Clay Gillespie Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 Thought Experiment - We sent a radio wave signal to a craft we have launched that is near Mars that takes 13 minute to be received telling the craft to turn on a light. How much longer then 13 minutes does it take us to see the light? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 1 minute ago, Clay Gillespie said: Thought Experiment - We sent a radio wave signal to a craft we have launched that is near Mars that takes 13 minute to be received telling the craft to turn on a light. How much longer then 13 minutes does it take us to see the light? It would take 26 minutes: 13 for the signal to get there and the same for the light to return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 3 minutes ago, Clay Gillespie said: How much longer then 13 minutes does it take us to see the light? *than Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay Gillespie Posted October 3, 2019 Author Share Posted October 3, 2019 No, the light is already there. We can see the craft in a telescope. Not the craft 13 minutes ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 It still took 13 minutes for the photons to arrive at your telescope Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay Gillespie Posted October 3, 2019 Author Share Posted October 3, 2019 (edited) It took radio waves thirteen minutes. The telescope sees mars and our craft as it is now, not thirteen minutes in the past. That would mean Jupiter is 18 minutes and so on. Not the case. Edited October 3, 2019 by Clay Gillespie Clarification Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 2 minutes ago, Clay Gillespie said: It took radio waves thirteen minutes. The telescope sees mars and our craft as it is now, not thirteen minutes in the past. What makes you think that? Why would one form of light (radio waves) take 13 minutes but another form of light (visible) not? ! Moderator Note Moved to Speculations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 41 minutes ago, Clay Gillespie said: The telescope sees mars and our craft as it is now, not thirteen minutes in the past. False Also, the actual time depends on where earth and mars are relative to one another. 13 minutes is the average travel time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 1 hour ago, Clay Gillespie said: No, the light is already there. We can see the craft in a telescope. Not the craft 13 minutes ago. It takes 13 minutes for the photons from the light you turned on to arrive on earth. That light isn’t “already there” What you see in the telescope is indeed the view of the craft from 13 minutes ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Janus Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 2 hours ago, Clay Gillespie said: It took radio waves thirteen minutes. The telescope sees mars and our craft as it is now, not thirteen minutes in the past. That would mean Jupiter is 18 minutes and so on. Not the case. When it's at its closest, we would see Jupiter as it was some 35 min ago. This delay is how Ole Romer made The first quantitative measure of the speed of light. By observing eclipses of Io, one of Jupiter's satellites, he was able to note that the observed timing of these eclipses varied in a pattern that matched how the distance between the Earth and Jupiter changed. This shift in the observed timing was caused by the fact that light took longer to get from Jupiter and the Earth when it was at its furthest than it did at it closest. The amount of the shift and change in distance gave him the speed of the light. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay Gillespie Posted October 4, 2019 Author Share Posted October 4, 2019 If we send a broadcast to every ship we have in space. Here’s the outcome I believe happens, minus out the here to there time of radio waves and the lights come on and are visible instantly. Put high speed cameras on every telescope involved, write down all Projected travel times of transmission and begin capturing images. Send the longest one first, shortest last, to synchronize them all to come on at once.So send 13 min then 11min then 6 min, so there is one event at T-0. What I predict will be seen is the recording of the same time frame on each camera for the visible appearance of light. The counter supposition is that the reverse order will present, 6 min later you’ll see 6, then 11 min later you’ll see 11, then 13 min later you’ll see 13. But this I contend with, I’m all in on the original proposition, Synchronized Illumination. Janus: We can measure the shadows of light from the sun and learn something, but we’re in the light bulb of the sun. We’re not in the light bulb we’re turning on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Janus Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 1 hour ago, Clay Gillespie said: If we send a broadcast to every ship we have in space. Here’s the outcome I believe happens, minus out the here to there time of radio waves and the lights come on and are visible instantly. Put high speed cameras on every telescope involved, write down all Projected travel times of transmission and begin capturing images. Send the longest one first, shortest last, to synchronize them all to come on at once.So send 13 min then 11min then 6 min, so there is one event at T-0. What I predict will be seen is the recording of the same time frame on each camera for the visible appearance of light. The counter supposition is that the reverse order will present, 6 min later you’ll see 6, then 11 min later you’ll see 11, then 13 min later you’ll see 13. But this I contend with, I’m all in on the original proposition, Synchronized Illumination. Janus: We can measure the shadows of light from the sun and learn something, but we’re in the light bulb of the sun. We’re not in the light bulb we’re turning on. The universe doesn't care what you believe. And what you believe what would happen is not what would happen in