Speed of light

Many Internet forums have carried discussion of the Electric Universe hypothesis. Much of that discussion has added more confusion than clarity, due to common misunderstandings of the electrical principles. Here we invite participants to discuss their experiences and to summarize questions that have yet to be answered.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Speed of light

Unread postby Royboy » Sun Jul 23, 2017 1:20 am

One of Wal thornhill's videos he states that light is instantaneous... Also Theoria Apophasis aka Ken Wheeler states the same. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcoYRofMtyk&t=905s
How then does the TBP explain the variations in the eclipse of Jupiter's moons ? which was used to calculate the speed of light. Also the light year has no meaning and the 'red shift' cannot be a Doppler effect. So how are space distances measured ?
Royboy
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2017 4:24 pm
Location: Mount Gambier, South Australia

Re: Speed of light

Unread postby Sam Batchelar » Wed Jul 26, 2017 10:26 am

Royboy wrote:One of Wal thornhill's videos he states that light is instantaneous... Also Theoria Apophasis aka Ken Wheeler states the same. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcoYRofMtyk&t=905s
How then does the TBP explain the variations in the eclipse of Jupiter's moons ? which was used to calculate the speed of light. Also the light year has no meaning and the 'red shift' cannot be a Doppler effect. So how are space distances measured ?



There will have been a considerable quantities of distances measured in space using 'parallax' measurement. Here the object where the desired distance is to be measured has to be in-front of a background (so to speak), observation of the object from two positions yields a measurement of the change in the objects position with relation to the background, the change (in position) is directly proportional to the distance between the two observation points (perpendicular to the distance to be ascertained) while the distance to the object to be measured is inversely proportional to the change in the position of the object against the background while the distance between the observation points is constant. To maximise the observable 'parallax' (change in position of the object) it is desirable to ascertain two measurement positions with a maximum distance between them allowing the parallax over the two positions to become tangible for a distant object. The greatest distance (between observation points) we currently have available involves observation twice over the course of the year (where the distance is approximately twice the approximated distance to the sun), however utilising these measurement positions requires accurate information about the planets orbit which is a area for error with this method, a less significant area for error is the motion of the distant (background) object used to ascertain the measurement.

A alternative approach would be to have two observation points where the distance to the object is exactly perpendicular to the distance to the second observation point, then the angle created at the distant object can be ascertained and from that angle and the distance between the observation points using the arctan function the distance to the object.

For observation of distance objects where the two previously stated techniques are in-practical there are techniques employed which are dependant on the idea that light decays at the same rate through different mediums allowing a accurate distance to be measured from a brightness measurement. This is a assumption based on the idea that light propagates without any medium present. It is also dependant on the idea that fields can exist independently of any object.

Furthermore for measurement of extreme distances of barely visible objects theories of expansion of the universe have been birthed from a age of science which focuses more on the experiments than the interpretation of the experiments themselves leading to erroneous theories which do not withstand rigorous and clear reasoning and logic.

It can be said that as the distances measured increases the number of assumptions and poorly thought through theories associated with ascertaining these measurements likewise increases.


With relation to the speed of light again this is built from Maxwells concept of transverse solely electro magnetic propagation, there are several reasons as to why this theory is questionable, one is that transverse vibrations exist only with some kind of boundary condition, another is that there are several report of measurements which exceed the velocity of light, the idea of the velocity of light being some kind of universal constant again is also dependant on the idea that light exists independent of any medium and therefor its velocity cannot be manipulated by change in that mediums physical properties. Once the idea is presented that light is a longitudinal wave in a medium inducing field strength fluctuations of a certain intensity and frequency to result in this wave being categorised as light then the velocity of this oscillation becomes dependant on the medium therefor it can be any quantity. This is a more favourable suggestion as a product of both reasons given above; that transverse vibrations exist only with some kind of boundary condition and that there are several report of measurements which exceed the velocity of light. Furthermore the Maxwell idea of a constant ratio between magnetic and dielectric forces existing independent of any medium applied to the motion of bodies through space such that the same ratio applies to give a limiting speed to the propagation velocity of a object also contradicts laws associated with the motion of bodies. Light is a finite velocity so a finite quantity of force creating a constant acceleration over a determined period results in acceleration beyond the velocity of light (after a sufficient extension of the period) excluding any drag / external forces. However this is un-neccasary as it is adequate to replace the Maxwell idea at the point of there being no boundary condition existing in space in conjunction with the contradictory measurements; for a theory / suggestion which can logically exist.

Considering a theory of a eather propagating longitudinal waves the wave velocity becomes a function of density and stiffness while the motion of some body is arrested by the medium to a degree where by its velocity can be manipulated to any quantity as a product of applied force. Clearly the wave velocity and the velocity of the object are independent of one another when the objects velocity is modulated by the magnitude of the applied force.
Sam Batchelar
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 5:03 pm

Re: Speed of light

Unread postby prioris55555 » Thu Aug 24, 2017 6:08 pm

Ken Wheeler essentially says

Light doesn't exist. Light is an attribute of the ether. It is like your shadow. The ether compression and rarefraction that is creating light is probably near instantaneous. I would assume it is longitudinal. The attribute - light - of that ether is slower and mat seem transverse like. He says it has been proven that light slows down when going thru a medium like glass but resumes it speed after that. What caused that "light" to speed up again. Interesting points.

As far as parallax measurement, it seems they are measuring the attribute. Not the ether.

