Notices
Results 1 to 80 of 80
Like Tree4Likes
  • 1 Post By Paleoichneum
  • 1 Post By SpeedFreek
  • 1 Post By pyoko
  • 1 Post By Strange

Thread: Compare sound wave speed / light/radio / and gravitation

  1. #1 Compare sound wave speed / light/radio / and gravitation 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    PLESE READ BELOW PDF
    ( copy link in new window )

    www.maroszvsnewton.cba.pl/start.pdf

    I want to know Your opinion aftre read start.pdf

    What You think below pdf is true or mistake
    (copy link in new window )

    www.maroszvsnewton.cba.pl/new4.pdf

    Can we measure like this or my experiment it is mistake one big mistake ?
    my drawing mean mistake ?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Western US
    Posts
    2,844
    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post
    PLESE READ BELOW PDF
    ( copy link in new window )

    www.maroszvsnewton.cba.pl/start.pdf

    I want to know Your opinion aftre read start.pdf

    What You think below pdf is true or mistake
    (copy link in new window )

    www.maroszvsnewton.cba.pl/new4.pdf

    Can we measure like this or my experiment it is mistake one big mistake ?
    my drawing mean mistake ?
    Your links don't work.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by tk421 View Post
    Your links don't work.
    But I'm betting the content of those files is 100% wrong. Just a hunch.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    Tesla2

    We have proven, repeatedly, with highly sophisticated apparatus, many many times, that the speed of light is isotropic.

    You cannot measure your speed using a light source in your own frame of reference.

    There is no such thing as absolute speed. Speed is RELATIVE.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    ( Michelson Molrley proof that we can't write ( not C+ rocket velocty ) ALWAYS only light velocity C
    I not write below about velocity

    ***************************************
    person from rocket can say :
    *********************************

    1 I know point where I sent light signal ( TRUE/FALSE ) ?

    2 I know signal direction ( orientation to rocket ) (TRUE/FALSE ) ?

    3 I know signal velocity ( Michelson Molrley mean ( not C+ rocket velocty ) but only light velocity C

    4 I know Power and energy of sinal in point where I sent signal (TRUE/FALSE ) ?




    R distans costant
    C or Souund or Radio wave constant velocity
    V rocket constant






    You can measure time OR !!!! power of signal Why ?

    Imagine below short story :

    It is dark night You are in ship on SEA
    - each 5 minutes you take pictures of city that you see far away
    each picture brightness wil show You distance change
    ( distance R ^2 function ultra precission - time is only line function )

    look what I done before I write above
    what You think It is just empty words !!?!?!!?!?!

    You can confirm
    or All Your Live say " I read in books that machine more heavy than air will never fly !!!!!

    step 1

    I make experiment in my home ( 1000 pictures camera always see lower power of light when I take picture with earth velocity
    arrow opposite I see lower light )

    step 2
    sun velocity is about 220 ( km/s ) my camera see 3.4 power of light different picture with arrow and opposite on this direction

    - west - east direction 30 km/s ( earth around Sun ) camera see 0.4 power of light different

    ( my nikon has 190118 pxc )

    to compare above velocity I use autocad drawing and three special angle : 1 Earth special angle 66.66 degree and
    2
    55 ( 55 it is my position Poland where I made experiment )- 3 I need this angle 23.34 to set camera W-E

    What You Think I made mistke my camera make mistake ( only special time 18:00 , 12:00 , 24:00, 6:00 only in Poland ? )
    and this what I showing You above is one big mistake ?

    step 3
    I prepare theoretical explain please use real data ( ok V=0 what is this - V=0 base on radio,light )

    I'm sory before teory I made my tool after this what I feel inside my head
    it is natural when You are good inventor see my patents:

    www.maroszvsnewtn.cba.pl

    ( You need any teory to use my COCA COLA battery or parking tower ) ? or pipe cover for bomb or Up sky Signal
    Last edited by tesla2; October 30th, 2012 at 01:34 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,249
    How many times are we going to have you post the same debunked argument you posted in your first post after joining the forum? Repeated posting does not change the fact that you do not actually understand the science you claim to be disproving.
    tesla2 likes this.
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114

    how much time need light to hit camera
    what happen with camera during light quantum travell to camera
    a) not move not change position and wait for light
    b) move with rocket velocity opposite to light quantum
    c) getting older and change geometry ( not work damage )

    what is Your opinion a) b) c)

