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


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

Who's Online
0 registered (), 242 Guests and 5 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
The universes expansion accelleration solved.
by newton
Yesterday at 01:25 AM
3mV VS 2mV ( final Experiment ) THX for Respect
by newton
10/16/17 06:41 AM
Instruction Manual How To brake SYMETRY !
by newton
10/13/17 01:04 PM
Eureca during fast motion mass M become longer!!!
by newton
10/04/17 03:03 PM
Short story about SYMETRY .
by newton
10/04/17 08:13 AM
P=MV neutralizer
by newton
10/02/17 09:53 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
newton 27
Marchimedes 1
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
#49679 - 09/09/13 04:26 AM Doppler RED/BLUE + Apparent Intensity SHIFT
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1194
.
What is it apparent point (important animation )
.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Aberrationlighttimebeaming.gif
.
.
Source ---->Vo ....distance ... Sensor ----->Vo

Vo - respect to apparent point
Body is moving = Body has got apparent point


What is it Apparent intensity SHIFT ?


below picture I copied ( it is map how "we" are moving)




below picture is my own


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-yrD2uFLkznM/Ua6hkakJkII/AAAAAAAAA80/9O4Y-yFYbsY/s1600/222.JPG

Description
Sun and Earth was in past in point 1 .The Sun started ring 1 in point 1 ( light wave = 3D ball ) after short time ( 5- 6 minutes ) Sun and Earth will be in point 4

??? Please study below problem and questins
Ring 1 ( wave 1 ) is traveling ( not exist C+ V )
Before (wave 1) minimal 150 000 000 km distance

What during signal travel is doing Earth and Sun
( please use above velocity map 20 km/s )

What will be after 6 months ( summer ?)

more precision drawing
Doppler Apparent shift + Red /Blue shift

( right now without test I can not add more informations )

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-InKq1jIj_lQ/UbK9Ky47o9I/AAAAAAAAA9Q/mBhe5uzSBwQ/s1600/F2.JPG


MY FIRST TEST IN HOME

FIRST PROTOTYPE WAS VERY CHEAP !!!
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Ncyo7TBLsjE/UVRty4WVV4I/AAAAAAAAAwo/ol2p-tM6KpE/s1600/maroszAD.JPG

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


CLASSICAL MECHANIC AND APPARENT POINT PROBLEM

Each body in the univrse is moving = Each body (planets) has got own Apparent point ( virtual point )

A point = zero mass ( it is virtual point )
A point = stationary point in the universe
zero kinetic energy master
( this point is not moving we are sure )

Very important paragraph in books ( physics - fundaments )

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

Please imagine below situation

Rocket 1 ------> 10 m/s ( respect to apparent point )

Rocket 2 ---------------> 20 m/s (respect to apparent point )

Rocket 3 -> 0,1 m/s (respect to apparent point )

Inside rocket we have a person . The person stated walk from rocket Rear to Front

How many energy need person inside R1 ,R2 and R3 please prepare kinetic parabola graph respect to apparent point

Galileo's problem and apparen point = zero kinetic energy
http://youtu.be/1HWsvZdMBek
http://youtu.be/zpgZJmbkAmA


ERNEST MACH VS classical Newton
http://youtu.be/MrHymMYT9Qg

I wait for people from Universities above and below link to many very nice test - before Us many job to do. Mr Mach was great engineer. We can step by step repeair physics and separate mathematica illusion from real Universe

I live in small polish town ( it is for me getto 25 % people without job ) I dream start research NEW physics and cooperate with many people in LAB below target
for next 50 years tests ( I'm good enginner I can prepare many usefull tool for team in lab ) I wait for any proposition cooperate --- +48 690 091 398

Br Maciej Marosz
Enginner and Inventor - not only physics I love design
http://tesla4.blogspot.com


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







Edited by newton (09/09/13 04:43 AM)

Top
.
#49683 - 09/09/13 02:38 PM Re: Doppler RED/BLUE + Apparent Intensity SHIFT [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Why would any scientist test this dribble of yours.

Here want me to disprove your dribble and rubbish with one image



Do you get how stupid your whole idea is and how simply testable it is ... smart people in the dark ages worked out how to test it.

So a smart person in the dark ages shows more intelligence than you are currently showing.

If the forces don't exactly balance the glass in the image above will fall. You can drive the little vehicle around any direction you like the glass will stay there it is a standard student robotics control exercise at uni.

The above image has a name ... lets see if you can work out what it's called.

There is a reason for getting you to find out it's name because this year an extremely accurate version of the above test was done in the quantum mechanics and there was a big reason it was done.

