| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Rebmun" |
| Date: |
27 Jun 2005 10:05:18 AM |
| Object: |
Measuring Our Absolute Velocity |
Measuring Our Absolute Velocity
"Great spirits have always encountered violent oppositions from mediocre
minds." - A. Einstein
In the 19th century, science had concluded that reality was based upon
the Aether, a rigid medium that pervaded all of space. The Aether was
required to account for the ability of forces (electric, magnetic,
gravitational, etc.) to "act at distance" and through which the vibrational
disturbance known as light could propagate. Late in the century, the next
obvious step was taken. Attempts were made to measure our velocity through
the Aether. The most notable of those attempts was the Michaelson-Morley
experiment that, to everyone's chagrin, produced a null result.
The difficulty was first resolved in 1903 with conclusions by
Fitzgerald and Larmor. Fitzgerald concluded that what was happening was that
lengths became shorter in the direction of the velocity vector and Larmor
concluded that, if this were true, clocks must slow by a reciprocal amount.
The result was the Lorentz Transformation Aether Theory, which, in
conjunction with the fact that the velocity of light represented the most
rapid means of transferring information, insured that our absolute velocity
through space could not be measured. In 1905, Dr. Einstein showed that the
theory could be derived from fundamental principles and Special Relativity
was off and running. When examined objectively, both theories are found to
be identical (cross-derivable), and differ only in philosophical viewpoint.
Transformations and the limit on the transfer of information imposed by
the velocity of light, we could not, in principle, measure our velocity with
respect to it. The other viewpoint asserted that, because our velocity with
respect to the Aether could not be measured, it was not valid to include the
Aether in physical theory. This interpretation required that all velocity
reference frames were equally valid and reality did not consist of space and
time as separate entities but was a single entity that was named space-time.
The mathematics of space-time work as long as one does not make the
common abuse of arbitrarily jumping from one velocity reference to another
in the same problem without compensation for the effects, but science was
still left with the problem of explaining "action at a distance". This
difficulty was overcome by the addition of the concept of "virtual exchange
particles" (photons, gluons, gravitons, etc.) whose existence was of such
short duration that the laws of quantum mechanics allowed them to "pop into
and out of existence" without violating the Law of Conservation of Energy
and which acted to exchange momentum (force) between physically separated
entities.
The elimination of the Aether from realm of acceptable physical theory
did not result from observations or the application of rigorous logic. It
was eliminated instead by a consensus opinion upon the part of the
scientific community. Since the Lorentz Contraction-Aether Theory is a
special case solution of the Special Theory of Relativity, the existence of
the classical Aether cannot be disproved without also disproving Special
Relativity. The existence of the Aether can be verified, however, if
information can be transferred between physically separated locations at a
velocity that exceeds the velocity of light! If that can be accomplished,
all that is necessary to determine our "absolute velocity" through space is
to compare the synchronization of clocks set by the hyperluminal information
transfer method with the synchronization of clocks set by electromagnetic
means. The difference in their "now" readings would allow their "absolute
velocity" to be measured and the establishment of our absolute velocity
through space (i.e.- the Aether) by direct observation, exactly as
Michaelson and Morley wished to do.
In the 1980's experiments were performed which showed that the quantum
coupling of the polarization of "paired photons" could be observed as
propagating at a velocity at least 4 times the velocity of light (and
probably at an infinite velocity of one is to accept a current
interpretation of quantum theory). It must be recognized that, since
changing the polarization of a photon does not change its energy,
transferring information through the polarization coupling of photons
represents a transfer of information without the transfer of energy. Since
the transfer of energy is not involved, there is no theoretical restriction
currently known on the velocity of that transfer. The paired photons travel
at the velocity of light, but their polarization can travel at any velocity
(including infinite). The limitation on the velocity of energy encoded
information transfer results from the fact that the Lorentz Transformation
for Energy is 1/(1-V^2/C^2)^0.5 becomes infinite at the velocity of light.
This limitation clearly does not apply to quantum numbers such as the
polarization direction of photons.
The diagram of the experimental setup is shown in
http://einsteinhoax.com/cf51.gif . This experiment can readily modified by
changing its instrumentation so as to allow the absolute velocity of the
setup to be measured directly without affecting the validity of its
operation. See http://einsteinhoax.com/cf52.gif . It does not seem
unreasonable, if a sufficient number of paired photons are observed, for the
errors in observation to be reduced to the point where our absolute velocity
through spaced could be measured to an accuracy of better than +/-400 miles
per second. (A recent report described a similar effect observed over a
distance of over 70 miles and should allow a much more accurate
determination.) THE SUCCESS OF SUCH A MEASUREMENT OF "ABSOLUTE VELOCITY"
DOES NOT DEPEND UPON PHYSICS SINCE THE NECESSARY RESULTS OF PHYSICAL
EXPERIMENTS HAVE ALREADY BEEN DEMONSTRATED, IT ACCOMPLISHMENT IS NOW A
ROUTINE ENGINEEERING PROBLEM WHICH IS EASILY SOLUABLE. The demonstration of
an "absolute velocity" would, however, throw the currently accepted idea of
space-time into a cocked hat (where it undoubtedly belongs since it is based
upon a consensus opinion and not provable fact) and return science to the
idea of the classical Aether. (The text associated with these diagrams can
be accessed at http://einsteinhoax.com/hoax.htm .
Remember that Dr. Einstein warned, "We have not proven that the Aether
doesn't exist, we have merely proven we do not need it (for calculations).
Also remember that it took 25 years of peer pressure to cause Dr. Einstein
to relinquish the idea of "absolute time" (equivalent to believing the
Aether) and accepting the unproven consensus viewpoint of space-time as a
single entity.
The source material for this posting may be found in "Gravity" (1987),
"The Einstein Hoax" (1997), and "Corrections to Residual Errors in Special
Relativity (1999) located at http://einsteinhoax.com/. EVERYTHING WHICH WE
ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING ELSE WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS
TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OBSERVATIONS, AND IT MUST BE
MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT ALWAYS MEET THIS
REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF WORKMANSHIP FROM
THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS.
All Newsposts by this Website are available at
http://einsteinhoax.com/postinglog.htm
Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not monitored on
a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the same courtesy
as they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of our parts,
please do not raise objections that are not related to material that you
have read at the Website. This posting is merely a summary.
E-mail:-
The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 5
years. In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF THE
MATERIAL PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by
individuals who have mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without
questioning it. If anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be
objectively answered, the material at the Website will be withdrawn.
Challenges to date have revealed only the responder's inadequacy with one
exception for which a correction was provided.
.
|
|
| User: "Guy Gordon" |
|
| Title: Re: Measuring Our Absolute Velocity |
29 Jun 2005 12:20:52 AM |
|
|
"Rebmun" <rebmun@isp.com> wrote:
Measuring Our Absolute Velocity
I DID IT! I measured our Absolute Velocity.
I sat in my car all day long watching the speedometer.
I had to sit there the whole day to average out the motion of the sun around the
Earth. But finally I got the answer.
I'll send it to you for $50.00.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Ghost In The Machine" |
|
| Title: Re: Measuring Our Absolute Velocity |
27 Jun 2005 11:00:09 PM |
|
|
In sci.physics, Rebmun
<rebmun@isp.com>
wrote
on Mon, 27 Jun 2005 11:05:18 -0400
<3bf82$42c015b7$d8080e24$1743@DIALUPUSA.NET>:
Measuring Our Absolute Velocity
.... is nonsensical as you've once again failed to get the Lorentz right.
[rest snipped]
--
#191,
It's still legal to go .sigless.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: Measuring Our Absolute Velocity |
27 Jun 2005 11:15:58 AM |
|
|
Rebmun wrote:
Measuring Our Absolute Velocity
"Great spirits have always encountered violent oppositions from mediocre
minds." - A. Einstein
Oh the delicious irony of that quotation!
[snip 130 lines of ignorant crap]
http://www.freefarts.com/farts.html
Move cursor over blinkers to hear Retic's lecture.
Psychotic ineducable boring spammer retic (Ernest Wittke),
You see yourself this way,
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/effete6.jpg
The entire remainder of the planet sees you this way,
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/effete3.png
http://www.edu-observatory.org/cranks.html
http://www.pagetutor.com/idiot/idiot.html
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/sunshine.jpg
<http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/youare.swf>
http://www.fuckinggoogleit.com/
http://www.meninhats.com/d/20040430.html
http://www.you-moron.com/
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=group%3Asci.physics+author%3Awittke
http://b5.sdvc.uwyo.edu/bab5/snds/argcstpd.wav
http://www.apa.org/journals/psp/psp7761121.html
http://insti.physics.sunysb.edu/~siegel/quack.html
<http://www.firehead.org/~jessh/film/kubrick/Kubrick-Psycho.html>
<http://www.naturalchild.com/elliott_barker/prisons.html>
The source material for this posting may be found in "Gravity" (1987),
"The Einstein Hoax" (1997), and "Corrections to Residual Errors in Special
Relativity (1999)
[snip]
Hey, stooopid spammer Ernest Wittke - Do you want EVIDENCE? Each of
the 24 GPS satellites carries either four cesium atomic clocks or
three rubidum atomic clocks in orbit, with full relativistic
corrections being applied. NAVSTAR Block II GPS satellites (currently
being launched as replacements) have two rubidium and two cesium
atomic clocks.
Internal inconsistencies in SR (meaning inconsistencies of a purely
mathematical logical nature) automatically lead to contradictions in
number theory, itself, and arithmetic, since the mathematics of
Minkowski geometry is equiconsistent with the theory of real numbers
and with arithmetic.
<http://optoelectronics.perkinelmer.com/content/Datasheets/rfs2f.pdf>
<http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/RelWWW/tests.html>
Mathematics of gravitation
<http://wugrav.wustl.edu/people/CMW/update98.pdf>
<http://www.astro.northwestern.edu/AspenW04/Papers/lorimer1.pdf>
Equivalence Principle testing
http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-th/0111236
Geometric structure of reality
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0103044
http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-th/0307140
GR structure, especially Part 4/p. 7
<http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2001-4/index.html>
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0311039
<http://www.weburbia.demon.co.uk/physics/experiments.html>
Experimental constraints on General Relativity
<http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/ptti/ptti2002/paper20.pdf>
Nature 425 374 (2003)
http://www.eftaylor.com/pub/projecta.pdf
<http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjjacob/Lecture16.pdf>
<http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/index.html>
Relativity in the GPS system
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9909014
Amer. J. Phys. 71 770 (2003)
Phys. Rev. Lett. 92 121101 (2004)
falling light
<http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/airtim.html>
<http://metrologyforum.tm.agilent.com/pdf/flying_clock_math.pdf>
http://metrologyforum.tm.agilent.com/cesium.shtml
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0008012
Hafele-Keating Experiment
http://www.hawaii.edu/suremath/SRtwinParadox.html
<http://physics.syr.edu/courses/modules/LIGHTCONE/twins.html>
Twin Paradox
Science 303(5661) 1143;1153 (2004)
http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0401086
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0312071
<http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-5/index.html>
<http://skyandtelescope.com/news/article_1473_1.asp>
Deeply relativistic neutron star binaries
http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0405160
Black hole evaporation
Physics Today 57(7) 40 (2004)
http://physicstoday.org/vol-57/iss-7/p40.shtml
No aether
http://fsweb.berry.edu/academic/mans/clane/
http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/17/3/7
No Lorentz violation
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0409089
Spin-2 gravitons have problems
<http://groups-beta.google.com/group/sci.physics.strings/msg/ba31a00f5f26277a>
(so does the proposal)
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0411113
<http://www.npl.washington.edu/eotwash/pdf/prl83-3585.pdf>
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0301024
Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 261101 (2004)
Nordtvedt Effect
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0403292
http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0310723
WMAP + Sloane Digital Sky Survey
http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0404175
Dark matter candidates
<http://nedwww.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/March01/Carroll/frames.html>
Carroll on what it all means.
Special Relativity is physics on a topologically trivial Lorentzian
manifold with a metric whose curvature tensor is zero. This is a
perfectly diffeomorphism-invariant condition and does not require
any particular coordinate choice. It is invariant under
the full group of diffeomorphisms. The Poincare group is
the group of *isometries* of the metric in special relativity.
The Special Relativity metric is *non-dynamical* (unlike GR). It
defines the coupling *constants* of your theory. If you change the
metric in any nontrivial way you are changing your theory. An
operation can only be called a "symmetry" of a special-relativistic
(non-gravitational) theory if it preserves the metric, and therefore
the symmetry of special-relativistic theories is the Poincare group
only. General Relativity (gravitation) has a dynamic metric.
NIM A 355 537 (1995)
Physics Letters B 328 103 (1994)
Physical Review Letters 64 1697 (1990)
Physical Review Letters 39 1051 (1977)
Physical Review 135 B1071 (1964)
Physics Letters 12 260 (1964)
Europhysics Letters 56(2) 170-174 (2001)
General Relativity and Gravitation 34(9) 1371 (2002)
http://fourmilab.to/etexts/einstein/specrel/specrel.pdf
<http://www.geocities.com/physics_world/sr/ae_1905_error.htm>
<http://www.physics.gatech.edu/people/faculty/finkelstein/relativity.pdf>
Longitudinal and transverse mass
Physics Today 58(3) 34 (2005)
Time passage, equator vs. poles
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0306076.pdf
<http://www.metaresearch.org/solar%20system/gps/absolute-gps-1meter-3.ASP>
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/gpsuser/gpsuser.pdf
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/default.htm
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/icd200/default.htm
http://www.trimble.com/gps/index.html
http://sirius.chinalake.navy.mil/satpred/
http://www.phys.lsu.edu/mog/mog9/node9.html
http://egtphysics.net/GPS/RelGPS.htm
http://www.schriever.af.mil/gps/Current/current.oa1
http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html
<http://www-astronomy.mps.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html>
If anyone
provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be objectively answered, the
material at the Website will be withdrawn.
Right, like your head has ever been withdrawn from your ***** - even
when you *****.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: Measuring Our Absolute Velocity |
27 Jun 2005 10:07:50 AM |
|
|
Rebmun wrote:
Measuring Our Absolute Velocity
No absolute frame of reference! No absolute position, displacement or velocity.
Thanks for registering "The Einstein Hoax " at crank dot net.
http://www.google.com/search?q=einstein+hoax+site%3Awww.crank.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