    I think that my post and I learn
    Thank You For You disscusiion not comment
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,249
    This image has been debunked twice at least now in several threads, posting it again is NOT going to gain you anything but suspension
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    a) or b) or c)

    or Your own theory many people wirite books that machine more heavy than air will never fly
    only few start build airplane

    I would like to repeat Hawkins words " Theory it is only theory not RULE"
    My picture destroy RULE or NOT ?
    My picture not fit to THeory I'm sory I measure I make experiment so TEORY IS ONLY TEORY

    NOT USE EINSTEIN ONLY RULE ARE IMPORTANT NOT THEORY !!!!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Professor pyoko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,094
    Wow... tesla2 you are insulting the real Tesla with your dribble.
    It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    Right now I'm looking company to build GPS for miners

    10 x better Nikon professional camera
    will see 35.0 not 3.4 point light different and 0,1 better precission in mistake

    base on traditional signal Miners have problem

    Many people will use this What I explain
    - Einstein have problem that not fit too this what animal use

    NASA make mistake they measure Sun velocity 220 km/s
    OK but they make mistake in direction right now I confirm this
    ( sun winter and spring ) when sun move with Earth not the same HOT
    sun give to Earth ( reason is Velocity) 8 minutes light distance and 8 minutes move in universe
    Earth and Sun not the same HOT efect near 12 %

    My train move or my station ? teoretical IDIOTS take flashlight and camera take picture

    Br Marosz Tesla 2
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    Stop insulting the work of Einstein, it has been proven to be correct in real experiments, repeatedly, for the past century, using proper equipment, not an LED torch and a digital camera. The speed of light is isotropic.

    Get yourself a laser interferometer, the proper equipment, and see for yourself.
    tesla2 likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    I NO NEED SPEAK ABOUT EINSTEIN HE LIE HIS FRIEND MACH
    THEY SPEAK AND HI LIKE HIS OPINION ABOUT gravitation mass

    He forget about his own words after many people ask him about MACH after public his theory

    (why this Guy Is Your Lider You like Person who speak with You and not keep word
    why Eistein not say SORRY to MACH why ?)

    see 2.jpg ( please use equations that You knew You can translate this or not )

    quantum of light hit in front of rocket wall ( Time T1) after this start back
    camera start work in T1 time and open chip only for 1 s
    quantum of light hit in camera chip ( Time T2)

    What happen with camera and rocket in time between (T1,T2)

    What You think rocket velocity V can change point where camera and light have collision
    ( V rocket base on light quantum between time (T1,T2)

    brightness of picture has strong relation with R distance ( it is square function relation )

    What You think rocket velocity V can change brightness of picture

    read 2.pdf

    can I compare radio/light/sound Wave They all have R distance similar ( it is square function relation )
    Attached Images
    • File Type: jpg 2.JPG (43.5 KB, 1 views)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post
    I NO NEED SPEAK ABOUT EINSTEIN HE LIE HIS FRIEND MACH
    Great way to carry on an objective, scientific fact and math-based discussion.

    Please go and learn the basics of relativity. You just need to study special relativity, which only needs simple arithmetic. You can also do it without reading a single word Einstein wrote (if you insist).

    You could have learnt so much about the way the world works, and the evidence which demonstrates that, in the time you took to draw your silly little diagrams.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    Simply Yes or Simply not ?

    Rocket velocity has relation to Power of light that see camera
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post
    Simply Yes or Simply not ?

    Rocket velocity has relation to Power of light that see camera
    Simply: no. As you have been told repeatedly.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    simply question :
    a)R distance = 300 001 km
    b)R distance = 300 000,001 km
    camera is open only 1 s

    V rocket can or not can change this what camera masure as a power of light ?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Why ask for a yes or no, and then ignore the answer?

    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post
    V rocket can or not can change this what camera masure as a power of light ?
    No. As you have been told repeatedly. Please go and study a little physics.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    what happen with rocket between time T1 ( quantum of light hit in front wall )
    and time T1 + 1 s

    a) base on the principle of conservation of momentum rocket accelerate ( because quantum of light hit rocket wall and give energy portion to rocket )
    b) V + V1 velocity rocket go opposite to quantum that back with C light base on front wall

    what you think C veloity base on camera
    C velocity base on front of rocket

    WOW
    ONE QGUANTUM GO WITH ROKET
    NEXT OPPOSITE TO ROCKET
    SO WE NOT HAVE ANY PROBLEM ALL IS RELATIVE
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post
    what happen with rocket between time T1 ( quantum of light hit in front wall )
    and time T1 + 1 s

    a) base on the principle of conservation of momentum rocket accelerate ( because quantum of light hit rocket wall and give energy portion to rocket )
    b) V + V1 velocity rocket go opposite to quantum that back with C light base on front wall

    what you think C veloity base on camera
    C velocity base on front of rocket
    I would like to answer this but I really have no idea what you are asking. Let me make a few comments that might be relevant:

    If the rocket is accelerating then you probably need to use general relativity not special relativity.

    Because the rocket is accelerating, the photons that go to the front and back of the rocket will be red and blue shifted.

    This will change their energy and their momentum.

    If you learnt a little bit of physics you would be able to work out exactly how red and blue shifted they would be and what the change in momentum of each would be.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Professor pyoko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,094
    Meh, this is like talking to a religious fanatic.
    tesla2 likes this.
    It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    I'm sorry I'm not fanatic
    please wait I will prepare drawing

    ( Thank You that you speak with me I learn
    how people see this what I write )

    please wait I will prepare drowing I want explain You what I mean the same drawing will help me

    Thank You
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post
    I'm sorry I'm not fanatic
    But you are not interested in learning.

    Please wait I will prepare drawing
    It will be wrong.
    tesla2 likes this.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    Please See drawing do You see how my system work
    the same efect You can have with gravitation
    HOT wave ,

    and all waves that You Use ( light radio. )

    to measure AIRPLANE OR ROCKET VELOCITY YOU NEED ONLY CONFIRM
    DISTANCE R BY POWER OF SIGNAL MEASURE AFTER SHORT TIME T
    Attached Images
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post
    Please See drawing do You see how my system work
    Your drawing only appears to show that if you travel at twice the speed, relative to the air, then you will go travel further before receiving the sound. This is basically true.

    But you are wrong (see, told you) to show the distance will be doubled if you go at twice the speed. The important factor is the difference between the speed of the plane and the speed of sound.

    If you can't get a simple calculation like this correct, you are going to have problems even with the simple mathematics of special relativity.

    Also, here you are measuring speed relative to the air that the sound travels through.

    That is very important: relative to the air that the sound travels through.

    No, no, no. Don't just skip over it. Stop. Think. This is really, really, really important.

    Read it again and think about what it means: you are measuring speed relative to the air that the sound travels through.

    Sound travels through air. The air can be considered stationary and provides a fixed reference frame. You can therefore measure your speed relative to the sound moving through that air. Because sound travels at a fixed velocity relative to the air.

    Light does not travel through a medium. You cannot measure the speed of light relative to that fixed medium (because it does not exist). Instead you can only measure the speed of light relative to yourself. When you do this it is always the same. (It is not like sound.)

    to measure AIRPLANE OR ROCKET VELOCITY YOU NEED ONLY CONFIRM
    DISTANCE R BY POWER OF SIGNAL MEASURE AFTER SHORT TIME T
    Your diagram does not show that it is measuring power. However, again, this might be possible with sound. But only because you are measuring it relative to the air that the sound travels through.

    It is obviously NOT possible with light.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    Sound needs a medium through which to propagate, and does so at a speed relative to the medium it is propagating through. If you also have a speed relative to that medium, you will find the speed of sound, relative to you, to be different, in different directions.