Try learning and following evidence rather than dribbling garbage it helps make one look less stupid.


Edited by Orac (09/09/13 02:48 PM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#49685 - 09/09/13 03:05 PM Re: Doppler RED/BLUE + Apparent Intensity SHIFT [Re: Orac]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
I should add some clever robotic engineers recently extended to trick to quadcopters throwing and recatching it

_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#49686 - 09/09/13 04:14 PM Re: Doppler RED/BLUE + Apparent Intensity SHIFT [Re: newton]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1194
Below expeiment in lab

Inertia and ball
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTLlpDD_1-M&feature=share&list=UU_2DOamWZpLDZF8H1uYvyUg

Glass and inertia forces

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ow-cgHAfNI&feature=share&list=UU_2DOamWZpLDZF8H1uYvyUg


Can You use Newton :):):) please evaluate forces ( above idea right now we have in F1 susspension ( Kowary Poland 50 km from my city ) Please remember about Newton smile smile

I will give You one question ?
what is it inertia

respect to what You want to measure Your inertia ?


Inertia = resistance to Your finger ? that give mass m



ball ---Vo--> < Me ( I'm ready to push opposit ball )

............^
...........You are ready
to push perpendicular to ball

Who will push and feel biger resistance ( You or Me )

( To help You please ask small lady that like Aikido !!!
she will explain you that perpendicula direction and huge man
fly like a birth )

What is it Inertia ??? ( You can not find one good definition in books )


Vo respect to apparent point is important not respect to Earth or Sun !!!

Top
#49690 - 09/09/13 05:35 PM Re: Doppler RED/BLUE + Apparent Intensity SHIFT [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
If you stop and read carefully you may learn something

Inertia is simply the conservation of a current state ... it can be expressed that simply.

You think of it in motion terms but Quantum mechanics tells you the principle goes far far beyond the garbage you are dealing with in motion.

The glass on the buggy is called an inverted pendulum and strangely enough you can do the same trick with quantum mechanics

http://phys.org/news/2013-08-quantum-inverted-pendulum-scheme-dynamically.html

You can also do a variation of the trick with thermodynamics.

This is telling you that INERTIA HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MOTION it is a far more general law.

You basic problem is you think that classic physics somehow works IT DOESN'T it has been known to be wrong for 100 years we only teach it at school because it's suitable for most layman problems and much simpler than the alternative.

Why they did the Quantum Mechanics version of the inertia test is because of this idea.

http://www.technologyreview.com/view/419...-inertial-mass/


The discovery of the Higgs particle means you live in a universe that can be described by Quantum Mechanics and inertia needs to resolve in that description as well as in the trivial classic physics world.

YES the Higgs particle also has a role in all this garbage you are discussing ... try starting here

http://profmattstrassler.com/articles-and-posts/the-higgs-particle/the-higgs-faq-2-0/


Are you beginning to see the scale of the issues yet Newton?

The scale of the problem you are dealing with across multiple areas of science and you somehow think anyone is going to accept your stupid child interpretation of classic physics ... are you really that crazy?

Everyone will ignore you because you won't even attempt to understand the scale of the problem and you think anyone cares about classic physics which we already know is wrong ... you look like a stupid child because you act like one, repeating silly ideas that aren't remotely feasible.


Edited by Orac (09/09/13 05:44 PM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#49691 - 09/09/13 06:40 PM Re: Doppler RED/BLUE + Apparent Intensity SHIFT [Re: newton]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1194

Thank You for post ( I understand and respect Your words )


very slowly can we speak about below example ?


a- apparent point

(m)---pipe---(m) ------> Vo


You .... and.... Me we look on masses m
( vo respect to a point )


Inside pipe we have ideal explosive material 1 jules ( master )
(equal forces work on each mass m ( zero friction inside pipe )


You and me see situation after short time ( many people confirmed and I'm sure V1=V1

<----V1- (m) .....pipe ...... (m) -V1----->

ok

My question how many % of energy from 1 joul took Your mass
and how many % took my mass


50% / 50 % ? ( impossible ? why impossible ?)

please take a pencil make kinetic parabola graph respect to apparent point ( apparent point = stationary point for any bodies in the universe )

before explosion pipe and masses inside pipe have Vo velocity
after explosion

V2= Vo-V1 and V3= Vo+V1

How big Delta E take left mass and right mass



very easy test ( red / blue ) air cappacity shift
do You understand that I know that V1 = V1 problem is how many energy cost symetry situation

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-3EPlifUKbIQ/UZ...oppler+ROOT.JPG



****
Homework star question ?

what if Vo = 2 m/s ( respect to apparent point )
and V1 = 2m/s

(Your mass absolute stop ) My mass change velocity from

Top
#49692 - 09/09/13 06:41 PM Re: Doppler RED/BLUE + Apparent Intensity SHIFT [Re: newton]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1194
Thank You for post ( I understand and respect Your words )


very slowly can we speak about below example ?


a- apparent point

(m)---pipe---(m) ------> Vo

You .... and.... Me

we look on masses m
( vo respect to apparent point ) but we don't know Vo


Inside pipe we have perfect explosive material 1 joul ( master )
(equal forces work on each mass ( zero friction inside pipe )

You and me see ideal symetry situation after short time
( many people confirmed symetry and I'm sure V1=V1 )

<----V1- (m) .....pipe ...... (m) -V1----->

ok

My question how many % of energy from 1 joul took Your mass
and how many % took my mass


50% / 50 % ? ( impossible ? why impossible ?)

please take a pencil make kinetic parabola graph respect to apparent point ( apparent point = stationary point for any bodies in the universe )

before explosion pipe and masses inside pipe have Vo velocity
after explosion

V2= Vo-V1 and V3= Vo+V1

How big Delta E take left mass and right mass



very easy test ( red / blue ) air cappacity shift
do You understand that I know that V1 = V1 problem is how many energy cost symetry situation

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-3EPlifUKbIQ/UZ...oppler+ROOT.JPG



****
Homework star question ?

what if Vo = 2 m/s ( respect to apparent point )
and V1 = 2m/s for person that is inside coordination system
roped with pipe

(Left mass absolute stop ) Right mass change velocity from 2 m/s to 4 m/s

explosive material has got 8 joules
mass m = 1kg

Left mass took 2 joules right mass took 6 joules ????

Am I right ???? or exist other solution ?


Edited by newton (09/09/13 06:48 PM)

Top
#49693 - 09/10/13 12:27 AM Re: Doppler RED/BLUE + Apparent Intensity SHIFT [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

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

Am I right ???? or exist other solution ?


WRONG ... TOTALLY

Again you are being na´ve .... Here you want me to dumb the test down for you.

You are in a plane and you throw a ball forward or backward does it make a difference?????? .... try it!!!!

NO ... IT DOES NOT ... IT'S THE SAME AS THROWING IT ON EARTH !!!!!!!


Why do you think an explosion in a pipe is any different ... because you are failing to grasp the obvious.

You are taking your energy to a stationary reference frame and not doing the maths correctly ... YET AGAIN YOU FAIL AT MATHS.


ARE YOU GETTING THIS YOU ARE WRONG AND MAKING A MISTAKE AND REPEATING IT OVER AND OVER WILL NOT MAKE IT RIGHT!!!!!

IT IS THE SAME MISTAKE ... MISTAKE + MISTAKE + MISTAKE is still wrong.


Lets go beyond your silly classic physics experiments and see if I can open your eyes.

I answered your question I want you to answer my question now and I want you to just answer the question stop posting examples and just have a simple discussion.


DO YOU REALISE CLASSIC PHYSICS IS WRONG AND CAN'T BE MADE RIGHT NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO, EVEN IF I ACCEPT YOUR WRONG MATHS IT SOLVES NOTHING?

Hint: Einstein started the problem but it has nothing to do with relativity but it is why we care little about your experiments they are pointless. I need you to grasp the problem goes way beyond what you are thinking.

Bigger hint:http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110405/full/news.2011.210.html


Edited by Orac (09/10/13 01:07 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#49694 - 09/10/13 03:36 AM Re: Doppler RED/BLUE + Apparent Intensity SHIFT [Re: Orac]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Okay I thought long and hard about this and decided to give the answer rather than make you work thru to it


The problem you are trying to work out is create a reference frame in classic physics ... it is pointless and I shall explain why.


The universe has another much more correct set of rules and descriptions which is Quantum mechanics and that description tells you classic physics is wrong and gives you ways to fix it.


QM has the same problem as classic physics in that it needs a reference frame only things aren't solid like in your imaginary solid classic world.


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


Quote:

Despite different name and treatment, a quantum reference frame still share much of the notions with a reference frame in classical mechanics. It is still defined with the same definition. It is still always associated to some physical system. And it is still always relational.



In Laymans terms:

QM has to be relational there is no choice because there is nothing solid to anchor a zero reference frame in, which is what you are desperately trying to do.

As the QM universe and your classic universe are the same thing QM more explicitly tells you why there can be no zero reference frame.


So you may think you are up against Einstein which you are but you are also up against QM because what you want to do in creating a zero reference frame is instantly falsifiable in QM.


So it is important you understand that if you try to create a zero reference frame it's not just Einstein you have problems with but particle physics and QM.

I am going to be sort of layman friendly and say Einstein doesn't have to be explicitly correct but any replacement has to be a RELATIVE THEORY you can not have zero reference frames because you can falsify that in the other two science fields.

The classic mathematics in your problem is just numbers that may make you feel like you can prove or disprove things but you need to understand that classic physics is a horrible simplification that inevitably breaks down if you look at it too hard ... all you are proving to yourself is that problem.

GET IT .. PHYSICS LAWS HAVE TO BE RELATIVE FOR QM AND PARTICLE PHYSICS TO HOLD


In looking for a zero reference frame you are looking for a pot of gold at the bottom of a rainbow and the two situations are exactly the same. The solid classic world is an illusion as is the rainbow and you want an absolute point on the illusion and refuse to accept it can't exist.

That is why scientists ignore you and treat you like a nutcase because you fail to do enough reading and learning to even understand the magnitude of your problem in your theory you insist is right.

Please tell me that some of this is getting thru and you are beginning to see the problem you face ... ABSOLUTE SPACE IS DEAD AND BURIED.


Edited by Orac (09/10/13 03:50 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#49695 - 09/10/13 05:22 AM Re: Doppler RED/BLUE + Apparent Intensity SHIFT [Re: Orac]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1194
.Ok
thank You that You read my post and You use Your own brain

Now we understant the problem ( I'm not idiot that think that we can measure asymetry of montion )

problem is how to evaluate how many energy need mass left and mass right for the same motion )

m -----pipe -----m ---> ( If exist velocity like show arrow)

mass LEFT will slown down after explosion
mass Right wiill accelerate after explosion

situation after explosion


<----V1 m .....Earth ...... m V1 ----- >


IF WE WILL MAKE THE SAME TEST BUT PERPENDICULAR PIPE
to Velocity arrow we can 100% be sure that
50% explosive energy will take mass m left and 50% mass m right

WHY because Inertia forces ( resistance that give mass m to dynamite is equal )


Ball -----> ............<<<<< child 1

the same Ball

Ball ----->
...............^
...............^
...............^
...............^
........... child 2

ASK SOMONE WHO LIKE AIKIDO ABOUT BELOW (we can measure below )

More Easy is push the ball perpendicular to velocity arrow
child 1 must invest more biger forces to have at the same time
the same velocity change
Child 2 have better situation very easy he can push the ball own finger ( reason is kinetic energy that have small ball )




Absolute zero not exist ? Yes we can not see zero smile
what mean zero if not exist zero not exist perendicular direction !!! to not zero montion ??? !!!


I was in point 1 --> I'm in point 2 ----> I will be in point 3

apparent point 1 ,2,3,4, .... exist ?
Yes

Below I showing doppler for light ( not my own picture )

apparent point 1 the source was in point 1 and started ring 1

point 2 , Ideal ring 2 , Ideal ring 3 ( C respect to Apparent point in all #3D direction ( rings = 3D Balls )

(NOT EXIST C+ V! so we not see ellipse on that drawing )




Apparent point ? I know that body was in that point
this point is not moving this point exist and is virtual
zero mass zero energy ONLY INDEX ( like zero in mathematica - without zero mathematica not exist -- without apparent point physics is flat and we don't know what is the time , what is our mass , main dimenssion )


You --- 300 000 km ---Bulb -----300 000k m --- me -----> 1m/s

Light need 1sec for above distance IF only rocket absolute not move Your and My Eyes will register the same brightness of bulb

below picture explain what is it brightness



CLASSICAL MECHAINIC IS NOT IMPORTANT ?

read below paragrapf is inside each book ( physics )
open Your book please find below paragraph in quantum mechanic

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

I don't know nothing ?
I must make many experiments and test then I will be sure


Edited by newton (09/10/13 05:26 AM)

Top
#49696 - 09/10/13 06:19 AM Re: Doppler RED/BLUE + Apparent Intensity SHIFT [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
DID YOU READ A WORD I WROTE AT ALL?

Originally Posted By: newton

CLASSICAL MECHAINIC IS NOT IMPORTANT ?


NOT ONLY IS IT NOT IMPORTANT CLASSIC MECHANICS IS WRONG .... WE KNOW IT IS!!!!!!!!

Why would I bother reading your post when you won't take 10 seconds to realize that science already knows that everything in classic physics is wrong.

DO YOU GET YOUR EXPERIMENT IS POINTLESS THERE CAN NOT BE ABSOLUTE SPACE YOU CAN'T CHANGE THAT NO MATTER WHAT YOUR RESULT.

There is nothing really to discuss your physics doesn't even describe the real universe.

Explain please Newton why you won't try to understand what I am telling you and comment specifically on this question.

NEWTON DO YOU REALIZE CLASSIC MECHANICS IS WRONG?

Yes all the stuff they taught you at school is a simplification it doesn't really work like that.


Edited by Orac (09/10/13 06:27 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#49700 - 09/10/13 01:47 PM Re: Doppler RED/BLUE + Apparent Intensity SHIFT [Re: Orac]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
LET ME TRY AND EXPLAIN THIS ONCE AND FOR ALL AND PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY

In classical physics, motion is continuous. Motion is the varying position of something with respect to time. Newton's laws describe it.


In quantum mechanics, there is no motion in that sense. You have two observed positions at different times, but no knowledge of what happened in between. The wave functions describing position and momentum are continuous though. But the object itself does not move smoothly on a classical path it simply is an illusion of observation in the same way the frames of a TV picture appear to show motion.


Classic physics is wrong the scientists worked that out back at the turn of the 19th century with the double slit experiment showing the wave behavior of matter.

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

Read from article=>Matter waves were first experimentally confirmed to occur in the Davisson-Germer experiment for electrons, and the de Broglie hypothesis has been confirmed for other elementary particles. Furthermore, neutral atoms and even molecules have been shown to be wave-like.

We have shown large molecules of 144 atoms (phthalocyanine (C32H18N8) and derivative molecules (C48H26F24N8O8)) can pass thru both slits simultaneously .... solid matter is an illusion or rainbow if you like.

The solid world isn't solid at all it is an illusion of our mind and humanity.


We have shown it beyond doubt with all the many amazing QM experiments that are routinely done.


Now QM also tells you there is no zero reference frame there can not be one because you are dealing with a wave


So do you understand why you can't use classic physics to solve the absolute space problem the universe doesn't even remotely work like what classic physics says it just a good approximation to match our human illusion.

It would be like me telling you I have an experiment to show that a rainbow has absolute space relationship. Even layman adults but not children can usually quickly work out that is ridiculous. That's the joke about the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow smile

If you want it in simple terms it is like you trying to tell me that TV is a real universe even though I can show you the images frame by frame and there is nothing alive and I can even make it go backwards.


See what I am trying to explain Newton what you think you can prove is impossible to prove in classic physics because classic physics isn't remotely like how the universe works.

No classical experiment can tell you about absolute space and that was what was confusing to all the old scientists and the trap you are falling into.

Do you see why you look like a child with a rainbow Newton? laugh


Edited by Orac (09/10/13 03:07 PM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#49701 - 09/10/13 06:18 PM Re: Doppler RED/BLUE + Apparent Intensity SHIFT [Re: newton]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1194
Below Problem that we have !!!

Einstein reasoned that there is no stationary hitching post in the universe relative to which motion should be measured. Instead, all motion is relative and all frames of reference are arbitrary. A spaceship cannot measure its speed relative to empty space, but only relative to other objects. If, for example, spaceship A drifts past spaceship B in empty space, spaceman A and spacewoman B will each observe only the relative motion. From this observation each will be unable to determine who is moving and who is at rest, if either.

This is a familiar experience to a passenger in a car at rest waiting for the traffic light to change. If you look out the window and see the car in the neighboring lane start to move backward, you may find to your surprise that the car you observe is really at rest and the car you are in is moving forward, or vice versa. If you could not see out the windows, there would be no way to determine whether your car was moving with constant velocity or was at rest.

How To solve above problem ????

Please imagine huge spaceship
(below idea explain later I wiil show how to use dark filtre and photocamera and simulate long distance)


************Big spaceship "solaris " *******************
sensor1---150mln km--- Bulb -----150mln km ---- sensor2
*****************************************************

------> <-------( absolute montion direction and arrow )

Please turn on and turn off bulb ( 1 secound signal only )
(Not exist C+V and not exist C-V )!!!!

If we are moving we have only two options
----V?---> this direction or opposite <----V?----

FACT 1
Light need time T = 5-6 minutes
for distance L = 150 000 000 km

FACT 2
Each source give beam that have some angle



If above huge rocket is moving and not exist C+V and not exist C-V
( Below animation expalin apparent point in Vacuum )

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


sensor 1 and sensor 2 will never register the same brightness

What is it brightness and why distance is important for brightness?




First test POLAND 2012




LIGHT CAN NOT BE AT TWO DIFFERENT PLACE IN ONE TIME AND HAVE THE SAME BEAM ANGLE !!!

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

I made in home very simply test (Modern Physic ---> it is impossible recognize ----> Me Marosz I can measuer You can repeat my test ) 220 km/s and 30 km/s and perpendicular direction to velocity ( 0 km/s )


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

About classical mechanic after I finished my test I started think about classical mechanic interpretation

I think that Pendulum not change position respet to Earth own rotation because Each body in the universe has got own special velocity and own special apparent point ( I call this inertia )

for Me ( I can make mistake I don't know I only think right now )mass m = constant we can not change mass m
Velocity rise up = inertia rise up not mass rise up

What is It inertia ? kinetic energy and AVERAGE Gravitation forces ( Mr Mach told that when you moving small mass on your table The universe feel your move -- average ravitation forces exist between universe and small mass m in your room )


BR MACIEJ MAROSZ
engineer and Inventor ( not Idiot )
my design - machine work ? ---> http://tesla4.blogspot.com/


I never study quantum for me it is to hard to understand
I like simple machine ( car engine , vehicle ) I use my photocamera to test because I during play with my daugter
i made strange picture I was my motivation for test

Top
#49702 - 09/11/13 01:11 AM Re: Doppler RED/BLUE + Apparent Intensity SHIFT [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

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

I never study quantum for me it is to hard to understand
I like simple machine ( car engine , vehicle ) I use my photocamera to test because I during play with my daugter
i made strange picture I was my motivation for test


Hence you can not understand that it is not just Einstein you are against it is QM.

QM is not that hard you can read around the more complicated mathematics which is just a formalization of the proofs.

There are millions of experiments that show QM is correct and as it describes the same universe as classic world and it explains why there can be NO ABSOLUTE SPACE and NO ZERO REFERENCE we accept Einstein is right or at least more right.


As you are trying to prove ABSOLUTE SPACE which no amount of classic experiments can prove because it is wrong I will simply ignore you the same as why all scientists do the same.


All mechanical and classical experiments will work up to certain limits on earth and you can use them for daily problems but you can't extend them into space or use them to try and explain the universe where they fail badly.


Good luck finding the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.


Edited by Orac (09/11/13 01:26 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#49703 - 09/11/13 03:56 AM Re: Doppler RED/BLUE + Apparent Intensity SHIFT [Re: newton]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1194
Dear Orac
thank You for speak on this forum ( Your model "recombintion" and my model )

Here is map prepared by astonomers not My own



Here is my test ( bulb = the SUN)

Earth -----150.mln-----SUN------------------EARTH ----> 20km/s
summer.......................................Winter



( FACTS from BOOKS not my own --- PHYSICS )

here is apparent point definition WIKI
( animation explain that not exist C+V and C-V in Vacuum !!! )
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Aberrationlighttimebeaming.gif


how look light's beam from the sun ( Luminosity def.)



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

OK ? here we have doppler definition ( rings = 3d ball (luminosity ) + not exist C+V and C-V ( apparent point animation in VACUUM !!! ) )

The SUN = SOURCE Earth = SNENSOR




HERE YOU HAVE MY TEST IN HOME

main idea how it work ?



FIRST TEST ( east west line pictures )

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

I also set camera 220 km/s and ( perpeddicular to velocity )

I'm absolutly sure that we can repeat my test inside rocket
( windowless spaceship )

Impossible problem to solve for Mr Einstein



Ultra precision test


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

DOPPLER = RED /BLUE and new fact !!! ( We have DISTANCE PROBLEM - MAROSZ's APPARENT point and LUMINOSITY SHIFT )




GRAVITATION APPARENT POINT SHIFT

( stronger gravitation - lover gravitation )




BR
Dear Orac Your IDEA about RECOMBINATION = also discovery
if is true ( WE HAVE AETHER )!!! think about it ...

about above test blogs
http://solarsytemspeed.blogspot.com/

perpendicular test
http://maroszad.blogspot.com/

I need study quantum I wiil go and buy some books ....






Edited by newton (09/11/13 04:22 AM)

Top
#49704 - 09/11/13 12:33 PM Re: Doppler RED/BLUE + Apparent Intensity SHIFT [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

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

I need study quantum I wiil go and buy some books ....


Here let me save you some money ... this is a reasonable enough introduction to quantum mechanics for layman no mathematics and not very hard to understand

http://www.quantumintro.com/

Initially the wave properties of matter are very unsettling because it is natural for humans to make the world solid and the human mind is great at fooling us

Which of the two yellow lines is longer ... measure them on screen with a ruler smile



Edited by Orac (09/11/13 12:36 PM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#49706 - 09/11/13 03:43 PM Re: Doppler RED/BLUE + Apparent Intensity SHIFT [Re: newton]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1194
Below Example will Kill Your brain I wait for Your post

..Bulb..<---300 000 km ------> sensor 1
.............................................
.....You inside big spaceship .....( zero windows)...........
.............................................
Sensor2.<------300 000 km ---> Bulb

Exist Motion ???

------------------> or opposite direction <-----------------

Light need 1 sec. to touch the sensor 1
Light need 1 sec. to touch the sensor 2

I know that You are moving I don't know velocity but I know that You are moving inside the universe

please turn on and off bulbs (0,001 sec long impulse )

please see animation apparent point definition ( books )
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Aberrationlighttimebeaming.gif

how light from bulbs is going (beam's shape )



THE LIGHT SPEED IS ABSOLUTE !!!
Not exist C+ Your rocket velocity !!!!

Orac I want to know Your opinion
During light is going to front and rear Are You moving ?

how sensors regiser brightness



a ) absolute stationary rocket
b ) 10 m/s ---------->
c) c/2 ----------->
d) <-------------- 10 m/s ( other direction)
e) You are moving but perpendicular to light from bulb


DO YOU SEE DIFFERENT a,b,c,d,e situation
please explain me how and why senror 1 and sensor 2 not register the same brighntess in situation b),c),d),e)
can You evaluate "SIGN" of the motion or perpendicular direction


BR more about my patents http://tesla4.blogspot.com/
about my test http://solarsytemspeed.blogspot.com/


Edited by newton (09/11/13 03:50 PM)

Top
#49707 - 09/12/13 12:09 AM Re: Doppler RED/BLUE + Apparent Intensity SHIFT [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Newton I already know the answer to your problem it is easy to answer when you know how and you won't listen ... I can even tell you the maths to fix your problem.

Repeating the same crap over and over won't convince me.

You simply refuse to look at your big problem .... look at your example on a different scale.

Take your problem down to a single atom ... think about it.

You have made space and motion absolute.

How does a single atom resist forces if space and motion are absolute?????

When you make something move the atom would experience the forces of motion differently is what you are saying?

So why doesn't the atom simply collapse when you push on it how does it generate a force relative to the centre of the atom???????


Lets extend the problem for you.


An electron you probably imagine as a small particle circling around an atom centre. That particle has mass you probably even know that.


So now your thought problem when you quickly accelerate a solid why don't all the electrons end up at one end.

Think about that if you are standing in a bus and it moves off to fast you lose your balance towards the back of the bus so surely an electron must suffer the same problem?


Your problem you are trying to work out is most pronounced for an atom so take your problem down to an atom scale.

Now try and think about your same experiments.

The problem you always end up with is historic electrons and bits of the atom should either fly of into space or the atom should collapse instantly.

This is why the absolute space and force question is most pronounced in the QM world because the centre of each atom is somehow able to act as a reference frame for the atom.

Think how ridiculous that is from what you are trying to do that the centre of each and every tiny atom can create it's own reference frame against the backdrop of the whole universe?


This is the problem that Einstein and many others were working on they only increased the scale to deal with large objects later.

Originally Posted By: newton
Below Example will Kill Your brain I wait for Your post


I am sorry I don't find it remotely confusing it is trivial to solve as does any scientist ... you are the only one who can see a problem.

See this is what I don't get you admit you find QM hard so you already realize you aren't as smart as many scientists. Yet for some reason you think you are smarter than scientists who already understand what you are doing wrong but won't listen to there answer.

To a scientist you look like a stupid child because you can't see the glaringly obvious problem in your own answer and I have given you the answer multiple times.

The answer for the last time because you seem to have mental issues, not meaning to be rude but it is frustrating how you can't see the glaringly obvious

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_energy#Kinetic_energy_of_rigid_bodies

Originally Posted By: your answer

Thus the kinetic energy of a system is lowest with respect to center of momentum reference frames, i.e., frames of reference in which the center of mass is stationary (either the center of mass frame or any other center of momentum frame). In any other frame of reference there is additional kinetic energy corresponding to the total mass moving at the speed of the center of mass. The kinetic energy of the system in the center of momentum frame is a quantity which is both invariant (all observers see it to be the same) and is conserved (in an isolated system, it cannot change value, no matter what happens inside the system).


Do what it tells you to do and you suddenly find your great mystery that only you see goes away.

Originally Posted By: Newton

Orac I want to know Your opinion
During light is going to front and rear Are You moving ?


There is no point in answering any more of your questions which are easy to answer because you won't listen and you jump all over the place.

You think there are multiple answers to your problem. The problem is if you chose an answer you must apply that answer to the same problem at different scales and then your whole universe blows up or collapses.

Until you stop posting the same garbage over and over and discuss one problem from start to finish at all scales and the implications it is pointless.

Now I have wasted enough time of this garbage and you refuse to listen so please don't address any more questions to me I am fast getting beyond interested because you are a nutcase who won't listen and do things logically.


Edited by Orac (09/12/13 12:33 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#49708 - 09/12/13 05:04 AM Re: Doppler RED/BLUE + Apparent Intensity SHIFT [Re: newton]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1194
ATOM GOOD QUESTION


Distance and gravitation forces ???

Earth-------Sun -----------------Eearth

Gravitation feel Apparent point position ????
this the reason why we have famous parabola ???

( below )

Earth------SUN---------------Earth ---> 20 km/s
..........Point1

each "*" = 1 minute

******Earth------SUN---------------Earth ---> 20 km/s
..........Point1


m-------M --------> motion

M-------m --------> motion

This a prblem for newton gravitation Eguation
Absolute montion change distance !!!!

Important is where signal started
how fast signal is moving respect to point where was HUGE mass M and where huge mass M started signal

Apparent point and we need change famous equation
Motion is in every bodies Respect to apparent point

NEWTON ---? GALLILEO ?

BR
THINK ABOUT GRAVITATION SIGNAL and 150 000 000 km distance
ARE WE MOVING ???? YES 20 km/s please use fact that gravitation have some velocity and need some time for distance !!! 150 000 000 km distance !!!

Earth------SUN---------------Earth -----> 20 km/s
..........Point1

each "*" = 1 minute

******Earth------SUN---------------Earth -----> 20 km/s
..........Point1

Winter and SUMMER position DO YOU UNDERSTANDE PROBLEM !!!
CLASSICAL MECHANIC = HUGE BODY MODEL
AFTER HUGE MODEL WE CAN SPEAK ABOUT SMALL THAT WE CAN NOT SEE

ATHOM
e-----C-------------e --------> Motion

C -center
e- electron

You know why we have ellipse shape ?


COPERNICUS STOPED THE SUN
MAROSZ STOPED THE SPACE

POLAND vs REST of THE WORLD 2/0 !!!!

To explain SKY mechanic very important is also THERMAL
shape change

I was looking in many books ( nobody describe that Half of the Earth is more HOT and hot body is more bigger please add to above self rotation ) ... this is the topic for many many posts .... other post about athom ?? who know :):)


Edited by newton (09/12/13 05:09 AM)

Top
#49709 - 09/12/13 12:14 PM Re: Doppler RED/BLUE + Apparent Intensity SHIFT [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

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


ATHOM
e-----C-------------e --------> Motion

C -center
e- electron

You know why we have ellipse shape ?




ROFL ... you know the atom is not elliptical right.

See how crazy you are .. is there no stupidity you won't make up to save your theory laugh


Here is an image of the hydrogen atom 1 electron, 1 proton

It was filmed on earth and guess what no ellipse .. QM even correctly predicted the exact orbital and it has for each and every atom in the periodic table.

There is a deeper problem your atom is like a Bohr atom model and you have to answer the stability problem ... which goes like this

WHAT STOPS THE ATOM COMPLETELY COLLAPSING ... IT CAN BECOME AN ELLIPSE ... AGAINST WHAT IS IT PUSHING TO STOP TOTAL COLLAPSE laugh

Your theory FAILED yet again ... think that's about what 7 or 8 times .. we don't allow 1 as scientists!!!!



Story of the image => http://io9.com/the-first-image-ever-of-a-hydrogen-atoms-orbital-struc-509684901


Anyhow you did make me laugh for the day.


I still don't get why you don't ask a scientist to explain all the evidence against your theory and try to work through each of the problems rather than look ever more silly.


Edit: Incase you do decide you actually want to learn you will note that QM theory of predicting atomic orbitals accuracy is rigorously tested usually by predictions like new elements and how to make them. Starting to see the mountain your theory has to get over, Einstein and relativity are the least of your theories problems.

http://phys.org/news80226997.html


Edited by Orac (09/12/13 01:16 PM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >



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

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

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

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