reality. Light is the same thing as radio waves, just at a different frequency. We already have direct evidence that light doesn't travel instantaneously. The Apollo astronauts left a reflector on the Moon. We have fired a laser at this reflector and measured the time it took to return. Laser are just a type of light. If light traveled instantly, there would have been no delay between firing the laser and seeing the reflection. As it was, the delay was the same as it would be expected if the light traveled at ~300,000 km.sec out to and back from the Moon. Lidar, which is like radar but uses light instead wouldn't work if things behaved like you claim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay Gillespie Posted October 4, 2019 Author Share Posted October 4, 2019 (edited) O.k Janus, the speed of light would be a different constant in a different solar system. “The speed of light is relative to the force of ejection from the center of origin.” But that must be a stable emanation, like our sun, We Are In That Center Of Force. The lighter in your pocket ignited will create a nested center of force, that center of force will become bigger the father it is from the superior center of force. Simply put the lighter creates a circumference of force, a nested center of force, the further away from the sun (Superior Center) that nested center (Inferior Center) is the greater the circumference of the Inferior center of force will be. Also realize this Janus, the laser example, is light traveling through light, the result is how fast does the power of that laser travel through the constant emanation of light from the sun. It would be different in a different solar system with a different sun, that had a different power of emanation. Edited October 4, 2019 by Clay Gillespie Misspelling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 What is the BS and why is it continuing? Especially given rules in the Speculations forum... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay Gillespie Posted October 4, 2019 Author Share Posted October 4, 2019 (edited) Can you add anything intelligent iPad? If you can’t prove or disprove don’t interject. Edited October 4, 2019 by Clay Gillespie Clarification Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 Just now, Clay Gillespie said: Can add anything intelligent iPad? Lol. Owned by autocorrect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay Gillespie Posted October 4, 2019 Author Share Posted October 4, 2019 Can’t speak to the Physics? IPerson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 9 minutes ago, Clay Gillespie said: Can’t speak to the Physics? You haven’t presented any Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay Gillespie Posted October 4, 2019 Author Share Posted October 4, 2019 Disprove what has you so worked up heckler. I’m sure the rules don’t say everything over Inow’s head is excluded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted October 5, 2019 Share Posted October 5, 2019 (edited) 5 hours ago, Clay Gillespie said: O.k Janus, the speed of light would be a different constant in a different solar system. “The speed of light is relative to the force of ejection from the center of origin.” But that must be a stable emanation, like our sun, We Are In That Center Of Force. The lighter in your pocket ignited will create a nested center of force, that center of force will become bigger the father it is from the superior center of force. Simply put the lighter creates a circumference of force, a nested center of force, the further away from the sun (Superior Center) that nested center (Inferior Center) is the greater the circumference of the Inferior center of force will be. Also realize this Janus, the laser example, is light traveling through light, the result is how fast does the power of that laser travel through the constant emanation of light from the sun. It would be different in a different solar system with a different sun, that had a different power of emanation. I'm sorry but nothing in the above is correct. Radio waves is part of the EM spectrum and so is photons. The constant c gives the maximum possible speed of any information exchange. This is incredibly well established and tested. It has nothing to do with one solar system compared to another. The speed limit c even applies to gravitational waves, and any other possible interaction. If the sun were to suddenly explode it would take 8 minutes before we would even notice on Earth. Your personal misconceptions and believes are nothing compared to well established tests of the speed limit as applied under GR. Edited October 5, 2019 by Mordred Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay Gillespie Posted October 5, 2019 Author Share Posted October 5, 2019 What do you think establishes the em spectrum, I’ll spell it out, the constant emanation of the sun. The earth is a light bulb nested within a light bulb. And yes it is well tested. And constant c is the conditions that exist within that bulb. Wrong answer on the sun, lights out when it goes boom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncool Posted October 5, 2019 Share Posted October 5, 2019 8 minutes ago, Clay Gillespie said: And yes it is well tested. Can you cite those tests? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay Gillespie Posted October 5, 2019 Author Share Posted October 5, 2019 Hey Bookmark, I’ll tell you what I have in common with Einstein, I quit reading other people’s work. -2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted October 5, 2019 Share Posted October 5, 2019 12 hours ago, Clay Gillespie said: Can you add anything intelligent iPad? If you can’t prove or disprove don’t interject. Indeed. Back up your claims, or we’re done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay Gillespie Posted October 5, 2019 Author Share Posted October 5, 2019 Make a direct contention, I’ll counter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts