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

1. 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 ?

2.

3. Originally Posted by tesla2
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 ?

4. Originally Posted by tk421
But I'm betting the content of those files is 100% wrong. Just a hunch.

5. 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.

6. ( 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

7. 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.

8. 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

9. This image has been debunked twice at least now in several threads, posting it again is NOT going to gain you anything but suspension

10. 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 !!!!

11. Wow... tesla2 you are insulting the real Tesla with your dribble.

12. 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

13. 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.

14. 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

can I compare radio/light/sound Wave They all have R distance similar ( it is square function relation )

15. Originally Posted by tesla2
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.

16. Simply Yes or Simply not ?

Rocket velocity has relation to Power of light that see camera

17. Originally Posted by tesla2
Simply Yes or Simply not ?

Rocket velocity has relation to Power of light that see camera
Simply: no. As you have been told repeatedly.

18. 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 ?

19. Why ask for a yes or no, and then ignore the answer?

Originally Posted by tesla2
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.

20. 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

21. Originally Posted by tesla2
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.

22. Meh, this is like talking to a religious fanatic.

23. 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

24. Originally Posted by tesla2
I'm sorry I'm not fanatic
But you are not interested in learning.

Please wait I will prepare drawing
It will be wrong.

25. 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

26. Originally Posted by tesla2
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.

27. 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.

28. 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 !!!

29. Originally Posted by tesla2
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.

30. 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 .

31. Originally Posted by tesla2
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?

32. 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 !!!!!

33. Oh well. I tried.

34. 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

35. 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?

36. Originally Posted by tesla2
I 'm ready if his equation can describe above efect
It can't. But it can tell you why there is no such effect.

37. 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

38. 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?

39. 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

40. Originally Posted by tesla2
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.

41. 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 ?

42. Why isn't this in the trash yet? This is the same nonsense that Tesla2 posts on every thread he appears in.

43. Originally Posted by tesla2
OBAMA get NOBEL FOR WHAT ?
You're aware that he didn't get the Nobel Prize for Physics, yes?

44. Originally Posted by Flick Montana
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!

45. ant not for this that he keep soliders out of USA

46. tesla2, you need a better translator program.

47.

48. 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

49. I can not write in polish too sorry

50. Originally Posted by tesla2
I can not write in polish too sorry
You can use Google Translate from any language.

51. Originally Posted by tesla2
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?

52. I measure velocity relative to point in universe where light was sent ( where source of light was )

this link what You think ?

53. Originally Posted by tesla2
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.

54. 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 ...

55. 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

56. It's like he's on a different plane of existance.

57. 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

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 )

58. Originally Posted by tesla2
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.

59. show me publication or any info

measure brightness not velocity C I want to see 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

60. 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

61. Brightness = more energy. What does more energy in one direction than another represent? Where did the extra energy come from?

62. 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 )

63. 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

Main Experiment and new GSP application

64. 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

65. Originally Posted by Strange
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

66. 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.

Originally Posted by tesla2
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

67. please see last version of file You will be sure that I need help in research

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

68. Originally Posted by tesla2
please see last version of file You will be sure that I need help
I think we can all agree on that.

69. 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....

70. 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?

71. 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 ... ???

72. Tesla, find a better translation softwear!

73. Originally Posted by Paleoichneum
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

my mob +48 690 091 398
Marosz Maciej Tesla 2

74. I didnt ask about your drawing, which we have seen before Im guessing. I said you NEED to get a better translator.

75. Originally Posted by tesla2
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.

76. 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

77. Originally Posted by Markus Hanke
Originally Posted by tesla2
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 )

78.

79. Originally Posted by tesla2
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.)

80. There is a big language problem here.

Originally Posted by tesla2
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.

Originally Posted by tesla2
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?

81. Originally Posted by tesla2

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

 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   BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On [VIDEO] code is On HTML code is Off Trackbacks are Off Pingbacks are Off Refbacks are On Terms of Use Agreement