Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #391303 > unrolled thread
| Started by | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-08-31 11:56 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-10-07 10:58 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 136 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-08-31 11:56 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. pcardinale@volcanomail.com - 2016-08-31 12:24 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-04 08:09 +1000
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-03 18:41 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-05 09:32 +1000
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-05 04:38 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-06 09:30 +1000
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-05 18:45 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-07 06:00 +1000
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. intuitionist1@gmail.com - 2016-09-28 00:54 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-28 00:59 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. intuitionist1@gmail.com - 2016-09-28 01:10 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. dlzc <dlzc1@cox.net> - 2016-08-31 12:29 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-08-31 12:37 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. dlzc <dlzc1@cox.net> - 2016-08-31 13:08 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-08-31 12:38 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. dlzc <dlzc1@cox.net> - 2016-08-31 13:09 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> - 2016-08-31 14:34 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-08-31 15:03 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> - 2016-08-31 14:35 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> - 2016-09-01 10:20 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. dlzc <dlzc1@cox.net> - 2016-09-01 11:58 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-01 12:23 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. astrofoton@interia.pl - 2016-09-01 13:29 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-02 02:12 +0000
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-01 12:38 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-01 13:38 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-01 14:37 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-09-02 12:20 +1000
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-09-01 19:53 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-02 11:22 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-02 12:57 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-02 14:40 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> - 2016-09-02 16:22 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-02 17:57 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> - 2016-09-02 18:29 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-03 03:55 +0000
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> - 2016-09-02 18:36 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-03 06:02 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> - 2016-09-02 18:43 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> - 2016-09-03 11:45 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-03 19:04 +0000
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> - 2016-09-03 11:49 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> - 2016-09-03 11:59 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Python <python@python.invalid> - 2016-09-03 21:37 +0200
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> - 2016-09-03 13:17 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> - 2016-09-03 13:22 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> - 2016-09-03 13:23 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-04 15:09 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-06 12:36 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-06 20:11 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-06 13:43 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-06 14:50 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-06 20:16 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-06 21:07 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-07 15:45 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-08 15:42 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-08 18:43 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-08 20:39 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-08 20:13 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-08 20:51 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-08 21:17 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-09 11:03 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-09 16:46 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-10 09:30 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Larry Harson <johnmcandrew66@gmail.com> - 2016-09-18 16:44 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-10 14:31 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-11 08:42 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-11 13:14 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-11 13:38 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-11 14:17 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-11 15:24 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-11 15:39 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-11 17:00 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-11 17:03 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-12 10:09 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 19:12 +0200
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-14 12:17 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 13:01 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-15 12:14 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-15 11:27 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-14 13:24 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 14:31 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-14 16:14 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 19:18 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-15 12:34 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-14 20:33 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-15 15:23 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-15 16:13 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-15 16:30 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-16 08:07 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-16 17:53 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-17 16:35 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-18 06:14 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-18 13:47 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-18 14:56 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-18 15:59 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-18 16:03 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-09-18 20:24 -0500
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. intuitionist1@gmail.com - 2016-09-28 01:01 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-18 17:04 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-18 18:39 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-19 15:40 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-20 14:18 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-20 20:04 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-21 11:31 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-21 14:52 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. akashaheights@gmail.com - 2016-09-22 13:31 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-23 12:55 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-23 10:24 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-23 11:24 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-23 14:32 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-23 15:24 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-24 14:07 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-24 14:40 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-27 08:42 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-24 16:58 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-24 17:20 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-26 16:00 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-28 10:30 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-28 14:05 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-28 14:13 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-28 14:32 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-29 03:15 +0000
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-29 05:18 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-29 13:17 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-29 14:44 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-29 15:54 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-29 19:40 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-30 03:59 +0000
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-30 12:57 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-10-01 06:00 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-01 12:40 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-02 11:28 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-03 15:58 -0700
Re: The measurement of the velocity of light. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-07 10:58 -0700
Page 3 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 Next page →
| From | Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-03 11:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b7a15f76-236d-4e43-9846-54ad234087a7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391303 |
The Apollo lander cannot be viewed using the Hubble telescope; consequently, a laser beam, that originates from the earth and reflected by the lunar reflector that has a surface area of approximately one square meter cannot form a measurable intensity since using the Hubble space telescope would require a illuminated object, at the surface of the moon, that has a diameter of 200 meters! The MIT lunar laser ranging experiment is the closest physicists have come to measuring the velocity of light but the result is no different from Newton's lanterns. _____________________________________________________________ No, it would look like a featureless point of light, just like all the stars of the night sky. If perfectly focused, all the light would strike just one pixel of the CCD array. _______________________________________________________________ "Hey, wait a sec! Hubble’s resolution is only 0.1 arcseconds, so the lander is way too small to be seen as anything more than a dot, even by Hubble. It would have to be a lot bigger to be seen at all. In fact, if you do the math (set Hubble’s resolution to 0.1 arcseconds and the distance to 400,000 kilometers) you see that Hubble’s resolution on the Moon is about 200 meters! In other words, even a football stadium on the Moon would look like a dot to Hubble." (By Phil Plait | August 12, 2008, Discover online). ________________________________________________________________ What is a range limit of the Hubble. According to your logic, one could see the sun 1.4 trillion miles from the earth.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-03 19:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nqf6rc$jih$2@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #391475 |
Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> writes: >What is a range limit of the Hubble. According to your logic, one could >see the sun 1.4 trillion miles from the earth. You can. But it would look like a featureless point of light at that distance, just like all the other stars.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-03 11:49 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5fee6f07-e963-4c85-9b47-e854222f782e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391303 |
Do you have any bit of energy that would allow you to do a study of the measurements of the speed of light that have been performed, or are you just a fat slob that lays around and dreams up lies? ______________________________________________________________________________ I have analyzed Huygens, Fizeau and Michelson-Morley and the method using a Kerr shutter and come to the conclusion that the velocity of light has not been measured. Also, I'm skinny. ___________________________________________________________________________ Huygens measures the velocity of light using a pendulum clock and Io's period as timing devices employed to measure the time the earth propagates from K to L (Fig. 3) which represents the earth's orbital diameter but Huygens' 22 minutes time delay is less than the time measurement uncertainty of a pendulum clock (60 minutes) for a time interval of six mouths. Fizeau (1849) uses a high rpm rotating cogwheel to form a series of light pulses to generated an intensity that is used to measure the velocity of light since a single light pulse cannot form a measurable intensity after propagating a distance of 8 km. To measure the velocity of light requires the time a single pulse propagates a specific distance. Michelson-Morley interferometer is used to measure the velocity of light by determining the wavelength that is used in the wave equation (λf = c) but the ether that forms a wave, of the wave equation, does not exist (vacuum). Furthermore, a Kerr shutter is used to determine the velocity of light but Kerr's nanosecond shutter speed cannot form a measurable intensity after a single light pulse propagates a distance of 8 km.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-03 11:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <85ce4d23-a0cd-4201-a4db-ae986194f0a3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391303 |
God has cometh to my sight and has said that the truth of his wisdom is in these words that giveth light where there is darkness for the sinners and the repenters to behold the truth and glory of the words of God, Jesus and the holy ghost that brings love, peace and harmony to the world. Behold for the Lord our savior has spoken the words to those who can feel his words. Come and be the brother and sister of the faithful that sing praise to the goodness of man and the world in which we live. Get life were their is but darkness. For he that loveith the world forgive syou for your transgressions and will help bring love and prosperity to those that seek the truth. In God we trust. In life we live. For the air we breatheth. My God bless your soul. Amen and women we thee your savior and water of life.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@python.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-03 21:37 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nqf8qg$ibf$4@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #391477 |
Le 03/09/2016 à 20:59, Carl Susumu a écrit : > God has cometh to my sight and has said that the truth of his wisdom ... You should stop smoking pot Carl...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-03 13:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <92cb9310-428c-457e-a6ad-78d8d02db26e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391303 |
What about a candle flame. How far can you view a candle flame using the Hubble? A million miles?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-03 13:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a31c66ef-1b8b-4a03-b53e-957e2ba35039@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391303 |
God has cometh to the sight of mankind and has said that the truth of his wisdom is in these words that giveth light where there is darkness for the sinners and the repenters to behold the truth and glory of the words of God, Jesus and the holy ghost that brings love, peace and harmony to the world. Behold for the Lord our savior has spoken the words to those who can feel his words. His strength. His love. His power and Glory. Cometh my brothers and sisters of the faithful that sing praise to the goodness of man and the world in which we live. To make the heart grow big in tenderness and gratitude. Get and give life were their is not but darkness. For he that loveith thee world forgiveth you for your transgressions and will help bring love and prosperity to those that seek the truth. In God we trust. In life we live. For the air we breatheth. My God bless your soul. Amen and women we thee your savior and water of life.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-03 13:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <026212a7-9c03-4864-b618-c2971e90f26c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391303 |
Do you have any bit of energy that would allow you to do a study of the measurements of the speed of light that have been performed, or are you just a fat slob that lays around and dreams up lies? by Fat Gary. ______________________________________________________________________________ I have analyzed Huygens, Fizeau and Michelson-Morley and the method using a Kerr shutter and come to the conclusion that the velocity of light has not been measured. Also, I'm skinny. ___________________________________________________________________________ Huygens measures the velocity of light using a pendulum clock and Io's period as timing devices employed to measure the time the earth propagates from K to L (Fig. 3) which represents the earth's orbital diameter but Huygens' 22 minutes time delay is less than the time measurement uncertainty of a pendulum clock (60 minutes) for a time interval of six mouths. Fizeau (1849) uses a high rpm rotating cogwheel to form a series of light pulses to generated an intensity that is used to measure the velocity of light since a single light pulse cannot form a measurable intensity after propagating a distance of 8 km. To measure the velocity of light requires the time a single pulse propagates a specific distance. Michelson-Morley interferometer is used to measure the velocity of light by determining the wavelength that is used in the wave equation (λf = c) but the ether that forms a wave, of the wave equation, does not exist (vacuum). Furthermore, a Kerr shutter is used to determine the velocity of light but Kerr's nanosecond shutter speed cannot form a measurable intensity after a single light pulse propagates a distance of 8 km.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-04 15:09 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f0d98cca-2a4b-4324-9af0-3fa45bb692f5@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391303 |
The TW speed of light has been measured many times and found to always be the same, thus proving BaTh correct. By HG Wilson. ______________________________________________________________ To measure the velocity of light requires the time a single light pulse propagates a specific distance but a single light pulse cannot form a detectable intensity after propagating a distance of 8 km since the intensity formed by a single pulse produced by a high rpm cogwheel is extremely low; consequently, Fizeau and modern physicists use a series of light pulses to measure the velocity of light which is physically invalid and proves the velocity of light has not been measured by modern physicists. Also, a transverse wave TW is a surface wave that cannot form within a volume, and a wave is formed by the motion of the optical ether, composed of matter, that does not physically exist (vacuum).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-06 12:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f89d3361-9015-48fd-ad01-85fcb3385754@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391303 |
To measure the velocity of light requires the time a single light pulse propagates a specific distance but a single light pulse, produced by Fizeau cogwheel or a Kerr shutter, cannot form a detectable intensity after propagating a distance of 8 km; consequently, modern physicists use a series of light pulses to measure the velocity of light which is physically invalid and proves the velocity of light has not been measured.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-06 20:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <886ed649-33b2-40f6-bbc4-8faa8371dd2e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391645 |
On Tuesday, September 6, 2016 at 2:36:19 PM UTC-5, numbernu...@gmail.com wrote: > To measure the velocity of light requires the time a single light pulse propagates a specific distance but a single light pulse, produced by Fizeau cogwheel or a Kerr shutter, cannot form a detectable intensity after propagating a distance of 8 km; consequently, modern physicists use a series of light pulses to measure the velocity of light which is physically invalid and proves the velocity of light has not been measured. Good.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-06 13:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c35f0c2d-cf80-41dc-97e4-7d78ae9d35dc@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391303 |
Huygens measures the velocity of light using a pendulum clock and Io's period as timing devices employed to measure the time the earth propagates from K to L which represents the earth's orbital diameter for a six month time interval but Huygens' 22 minutes time delay is less than the time measurement uncertainty of a pendulum clock (60 minutes) for a time interval of six mouths which proves Huygens measurement of the velocity of light is physically invalid. Fizeau (1849) uses a high rpm rotating cogwheel to form a series of light pulses to generated an intensity that is used to measure the velocity of light since a single light pulse cannot form a measurable intensity after propagating a distance of 8 km. To measure the velocity of light requires the time a single light pulse propagates a specific distance but a single light pulse cannot form an intensity after propagating a distance of 8 km; consequently, Fizeau and modern physicists use a series of light pulses to measure the velocity of light which proves the velocity of light has not been measured. Michelson-Morley interferometer is used to measure the velocity of light, using a diffraction effect, to determine the wavelength of light that is used in the wave equation (λf = c) but the ether that forms a light wave does not physically exist (vacuum); consequently, the wave equation that is representing the formation of light waves produced by the motion of an optical ether, composed of matter, cannot be used to determine the velocity of light. Furthermore, a Kerr shutter is used to determine the velocity of light but Kerr's nanosecond shutter speed cannot form a measurable intensity after a single light pulse propagates a distance of 8 km which is experimental proof the velocity of light has not been measured.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-06 14:50 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8cd5253e-2a77-4637-968e-b9307e7a3cd5@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391652 |
On Tuesday, September 6, 2016 at 3:43:15 PM UTC-5, numbernu...@gmail.com wrote: > Huygens measures the velocity of light using a pendulum clock and Io's period as timing devices employed to measure the time the earth propagates from K to L which represents the earth's orbital diameter for a six month time interval but Huygens' 22 minutes time delay is less than the time measurement uncertainty of a pendulum clock (60 minutes) for a time interval of six mouths which proves Huygens measurement of the velocity of light is physically invalid. Astronomers who needed accurate timing regularly calibrated their pendulum clocks against the meridian transits of stars whose positions had been cataloged to high accuracy. The meridian transits could be timed to within about a second. Once his clock was sync'ed to a star's meridian transit, Rømer could rely on his clock to maintain accuracy to within seconds per day. Rømer's timings, taken six months apart, used freshly sync'ed clocks.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-06 20:16 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fd513652-bba3-4e92-8eb0-35f3db7d313f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391658 |
On Tuesday, September 6, 2016 at 4:50:34 PM UTC-5, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > On Tuesday, September 6, 2016 at 3:43:15 PM UTC-5, numbernu...@gmail.com wrote: > > Huygens measures the velocity of light using a pendulum clock and Io's period as timing devices employed to measure the time the earth propagates from K to L which represents the earth's orbital diameter for a six month time interval but Huygens' 22 minutes time delay is less than the time measurement uncertainty of a pendulum clock (60 minutes) for a time interval of six mouths which proves Huygens measurement of the velocity of light is physically invalid. > > Astronomers who needed accurate timing regularly calibrated their pendulum > clocks against the meridian transits of stars whose positions had been cataloged > to high accuracy. The meridian transits could be timed to within about a second. > Once his clock was sync'ed to a star's meridian transit, Rømer could rely on his > clock to maintain accuracy to within seconds per day. Rømer's timings, taken six > months apart, used freshly sync'ed clocks. Clarification: Astronomers wouldn't actually adjust the primary clock itself, but would record the readings of multiple meridian transits against the primary clock. From these multiple readings, a true time could be interpolated for events recorded between transit measurements, or extrapolated from a single measurement or set of measurements.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-06 21:07 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b09a66d8-e2e2-4ca1-9f47-93de192a8118@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391674 |
On Tuesday, September 6, 2016 at 10:16:24 PM UTC-5, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > On Tuesday, September 6, 2016 at 4:50:34 PM UTC-5, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > On Tuesday, September 6, 2016 at 3:43:15 PM UTC-5, numbernu...@gmail.com wrote: > > > Huygens measures the velocity of light using a pendulum clock and Io's period as timing devices employed to measure the time the earth propagates from K to L which represents the earth's orbital diameter for a six month time interval but Huygens' 22 minutes time delay is less than the time measurement uncertainty of a pendulum clock (60 minutes) for a time interval of six mouths which proves Huygens measurement of the velocity of light is physically invalid. > > > > Astronomers who needed accurate timing regularly calibrated their pendulum > > clocks against the meridian transits of stars whose positions had been cataloged > > to high accuracy. The meridian transits could be timed to within about a second. > > Once his clock was sync'ed to a star's meridian transit, Rømer could rely on his > > clock to maintain accuracy to within seconds per day. Rømer's timings, taken six > > months apart, used freshly sync'ed clocks. > > Clarification: Astronomers wouldn't actually adjust the primary clock itself, > but would record the readings of multiple meridian transits against the primary > clock. From these multiple readings, a true time could be interpolated for > events recorded between transit measurements, or extrapolated from a single > measurement or set of measurements. you are getting warmer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-07 15:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <bdc8f779-aa10-46bd-921f-edd3bf0e985e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391303 |
Huygens describes the propagation of light. Huygens' light waves are formed by the motion of an optical ether, composed of matter. The hardness of the ether spheres form a springiness that transfers the energy of the luminous body through the ether in the formation of expanding spherical waves similar to the production of sound waves yet light propagates with a higher velocity in vacuum than in air or glass yet sound propagates at a faster velocity in a denser solid or liquid than in air. Lenard's photoelectric effect proves light is composed of particles. In vacuum, there are less obstructions then in air or glass for the propagation of light particles which results in light propagating at a faster velocity in vacuum yet the opposite is true for sound since sound propagates faster in glass than in air. The collision of air molecules produces the exchange of the kinetic energies of air molecules results in the formation of propagating sound waves; consequently, the closer the particles of the medium, the faster sound propagates in the medium which is the opposite effect for light since light propagates with a slower velocity in denser glass and air compared to vacuum. Huygens propagation of light, based on an optical ether, composed of matter, is not obsolete since Huygens' principle can be found in current physics text books.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | alsor@interia.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-08 15:42 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <24bfc55a-f1a2-421d-ab5c-e4d930e5cc34@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391734 |
W dniu czwartek, 8 września 2016 00:45:38 UTC+2 użytkownik numbernu...@gmail.com napisał: > Huygens describes the propagation of light. Huygens' light waves are formed by the motion of an optical ether, composed of matter. The hardness of the ether spheres form a springiness that transfers the energy of the luminous body through the ether in the formation of expanding spherical waves similar to the production of sound waves yet light propagates with a higher velocity in vacuum than in air or glass yet sound propagates at a faster velocity in a denser solid or liquid than in air. Lenard's photoelectric effect proves light is composed of particles. In vacuum, there are less obstructions then in air or glass for the propagation of light particles which results in light propagating at a faster velocity in vacuum yet the opposite is true for sound since sound propagates faster in glass than in air. The collision of air molecules produces the exchange of the kinetic energies of air molecules results in the formation of propagating sound waves; consequently, the closer the particles of the medium, the faster sound propagates in the medium which is the opposite effect for light since light propagates with a slower velocity in denser glass and air compared to vacuum. Huygens propagation of light, based on an optical ether, composed of matter, is not obsolete since Huygens' principle can be found in current physics text books. Good but the light propagates in the vacuum only, not in the glass, nor any other matter.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-08 18:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f0bb52d2-1727-4e61-a13d-5f52498b2abb@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391303 |
Good but the light propagates in the vacuum only, not in the glass, nor any other matter. _________________________________________________ Light propagates in glass and air unless I am mistaken.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | alsor@interia.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-08 20:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4a602ada-fe7a-43fb-ad77-37bef80ca6c9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391828 |
W dniu piątek, 9 września 2016 03:43:43 UTC+2 użytkownik numbernu...@gmail.com napisał: > Good but the light propagates in the vacuum only, not in the glass, > nor any other matter. > > _________________________________________________ > > > > Light propagates in glass and air unless I am mistaken. You have incorrect intuition. The light in the glass still propagates in the ether only, and because of that the speed is decreased! c_glass = c/n = c*cos(f);
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-08 20:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <38d7c851-11fe-4338-943b-b79fb53fe293@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391303 |
Maxwell assumes that since radio waves and light propagate at the same velocity that light has an electromagnetic field structure but Maxwell's electromagnetic theory of light is based on Faraday's induction effect that is not luminous. In addition, it is not physically possible to determine the velocity of light. Huygens measures the velocity of light using a pendulum clock and Io's period as timing devices employed to measure the time the earth propagates from K to L which represents the earth's orbital diameter transversed in a six month time interval but Huygens' 22 minutes time delay is less than the time measurement uncertainty of a pendulum clock (60 minutes) for a time interval of six mouths. Fizeau (1849) uses a high rpm rotating cogwheel to form a series of light pulses to generated an intensity that is used to measure the velocity of light since a single light pulse cannot form a measurable intensity after propagating a distance of 8 km. To measure the velocity of light requires the time a single light pulse propagates a specific distance. Michelson-Morley interferometer is employed to obtain an optical wavelength that is used in the wave equation (λf = c) to determine the velocity of light but the ether that forms a light wave that is represented with the wave equation does not physically exist (vacuum). Furthermore, a Kerr shutter is used to determine the velocity of light but Kerr's nanosecond shutter speed cannot form a measurable intensity after a single light pulse propagates a distance of 8 km yet the velocity of light is used to justify Maxwell's electromagnetic theory of light. Peace, love and cute, hairy and smelly hippie chicks.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web