    Light works differently to sound. It always has the same speed, relative to you, regardless of your speed relative to anything else.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    I know why I have problem understant You and You not understand me (see below am I right or Not ?)

    WHAT IS POWER OF LIGHT THAT SEE PHOTOCAMERA ?
    WHAT IS SPEED OF LIGHT ?

    GEOMETRY IS REASON WHY CAMERA SEE MORE LIGHT ---- NOT VELOCITY !!!
    Attached Images
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post
    WHAT IS POWER OF LIGHT THAT SEE PHOTOCAMERA ?
    See that word "isotropic"? It means "the same in all directions".

    WHAT IS SPEED OF LIGHT ?
    c. for all observers.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    ok but camera will see lower bright area
    microphone will also register lower sound area

    My sytem of measure work corectly ? camera register how fast change AREA ?
    so I can measure by this tool like l this !!!

    and it is reason why camera see more light opposite to Earth velocity arrow
    compare to exactly with arrow .
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post
    My sytem of measure work corectly ?
    No. It doesn't. I have explained why. Do you understand the explanation? Or are you just ignoring it?
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    You Told and many physics told that nobody can measure velocity inside separate coordination system

    Michelson Morley proof isotopic

    Marosz give You info ( I confirm isotopic - isotopic mean That My camera see not the same AREA)

    isotopic mean that - power of light go down when You take picture with velocity and opposite velocity your own coordination system ( rocket without window )

    how big is area that see Your camera - this has relation what is Your velocity compare to light velocity on direction where You measure (in future this what I measure and explain You it will be definition absolutly zero coordination system )

    MY SYSTEM WORK see last page ( copy in new window ) I not make mistake
    copy to new window www.maroszvsnewton.cba.pl/new4.pdf
    Gravitation also is isotopic and also have distance R^2

    Grawitation mass m not mean the same what mass m that not move !!!!!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Oh well. I tried.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    Thank You for help me please check am I good understant or not

    please help me write Einstei equations ( velocity ) below jpg and link to
    pdf ( please copy and open in new window )

    www.maroszvsnewton.cba.pl/mainrule.pdf


    I don't know Einstein I will learn ... I 'm ready if his equation can describe above efect
    it is not doppler but geometry power reduction
    Attached Images
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,437
    Granted, this isn't my area of expertise (if such a thing could be said to exist), but what they hell is that picture supposed to be?
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post
    I 'm ready if his equation can describe above efect
    It can't. But it can tell you why there is no such effect.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    I measure this efect 08/09 of October 2012 everybody can do the same experiment in home ( AND MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE WHAT MY CAMERA ) this mistake You can evaluate using TALES proportion and measure velocity that You already knew
    30 km/s Earth around SUN

    copy below link to new window

    http://www.maroszvsnewton.cba/exp1.pdf

    on direction E-W Nikon see 0.4 point light different but if I set the same camera prependicular direction to Equator plane
    I can measure 3.4 point of light different ( each nikon schould feel the same different on the Earth I call this DYNAMIC NORTH )

    if You know what is the time and You measure W-E N-S I can inform You ( +/- 5 degree mistake Your position on globe)
    give me more good light sensor ( +/- 0,0001)
    my discover mean zero problem with measure radio signal time to satelite
    MY GPS will work underground )

    copy to new window below link:

    http://www.maroszvsnewton.cba.pl/applications.pdf


    I Test classical bulb and Led ( I take with me tool in to the mountain 5 km far away from my home )



    My camera will be after time T there where I explain in attached final.jpg

    ( I not confirm gravitation efect I only compare similar
    parameter ---- Gravitation Forces has got relatin to R^2 function distance )

    I also think that hot wave will have similar efect.

    I HAVE BIG QUESTION TO MR E he write that he can imagine what see each observator

    Dear Mr E please write me what wil see observator that totaly not move in universe

    Please imagine that airplane has got 300 000 km long left and 300 000 km right
    before light will hit camera sensor You can easy evaluate
    that 1s is minimal time ( what if rocket has velocity V base on totaly zero observator )

    IT IS NOT TRUE THAT ALL IS RELATIVE each bodies has velocity base on totaly zzero point
    (ONLY IF ROCKET TOTALY NOT MOVE - if rocket has velocity base on totaly zero point in universe light will not tuch front sensor)

    what is totaly zero point - in math we have 0 nobody see zero but is very good tool to evaluate
    Attached Images
    Last edited by tesla2; October 31st, 2012 at 01:37 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    Tesla2, a simple question for you.

    Are you saying that all the interferometry experiments we have performed over past century, that confirm that the speed of light is isoptropic (the same in all directions), are incorrect, due to what you have found using your digital camera?

    Yes, or no?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    brightness has nothing common with velocity of light ( michelson morley measure velocity not brightness )


    below picture I made using data from books that have many more years than Eintein
    ( power geometry .jpg - show that light in special distance R reduce natural
    power )

    Today I'm 100% sure why my camera measure lower brightes and higher brightes
    and how to use TALES'S proportion to exactly evaluate this what my camera measure ( You thik that it is mistake . Why ?)

    do You see any mistake below? where ?

    I'm too schort to speak about Einstein

    I just made tool that show Rocket velocity from inside coordination system


    Attached Images
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post
    Today I'm 100% sure why my camera measure lower brightes and higher brightes
    You may be 100% sure, but you are also 100% wrong. The figures you posted before showed no statistically significant correlation with direction or velocity. You are just seeing random variation in the source, your camera's sensor and post-processing. You could, at least, use the correct instrument for measuring light intensity.

    do You see any mistake below? where ?
    Why do you ask? You have had your fundamental errors explained to you many times and you just ignore it.

    OK. Let's make you happy instead: yes, you are right. Einstein was wrong. Please book yourself a return ticket to Oslo to collect your Nobel prize. I recommend First Class for someone as important as you.

    I'm too schort to speak about Einstein
    I don't know what you height has to do with it.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    People always make angry it is natural
    I think that Einstein make big mistake he schould speak with Mach not only before
    SRT but after people ask him why You not Use Mach in SRT
    Nobel prize is for people who have money
    not for people who discover !
    OBAMA get NOBEL FOR WHAT ?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    Why isn't this in the trash yet? This is the same nonsense that Tesla2 posts on every thread he appears in.
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,437
    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post
    OBAMA get NOBEL FOR WHAT ?
    You're aware that he didn't get the Nobel Prize for Physics, yes?
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    You're aware that he didn't get the Nobel Prize for Physics, yes?
    What!? Why not??? That's outrageous!!!1! I'm going to write to the Nobel Komittee and insist they do so!!one!
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    ant not for this that he keep soliders out of USA
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    tesla2, you need a better translator program.
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    question 1 my airplane position ok /not
    guestion 2 point where light was sent is movin g with airplane or not
    question 3 do you see on light graph what will be in point where is camera and airplane
    qestion 4 some photograph use definition force of light - can we compare force of light to force of gravitation
    airplane.JPGluminous.JPGfinal.JPG
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #48  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    I can not write in polish too sorry
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post
    I can not write in polish too sorry
    You can use Google Translate from any language.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post
    question 1 my airplane position ok /not
    guestion 2 point where light was sent is movin g with airplane or not
    question 3 do you see on light graph what will be in point where is camera and airplane
    qestion 4 some photograph use definition force of light - can we compare force of light to force of gravitation
    I don't know what you think your diagrams are supposed to show. And I don't understand your questions. You might as well just write in your own language. It will make as much sense.

    The facts:

    The light intensity will be decrease with the square of the distance from the source. You could use this to work out how far you have travelled from the source in a given time and hence your speed.

    So what?

    You are just getting a measure of distance travelled (by measuring the intensity of the light) and the time taken.

    This tells you the speed you are moving relative to a fixed point (the light source).

    This is what we expect: all speed is relative. You are measuring speed relative to the light source.

    But ... here is my prediction: you will ignore this and post another picture and more meaningless questions. Why don't you spend the time studying physics instead?
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #51  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    I measure velocity relative to point in universe where light was sent ( where source of light was )


    please see last page https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B0B...Ux5aVZwZnZ0czQ

    this link what You think ?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #52  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post
    I measure velocity relative to point in universe where light was sent ( where source of light was )
    You are measuring velocity relative to where the light source is.

    If the light source is attached the the plane then the distance from the light will be constant and the intensity of the light will be constant. You will therefore say you have not moved and your speed is zero. That is correct because you have not moved relative to the light.

    this link what You think ?
    You are ignorant and you clearly enjoy being ignorant. You are so proud of your lack of knowledge that you put it on the web.

    I think you said you are unemployed. Do you think there might be a reason for that? I would not employ someone who was ignorant and did not want to learn.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #53  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    I see you have been posting the thing on many other science forums.

    EVERYONE tells you that you are wrong for the same reasons.

    Do you think there could be a reason for that? Think about it ...
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #54  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    please think that below airplane is very long camera distance = 300 000 km and You sent only one quantum of light very short

    where will be point in universe ( point where You sent 1 quantum ) and ( camera if airplane velocity 0.5 C base on point where You sent ) ?

    airplane.JPG
    Reply With Quote  
     

  56. #55  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,437
    It's like he's on a different plane of existance.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  57. #56  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    Michelson Morley was try find light velocity compare to Earth

    They not measure brightness of light beam

    I'm sorry I just measure brightness of light and I can recognize where is East and West

    each day I will prepare better tool and better link to explain You mistake


    https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B0B...ktLMEN1N2oyU0k

    https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B0B...m5Zb0tlT1d1bUk

    BR MAROSZ TESLA 2 from Poland

    I'm sory for show You So many infrmations and knowledge That can destroy 100 Yers mistake

    You schoud slowly wait for ARMY they INVENTED ALL new patents before peole like You was able SEE before
    Army want to protect You from schoock now I understand why they use Radio Wave and block tesla )
    Reply With Quote  
     

  58. #57  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post
    I'm sorry I just measure brightness of light and I can recognize where is East and West
    This has been done properly by proper scientists using the proper instruments and doing a proper analysis of the results and sources of error. There is NO difference.

    Your joke experiment is of zero value.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  59. #58  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    show me publication or any info

    measure brightness not velocity C I want to see link
    one link

    If You can't show me this info it mean that my ( not perfect Nokon ) is only one small fish in empty water

    "Brightness" not C velocity
    Reply With Quote  
     

  60. #59  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    You don't appear to understand enough physics to understand this, but what you are claiming is known as "Lorentz violation". It doesn't matter if you measure velocity, energy or any other physical parameter: Lorentz covariance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    If you search journals for research on this you will find tens of thousands (maybe hundreds of thousands) of research papers on this. Every single one proves you are wrong. Come back when you have read them all and are able to explain why every single one is wrong.

    You could start here: Modern searches for Lorentz violation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  61. #60  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    Brightness = more energy. What does more energy in one direction than another represent? Where did the extra energy come from?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  62. #61  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    the same energy angle rise up

    More area m^2 / the same energy = lower light force


    this efect is natural for camera obscura ( like right now relative for You see jpg it is not my )
    Attached Images
    Reply With Quote  
     

  63. #62  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    My Nikon without any mistake and very easy can recognize
    West or East direction ( this was main target Michelson - Morley experiment )


    brightness the master source of light has nothing comon with speed of light

    brightness has strong relation with Earth Velocity and photography rules only


    Always one direction give different brightness of picture
    after 12 h direction change
    I also measure SUN velocity brightness I see near 8x stronger brightness different
    than west east

    I can give/sent any data or make any experiments that You want and use my tool .

    I wait for cooperation offer I'm ready start many new experiments

    Main Rule Explain
    https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B0B...ktLMEN1N2oyU0k

    Main Experiment and new GSP application
    https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B0B...m5Zb0tlT1d1bUk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  64. #63  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    please show me brightness reration to lorenz covariance
    use my drawing ( push print screen copy and edit in paint )

    If Airplane will be shortter or longer give me Forces that reduce long ( not math equations )

    Engineer if have problem with shape use more material it is simply rule but work
    material can't win with mistake
    Reply With Quote  
     

  65. #64  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    You don't appear to understand enough physics to understand this, but what you are claiming is known as "Lorentz violation". It doesn't matter if you measure velocity, energy or any other physical parameter: Lorentz covariance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    If you search journals for research on this you will find tens of thousands (maybe hundreds of thousands) of research papers on this. Every single one proves you are wrong. Come back when you have read them all and are able to explain why every single one is wrong.

    You could start here: Modern searches for Lorentz violation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    please show me brightness reration to lorenz covariance
    use my drawing ( push print screen copy and edit in paint )

    If Airplane will be shortter or longer give me Forces that reduce long ( not math equations )

    Engineer if have problem with shape use more material it is simply rule but work
    material can't win with mistake
    I saw many teoretical IDIOT real job welding learn them respect to Engineer not To equations
    and theory

    Lets speak about TWINS PARADOKSE people that are in airplane will live longer
    WOW WOW MR E GIVE ME LIVE
    Reply With Quote  
     

  66. #65  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    You cannot do science by drawing. You do it by formulating a mathematical relationship and then testing that mathematical relationship against empirical evidence.

    The mathematical relationship you are contesting, however, is the relationship between space and time, which Einstein showed to be relative, rather than absolute.

    We have repeatedly tested this.

    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post
    Lets speak about TWINS PARADOKSE people that are in airplane will live longer
    WOW WOW MR E GIVE ME LIVE
    Yup. We sent atomic clocks around the world on airplanes, then compared them to an atomic clock that was left on the ground. The clock on the plane that flew eastwards showed less elapsed time than the clock on the ground, after they were brought back together again. People on that airplane aged less than people on the ground.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele-Keating_experiment
    Reply With Quote  
     

  67. #66  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    please see last version of file You will be sure that I need help in research

    https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B0B...nFOSk9qdHNfckk

    right now I need get moneny for test ( my camera is good first step )

    You are good in relative You can easy evaluate Airplane Position

    Please ask any photographer what he think about light power and camera quality of measure
    my nikon use 190118 point but professional many point more !!!



    I have better situation to Einstein
    Einstein public his theory but
    in time when he write nobody was able 100% confirm ALL his words ( they did't have suitable tools )

    I belive in Mach I can explain You reason of time but right now it will be just talking
    without mone

    Gravitation Wave have also R distance ^2 similar like Light
    gravitation has meaning for Clock power of gravitation has relation to Clock
    right now I need get NOBEL for my GPS / and Velocity
    next I will explain You more
    BR
    Reply With Quote  
     

  68. #67  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post
    please see last version of file You will be sure that I need help
    I think we can all agree on that.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  69. #68  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    what You mean where I make mistake

    we can confirm our velocity without outside observation

    ( If You not belive please imagine that You sent
    light prepedicular to airplane with airplane )

    prependicular mean absolutly Zero to Your Own Velocity

    You can take picture every 0,1 secound You will see where is
    light ( how long sign You see ) base on picture You and light signal long
    You will know Your distance to point where You send signal

    above for physics that You know is totaly impossible !!!!

    SEE PICTURE DO YO HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH PREPENDICULAR DIRETION TOO....
    Attached Images
    Last edited by tesla2; November 1st, 2012 at 02:09 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  70. #69  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Why do you keep asking questions when you have already decided that everybody else in the world is wrong and that only you have found The Truth?
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  71. #70  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    You heve right better make Earth Quake ??? or create new weapon for army ?

    do You saw prependicular direction drawing ?
    what You think impossible for people ?
    Impossible for Our knowledge level ?

    I make this drawing because I learn ... when You write me mistake I learn ....
    what You think ?
    Prependicular direction destroy Your IDEA That master Source of ligt moving ?
    destroy LORENZ ?
    destroy Einstein ?

    why You write Your post - You not like people who are inteligent ???
    only reason or You want to learn

    WHO ARE YOU
    WHAT YOU DONE
    YOU LEARN or REPEAT like ... ???
    Reply With Quote  
     

  72. #71  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,249
    Tesla, find a better translation softwear!
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  73. #72  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    Tesla, find a better translation softwear!
    You have right I'm sorry - in below link I show very important one drawing

    ( prependicular picture and vertical picture )

    I hope that everybody who saw below (this what I done by drawing only !!!!!)

    will help me inform people that one engineer from Poland explained how to inside rocket without windows You can read own velocity

    Rest will be confirmed in many experiments . I hope this picture
    will help me open my own lab .

    Thank You Very Much all persons that will help me realized
    my dream

    https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B0B...jhxd0UwZHpodmM

    my mob +48 690 091 398
    Marosz Maciej Tesla 2
    Reply With Quote  
     

  74. #73  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,249
    I didnt ask about your drawing, which we have seen before Im guessing. I said you NEED to get a better translator.
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  75. #74  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post
    we can confirm our velocity without outside observation
    No you can't. Both cameras at each end of the airplane will see the exact same thing. You cannot determine your state of relative motion in an inertial frame without reference to some outside frame.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  76. #75  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    You not see nobody see on forum You have first
    drawing that I made

    vertical !!!! picture ( new ) and horizontal picture ( no need any word and math - You must only know what proof Michelson Morley not exist light speed C + rocket speed ( all 3d direction is the same )

    Earth = Airplane or Rocket

    https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B0B...UtQT3JDRjB4Qjg
    Reply With Quote  
     

  77. #76  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post
    we can confirm our velocity without outside observation
    No you can't. Both cameras at each end of the airplane will see the exact same thing. You cannot determine your state of relative motion in an inertial frame without reference to some outside frame.
    see link and please repeat You words

    https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B0B...UtQT3JDRjB4Qjg ( vertical picture I add yesterday )
    Reply With Quote  
     

  78. #77  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    114
    Reply With Quote  
     

  79. #78  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post
    PLEASE MOVE THIS TOPIC TO PHYSIC
    Why? You are clearly not interested in physics and you are not interested in learning any physics.

    I think it should be moved to Trash as it is too dismal even for Pseudoscience.

    MY EGLISH IS BAD
    So use Google Translate. (Your pictures are incomprehensible as well.)
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  80. #79  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    There is a big language problem here.

    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post
    You must only know what proof Michelson Morley not exist light speed C + rocket speed ( all 3d direction is the same )
    Not exist? If that is what you meant to say, you are wrong. The proof does exist. We have repeated the experiment, over the course of a whole year, whilst the Earth did a full orbit around the sun, using equipment 1000 times more sensitive than your camera.

    You need to understand just how sensitive a laser interferometer is. Do you know how it works?

    There is no way to tell your velocity without an outside reference. Full stop.

    The Earth velocity is not added or subtracted from light speed, if that is what you meant to say.

    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post
    Earth = Airplane or Rocket
    Do you know the velocity of the Milky Way galaxy, relative to the cosmic microwave background radiation? The CMBR "rest frame" is the closest thing we have to a frame against which the universe expands.

    We know that velocity.

    Can you calculate it, using your method?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  81. #80  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by tesla2 View Post

    see link and please repeat You words

    https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B0B...UtQT3JDRjB4Qjg ( vertical picture I add yesterday )
    Ok, I repeat my words : Both cameras at each end of the airplane will see the exact same thing. You cannot determine your state of relative motion in an inertial frame without reference to some outside frame.

    What You think light signal has rocket velocity + light C ? ( impossible )!!!!!!!!!
    No, because that is not how you add velocities in SR. They are 4-vector quantities, and there is a special addition formula for them :

    Velocity-addition formula - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Voltage from Radio/Some other EM Wave
    By fatman57 in forum Physics
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: November 23rd, 2012, 12:45 AM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: October 17th, 2012, 09:43 AM
  3. Speed of light/sound question
    By Ell223 in forum Physics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: December 29th, 2009, 01:39 PM
  4. Does a smaller light speed in a medium rule out the wave the
    By sorincosofret in forum Pseudoscience
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: June 8th, 2009, 12:46 PM
  5. Speed of Sound & Light?
    By Jason72 in forum Physics
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: January 12th, 2009, 07:44 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •