Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #635920 > unrolled thread

the speed of light is wrong

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  the speed of light is wrong The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-06-09 11:38 -0700
    Re: the speed of light is wrong pcardinale@volcanomail.com - 2017-06-09 13:36 -0700
      Re: the speed of light is wrong The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-06-09 13:50 -0700
        Re: the speed of light is wrong The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-06-10 10:55 -0700
          Re: the speed of light is wrong The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-06-10 11:18 -0700
            Re: the speed of light is wrong "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-06-10 12:18 -0700
              Re: the speed of light is wrong "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-06-10 13:15 -0700
            Re: the speed of light is wrong The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-06-12 09:40 -0700
              Re: the speed of light is wrong Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-06-12 13:26 -0700
                Re: the speed of light is wrong mosca.muha@gmail.com - 2017-06-13 07:29 -0700
              Re: the speed of light is wrong "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-06-13 15:20 -0700
                Re: the speed of light is wrong "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-06-13 17:03 -0700
                Re: the speed of light is wrong benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-06-13 20:56 -0400
                Re: the speed of light is wrong Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2017-06-18 14:07 -0700
                  Re: the speed of light is wrong "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-06-25 12:31 -0700
                    Re: the speed of light is wrong Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2017-06-27 15:39 -0700
              Re: the speed of light is wrong The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-06-15 09:34 -0700
                Re: the speed of light is wrong The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-06-16 01:36 -0700
                  Re: the speed of light is wrong The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-06-22 10:53 -0700
                    Re: the speed of light is wrong The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-06-23 11:12 -0700
                      Re: the speed of light is wrong The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-06-25 10:51 -0700
                        Re: the speed of light is wrong Peter Percival <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2017-06-25 19:04 +0100
                          Re: the speed of light is wrong The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-06-25 11:30 -0700
                            Re: the speed of light is wrong Peter Percival <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2017-06-25 19:38 +0100
                              Re: the speed of light is wrong "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2017-06-25 15:15 -0400
                          Re: the speed of light is wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-06-26 07:45 +0200
                            Re: the speed of light is wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-06-26 07:56 +0200
                              Re: the speed of light is wrong Jim Petroff <ruuri@twjotr.eo> - 2017-06-27 12:15 +0000
                                Re: the speed of light is wrong Jim Petroff <ruuri@twjotr.eo> - 2017-06-27 12:21 +0000
                                  Re: the speed of light is wrong jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-27 16:22 +0000
                                    Re: the speed of light is wrong Jim Petroff <ruuri@twjotr.eo> - 2017-06-27 20:36 +0000
                                      Re: the speed of light is wrong jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-27 21:00 +0000
                                        Re: the speed of light is wrong Jim Petroff <ruuri@twjotr.eo> - 2017-06-27 21:10 +0000
                                          Re: the speed of light is wrong jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-27 21:52 +0000
                                            Re: the speed of light is wrong Jim Petroff <ruuri@twjotr.eo> - 2017-06-29 09:55 +0000
                                Re: the speed of light is wrong jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-27 16:20 +0000
                          Re: the speed of light is wrong Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2017-06-26 05:22 -0700
                      Re: the speed of light is wrong Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-06-26 06:15 -0700
                        Re: the speed of light is wrong The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-06-26 12:08 -0700
                Re: the speed of light is wrong Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-06-16 08:42 -0700
        Re: the speed of light is wrong "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-11 20:51 +1000
          Re: the speed of light is wrong Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> - 2017-06-12 19:54 +0000
          Re: the speed of light is wrong Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-06-12 13:20 -0700
        Re: the speed of light is wrong pcardinale@volcanomail.com - 2017-06-12 12:31 -0700
      Re: the speed of light is wrong Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-09 16:57 -0500
        Re: the speed of light is wrong benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-06-09 18:54 -0400
      Re: the speed of light is wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-06-10 09:54 +0200
        Re: the speed of light is wrong Kitubu Nkyaku <akntuu@buwkau.kk> - 2017-06-10 11:00 +0000
          Re: the speed of light is wrong Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-06-12 13:16 -0700
    Re: the speed of light is wrong "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-06-10 12:17 -0700
      Re: the speed of light is wrong "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-06-10 13:13 -0700
    Re: the speed of light is wrong Hägar <hsahm@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-10 13:06 -0700
    Re: the speed of light is wrong "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-06-10 21:28 -0700
    Re: the speed of light is wrong "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-06-25 12:30 -0700
      Re: the speed of light is wrong "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-06-25 14:26 -0700

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

#636062

On 10/06/17 06:50, The Starmaker wrote:
> pcardinale@volcanomail.com wrote:
>>
>> On Friday, June 9, 2017 at 11:39:02 AM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
>>> i certaintly wouldn't use any of your..
>>> 'measuring tools'.. to measure it.
>>>
>>>
>>> just as i wouldn't measure Time using some ...clock a nut invented.
>>
>> The speed of light isn't measured anymore.  It's now a defined constant.  The value is exactly 299,792,458 meters per second.

The important universal constant c has a defined value. It also happens 
to be the speed of light relative to its source. But the speed of light 
relative to other objects can have any practical value.
> 
> 


-- 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#636163

"HGW..." <hgw@....> wrote in news:ohj7bv$1j20$2@gioia.aioe.org:

> On 10/06/17 06:50, The Starmaker wrote:
>> pcardinale@volcanomail.com wrote:
>>>
>>> On Friday, June 9, 2017 at 11:39:02 AM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
>>>> i certaintly wouldn't use any of your..
>>>> 'measuring tools'.. to measure it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> just as i wouldn't measure Time using some ...clock a nut invented.
>>>
>>> The speed of light isn't measured anymore.  It's now a defined
>>> constant.  The value is exactly 299,792,458 meters per second. 
> 
> The important universal constant c has a defined value. It also
> happens to be the speed of light relative to its source. But the speed
> of light relative to other objects can have any practical value.

Define "any practical value" in this case. 

-- 
Cujo -  The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls in dfw.*,
alt.paranormal, alt.astrology and alt.astrology.metapsych. Supreme Holy 
Overlord of alt.fucknozzles. Winner of the 8/2000, 2/2003 & 4/2007 HL&S
award. July 2005 Hammer of Thor. Winning Trainer - Barbara Woodhouse 
Memorial Dog Whistle - 12/2005 & 4/2008. COOSN-266-06-01895.
 "Be careful though, your kookshit about how I am this and that will 
reveal who the real kook is." - Edmo in PKB mode.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#636170

On Sunday, June 11, 2017 at 6:51:47 AM UTC-4, HGW... wrote:
> On 10/06/17 06:50, The Starmaker wrote:
> > pcardinale@volcanomail.com wrote:
> >>
> >> On Friday, June 9, 2017 at 11:39:02 AM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
> >>> i certaintly wouldn't use any of your..
> >>> 'measuring tools'.. to measure it.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> just as i wouldn't measure Time using some ...clock a nut invented.
> >>
> >> The speed of light isn't measured anymore.  It's now a defined constant.
> >>  The value is exactly 299,792,458 meters per second.
> 
> The important universal constant c has a defined value. It also happens 
> to be the speed of light relative to its source. But the speed of light 
> relative to other objects can have any practical value.

Care to provide some evidence of that claim?
No one has yet shown anything including light
traveling faster than c.

ed

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#636160

On Friday, June 9, 2017 at 1:49:56 PM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
> pcardinale@volcanomail.com wrote:
> > 
> > On Friday, June 9, 2017 at 11:39:02 AM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
> > > i certaintly wouldn't use any of your..
> > > 'measuring tools'.. to measure it.
> > >
> > >
> > > just as i wouldn't measure Time using some ...clock a nut invented.
> > 
> > The speed of light isn't measured anymore.  It's now a defined constant.  The value is exactly 299,792,458 meters per second.
> 
> 
> Translation: "a defined constant" means, somebody said "That's it, don't question it, it's set in stone..it's our law, don't fuckin break it."
> 

No, that's not what it means.  The speed of light became a defined constant when the definitions of the meter and the second were changed in order to make the standards more accessible.  Obviously the definition doesn't affect the speed of light, it just affects the numerical value that represents it when using standard meters and seconds.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#635949

On 6/9/2017 3:36 PM, pcardinale@volcanomail.com wrote:
> On Friday, June 9, 2017 at 11:39:02 AM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
>> i certaintly wouldn't use any of your..
>> 'measuring tools'.. to measure it.
>>
>>
>> just as i wouldn't measure Time using some ...clock a nut invented.
> 
> The speed of light isn't measured anymore.  It's now a defined constant.  The value is exactly 299,792,458 meters per second.
> 

light is not that fast,  only one foot per nanosecond.

the PC board in your computer is designed such that delays caused by the 
slow speed of light on a PC board do not cause trouble.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#635960

On 6/9/2017 5:57 PM, Serg io wrote:
> On 6/9/2017 3:36 PM, pcardinale@volcanomail.com wrote:
>> On Friday, June 9, 2017 at 11:39:02 AM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
>>> i certaintly wouldn't use any of your..
>>> 'measuring tools'.. to measure it.
>>>
>>>
>>> just as i wouldn't measure Time using some ...clock a nut invented.
>>
>> The speed of light isn't measured anymore.  It's now a defined 
>> constant.  The value is exactly 299,792,458 meters per second.
>>
> 
> light is not that fast,  only one foot per nanosecond.
> 
> the PC board in your computer is designed such that delays caused by the 
> slow speed of light on a PC board do not cause trouble.

To go REALLY fast you need a quantum computer using entanglement!
That's basically using ESP to compute! Way faster than light and proves 
Einstein is an idiot!  And you can take that to the bank.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#635997

Dne 09/06/2017 v 22:36 pcardinale@volcanomail.com napsal(a):
> On Friday, June 9, 2017 at 11:39:02 AM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
>> i certaintly wouldn't use any of your..
>> 'measuring tools'.. to measure it.
>>
>>
>> just as i wouldn't measure Time using some ...clock a nut invented.
> 
> The speed of light isn't measured anymore.  It's now a defined constant.  The value is exactly 299,792,458 meters per second.
> 
Addendum: As it was realized it is more constant and precise
than all previously used distance standards
it was measured with.

-- 
Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer )

A wise man guards words he says,
as they say about him more,
than he says about the subject.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#636003

Poutnik wrote:

>> The speed of light isn't measured anymore.  It's now a defined
>> constant.  The value is exactly 299,792,458 meters per second.
>
> Addendum: As it was realized it is more constant and precise than all
> previously used distance standards it was measured with.

Too bad you can't prove it. You just move your lips. Infact the empirical 
data from measurements shows exactly the opposite. What a shame, at your 
age. You should know better. I would understand a young student, not being 
aware, but you, at your age. What a illegitimate shame.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#636169

On Saturday, June 10, 2017 at 7:00:35 AM UTC-4, Kitubu Nkyaku wrote:
> Poutnik wrote:
> 
> >> The speed of light isn't measured anymore.  It's now a defined
> >> constant.  The value is exactly 299,792,458 meters per second.
> >
> > Addendum: As it was realized it is more constant and precise than all
> > previously used distance standards it was measured with.
> 
> Too bad you can't prove it. You just move your lips. Infact the empirical 
> data from measurements shows exactly the opposite. What a shame, at your 
> age. You should know better. I would understand a young student, not being 
> aware, but you, at your age. What a illegitimate shame.

Oh? So you have empirical data for something moving faster than
299,792,458 meters per second??

Show us and I will personally write to the Nobel committee on your behalf.
ed

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#636021

On Friday, June 9, 2017 at 11:39:02 AM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
> i certaintly wouldn't use any of your..
> 'measuring tools'.. to measure it.
> 
> 
> just as i wouldn't measure Time using some ...clock a nut invented.

Photons never slow down even when imperial thinkers say it takes 200,000 years for photons to go from sun's core and get to Sun's surface.Photons do not bounce as the reason for reflection. I've posted this reality for over 25 years.Still it goes for not.TreBert

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#636024

<http://tinyurl.com/Loudmouth-Glazier-8Feb2017>,
"reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> wrote:
"I posted this reality for over 25 years.Still it goes for not"
explaining why SwineBert is a stinky, habitual Face-Shitter
& a criminal Graveyard vandal who has put a permanentr 
__Stain of Shame__ onto his Jewish Glazier Family Name....

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#636023

"The Starmaker"  wrote in message news:593AEB3E.5E36@ix.netcom.com...

i certaintly wouldn't use any of your..
'measuring tools'.. to measure it.

just as i wouldn't measure Time using some ...clock a nut invented.


*** here's the low-down on the SOL:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p6iA3iD1q4ovgZrhzriOQZNROOXuQzZsvuaquxhCWAA/edit?usp=sharing

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#636052

<http://tinyurl.com/Loudmouth-Glazier-8Feb2017> aka
"reber G=EMC^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> shows
his Radical Extremist Jewish Supremacy by saying:
Meters bull shit.Its 186,282 miles in one second.
I do the impossible. I figured out the method when
I was 15.Way back in 1943.TreBert
>
>
So, Glazier, given all that tell and explain which
one of your 17 theories turned you into a Face Shitter
and a Criminal Graveyard Vandal

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#637675

On Friday, June 9, 2017 at 11:39:02 AM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
> i certaintly wouldn't use any of your..
> 'measuring tools'.. to measure it.
> 
> 
> just as i wouldn't measure Time using some ...clock a nut invented.

At c AA it has no thickness.No time,and needs no space.I think it might be as thick as the diameter of an electron if it has spin.Trebert

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#637687

<"reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> alias
<http://tinyurl.com/Loudmouth-Glazier-8Feb2017> who
shows his Radical Extremism of Jewish Supremacy in the
<http://tinyurl.com/Blog-of-2-fecal-kikes-Mar2017> now wrote:
"At c it has no thickness.No time,and needs no space.I think
it might be as thick as the diameter of an electron if it has spin."
>
>
Now Glazier, given that you know all that, you should be
able to explain why you became such a loudly bragging
Face Shitter & a criminal Graveyard Vandal about whom
Bert's Pool-playing ex-cronies, the Mexicans, added:
Bert is  __ "la judío cerdo idioto" __, (the idiotic Jewish Pig)
especially since Glazier declared:
>
*** "I am a proud Jew with a Superiority complex &
*** an IQ of 122", & "I  know how everything works"
*** "Being Jewish I know this is so very true" -- Bert.
*** __**  "Why am I not loved by all?" --- Bert  **__.
>
>
>
.... ahahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA...AHAHAHAHA...

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web