINE

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



MAROSZ's AETHER MODEL

below IDEA can be the best computer CPU model ( many diffrernt HZ - zero HOT problem ( zero signal lost ) - gravitation is able help us change information's adress ) many informations in one and the same time ( ideal parallel magistrale )

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-JSuPkGLL5RA/UVFJrlAx17I/AAAAAAAAAuA/rC_sxo68KBE/s1600/aether2.JPG

Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/14/13 08:44 AM

Whats that like that 75th time you have posted the same bullshit image laugh


I assume it's not for me but anyone stupid enough to wade thru this trash from top to bottom ... newsflash I don't see anyone else commenting they all stopped reading about 100 posts ago.


Paul told you and I have told you it actually doesn't help it will turn most people away instantly haven't others told you that. Spend some time and try and write out your theory google translate is your friend .... there you go I helped you again.


For my part I did enjoy having fun with the HMS TITANIC of science theories it has more holes in it than swiss cheese. You give me great humor each day and I do hold an outside chance one day the penny will drop and you will understand but it is a fading hope smile


My humor with your current post is you cover black holes you have got a few of them in the theory

OH BUT WAIT IT'S SMASHED ALL THE OTHER THEORIES.

I HAVE WORKED OUT ALL THE OTHER THEORIES DISAPPEARED INSIDE ALL THE BLACK HOLES IN MAROSZ's THEORY.

Anyhow enough laughs for today I must get packed.

Take care see you in a couple of weeks no doubt you will be up to posting 150 of the same image by then.

May the 5 dimensions of an EM wave not disrupt your 3D world sniker world badly while I am away.

WAIT SAME IMAGE INCOMING BELOW HERE laugh

VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/14/13 09:53 AM

One Photon Enery Porion
PROBLEM how much energy medium is able
take from light (transport cost )
(Medium = Air /Water HOT/COLD)


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


Originally Posted By: newton

Can we warm medium by light ?


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



IN MY TEST ( CAMERA TIME = 10 sec )
How long trip light made in air before hit camera's sensor ?
respect to point where Earth was in past !!!

CAMERA1---R---BULB--R--CAMERA2 ---> 30 km/s = 30 000 000 mm/s

DEAR ORAC PLEASE STUDY
law of conservation of energy


CAMERA 1 and CAMERA 2 distance ? NOT EXIST C+ 30 km/s

PLEASE SET THE SAME CAMERAS
PERPENDICULAR TO 30 km/s
THEY WILL REGISTER THE SAME BRIGHTNESS of PICTURE



IF YOU FINISH STUDY please think what if we will change R
ohh sory for You we no need test .... I will not learn You more
Posted by: Revlgking

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/15/13 04:14 AM

ORAC. An interesting signature you use:
"NO layman has ever changed science ..." you say. Where is the evidence for this comment? grin

Check out: http://science.howstuffworks.com/first-scientist.htm There, 1834, is mention of when the name scientist was first used.
And http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientist

Did Copernicus, a monk ... and there are others like him... have a degree in a science? Were there no self-taught scientists, ever? What about Benjamin Franklin?

ME? When it comes to science, I am content to be a curious layman. So I read and ask questions, OK! smile

SO, HERE GOES:
==================================
LUX says no to most dark matter

What does this title mean? "Most dark matter"? Why not all matter?

Yes, I have read:
http://luxdarkmatter.org/papers/LUX_First_Results_2013.pdf

BTW, I learned that LUX is an acronym for Large, [/b]underground [b]Xenon. The basic word, in Latin, is Lux; in Greek, it is phos (thus we get, phosphorus, photography, etc.); in French it is, leger, and so on.

BTW 2, I have always been interested the sciences. However, the only physics that I really know is of the kind that I studied--and did well in at that level--when I was at the high school--in the late 1940s.

AS A THEOLOGIAN, one who takes the integral-theory approach to philosophy, the sciences and the creative arts
I know that the Bible is not a book. It is a collection of ancient documents, which are full of comments & metaphors about a 'god' and 'gods', in many forms', including 'light'.

For example, in Genesis 1.03, it is recorded that God [ELOHIM--the highest power] said, "...let there be light (related to the German word, Licht). In John 8.12, Jesus is quoted as saying, "I am the Light of the world ..."

1.First, physically speaking, without the LIGHT of information--the kind we call bits and bytes--would physics, as we know it, exist? Of course not!

2.Second, mentally speaking, without the LIGHT of knowledge--the kind that is physically (genetically) transmitted in the DNA, from one generation to another--would animal life as we know it, exist? Again, of course not!

3.Third, spiritually speaking, without the LIGHT of spirit-based wisdom--the kind that is physically, mentally (or culturally) and spiritually transmitted, from parents to children, to tribes, to nations and so on, by the use of behaviour, language of the kind that leads to self-awareness and to consciousness--would humanity as we know it, exist? Once more I say, of course not.


With this in mind, take note of Exodus 3.14. For me, it is a poetic story--not one to be taken literally--of a thought that came into the mind, soul, spirit of Moses, when he (about 1,300 BC) or so the story goes, saw a burning, or light-giving bush. Out of this 'light' and into the mind of Moses, came the god-given thought, "I AM, WHO I AM".

LIFE, therefore, MUST BE KEPT IN BALANCE
From this metaphor from Exodus, I learn: Every time I see, hear and experience things, phenomena, with my senses--and do so, consciously, it is possible for me, or anyone, to have a peak, god-like experience. What we do with such phenomena makes us who we are, WHO I AM--for better, or for worse, for good or evil...

Ah YES! The importance of ECOLOGY.

Let us not forget that it is too much sun LIGHT and HEAT that can dissipate life-giving waters and make deserts appear. On the other hand, it is the lack of sunlight--brought on by too much dust and water-logged cloud cover, which can bring on another ice-age.

THE CHALLENGE

It is up to all of us, as people--philosophers, including curious children, scientists (especially those here on SAGG) and all creative artists to show the way.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/15/13 07:19 AM

Experimentum crucis !

I SHOWED ABOVE FACTS AND TEST ( everyone can repeat in home )
We must repeta my test in LAB / Ligo it is greate place !!!


Copernic stoped the SUN / Marosz Space Time

How to start very long trip - zero fuel on board ?

Rocket ( spaceship ) must start ideal opposite to constant solar system motion


<--- rocket.......solar system -- constant speed --->



If rocket will stop or slown down ( for exaple only 1 km/s ) !!! rocket can wait and not use fuel ( Earth and Sun will continue motion ! )


When persnon inside rocket will look on the SUN
He will see RED shift AND Intesity of signal ( Inverted square law problem )like in TOLMAN TEST 1930

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

I was in point 1 I'm in point 2 I will be in point 3

I no need other bodies to evaluate own position
( I'm moving or star ? I no need star I can observe how energy feel problem of my own motion !!! Energy always escape there where feel lower resistance !!! bodies not like accelerate !!! acceleration cost more energy than slowing down !!!

kinetic energy graph = parabola !!!
rise up speed 2 m/s is not equal slown down 2 m/s

m*V*V/2 !!! ( please take a pancil and evaluate the problem )
zero = point where You were short time ago in space ( apparent point )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HWsvZdMBek


below more wide classical mechanic

(Galilleo and NEWTON did't recognize constant motion problem in his Equations - Marosz I can recognize inertia mass free from gravittion and what ? what is it inertia ? kinetic energy do You see relation )



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpgZJmbkAmA


Dark mattery problem what if ? body go more faster than own gravitation ( Newton did't even think that we can lost gravitation mass - Inertia mass m and gravitation mass are two different masses Einstein can not put "=" )

1 http://youtu.be/iHMYfYo9cXg

below You tube I made small mistake we need add also Omega problem to mass m motion

2 http://youtu.be/H8ER7Rr3tvU


CLASSICAL MECHANIC and TELEPORTATION ?

m ------------> V>G


if someone will give to mass m energy portion E and mass m will start go more faster than own gravitation waves ( Mr Mach's model - More faster than sound Airplane )
Nobody will see mass m !( light can not hit mass m and back to observer eyes )

light >>> mass m ---->

other bodies will feel always apparent position of mass m


above model work also for small speed
20 km/s 30 km/s , 220 km/s

m1 --R-- M ---R-- m2 >>> motion

mass m1 will feel Mass M gravitation
position more closer than mass m2
mass m1 go to apparent position mass M
mass m2 escape from apparent position mass M

similar problem registered and described Maciej Marosz in 2012
after made in home own test

camera 1 ----R ----BULB -----R ----camera 2 >>>> 30 km/s

Very important is INVERTED SQUARE LAW
and velocity 30 km/s 220 km/s
and distance R

(please try find info in books about below facts)

1730 James Bradley Aberration
1842 Doppler
1930 TOLMAN brightness test



2012 Marosz Michelson Morley ( brightness of beam )









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

Experimentum crucis !

WHERE ENERGY ESCAPE MORE EASY ?
DO WE HAVE ANY SPECIAL DIRECTION IMPORTANT FOR LIGHT ?
+30 km/s - 30 km/s No !!!
for mass M Yes !!!

IIMPORTAANT FOR MASS M ---m reaction and action ?

HOW LOOK UNIVERSE ( velocity map ) ?
( absolute montion and Michelson Morley brightness ? )

WHY WE HAVE WINTER AND SUMMER ?
66.66 is reason no 1
exist more ???

HOW WORKS ELECTRON and ABSOLUTE MOTIONS Problem ?

WHY ATOMIC CLOCK SLOWN DOWN ?
OUR ATHOMS inside OUR OWN BODIES FEEL BELOW PROBLEM ON EARTH?



HOW LONG WE WILL LIVE ? = HOW LONG PERIOD OF ELECTRONS ? = HOW BIG ELLIPSE MADE SMALL ELECTRON IN SPACE HOW COOPERATE ELECTRON AND ATHOM CENTER ( apparent distance and motion ) ?

I can die I will don't know answers ?

I need test please help me and not F.. about this what was in past afer I made my test MM brightness version all will look different

LIGO experiment proposition My first blog few day afer my test
http://tesla2.blogspot.com/

I have in home oryginal camera and memo card
exist also person in USA that is able confirm what I did ( we comunicate by phone mail and Y tube )
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/15/13 08:41 AM

Originally Posted By: Revlgking

Did Copernicus, a monk ... and there are others like him... have a degree in a science? Were there no self-taught scientists, ever? What about Benjamin Franklin?


I am sitting a the airport terminal waiting to catch the next flight reading your reply Rev. The networks bad it's cold and I am very tried so bear with me and I have had to write this offline while having a coffee.

The problem we have is when we look at very old history you could have someone with moderate intelligence and they could actually be very bright in there period. However it's important to realize with say Benjamin Franklin knowledge
these days would actually be considered something like a school dropout today. The baseline of knowledge that needs to stay up with science increases every year, our children and grandchildren will need to learn things we may not even
know right now.

Therefore when you are judging the overall ability to change science the point of reference to use is do they understand enough of what is already known to actually make a difference.

So let's look at some of these characters we have on our forum and it appears to be true of all science forums at least that you get a level of what I would call anarchist tendencies.

Your mate TT is a classic for that he has absolutely nothing useful or even remotely interesting to say infact you can boil almost all of anything he has to say as being contrarian ... if you call it white he will call it black. I showed in one of the threads it's quite funny because you can turn the whole argument back on him because he suffers the second problem they all have

MOST OF THESE GUYS ARE NOT REAL SMART AND MOST HAVE COMMUNICATION SKILL ISSUES

They actually assume and think they are smart and they are smarter than us poor plebs who frequent these forums because we actually have interest in the area.

Lets take our mate Maciej Marosz here he hasn't even worked out he has spoken to me on a number of sites because he posts on many sites .. the thought I doubt even crossed his mind.

Parts of the original idea was posted on the Lockheed Martin competition for a $25 000 prize which was open last year, here is his application

https://lmco.brightidea.com/ct/ct_a_view...E0-D1256AAF34A6

He has also posted the idea on a number of university websites like MIT.

The he has the obligatory posting on physics forums

http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=33678
http://www.topix.com/forum/science/physics/TRK70M5NLJMGPMJT1
http://able2know.org/topic/225878-1

He was even posting it on electronic distributor websites like Farnell which made me laugh.

He is represented on youtube

He has what seems like countless websites
http://tesla4.blogspot.com.au/
http://hwdp1.blogspot.com.au/2013/01/bells-telephone-maroszs-lagiewka.html

He was obviously getting desperate trying posting on what we generally call the nutcase sites

http://www.network54.com
http://freeenergyforum.com

Andy at network54 actually did a reasonable job of hearing him out

Basically you name it he has posted or tried to get traction on this idea and how he has the persistence and energy for all this I admire and why I sort of waded thru this garbage.


The usual response which I actually felt sorry for him for was on google+

Best Answer Voter's Choice
I have just nominated you for the Cretin of the Week Award.


So whats going on here why is Maciej Marosz regarded so badly by basically everyone why isn't he taken seriously.

There are basically two problems for Maciej Marosz


1.) He is missing understanding and knowledge on large important parts of science in the area he is trying to change.


Benjamin Franklin who you detailed above was basically a world leader in understanding of electricity when he was working on it. Franklin was instrumental in starting the University of Pennsylvania. Einstein and Feynman both worked with the leading scientists of there day.

A question that comes to mind has an real advance ever been made by someone who did not understand the leading theories in that area at the time. I actually doubt it because to effectively overturn a theory you have to understand it and I can't think of anyone who has done it.


2.) The second problem and I think it stems from the previous problem is he won't argue out a theory and accept the result of argument.

You watch footage of the discussions and lectures of Einstein and Feynman they didn't avoid questions or objections to there theory they actively went after them like rabid dogs. I watched footage of Einstein and Bohr going at it over atomic
structure they were good friends but boy they argued hard.

Wikipedia records it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohr%E2%80%93Einstein_debates

=> Their debates are remembered because of their importance to the philosophy of science.


They will be remembered because they were brutal and honest science arguments.


So there you have my two requirements for being able to overturn the world of science

- You must understand the theory and implications you seek to overturn
- You must be able to systematically and logically argue against the existing theory in favour of the new one answering all objections to it.


If you could get a layman able to meet those two requirements they probably could do it, the problem is would a layman ever develop those skills without a formal education to develop that ability ... I doubt it


So there you have my long and honest answer Rev and I have 20 min left to waste smile


Originally Posted By: Revlgking

THE CHALLENGE

It is up to all of us, as people--philosophers, including curious children, scientists (especially those here on SAGG) and all creative artists to show the way.



I tried Rev K but like you I do only have so much time to give to lost causes smile

The post ended up so long I doubt anyone will read it which is probably just as well laugh
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/15/13 10:45 AM

ORAC
1.) He is missing understanding and knowledge on large important parts of science in the area he is trying to change.

Actual physics about motion




ORAC ( person who graduate high school )
+ my strait questions about medium problem
( how many enegry light lost in medium above small box can be full of air or Vacuum )


LIGHT >>>> MEDIUM ---- sensor

Marosz - medium = machine that transport energy
not exist machine that have 100% efficiency !!!

One Photon Enery Porion PROBLEM

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


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

Above questions we speak about
Michelson Morley but Brightness of beam Version
in 2012 in Poand I made first test in home



1930 Tolman surface brightness test
( Doppler + inverted Square Law )

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tolman_surface_brightness_test1930


Marosz's test


camera1 ---- R ---- Bulb ----R ---- Camera2 >>>> 30 km/s
..................................P1


My version ( about my own test )
Why camera 1 will register more brightness picture compare to camera 2


Bulb started wave 1 in point 1 ( not exist C+ 30 km/s or C-30 km/s EXIST ONLY C - fact confirmed many times ! )

Below doppler + inverted square law .


camera1 will register more brightness picture
reason is that light is going to camera1 but camera1 also is going opposite to light.

camera 2 will register lower brighntess of bulb ( reason is that at one and the same time camera 2 escape from point 1 camrera1 is going opposite to point 1

Other Problem That I see is mediunm
Medium = Air
Medium = Water

Light exchange hot with medium !!!!
we see that camra1-----Bulb >>>> 30km/s distance is shorter

we see that Bulb ------camera 2 distance is longer >>>> 30 km/s

After I finished test with cameras

first test ( Poland 2012 ) http://youtu.be/XF_npmQ8kGY

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

I prepared Idea new tool how to measure velocity
I need build 3d sensor ( many small photoelemens around master source of light ( Amm) + ( Volt) + stable big battery )




( I want to use "wodore" - hydrogen as a medium ?)


Story of the above image =>
http://io9.com/the-first-image-ever-of-a-hydrogen-atoms-orbital-struc-509684901

I think that on above picture we can see directly relation between electron position and Earth Motion ----> 30 km/s ? or 220 km/s

( Important is laboratory localization , picture time , and angle to velocity's vectors ) How fast is moving microscope during picture ? why we see ellipse ?


Other Problem That I see is mediunm

can we use analogy ?

physics like analogy ? electric wire = medium ?

ELECTRIC ENERGY >>> .........wire....... <<<EL. Energy

I not made above test but wire = medium for electric energy



[img:center]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-FTEj6Y-2f9U/UlOg3Q6y7II/AAAAAAAABM0/tkyYFv7oc4c/s1600/24.JPG[/img]



WHAT IS YOUR MOTION ?
EXIST ZERO MOTION RESPECT TO LIGHT ?

LIGHT SPEED IN AIR = CONSTANT IF ABOVE METODE USE LIGHT AND FINALY WE HAVE MOTION can we say that this motion is constant and absolute !!!

V= distance / time

Mathematic

We can not build function that have relative arguments and give
one and absolute resoult

conclusion - time and distance can not be relative.
THE END OF EVIDENCE

Other Idea and question ?

Light made distance "a" during time T .



Can we evaluate how many new positions had laser in space
during time T?

( each line represent point 1...2...3....4... similar like I showed in above first picture ( Tolman test doppler + inverted square law )


What if Vo = C/2 what if Vo = 1 km/s ?

How huge aberration ?
( 1730 J Bradey) will register rocket's opposite wall.

we can use sensors similar like in photocamera and see
where is the light ( inside rocket must be Vacuum )

What is it aberration ? belwow animation

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6d/Aberrationlighttimebeaming.gif

HOW I STARTED THINK ABOUT AIRPLANE ( MR MACH's model)


NOT EXIST C + 400 km/h
NOT EXIST C + 800 km/h


Airplanes started light in past in point 1 light need short time T for distance Point 1 ---- sensor inside airplane .
during time T airplanes Escape from place where signal started

A1 ----> 400 km/s
A2 ---------------> 800 km/h

P1



During one and the same time in one and the same space
Airplane 2 made 2x longer distance compare to Airplane 1



FIRST STEP TO NEW MORE WIDE CLASSICAL MECHANIC

( exist motion not exist III Newton's Law - If velocity will be biger than Gravitation body's signal we can have perpetuum motion first type !!! ) Einstein not inform people that we can not cross gravitation velocity !!!

below example mass m velocity >Gravitation but the same problem we can measure for lower velocity 30 km/s /// 220 km/s

Mach - first engineer who describe Supersonic Speed problem

( please look on 4 animations left side page below link )
http://www.acs.psu.edu/drussell/Demos/doppler/doppler.html

1 ZERO , 2 sound < , 3 = sound ,4 > sound

Marosz- first person who showed people what will be if mass m will cross Supergravitation speed ( mass m faster than own gravitation)

Mach's equations can describe below problem ( idea owner is Marosz )

1 http://youtu.be/iHMYfYo9cXg

to below model we must add omega mass m ( Bomb it is not good example - Astronomers can use below idea and start look bodies similar to m on sky )

2 http://youtu.be/H8ER7Rr3tvU

Hipergavittional rotation !!!
3 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_DPoFJadyk

DEAR ORAC PLEASE WRITE ONLY ABOUT ABOVE POST

IN PAST BEFORE I STUDY PROBLEM
I WROTE IN WEB MANY STUPID LINKS IT IS NATURAL FACT FOR PEOPLE WHO WORK AND USE OWN HEAD TO DESCRIBE PROBLEM

ABOVE I SHOWING YOU MODEL AND REASON WHY IN MY TEST I CAN RECOGNIZE 30 km/s !!!

PLEASE DESCRIBE YOUR VERSION OF ABOVE PROBLEM !!!

please not speak about quantum and athom build please write about this what I showed above !!!
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/15/13 12:00 PM

I have no intention of wasting more time on this .... I have told you a number of times I don't do classic physics arguments it's all wrong anyhow. The second part of that is you don't want to learn as you say "I don't want to learn you ORAC", you are happy with your level of science so be it.

I have given you what help I can, I know you believe you are right ... so go out an prove it I explained and helped with how.


Just please remember you have a wife and child and a job keep that in your mind at all times over the next few years.


You are unfortunately going to be very disappointed I suspect and most likely will get blocked from all the really good science sites. I know why they will do it but I hope you don't get bitter about it and think it is all a conspiracy ... science has actually been reasonably kind to you.


I understand you don't know why I say all that but all I can do is ask you to study more and be harder on your own ideas than you are currently being ... in science fooling oneself is the easiest thing to do.


I really do wish you well who knows you may be able to one day say that you showed ORAC to be a complete idiot who knows nothing of physics. If however I am right and in a few years from now come back and I will show you why no one took you seriously.


God speed and good luck on your journey BUT NEVER FORGET YOU HAVE A WIFE AND DAUGHTER and be good to then first and foremost.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/15/13 12:26 PM

I have no intention of wasting more time on this .... I have told you a number of times I don't do classic physics arguments it's all wrong anyhow.

DOPPLER EFECTE FOR LIGHT + MAROSZ DISCOVERY


source ---> v1 .......R...... Sensor----> v2


v1 = v2 = V

we not register RED/BLUE

What will register sensor ? ( IVERTED SQUARE LAW)

Sensor will register brightness
brightness will be function R distance and V and power of the source and size of the source !!!




if I not made mistake astronomers can use below functions



YOU WANT TO BUILD QUANTUM COMPUTER ? YOU NEED KNOW PERFECT Hz of waves and relation to constant V

constant V is changing wave Hz
constant V Is inside athom
constant V info will help You "keep spin " in normal temp

You like use microscopes or other optics
( You want to calibrate )
You want to build perfect photocamera ( zero deformation )

You like doube slits experiment ? You want to check ?

Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/15/13 12:56 PM

above Orac = typical exaple
how people NOT STUDY DISCOVERY



1 this man is crayzy he must go sleep

2 we have have in books all what he Discoveried ( nothing new )


3 silent .... it is not my bussnes to support true for free
4 silent ....


5 50 years after Author Die ...

somone open in web and find similar to my idea

... if he live in country where exist cyvilisation and he have many contacts / friends from universities

... if his father has money( Tesla invented radio not Marconi )


what is next step ... prepare good mathemtaic equations
18 000 people in cern will very hard work and made experiment

AND BINGO NOBEL for HIGS

Who was author ?
Who schould get Nobel ? ( 18 000 people in CERN )
Real Athor
or Mathematica and Equations ?

in my link ( below )
I showed many patents that can save many people lives
and what ?

BMW INOVATION CENTER --> we not undrstand how Your UP sky patent Work
( FORD - nice light please try secound market )

http://tesla4.blogspot.com

Thank You for not read my posts ( firemans / policemans can die !!! !
Thank You for not support my discovery we no need
New we like old confirmed bad theories !!!

Leonardo , Copernic , Mach , M...sz ?





Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/15/13 02:51 PM

Rev K gave examples above of people with little education who made a difference in science. Edison was another who off limited education made his mark.

How did they do it ... they listened to arguments against them and worked slowly thru them methodically and for some of them it took years.

See even in your response above it has what we call bad attitude

Maciej Marosz only learns his way or no way.

Look back up above that

Copernic stoped the SUN / Marosz Space Time

Do you really think a serious scientist is going to very impressed by that ... are you trying to offside anyone involved in science before you even say a word.

That's an egotistical thing which shows for some reason you think you are smarter than everyone else .. it only takes a few sentences to work out you aren't.


I have seen the interactions of you with science sites you rarely listen to what they are actually trying to tell you.

Look at your exchange with Andy here

http://www.network54.com/Forum/741048/thread/1367990213/last-1368123331/Winter+and+Summer+(+Doppler+and+Marosz+)+Red-BLue+%2B+LUMENS+per+Steradian

Andy wasted time for you talking to real scientist who gave him one of the real problems for you in classic physics.

He sort of explained you didn't have the doppler right I know why he can't explain that QM problem again. He did however get the next bit right the Planck satellite mission and all it's data says you are wrong.

So what did you do with that objection you ignored it smile

Sorry Maciej Marosz when someone has a problem that big with your theory you analyze your theory against the complaint and see if it's possible you are wrong. If you don't understand it you ask for help to do it .. what you don't do is ignore it.


So lets go to this exchange with primordial
http://cs.astronomy.com/asy/news/f/20/t/56265.aspx

Again he gave you a serious problem which you just ignore. I don't think you even tried to understand what he was saying from your responses and I think he worked that out and stopped talking to you.


What everyone is telling you is these arguments are old like hundreds of years old and you need to be aware science has long since argued it's way thru them. As such you are going to have to expect there will be objections which you can't just ignore draw more pictures and hope it will all go away.


Your exchange here didn't go much better

http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=43880

You tried to tell a scientist something that was blatantly like stupidly blatantly wrong what did you think was going to happen?


I am not doing this to be mean I am showing you that the biggest problem with Maciej Marosz theory at the moment is Maciej Marosz's attitude.


You can't act like that Maciej Marosz you may think you are smart but compared to these people you are not smart

Robittybob1 in the link at the bottom explains the problem
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=43880

=>If you listen to his YouTube videos you get a better idea what he is on about. I tell him where he is wrong, but I wouldn't say he is listening to me either.

People have gone out of there way to listen to what you have to say in the samples above I count 5 people who actually seriously looked at your ideas so if you count me 6.

Six people spent time working thru your picture which wasn't easy and we all think there is a problem and you won't even discuss them you ignore them or worse start insulting them.

That is why I have no intention of going any further with you.

People have given you a reasonable chance to act in a respectful manner given they are spending time on this stuff for free and you are asking for there help and expertise.

When they try and help Maciej Marosz attitude kicks in.

So there you have my answer ... I waste no more time on Maciej Marosz .
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/15/13 07:47 PM

That's an egotistical

YES - Not Exist many people who are able feel this what I alone without lab I take camera and I saw it after three days fight !!!


All what You see In my Page = egoistcal !
http://tesla4.blogspot.com


How many lives save my patents ?
( please ask policemans and firemans and people who work on Highway )

Do You saw my version of the robot for bomb ?

Do You saw AIR FLY TOOLS ?

ART is for each of us ...

I'm sorry but to create You pay huge prize for fly !!! Nobody understand how feel You during create ...and how feel You three day later ...

I want to fly I showed You above very good facts for research play and have fun drink VODKA and make drawings ...

Someone in past ask Picasso : What is the different between ART and simple paint ( Art = That You want to sale this what is Your own - You not painting nothing what people want to buy )
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/15/13 07:57 PM

IF I WILL LIVE AND I WILL SEE THAT SOMONE FROM CAMBRIDGE or OTHER UNIVERSITY copied MY IDEA

I will doo all to show that is COPY ( please keep this forum )


Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/15/13 08:13 PM





Inverted square Law ( Old Greece camera obscura )
J.Bradley berration 1730
Doppler 1842
TOLMAN 1930


2012 Marosz Michelson Morley ( brightness of beam version )
- new compass
- new navigation type ( Internal velocity system )
- new system for airplane velocity
- additional efect for doppler ( constant motion Intensity )
- additional efect for doppler ( Winter Summer on the Earth 66.66 it is not only one reason )

- conastant motion and gravitation mass different
( explain that Einstein can not put inertia mass = gravtation mass ) !!! it works not only for huge speed >G

m----R------M -----> 30 km/s
m----R------M ----------------> 220 km/s

mass m not feel the same gravitation reason is longer apparent distance to mass M also R is important for that efect ( please compare light to gravitation ----INTESITY PROBLEM )

to prove above I can use facts that I showed ( all is in books)


SPECULATION
( I can not proved right now by arguments from books but Mach's Supersonic model is very open IDEA )

- Perpetuum motion first type Idea explain ( body faster than own gravitation ) dark mattery problem ,
- Marosz's Aether self EM Background model





Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/15/13 08:36 PM

LIGHT >>>> MEDIUM ---- sensor

One Photon Enery Porion PROBLEM


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


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


THANK YOU FOR HELP ORAC !!!

camera 1 ---R---- BULB ---R--- camera 2 >>> 30 km/s

How many energy light will lost for medium ?
cam1 and cam 2 ?
What if cam 1 and cam 2 will be perpendicular to 30 km/s ?

Where is BULB's) apparent position during camera 1 register signal ?

Where is BULB's) apparent position during camera 2 register the same signal ?

Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/15/13 08:42 PM

DEAR ORAC PLEASE NOT USE MY OLD LINKS
IT IS NOT NICE SCIENCE METHOD !!!



In past I wrote many stupid words it is natural for somone who read and learn ( You don't know who are people taht You use name and what they knew )

above You have problem and Your ansvers about medium
and question how much energy lost light in medium !

In vacuum also not exist ZERO LOST not exist machine that can transport energy and have zero lost !

Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/16/13 02:59 AM

Originally Posted By: newton
DEAR ORAC PLEASE NOT USE MY OLD LINKS
IT IS NOT NICE SCIENCE METHOD !!!



As I said I am not doing this to be mean but to show you your biggest problem.


Originally Posted By: newton

In past I wrote many stupid words it is natural for somone who read and learn ( You don't know who are people taht You use name and what they knew )


Think hard here and consider what you just said right then.

Is it possible you still haven't leant enough and are still saying things that are very silly and sometime in the future you will look at what you said here like you consider what you said in those links.

How do you know you have learnt enough and are not still being silly?

Maciej Marosz the easiest person to fool is yourself.
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/16/13 03:38 AM

Here is your problem you are insisting I am wrong so I am not going to argue I want you to work it out

Light from our sun does not make it 1000m down in the ocean

http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/light_travel.html

Quote:

Sunlight entering the water may travel about 1,000 meters (3,280 feet) into the ocean under the right conditions, but there is rarely any significant light beyond 200 meters (656 feet).


Star light you see from a star you see at night from a similar sort of sun is 1 billion light years away

So it has travelled 1 000 000 000 years x 365 days * 24 hrs * 60 min * 60 sec * 3E8 speed of light in space

Which is 9,460,800,000,000,000,000,000,000 meters

Attenuation is the classic physics name for energy lost in a media (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attenuation)

Quote:

In physics, attenuation (in some contexts also called extinction) is the gradual loss in intensity of any kind of flux through a medium. For instance, sunlight is attenuated by dark glasses, X-rays are attenuated by lead, and light and sound are attenuated by water.


Calculated the attenuation of space assuming it is a media for me please?

We will assume the light could go no further for simplicity and 1 billion light years in space = 1000m in water for light.

So calculate away please you have all the facts you need, if space were a media and it attenuated you then have a number and units?

So you have a simple problem you are asked to solve lets see if you answer it or post your usual dropkick stupid pictures... I have money on the later.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/16/13 07:54 AM

ORAC
Look at your exchange with Andy here


http://www.network54.com/Forum/741048/th...S+per+Steradian


His expert try explain what is it Doppler RED

"please ask Andy about help You will see milions links about paranolrmal behevior !"

*****************************************************
Marosz

source --->V1 ......R.......sensor ----> V1

V1 = V1
He had nice expert I ask about constant the same motion
and he give me links about red shift ( and many links without sense to my problem )

Orac please read links that You showing what did you lern

1930 Tolman surface brightness test
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tolman_surface_brightness_test



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

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

AS I told You please use above posts on this forum
right now i know that I can not make many posts in many place I must use one two froum max ( quality of the post I'm tired )


Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/16/13 09:21 AM

Not discussing that until you can do one task you are asked to do .. you insist I am wrong let me show you the problem.

I am not interested in your problem at the moment.

If you can answer one question you get to ask one question.

Calculate the efficiency of space per meter.


You say you are a process engineer you must know how to calculate the efficiency per meter ... high school children could do that.


Energy E leaves point (a) it travels x meters where it stops at point (b).


A ------------- x meters ---------------- B


What is the loss per meter ... not a hard question?
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/16/13 09:24 AM

ORAC huge logic person ?

Laser Hz 1/128 000 000
Light during time T made distance "a " ( in rocket vacuum )



TIME T
How many mm made ROCKET = HOW MANY NEW POSITIONS HAD LASER

( apparent positions 1..2..3..4 ) ?


LASER's beam shape problem ? Beam = small part of 3d Ball



Can We use two slits before opposite rocket's wall ?

EXIST ZERO MOTION and NOT ZERO MOTION ? ( 1905)

( how many light and how big area 1730 J. Bradley- aberration)

PEOPLE ARE TO STUPID TO UNDERSTAND ABOVE ?

BELOW MORE HARDER TO UNDERTTAND TEST !!!




USA invest 300 000 000 USD PUBLIC MONEY

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

They can invest next 300 000 000 USD and
never find problem that not exist




Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/16/13 09:56 AM

I have given you a simple problem for you to learn something.

Answer the problem if you do not know how to do the calculation say so and I will show you.

You can't avoid and deflect to some other problem


YOU NEED TO LEARN ... SO LEARN


STOP ACTING LIKE A MENTAL RETARD

AS THIS IS MY THREAD .. ANSWER THE QUESTION OR LEAVE.

You have your own threads this one belongs to me standard forum rules I started it ... so what I want to discuss is what gets discussed.

I have given you a choice and I will ask the moderator to ban any further posts not about what I want to discuss.

It is a democracy you want to discuss something different go make you own thread and you can control what gets discussed.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/16/13 11:10 AM

ORAC
I have given you a simple problem for you to learn something.


ORAC
are You able use "simple problem" that You given me ?
PLEASE PREPARE SIMILAR TO MY DRAWING
PLEASE EXPLAIN ABOVE SITUATION ( FACTS ... please Mr Marosz it is not work because it will be look like this ...)

I'm idiot ? You can or not proove my mistake ?

How old are You ? please use books

for me ( simple Engineer Poland )to evaluate above
we need

Doppler ,
Inverted square law,
1730 J Bradley ,
1930 Tolman brightness test )

Please destroy my model
( You graduate moore nice school I'm only engineer smile ?

let me help You start ...( they all like start like below)

GPS system works so Einsten works !!!
Yeeeee. Einstein was great ... ( good point for start speak )

Next argument
MArosz You are Idiot and You not understand mathematic
I would like to help people like You please study mathemtic
You have nice imagination but Einstein all described

I waiting here smile ...
ask friends ... smile other "idiots" like me ...
ASK mr ANDY and his expert smile
look on my old links ...
We can have many fan here !! anyone want some Popcorn .. !!!

the forum is sponsored by LIGO project
general Investor 300 000 000 USD
for EINSTEIN SRT check
Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/16/13 11:34 AM

As this has degenerated into what I suspected you are either too ashamed or have not the education to be able to do a simple efficiency calculation.

I gave you a chance that I could teach you at least that all you had to do was ask


As callian put it on the other forum

Quote:

Marosz, wi&#281;c mo&#380;na spodziewa&#263; si&#281; naprawd&#281; by&#263; zatrudniony przez nikogo, z tym du&#380;o g&#322;upoty?



Now has this has degenerated into a name calling exercise I suggest we just not communicate.
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/16/13 11:44 AM

ORAC PLEASE SOLVE BELOW BROBLEM ?

Laser Hz 1/128 000 000
Light during time T made distance "a " ( in rocket vacuum )



TIME T
How many mm made ROCKET = HOW MANY NEW POSITIONS HAD LASER

[b]T = 1/ 300 000 sec. ,Vo= 30 km/s rocket's wide 1000 m [/size]


above real nombers TEACH ME PLEASE !!!
I CAN NOT FIND HOW MANY LINES WILL REGISTER SENSORS on ROCKET'S WALL


1930 Tolman Brightness Test
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tolman_surface_brightness_test

( apparent positions and bulb in space 1..2..3..4 ) ?[/b]


Below 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 )





ORAC DO YOU KNOW PHYSICS (1905 )

EXIST ZERO MOTION respect to light ? ( 1905)

PEOPLE ARE TO STUPID TO UNDERSTAND ABOVE ?
WHY THEY LIKE BELOW MORE HARDER TO UNDERTTAND TEST !



USA invest 300 000 000 USD PUBLIC MONEY

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

They can invest next 300 000 000 USD and
They will never find problem that not exist




Posted by: Orac

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/16/13 11:52 AM

Rose as per my email to you could you please delete this thread there is nothing useful in it as we have just a troll which is what I have suspected for some time.

It serves no purpose and it may send a subtle message to the troll
Posted by: newton

Re: LUX says no to most dark matter - 11/16/13 12:00 PM

ABOVE POST = ZERO NEW THEORY

Maciej Marosz author showed only how cooperate

Inverted Square Law
1730 James Bradey ( aberration )
1842 Doppler
1930 Tolman brightness Test

I showed above zero my own Theory ORAC not like read books from secoundary school ( he need repeat ) !!!

How I started read about above facts ?

in 2012 I made in home test ( nobody trust my idea )

camera1 ---- R-----BULB ------R -----Camera2 >>>>>30 km/s

camera 1 in my test in home registered more higher brightness of picture - camera 2 registered more darkness brightness of picture

Without cooperation and more precision test We can not eliminate all problems that can be important for my test.

Mr Orac
Was first person who informed me about Medium Problems
Medium in my opinion can give different resistance to
light ( light lost more energy during trip to camera 2

Light >>> medium ---> 30 km/s <<< Light

camera1 ---- R-----BULB ------R -----Camera2 >>>>>30 km/s

Medium can be also electric wire

El Energy >>> ......wire ......<<< El Energy ---> 30 km/s

We can repeat my test in electric version and measure resistance problem. Electrons has got mass m. Wire's resistance in my opinion has got relation with direction and arrow 30 km/s velocity / 220 km/s ... and XX? km/s ...

XX? - nobody in past made similar test for Earth

Below I present not cofirmed Idea that can be evaluate by electric wire test ( electron has got mass m )

Electrons position in universe ?
( If Erth is moving = electric wire and electrons inside wire have got kinetic energy )

Electric energy must make Work opposite to electron mass m inertia . We can change sign ( +/ - ) and ( -/+)

Can we compare INERTIA resistance to electric resistance ?

to evaluate below situation and recognize symetry and asymetry situation please use classical mechanic :

m = 1kg
Vo = 1m/s respect to virtual zero point ?

ZERO POINT ? it is LOCAL apparent Earth's position
shotr time before start electric test
in my above posts I use point 1..2...3...4...


How many energy cost ?

stop mass m <----- mass

m ------> rise up velocity mass m

to change m velocity from 1m/s to zero we need use 1/2 Joul
to change m velocity from 1m/s to 2m/s we need use 3/2 Joul

Water always goes from moutains to sea level ?
Where are mountain and where is sea level ?
Airpreasure works similar like water !!!

ELECTRIC TEST IDEA ( rocket = Earth )



MASS M POSITION IN THE UNIVERS ( KINETIC ENERGY )

For somone who not read my two three above post below Ytube will loks like simple mistake ( sec school level Idiot )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HWsvZdMBek
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpgZJmbkAmA



Br Maciej Marian Marosz
Poland 2013