relativity proven false in 1913

[markprice]

Basically on a rotating surface light speed varies. This explains it precisely @ 3:33

Now hold up before you freak out about "conspiracy theory!" as is common on this site to end relevant topics in my experience. I don't agree with the results confirming the bible or aether because none of that is understood or relevant. It's bad enough that some physicists have spent most their career not knowing the facts--that's the conspiracy--never mentioned until they stumbled across the information...I just wonder if people know about this in general these days.

The other issue is they dismiss the implications with: "This simplistic explanation, however, breaks down in cases where the light is propagating through a medium which has a refractive index that is not one. In that case, relativistic addition of velocities can be used to calculate the lab frame phase velocity of the light moving in the same direction as the rotation as well as for the light moving in the opposite direction from the rotation. The difference in lab frame phase velocities determines the difference in travel times, and this difference in travel times can be multiplied by the optical frequency to determine a phase difference." - wiki

What?

That seems like a lie to me. That (lab frame phase velocities) does not determine the differences in speed of light which already were proven to exist. Sounds to me like a gobblygook excuse for a contradiction that was never accepted or talked about, unless a student brought it up.

Anyone want to take a stab at clarifying this ?

Edited August 5, 2015 by markprice

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

1913 though.

102 year ago... 20 years before Einstein published his General Theory of Relativity, with (lets be honest) fairly primitive technologies and equipment.

The theory makes some sense when you realise relative velocities on a globe are different depending on where on/in the globe you are (ie you're moving faster at the Alps then you are in Denmark). BUT we have 102 years of theories and technological development between us and the theorists cited.

[Mr.United_Nations]

whats with this anti Nasa bashing?

[markprice]

A correction: the lab frame phase velocities does not undermine the differences in speed of light that were already proven to exist.

At the time you would think Einstein would have had to deal with this before publishing his theories.

Anyway I have no idea how optical frequency applies...

[markprice]

whats with this anti Nasa bashing?

don't worry about it.

Edited August 5, 2015 by markprice

[bison]

I believe you'll find that it is the phase velocity of light waves that is affected by the Sagnac instrument. This is not the same as what is generally understood in relativity as the velocity of light, which has been repeatedly demonstrated, over the past century, to be fixed.

It is readily conceded that, under certain circumstances, the phase velocity of light can exceed the fixed speed of light. This does not mean that that energy or information has travelled at greater than the fixed speed of light.

The waves and crests of light waves can be put out of synchronization with one another when traveling in opposite directions in a rotating frame. Those moving in one direction are, in effect, pushed forward, relative to those traveling in the other direction. This lets these waves and crests arrive at their destination slightly sooner, and so cause interference patterns with the other waves.

If there actually were an ether in space that could influence the speed of light, it should have been detected in the Michaelson-Morley experiments, or in the many experiments since then, made to confirm their results, with greater and greater precision. There has been no such detection of variability in the velocity of a beam of light.

Edited August 5, 2015 by bison

[SHaYap]

1919 saw the first successful attempt to measure the gravitational deflection of light. Two British expeditions were organized and sponsored by the Royal Astronomical Society and the Royal Society. Each of the two groups took photographs of a region of the sky centered on the Sun during the May 1919 total solar eclipse and compared the positions of the photographed stars with those of the same stars photographed from the same locations in July 1919 when the Sun was far from that region of the sky. The results showed that light was deflected, and also that this deflection was consistent with general relativity but not with "Newtonian" physics. The subsequent publicity catapulted Einstein to world fame, and led to his having the only ticker-tape parade ever held for a scientist on Broadway in New York City.

With repetitions of eclipse measurements over the next half century, astronomers were able to improve on the accuracy of these first results by only about a factor two, yielding a confirmation of general relativity to within about ten percent. The breakthrough came in 1967 with the realization that simultaneous measurements with a set of radio telescopes (especially, "Very Long Baseline Interferometry") could be used to measure light deflection with much greater accuracy.

In addition to providing the means to test general relativity to high accuracy, the fact that mass deflects light has been a great boon to studies of the universe. Masses acting as gravitational lenses have now become a standard tool of astronomy. They allow astronomers to infer the masses of cosmic objects, and the structure and size scale of the universe (with some caveats). Through their magnifying effect, gravitational lenses have also been used to observe the properties of very distant galaxies and quasars, as well as to search for planets around distant stars.

• einstein online info link
  

Just a little bit of a small part of the greater puzzle that was already solved, verified and proven ~

~

[markprice]

I believe you'll find that it is the phase velocity of light waves that is affected by the Sagnac instrument. This is not the same as what is generally understood in relativity as the velocity of light, which has been repeatedly demonstrated, over the past century, to be fixed.

The waves are altered (time) by centrifugal force. Light as wave pattern interferes with other light in wave form so wouldn't that alter speed?

It is readily conceded that, under certain circumstances, the phase velocity of light can exceed the fixed speed of light. This does not mean that that energy or information has travelled at greater than the fixed speed of light.

You got the waves changing speed and the waves are light...what am I missing here?

The waves and crests of light waves can be put out of synchronization with one another when traveling in opposite directions in a rotating frame. Those moving in one direction are, in effect, pushed forward, relative to those traveling in the other direction. This lets these waves and crests arrive at their destination slightly sooner, and so cause interference patterns with the other waves.

The waves "carry" light or are light, right? going different directions causing interference and speed variation...how is that fixed speed?

If there actually were an ether in space that could influence the speed of light, it should have been detected in the Michaelson-Morley experiments, or in the many experiments since then, made to confirm their results, with greater and greater precision. There has been no such detection of variability in the velocity of a beam of light.

I don't think it (aether) is in space like they supposed, or they say that experiment proves the earth is stationary. IMO it (aether) is a dimension not understood yet engineers have worked with it after Tesla was shut down. I don't know the details yet.

[markprice]

• einstein online info link
  

Just a little bit of a small part of the greater puzzle that was already solved, verified and proven ~

~

So light deflection agrees with relativity. That's fine. It is a working model; I just have to find out why so many people are so confident that they have completely transcended that model. I guess more on that later after I look into it: a suspicious group called AetherForce...

[SHaYap]

So light deflection agrees with relativity. That's fine. It is a working model; I just have to find out why so many people are so confident that they have completely transcended that model. I guess more on that later after I look into it: a suspicious group called AetherForce...

I have no idea about that 'force' ~ not an expert myself by any means ... there are still much fascinating pursuits in regards to this equation of the matter , I just tend to keep close to the reaches known rather than the far fetching beyond the means of what is achievable ~

~

[bison]

The progress of light waves in a beam of light is not quite so rigidly linked to the speed of a beam of light as might be supposed. We know, for example, that in the Doppler shift, light waves can be bunched together or spread apart, when they either move toward us, or away from us at substantial speed.

No one in the sciences, I think, is seriously contending that the Doppler shift causes the speed of light to change, yet the positions of the light waves are changed with respect to those in a beam of light that is moving either toward or away from us at a lesser speed.

It might be helpful to think of light waves as energy variations in a surrounding domain of light; Rather like waves on the sea. The waves do not move the water toward the shore, they move through the water. Wave action does not increase the speed of an ocean current, it floats on top of the current. The sea waves are analogous to light waves, and the sea current to the fixed speed of light.

[markprice]

The progress of light waves in a beam of light is not quite so rigidly linked to the speed of a beam of light as might be supposed. We know, for example, that in the Doppler shift, light waves can be bunched together or spread apart, when they either move toward us, or away from us at substantial speed.

No one in the sciences, I think, is seriously contending that the Doppler shift causes the speed of light to change, yet the positions of the light waves are changed with respect to those in a beam of light that is moving either toward or away from us at a lesser speed.

It might be helpful to think of light waves as energy variations in a surrounding domain of light; Rather like waves on the sea. The waves do not move the water toward the shore, they move through the water. Wave action does not increase the speed of an ocean current, it floats on top of the current. The sea waves are analogous to light waves, and the sea current to the fixed speed of light.

Okay, that is good to know: wave structure, or interference does not effect speed. Thanks. But there was a time difference noted in the experiment...

[markprice]

I have no idea about that 'force' ~ not an expert myself by any means ... there are still much fascinating pursuits in regards to this equation of the matter , I just tend to keep close to the reaches known rather than the far fetching beyond the means of what is achievable ~

~

Yeah but they seem to be achieving, at least in the "borderlands" what was never considered useful to corporate profits.

"General Electric hired Charles Steinmetz to develop that mathematical modeling of Tesla's poly-phase AC electricity. It was really Steinmetz, not Tesla, who "wrote the book" on how the system works! But General Electric was only interested in understanding just enough to make the system work so they could make money with it. They really didn't care what else was possible!"

That kind of thing or "the galaxy in a lightbulb"

...while Dollard is currently being defamed by AetherForce. It's such a mess at the moment it makes me want to figure it out anyway.

[SHaYap]

I'm not sure you are on about about and the reality of it is I have no idea about the maths or theories being this or that ~ no opinions either ... as long as it works like what these gizmos are working towards ~

Public Release:

7-Jul-2015

Omnidirectional free space wireless charging developed

The simultaneous charging of multiple mobile devices at 0.5 meter away from the power source is now possible under the international electromagnetic field guidelines

The Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST)

• eurekalert link
  

Understanding what WiTricity® technology is—transferring electric energy or power over distance without wires—is quite simple.

Understanding how it works is a bit more involved, but it doesn’t require an engineering degree. We’ll start with the basics of electricity and magnetism, and work our way up to the WiTricity technology.

• WiTricity link
  

[Duke Wellington]

Basically on a rotating surface light speed varies. This explains it precisely @ 3:33

Now hold up before you freak out about "conspiracy theory!" as is common on this site to end relevant topics in my experience. I don't agree with the results confirming the bible or aether because none of that is understood or relevant. It's bad enough that some physicists have spent most their career not knowing the facts--that's the conspiracy--never mentioned until they stumbled across the information...I just wonder if people know about this in general these days.

The other issue is they dismiss the implications with: "This simplistic explanation, however, breaks down in cases where the light is propagating through a medium which has a refractive index that is not one. In that case, relativistic addition of velocities can be used to calculate the lab frame phase velocity of the light moving in the same direction as the rotation as well as for the light moving in the opposite direction from the rotation. The difference in lab frame phase velocities determines the difference in travel times, and this difference in travel times can be multiplied by the optical frequency to determine a phase difference." - wiki

What?

That seems like a lie to me. That (lab frame phase velocities) does not determine the differences in speed of light which already were proven to exist. Sounds to me like a gobblygook excuse for a contradiction that was never accepted or talked about, unless a student brought it up.

Anyone want to take a stab at clarifying this ?

Where in the Bible does it explicitly state the Earth is at the centre of the Universe and that other astronomical bodies orbit around it?

[bison]

Okay, that is good to know: wave structure, or interference does not effect speed. Thanks. But there was a time difference noted in the experiment...

Any difference between the arrival time of of one light beam, as compared to the other, can be explained by the motion of the experimental device. Its movement lengthens the path of one light beam with respect to the other. If it has to cover a greater distance, and light has a fixed velocity, it should arrive later.

The same time difference would result if a light path were moved in any linear direction, and then compared to a similar light path that had not been moved. Consider-- A light path that is moved not only has to travel the distance between one end and the other, but also the distance over which it is moved.

Edited August 7, 2015 by bison

[markprice]

I'm not sure you are on about about and the reality of it is I have no idea about the maths or theories being this or that ~ no opinions either ... as long as it works like what these gizmos are working towards ~

about this:

"Wireless Transmission Systems Are Limited To The Speed Of Light, But Only If The Signals Are Electromagnetic In Nature. Tesla And Alexanderson Engineered Wireless Transmission Systems With No Such Limitations That Were Fully Operational By 1917... Thereby Disproving Einstein's Relativity Before It Was Even Generally Believed By The Scientific Community!"

edit: here's the link: The Extraluminal Transmission Systems of Tesla and Alexanderson by Eric Dollard

Edited August 8, 2015 by markprice

[markprice]

Where in the Bible does it explicitly state the Earth is at the centre of the Universe and that other astronomical bodies orbit around it?

I did not write them down but I heard there are a bunch of bible quotes that established the flat earth model. That's a whole other area of research you could do on your own. If you go to youtube and check out flat earth you will see those who say it confirms the bible model.

[markprice]

Any difference between the arrival time of of one light beam, as compared to the other, can be explained by the motion of the experimental device. Its movement lengthens the path of one light beam with respect to the other. If it has to cover a greater distance, and light has a fixed velocity, it should arrive later.

The same time difference would result if a light path were moved in any linear direction, and then compared to a similar light path that had not been moved. Consider-- A light path that is moved not only has to travel the distance between one end and the other, but also the distance over which it is moved.

I think it is a little bit trickier than that because both locations are moving simultaneously so there is no stretch in distance.

[markprice]

Early experiments in case anyone is interested:

Dollard ended up suffering basically the same fate as Tesla. Just a tragedy. If I could send that guy one million dollars to make his last years productive I would do so immediately, but then that work would probably be destroyed as well.

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

I often hear about how fantastic Teslas wireless electricity transmitter would have been, but even if you could transmit electricity without wires, you would still have to make the electricity in the first place. So there would still be the cost of the electricity generation.

A lot of it would be wasted in transmission. If you pump power into the atmosphere power would falls by the inverse square of the distance.

So what is the supposed gain in doing so ?

[markprice]

And to round out the conspiracy (not a theory) illustrated in post #7 notice Einstein got a parade. What a joke. Government controlled "science" is not the actual science people need. We all know funding is directed in the wrong direction (war, control) but instead of getting p***ed off I will leave it at that. Normally I would go off on a rant here which only leads to locked threads.

[markprice]

I often hear about how fantastic Teslas wireless electricity transmitter would have been, but even if you could transmit electricity without wires, you would still have to make the electricity in the first place. So there would still be the cost of the electricity generation.

A lot of it would be wasted in transmission. If you pump power into the atmosphere power would falls by the inverse square of the distance.

So what is the supposed gain in doing so ?

Free endless supply of electricity...nevermind.

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

Free endless supply of electricity...nevermind.

The Wardencclyffe tower used a coal powered generator to make the electricity. So how could it be free and endless ?

I am not saying that wireless electricity isn't possible. It is. But it is very inefficient and you still have to make the elctricity in the first place !

[bmk1245]

The Wardencclyffe tower used a coal powered generator to make the electricity. So how could it be free and endless ?

I am not saying that wireless electricity isn't possible. It is. But it is very inefficient and you still have to make the elctricity in the first place !

He has no clue what is the difference between electricity production and transmission.