Go Back   Physics Help Forum > High School and Pre-University Physics Help > Light and Optics

Light and Optics Light and Optics Physics Help Forum

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old Jun 7th 2013, 06:01 AM   #11
Forum Admin
 
topsquark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On the dance floor, baby!
Posts: 2,659
I had a nice little response to your post and then I realized you weren't saying what I thought you were saying. Ah well.

(it is understood that the apparatuses they use for these experiments move with them)?!

This idea has a very important consequence: velocity is not absolute. This means that velocity can only be measured in reference to some object(s)?!
This is all essentially correct. You seem to be posting it and saying that Physics doesn't agree? Still confused.

Second, and somewhat surprisingly, it can be very useful to not specify a coordinate system. This relates to the field of differential geometry and winds up being a very powerful tool to analyze General Relativity. (It's a bit of over-kill for Special Relativity.)

-Dan

Edit: Oh! And I think the rocket analogy is due to Einstein....The principle of equivalence. Basically you can't tell, from inside the rocket, if the rocket is accelerating you or if its the acceleration due to an external gravitational field.
__________________
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

See the forum rules here.
topsquark is offline  
Old Jun 7th 2013, 08:55 AM   #12
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 64
You ----V1 ---> .....................Ydistance ...................STAR --------->V2


V1>V2 You see blue
V1<V2 You see red


V1 = V2 ? ( not a problem )

Marosz You see not the same brightness ( luminosity change )


Perpendicular test ?

Star ------>V1
i
i
Y distance
i
i
i
You ------>V2


You see star but not in real position






Velocity and above picture = absolute speed

why absolute ?


C= constant in Vacuum
Y we can measire = constant
Source's power = constant

Vo ( constant velocity - zero acceleration ) and above method




IMPORTANT EVIDENCE !!!

Velocity it is function V=distance/time

Mathematica and Logic

Not exist function that have got relative variables and finaly give You absolute volume


THE BEST ARE LINKS at the end of my blog

http://solarsytemspeed.blogspot.com/

Last edited by tesla2; Jun 7th 2013 at 09:08 AM.
tesla2 is offline  
Old Jun 7th 2013, 12:29 PM   #13
Forum Admin
 
topsquark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On the dance floor, baby!
Posts: 2,659
Okay, I see your point now. I'm not sure why this is a problem...the effect is known and it drove any number of Astronomers batty back in the 16 and 1700s when they were trying to publish charts for sailing vessels.

-Dan
__________________
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

See the forum rules here.
topsquark is offline  
Old Jun 7th 2013, 11:13 PM   #14
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 64
thank you tHAT you read my english

Astronomers use STARS ( below I showed picture
TO measure this efect we can make test
or wait ... LONG ....LONG ... TIME ... - ... light from FAR FAR star )




IN POLAND in all books we have that we can not recognize own CONSTANT
velocity only we can measure acceleration ( fundaments )



TODAY I FINISHED MY LAST JOB y=x2 or y=x4 ( below picture is ok )




Doppler it is not only Hz change but Luminosity also


BELOW WORDS WE HAVE RIGHT NOW IN ALL BOOKS
(PHYSICS) PLEASE READ YOU WILL UNDERSTAND

( please remember that we speak about fundaments not about theory )


GALLILEO and HIS FAMOUS PROBLEM


" Galileo postulated his relativity hypothesis: any two observers moving at constant speed and direction with respect to one another will obtain the same results for all mechanical experiments (it is understood that the apparatuses they use for these experiments move with them).
This idea has a very important consequence: velocity is not absolute. This means that velocity can only be measured in reference to some object(s), and that the result of this measurment changes if we decide to measure the velocity with respect to a diferent refernce point(s). Imagine an observer traveling inside a windowless spaceship moving away from the sun at constant velocity. Galileo asserted that there are no mechanical experiments that can be made inside the rocket that will tell the occupants that the rocket is moving .
The question ``are we moving'' has no meaning unless we specify a reference frame (are we moving with respect to that star'' is meaningful). This fact, formulated in the 1600's remains very true today and is one of the cornerstones of Einstein's theories of relativity."


MAROSZ ( me )
" (it is understood that the apparatuses they use for these experiments move with them)." ?!
"This idea has a very important consequence: velocity is not absolute. This means that velocity can only be measured in reference to some object(s)" ?!

We can recognize velocity and we no need use other objects ( Stars ) we can use fact confirmed by Michelson Morley light's velocity = only C not exist C+ V source





Ring 1 ...Ring 2 ... Ring 3 ..... and luminousity = that "apparatuses " not move with Us ?!?!

EXIST VELOCITY Vo and TIME = EXIST DISTANCE


EXIST DISTANCE = EXIST DIFFERENT LUMINOSITY

Fact 1 Distance is important for photography ( luminosity )

Fact 2 Bulb's power is constant

Fact 3 C in Vacuum = Constant



Vo it is function ! ( and we have absolute parameters )
( C , distance Y or many combinations x*Y
and bulb's power that fit to x*Y )



http://solarsytemspeed.blogspot.com/




GRAVITATION OR VELOCITY ? what is blocking the light ?

( we need make many test I hope someone will help me before my die ) !!!

SITUATION 1
LIGHT IS INSIDE BLACK HOLES AND WANT TO ESCAPE




OR WE HAVE SITUATION 2 LIGHT CAN NOT TOUCH THE MASS M
AND BACK TO OUR EYES ?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-QDhADrDXABA/UVl_hphDVsI/AAAAAAAAAxc/skybrn6FqbQ/s1600/darkmaterr.JPG

HOW I UNDERSTAND AETHER ???
zero mass zero friction
3D symetry condition for many different Hz signals

MAROSZ's AETHER MODEL

below IDEA can be the best computer CPU model ( many diffrernt HZ - zero HOT problem ( zero signal lost ) - gravitation is able help us change information's adress ) many informations in one and the same time ( ideal parallel magistrale )


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-JSuPkGLL5RA/UVFJrlAx17I/AAAAAAAAAuA/rC_sxo68KBE/s1600/aether2.JPG



Last edited by tesla2; Jun 7th 2013 at 11:26 PM.
tesla2 is offline  
Old Jun 7th 2013, 11:32 PM   #15
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 64
I'm SORRY VERY IMPORTANT PICTURE
Y=150 000 000 km


tesla2 is offline  
Old Jun 8th 2013, 04:53 PM   #16
Forum Admin
 
topsquark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On the dance floor, baby!
Posts: 2,659
Enough is enough

I have patiently tried to understand your work and though I'm unclear about a few points I am no longer willing to look through all these diagrams to pick out the gems. The two important things here is that MM showed no speed change indicating an aether. If there were an aether their results would have been compromised by the not having the techniques of SR which hadn't been invented yet. But their null result made that point irrelevant. The other important thing is that the speed of light is a constant (c) in any coordinate system. This is a result of ElectroMagnetism not Special Relativity, which adopted the result.

Both of these facts seem to cover any of the objections that you have been trying to state. At least it covers anything I've been able to see in your postings.

Points made. Thread closed.

-Dan
__________________
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

See the forum rules here.
topsquark is offline  
Closed Thread

  Physics Help Forum > High School and Pre-University Physics Help > Light and Optics

Tags
michelson, morley, problems, solved, technical



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Physics Forum Discussions
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How Michelson Morley solved two technical problems tesla2 Advanced Optics 1 Jun 5th 2013 01:25 PM
two technical errors MICHELSON MORLEY tesla2 Theoretical Physics 0 Jun 2nd 2013 04:22 AM
Michelson Morley + Marosz VS MR E tesla2 Quantum Physics 4 Oct 24th 2012 10:17 AM
Michelson-Morley Experiment Aryth Special and General Relativity 1 Sep 1st 2009 03:25 PM


Facebook Twitter Google+ RSS Feed