Wal says latest satellites can measure 1000LY. They say such and such a star is so many light years away. As long as nobody gets there, there will not be in proof that it is that far away. All those distances can be fairy tales. ... who will ever prove it is wrong... we'll be long dead by the time that happens.
prioris55555
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2017 8:27 am

Re: Speed of light

Unread postby Markhsmit » Wed Aug 30, 2017 11:44 pm

My understanding of Relativity is that any frame of reference can be used as a reference to calculating speed of another object. Therefore I have chosen the photon's frame of reference. According to Relativity arguments, time dilates at faster speeds, and for the photon time does not exist. Therefore the photon is everywhere at the same time, it does not travel, and everything else travels at speeds set by this reference. Light becomes the backdrop.

Fine, so I then set the speed of light at zero (0) since it is timeless and speed requires time. When this is done, many mathematical equations that use the speed of light (c) appear to become meaningless to me. For example with E=mc^2, energy has no value, and the equation cannot be algebraically rearranged. However, setting this speed to zero explains why nothing can go slower than this (or faster according to standard model) and this makes sense to me. So Einstein's limitations are still preserved. Or are they?

Firstly, is this an acceptable frame of reference? And secondly, what happens to current mathematical models if we set light at zero speed? What is currently used as our zero speed, and what does that mean?

Cheers!
Markhsmit
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2017 8:07 am

Re: Speed of light

Unread postby Solar » Tue Oct 03, 2017 6:22 pm

Abstract

Contrary to the assertion of Special Relativity, the speed of light is not always constant relative to a moving observer. The Global Positioning System (GPS) shows that the speed of light in the Earth Centered Inertial (ECI) non-rotating frame remains at c relative to the frame—but not relative to an observer or receiver moving in that frame. When a GPS receiver changes its translation speed relative to the ECI frame, the speed of light measured relative to the receiver changes. A crucial experiment of the constancy of the speed of light relative to a moving receiver could be conducted in the following way: Let two GPS satellites and two airplanes be positioned in a straight line. Let the two airplanes travel at the same speed directly toward one of the two satellites and directly away from the other satellite. The travel time differences of GPS signals arriving at the two airplanes is measured and recorded with the airplanes flying first toward one of the satellites and then flying the opposite direction toward the other satellite. The travel time differences obtained as the airplanes fly in opposite directions are compared. If the travel time difference is the same when the velocity of the airplanes is changed, then the speed of light is indeed constant relative to the moving airplanes, otherwise it is not. The calculation using the GPS range equation and the results of a Real-Time Kinematic (RTK) differential GPS test have shown that the constancy of the speed of light relative to moving airplanes is not correct. The change of the time difference could reach about 10 ns for subsonic airplanes and 30 ns for supersonic airplanes. The result of this crucial experiment is not only important scientifically, but also indicates the possibility of a new way to directly measure vehicle speed relative to the ECI frame.

Conducting a Crucial Experiment of the Constancy of the Speed of Light Using GPS - Comments on Ashby's "Relativity and the Global Positioning System. - Ruyong Wang, Ronald R. Hatch
"Our laws of force tend to be applied in the Newtonian sense in that for every action there is an equal reaction, and yet, in the real world, where many-body gravitational effects or electrodynamic actions prevail, we do not have every action paired with an equal reaction." — Harold Aspden
User avatar
Solar
 
Posts: 1272
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am

Re: Speed of light

Unread postby Webbman » Wed Oct 25, 2017 5:40 pm

this putting light up on a pedestal doesn't really accomplish anything.

time moves along whether light is present or not and doesn't care at what speed light moves at. Space doesn't care about the speed of light either. Its just space.

its the light itself that cares about space and time, not the other way around but what light really cares about is how resistive the environment its moving through is.

electricity conducts based on the conductivity which is basically a lack of resistance of the material it is travelling in. I believe light is similar. Light conducts better the lower the resistance of the environment.

the problem is that we don't fully understand general resistance of various areas because we don't account for all the electromagnetic components of systems such as heat and electromagnetic noise and assume its nothing.

light moves pretty fast even in high resistance environments, so we have no real idea how fast light can travel when it moves into a lower resistance environment like for say outside the solar system or outside the galaxy.

if it were logarithmic the speed could potentially be magnitudes faster with even the tiniest reduction of resistance at that scale.
The secret to the universe is a rubber band.
Webbman
 
Posts: 368
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2014 10:49 am

Re: Speed of light

Unread postby Zyxzevn » Mon Oct 30, 2017 8:03 am

Royboy wrote:One of Wal thornhill's videos he states that light is instantaneous...

I think that is a reference to Ralph Sansbury's experiment:
In that Ralph uses a photon-emitter directed towards a detector. There is also a very fast switch in between.
He sets the switch to open at the time the photon would pass it,
but sees no photon at the detector.
With that Ralph concludes that something faster than light needs to be present to carry the light.

I think it would be interesting to repeat this experiment and test it with varying circumstances..

An immediate force would explain why an electron can have a stable orbit around a proton.
Or explain why gravity gives us very stable orbits.

Special relativity thinks that all forces move at the speed of light.
If forces only work at the speed of light, we need to correct for changes in the
paths of the central objects.
This correction can be a linear extrapolation based on the speed of the origin,
which gives us the equations of special relativity.
This correction does not handle changes in speed.
More ** from zyxzevn at: Paradigm change and C@
User avatar
Zyxzevn
 
Posts: 700
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:48 pm

2014 International Conference on Superluminal Physics

Unread postby Solar » Sat Nov 04, 2017 6:36 am

"Our laws of force tend to be applied in the Newtonian sense in that for every action there is an equal reaction, and yet, in the real world, where many-body gravitational effects or electrodynamic actions prevail, we do not have every action paired with an equal reaction." — Harold Aspden
User avatar
Solar
 
Posts: 1272
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am


Return to Electric Universe - Net Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest