Masanov

You see guys, I did not know, that short answers of Swansont should be accepted as convincing.

Guys, write to rainbow-calendar@hotmail.ru Dave, pls give your whereabouts, I mean address. Where is the headquaters of SF? Give pls also a telephone number!

A lot of posts are short and misleading, guys do not read them, so 2000000000 short posts are the main goal in this forum, not real discussions. After 3000 visitor you are trying to close the thread as if you afraid of pemissivism.Happy celebrations! By the way, quote at least one experiment proving relativity! Annoy me with famous experiment! Annoy me with famous experiment!

Forum is for discussions. You are trying to make order as an arbitrary ruler. You are ordering around like a Bush! If you close all my threads, I will find good forums elsewhere. I noticed, that your forum is poorly visited. So, I understand why!!! Your forum is just for stealing ideas.

Dupes, don't be duped! As in water clocks, where water flows into the reservoir with a certain speed, the same is with the LIGHT TIME CLOCK, where light flows into its tube with constant speed. Nevermind, that the reservoir of LTC is filling in slowly then, when viewed from other systems. In all systems the speed with which light flows into this reservoir is the same, acc. to postulates themselves.

Soon to come animations of Michelson and Morley experiment. The table will rotate, the eye will look, the "wind will blow" but will not be seen, because of a mistaken proportions, shown above. First animation will be very simple: rotation of the table and explaination of the experiment.

blinks of light of the mobile source if on the orbit (shifts of light could occur due to accelerations of the mobile source along the orbit); in different directions density/frequency of blinks is different; the same should be with atomic clock tickings (my view:time of atomic clocks should not show constant tickings in different directions): Super answer to all questions piled so far. 1) atomic clocks; 2) magnets; 3) what if LTC do not contract or stretch when observed, but just viewed with different time data (by not phychs). Short answer: as in a pipe of water clocks, according to postulates time flows with constant speed, so if time data viewed is different, then rescale LTC's time ruler, dupes.

So, you want to star in my thread? You like the word LTC?

In your own tread. If LTC is not useful for checking Relativity' date=' then relative time is not seen. You have to calculate it. How? next time, slowly. I read about atomic clock many times... By the way there was a remark that in devices like LTC seen from another inertial systems (IS) there should be less waves [less chains'] observed, which is a very biased assertion. So, I read your URLS. So, one can build LTC and demand to show, where, when and why they observe LTC in other IS with not full amount of waves.

If this idea is true [3rd idea of space] then in MM experiment the EYE before the turn of the table and the EYE after the turn of the table will see identical waves and their identical speeds. Though the difference is there in waves [lengths, speeds], but it cannot be noticed because of PROPORTIONS between lengths and speeds of the waves. In the picture 1st EYE) "BLACK" wave and "RED" wave big and with fast speed (before the turn of the table) 2nd EYE) "BLACK" wave and "RED" wave short and with slow speed (after the turn of the table) Compare this case with the fourth idea http://www.rainbow-calendar.hotmail.ru/MMExpEye(1).htm

See Luke, people like LTC and are trying to discuss how to use it as a checking device. So far I have noticed only calculations and references. And tickings, . All we need is clinkings, clunking sounds here and a good plan. So far there has been no good propositions to SEE relative times by LTC, except for once by Halucinogenia. Halucinogenia is good in calculations. Calculate the speed with which one should move with S' to see LTC of S half filled with light, when LTC in S' is full. Light moves in LTC very slowly like a mercury, or like that. Even observer should have the possibility to notice that. If you do not know how to use LTC, then sorry, I can't help it. Let us speak in another way. LTC is a clock? Apply it in Relativity! Why you speak of other clocks? Propose to pilots this device and ask them to make a diary day by day.

Why you argues about the fates of my thread. Go make yours and prove it. Say, you were not on that trip. You did not mentioned how much tickings there were on the Earth, how much in flight. Make LTC and go checking. I would be greatful to you, if you do this. You mentioned only seconds, how much tickings there should be in a seconds. What is the connection between your TICKINGS and postulates? You see it is the theme of your separate thread. There should not be a thread in a thread, hampering development. You uttered your opinion that you see not relative speeds, but times. OK, use LTC to show them. Place orders to make it, or you may place here plausible plan, I will place order, if you plan will convince ONE FIRM I KNOW. I am not going to discuss tickings!

directions: to the plate, from the plate and from reflectors No need to quote so much. Or main direction to the EYE.

In MM exp thread there are 4 ideas of space. You have to tell you prefer light to spread in the inertial system of the mobile source of light or in the IS of [space==EATHER]?

PLS make your separate thread to test me there and do not make me harm by intefering with questions. You both agreed with three times, having angles attached. I appreciate your help, so I do not need your fight here any more. I have found guys who make calculations, read carefully, propose alternate variants. Just look at the page, only your interferance!

OR STRETCHED

PLS discuss atomic clocks in yourOWNthread. atomic clocks have some distances for electrons or light to pass them? It's Geiger clock?, so why are you thinking that dilations of tickings is the proof of relativity, it's the proof of accelerations in the orbit. The article you mentioned stated, that the nav system would have had the problem if clocks had not been slowed down beforehand. So, when you are together with the clock really slowed down, you see this slowing in your inertial system, not in the system you are observing. Then this is not relativity. Moreover, LTC thread is just to discuss the miracle, that light can move inside the tube with the speed 1 cm per second. That is it. So, if you have built LTC already, then show how it works. Does light speed change in the LTC tube, if you move in a train? When someone builds LTC and explains, how it works, and if light really can move inside the tube of LTC like a murcury, discussion is closed! If you want to prove with LTC or atomic clocks that you observe different time peeping into another inertial system, show it. Your atomic clocks showed data of pilots moving with clocks, these pilots did not peeped into other inertial systems.

Good. Nice. But i did not propose length contraction. See the following explanation, why in your case you should rescale LTC if it is contracted Only to Halucinigenia because the proposed is not in the course of discussion: his layout is different SUPERANSWER SUPERANSWER SUPERANSWER SUPERANSWER SUPERANSWER SUPERANSWER Your calculations can be done alternatively in both frames S and S'. You just install 2 LTCs into each of the frames. One - shows real time of the frame[you are in] and the other shows the relative time of the opposite frame. You [in S], or you [in S'], judging your real time LTC data see that light in the relative LTC tube is slower vertically, because of its tube's length change. So, because longitudinal light speeds in the real time LTC and in the relative time LTC are proportionately different, then time is common. So, the length change is a FACTOR TO CONSIDER not to use relative light time clocks for observations and measurements of other inertial systems times. Use non-relative LTC of your frames. For example, LTC of your frames can exactly measure the speed of light moving vertically in a relative LTC tube. Though your proposal deviates the discussion that relative times instead of relative speeds of the light pulses are pure calculations and not seen, it's very nice of you to help. Generally, your task is the same as water clocks of different diametres but with the same speed of water flow. If the time ruler on these water reservoirs remain the same, and you will get lazy to rescale a ruler, you will have problems with time data. As in water clocks [where time flows with the speed of water in tubes], in LTCs time also flows with the speed of light, and the postulates demand C to be constant in all systems, so in your case just rescale LTC with bigger diametre. SUPERANSWER SUPERANSWER SUPERANSWER SUPERANSWER SUPERANSWER SUPERANSWER

http://www-astronomy.mps.ohio-state.../Unit5/gps.html does not work You did not answer the question: if you see different distances light pulses passed for one LTC time, you have relative speeds or times?

Here is the mobile source of light, blinking. It is the 3rd idea explained and historical. Light spreads not in the inertial system of the mobile source!!!!!... It spreads in the Eather. That is why when striken against the mirrors in MM experiment LIGHT was not influenced by EATHER WIND. In main direction of MM exp we had identical waves of light and identical speeds. In this situation EYE before the turn of the table will see two beams with identical waves, and after the turn of the table, though waves before and after the table turn should be different [soon animation to this]. Also wait for general animation of MM experiment and summarizing animation of mistakes. So, MM exp mistakes are: 1) light in MM exp was not in the EATHER inertial system, though it was originally thought that EATHER is a conveyer of light. Having stated that there's no EATHER WIND is not enough to state that there's no EATHER. 2) the case, when light spreads in the inertial system of EATHER was not checked, and for this we need 2 sources of light, not one [which was the case]; as EATHER was not checked profoundly, then MM exp should be remade. 3) So-o-o-o-o!!! I think One cannot use MM exp to check movement in space, because in all 4 cases waves of light enter EYE in proportions of their speeds to their lengths.

ATTENTION! I do not answer when someone is deliberately mixing up what I have said and is making me a liar in public.

You see LTC in your system and in the system you are observing. When light appears on the exit of the LTC tube in your system, it should be on the exit of the system observed. = if you contract or stretch the distance passed by the light pulse, then you sctretch or contract the speed, with which the light has passed this distance. Not to pass, has passed!

Thank you for references, before I answer your reference I need a break... one cannot pay for the internet and read at the same time. No, you just imagine, that you see slight difference in time. All million times SEEN have vectors and are IMAGINED for common LTC time. In the long run explaine, why times have angles. If your references do not explain this, so why you gave them to me. Explain by by your words.

Relative speeds are illogical? You cannot imagine LTC time of S for all million pulse in S'? Then what you can imagine? Then leave it to Scotland Yard.