sananda

The mechanisms are understood, but again the why is just ignored and is the same as magic, just like gravity.

not really, it shows that time is related to the speed of one object relative to another... yes the constancy of light comes into the equation... but it doesn't verify that c is constant to all observers. so what you're saying is there have been no practical experiments done with moving observers and light sources?

quantized meaning take a segment out of the wave... sher you could quantize a wave on the ocean if you wanted to.

Yes I was aware of GPS but is that not to synchronise clocks and has more to do with inertia than light speed (if you ignore the intrinsic links)? My hypothesis predicts that light speed will be measured as c where a sensor is moving towards a light source because the sensors time will have sped up in proportion to the addition of speeds keeping light speed at c. I want to see the results of experiments where the sensor is moving away from the light... I'll take a look at the Vessot rocket experiment, cheers. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedjust looking at vessot and again it is just meauring clock tick rates. this is different to measuring 'c' from a moving observers perspective.

mr. skeptic. you certainly live up to the name Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged That's actually beautiful, thanks for that, I had never heard of Cherenkov radiation. Now is the boom coming from the electron's effect on ether or the interaction with other elecrtons within the matter? Surely that gives us hope that exceeding light speed in the vacuum of space is possible?

where's the evidence of an actual photon though? imagine a tiny dust particle in air, it could be affected by a sound wave. the dust particle would move with any currents in the air also... electrons vs virtual particles?

I totally agree that there is no magic only processes and systems we do not fully understand. As for your comments on the placebo effect, lucky we're in pseudoscience or your thread would have been moved here

Michelson Morley's experiment was looking for ether drag as they thought like everyone else that light propagated along this ether... they did these experiments in basements and they did find drag, maybe it was biased or caused by error but most of the experiments did find it... I love the fact that one of them tried it in a place where there were thinner walls because he couldn't let it go... The experiment was like throwing a ball up in the air whilst sitting on a open top bus... wind will catch the ball... but maybe simply being on a planet meant it was more like throwing it on a closed top bus with only the window open? Either way, it was valid for some scientists to remove ether at this point and explore that possibility, but we know it exists today, though we now call it something else entirely... so why is it not valid to try and solve it with this ether in mind? Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged just reading those links, both test for ether drag not for light speed at a moving target.

Was the craft travelling fast enough to cause significant time effects? I would say the experiment would need to be carefully planned out so all the variables are accounted for... Maybe it can't be done?

Some scientists back then thought it was a physical one right? Say we could travel faster than the speed of light... would there be a photonic boom at the atomic level?

As many mass-less particles as you want can exist in one place if they are waves. Rainman, something gives matter (with mass) momentum. Also, the resistance to change in direction shows that there is something going on in the universe behind the scenes... matter is clutching to something that it can move freely in one direction through... The Dirac Sea is an interesting concept that I'm sure some of the members here get excited about in it's QFT form... I believe Dirac described this as aether too This field exists, we know that right? So matter has to travel through it, so where's the drag? What if the field has a pattern and atoms configure themselves to roll along it nicely? I know, I know, speculation... so sue me!

i guess it bothers me that we can't even approach light speed... they said the same about planes and the speed of sound, and look I know that these things are worlds apart because mass is connected to energy whereas a plane has to cut through air... i love the principle of supercavitation with submarines, perhaps matter causes similar type of effect on space time and thus can glide freely through space.

Are you suggesting these experiments used light from the sun or that they incorporated the suns gravitational effect on ether into the calculations?

cool insane alien... can I learn here?

thanks Mr. Skeptic... can you tell me about any particular experiments using moving sensors. I'm aware of the atomic clocks speeding up the further you get from earth but specifically i'd like to see results on experiments where lasers are directed at sensors moving towards the light source and sensors moving away from the light source... it must be something that's done with satellites on a daily basis?

Look at a single atom and the electron cloud that surrounds it... It takes energy to form something so beautiful and keep it burning brightly... The energy goes into creating the illusion of volume, the illusion of mass. The animation of matter is the action, gravity is the equal but opposite reaction. Halclem reckons the energy goes into another universe, so the atom is just a sink for this energy... I think that we can stay in this dimension and simply state that gravity is the result of the fuel being used up in the animation of matter itself... a flame burning oxygen to shine is about as good an analogy as you will get. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged no problem, i thought the question was directed at my response.

come on, you have to admit the rubber sheet must be sagging it's so overused at this stage... I am a 100% supporter of relativity.

I agree totally, it is no more magic than Newtonian. Newton as much as said it was beyond his comprehension and preposterous to think an object could act on another magically without a medium. The geometry is a modified Cartesian though... I suggest the geometry is Cartesian but that the atmosphere of the block varies and this affects the matter and energy traversing it. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged I've another theory too, it is that you're 13. I can cut and paste some formulas from Wikipedia if you want me to... what would that prove. For me even the fact that mass increases as you speed up until the point that you need infinite energy to get it to light speed suggests that space is thick with ether, and though it is not the resistive wind that michelson-morley were searching for it means there is another system in operation. For example if energy is being plucked from virtual particles, which we all know permeate space, then space would have a kind of stickiness... if it is pattern based then moving through it at a constant speed should not be a problem as the matter absorbing energy changes it's flywheel speed... perhaps it is this change in absorption rate that causes objects to resist motion.

it would be easy enough to hide in space if you've managed to overcome light speed and gravity.

how many times has the rubber sheet been analogy been used on this forum... i wish people would think for themselves.

if you know how the placebo effect works please share!!! ok replace magic with "all unexplained phenomenon" can be termed science we do not understand yet as for the arthur c. clarke point, it took Christianity a long time to get where it has... give arthur some time

An atom absorbs energy at a constant rate based on its atomic weight... In fact its atomic weight is a direct result of how fast it absorbs ether. Atomic weight and G are therefore intrinsically linked The electron cloud is the result of the absorption of energy The absorption of energy gives matter it's volumetric properties The electron cloud pattern shows how energy is being absorbed from the ether

yes but to validate the why people perform experiments and if we can get to the why of gravity we can combat it... if we just analyse the way it works and forget about the why, we will always be trapped by it. can you see the difference?

isn't it true that the photon is only a quantum measurement that came from the discovery of the photoelectric effect!!! such short-sightedness to throw away the fact that light is a wave only... you could fill a sail with wave energy be it water, air, light etc. what if the electrons produced are a result of some other process such as the transfer of extra energy into an atom... an inversion of the way light is emitted from atoms when electrons jump between shells???

That experiment was designed to measure ether drag or wind... and funny enough it did and still does, though it's nothing like as strong as expected. There's no moving parts relative to the light source... It just shows that firing light into ether in all directions makes negligible difference to the measurement of light speed. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedhas anyone measured it using a moving detector such as a satellite?