This should be fun.

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

I wouldn't want to pay that speeding ticket...

very interesting to say the least

to quote someone at I09 with this..

"Boys, we're back in business"

Have a look at this blog, especially this entry, before jumping up and down.

GIMP 2.7.4, Inkscape 0.48, Genetica 3.6 Basic, FilterForge 3 Professional, Blender 2.61, SketchUp 8, PoserPro 2012, Vue 10 Infinite, World Machine 2.3, GeoControl 2

Considering that the 1987 supernova was so far away, it is quite possible that the neutrino wave they detected then was simply the -last- wave before the visible light arrived. No one has on site measurements, so no one can say if there was or wasn't multiple neutrino shockwaves. The big wave could have gotten here 20 years before then and the technology wouldn't have noticed it.....and such a hypothetical wave would have -had- to be FTL.

Be interesting to see if this is a measurement error, an unknown effect, or if Einstein's relativity theory's have loopholes after all.......

Quote - Have a look at this blog, especially this entry, before jumping up and down.

ah c'mon. have a heart and give us a day or two to think there maybe a way off this rock before all hope is dashed again.

Gee and I thought somebody was posting a benchmark of how fast Firefly is in P9-PP2010 :rolleyes:

Gary

"Those who lose themselves in a passion lose less than those who lose their passion"

There are a number of issues to check before anyone priduces a FTL drive system ;)

clock synchronisation for one.

markschum based on some of the scripts I have seen you create, we expect you to post a freebee python script that does this by morning so Mr. Bach's quote from Scotty "Boys were back in business" becomes reality!

Gary

"Those who lose themselves in a passion lose less than those who lose their passion"

The speed of light was never the "Maximum Speed limit" for the universe anyway.

Cheers

My website

YouTube Channel

In a quantum universe there are no rules or defined behaviors anyway.:blink:

Huh. Huge, important discovery, or "systematic errors" and something to be filed away with the periodic announcements of successful cold fusion? Interesting. Thank you for the link.

===========================sigline======================================================

Cage can be an opinionated jerk who posts without thinking. He apologizes for this. He's honestly not trying to be a turkeyhead.

Cage had some freebies, compatible with Poser 11 and below. His Python scripts were saved at archive.org, along with the rest of the Morphography site, where they were hosted.

I have been working for a while on the 'irrelevancy drive " , you just ignore the world until it goes away , and you are somewhere else. ;) Its not working cause I stop to have a drink.

" I think "systemic errors" will win.

I've been working on the Off Topic Drive, myself, but I seem to be having trouble maintaining focus on the project. :lol:

I'm betting that the limitations of the speed of light will win out, too. IIRC, they were challenged by other results a year or two ago, but that went away.

===========================sigline======================================================

Cage can be an opinionated jerk who posts without thinking. He apologizes for this. He's honestly not trying to be a turkeyhead.

Cage had some freebies, compatible with Poser 11 and below. His Python scripts were saved at archive.org, along with the rest of the Morphography site, where they were hosted.

And why the speed of light must be the speed limit ? It is an imposed condition by the only reason that if something travel faster than light, Eistein's theory is wrong and, you know, Einstein cannot be wrong.

Is not different from the dark ages when Aristotle never could be wrong.

Einstein's theory is conceptually flawed. His theory is based on the observed behaviour of light with the postulate that light are particles (photons), the Newton's theory of light. But Einstein ignored Huygens theory of light, where light is a wave.

Until today nobody was abale to decide is light is a wave or particles and Einstein's theory ignores the wave nature of light and every temptative of Einstein trying to include electromagnetism in his Theory of Relativity ended in fracass.

Stupidity also evolves!

If the speed of light ceases to be a limit, does that enable a unified theory? I don't recall any of the layman's books on relativity I've read ever speculating upon the point.

===========================sigline======================================================

Cage can be an opinionated jerk who posts without thinking. He apologizes for this. He's honestly not trying to be a turkeyhead.

Cage had some freebies, compatible with Poser 11 and below. His Python scripts were saved at archive.org, along with the rest of the Morphography site, where they were hosted.

Unification of theory has nothing to do with if exist speed limit or not. Unification of theories is possible if each theory can be derived from a bigger theory. If the theories deals with elements that are independent and has nothing to do one with each other, unification never will be possible.

The Einstein's Theory of Relativity is very funny. Einstein took Lorentz Electromagnetic theory, a wave theory. Took from Thomson electron's theory the famous E = mc2, waves and electromagnetism again and then put gravity that was not existent in any theory and then ignored all waves, electromagntism, and electrons remaining only gravity and the imposed speed light limit, limit that doesn't exist in any of these theories.

Stupidity also evolves!

Which shows, kawecki, that your knowledge of physics is quite flawed.

Hi I am not going to even engage in a "physics debate"
But I am amazed at the arrogance of any human being who makes an Eternal universal Declaration about anything.

For a human being with a Limited Life span to Set a limit on something that has existed Billions of year before him and like billions more after him ( the universe)
is Just plain silly

remember there was a time when
The "Limit " of human strength for the overhead press was 500 pounds
or human speed was the four minute mile etc etc.

Cheers

My website

YouTube Channel

Quote - Which shows, kawecki, that your knowledge of physics is quite flawed.

Do you think ? Academic scientific knowledge is something very strange, probably beyond my capabilities of comprehension.

Faraday's homopolar generator violates Einstein't Theory of Relativity, so such abomination cannot exist. If you apply the famous electromagnetism Maxwell's equations as are taught today, such thing cannot work. But if you take a school book any electrical technician can prove that the homopolar generator do work with only basic arithmetic operations and so, we have soldering machines and even Reagan's star war lasers.

Einstein is a myth, his Theory of Relativity is so advanced that only few initiates can understabd. Well, his second theory, the General Theory of Relativity, yes indeed it is, but it is very rarely mentioned. On the other side, his first theory and the most famous and comented one, the Special Theory of Relativity, contrary to all believe and myths, is very simple. You need not to be a genius, everyone with basic knowledge in mathematics and physics can underatnd it without any problem. It can be taught in schools, but if is done, what will happen to the myth ?

Stupidity also evolves!

Just for reference, I have nothing against an healthy discussion, but please don't make it personal. If this is getting ugly I will lock the thread.

A ship in port is safe; but that is not what ships are built for.
Sail out to sea and do new things.
-"Amazing Grace" Hopper

Avatar image of me done by Chidori.

Meanwhile, conservation of momentum, the law of thermodynamics, relativity, quantum mechanics (just to mention the most known stuff) sit indifferent and keep telling everybody:

You can't do that. You will never be able to do that. And we could not care less if you like it or not.

P.S.: in the end, those years spent getting an M.Sc. in Physics were worth something.

GIMP 2.7.4, Inkscape 0.48, Genetica 3.6 Basic, FilterForge 3 Professional, Blender 2.61, SketchUp 8, PoserPro 2012, Vue 10 Infinite, World Machine 2.3, GeoControl 2

Guys you are way off base. The USS Enterprise (NCC 1701) was capable of crusing at a Warp Speed of 8. Plus on a good day Scotty could squeeze a Warp Speed of 9 from the USS Enterprise if the Captain needed it in an emergency; whch seemed to almost be a weekly requirement. Shoot I remember wtaching the NCC 1701 going from one side if the universve to the other in less then an hour. That has to be way faster then the speed of light...right?

Einstein's was some back yard hack compared to Gene Roddenberry who helped design the USS Enterprise (NCC 1701) back in 1965 but it wasn't launched until 2245. Roddenberry even assigned The USS Enterprise with the numbers of 1701 after the address of house across te street of where he grew up. Which has to blow a hole in the Theory of why did the chicken cross the road don't you think?

Gary

"Those who lose themselves in a passion lose less than those who lose their passion"

Quote - And why the speed of light must be the speed limit ? It is an imposed condition by the only reason that if something travel faster than light, Eistein's theory is wrong and, you know, Einstein cannot be wrong.

That's a key point, kawecki; the limit is there simply to make the math work. If this result is verified, we'll need to work on some new mathematics...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Wisdom of bagginsbill:

"Oh - the manual says that? I have never read the manual - this must be why."
“I could buy better software, but then I'd have to be an artist and what's the point of that?"
"The [R'osity Forum Search] 'Default' label should actually say 'Don't Find What I'm Looking For'".
bagginsbill's Free Stuff... https://web.archive.org/web/20201010171535/https://sites.google.com/site/bagginsbill/Home

Quote - Meanwhile, conservation of momentum, the law of thermodynamics, relativity, quantum mechanics (just to mention the most known stuff) sit indifferent and keep telling everybody:

You can't do that. You will never be able to do that. And we could not care less if you like it or not.

P.S.: in the end, those years spent getting an M.Sc. in Physics were worth something.

I'll see your M Sc (youngest brother) and raise you a PhD (middle brother).

Both of 'em believe it's possible. The actions described in the experiment aren't going to change the way the world works but could, if proven, open up a new branch of physics, in the same way Einstein's theories replaced Newton's in some cases.

Nobody with any sense is talking about a wholesale rewrite of the laws of physics; there may be cases when the speed of light can be taken to be inviolate but for certain exotic particles, an honourable exception could be made.

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery

plus it should be noted, the guys publishing this are saying "wtf, this can't be right, can someone check our work? we must be wrong!"

But, if I have to get converted to neutrinos to travel faster than light will I still be able to enjoy a pint down at the local?

Ian Porter (MMRS)

Quote - > Quote - Which shows, kawecki, that your knowledge of physics is quite flawed.

Do you think ? Academic scientific knowledge is something very strange, probably beyond my capabilities of comprehension.

Faraday's homopolar generator violates Einstein't Theory of Relativity, so such abomination cannot exist. If you apply the famous electromagnetism Maxwell's equations as are taught today, such thing cannot work. But if you take a school book any electrical technician can prove that the homopolar generator do work with only basic arithmetic operations and so, we have soldering machines and even Reagan's star war lasers.

Einstein is a myth, his Theory of Relativity is so advanced that only few initiates can understabd. Well, his second theory, the General Theory of Relativity, yes indeed it is, but it is very rarely mentioned. On the other side, his first theory and the most famous and comented one, the Special Theory of Relativity, contrary to all believe and myths, is very simple. You need not to be a genius, everyone with basic knowledge in mathematics and physics can underatnd it without any problem. It can be taught in schools, but if is done, what will happen to the myth ?

Are you familiar with the Michelson-Morley experiment and the Lorentz transformations? That's where the speed limit of the Theory of Relativity comes.

Besides, there is something else that you should consider before you start ranting against the so called stablishment. The physics are well aware that the theory of Relativity is not the theory to end all theories. It works well in macro scale, but starts to breaks off as we reach atomic size of smaller, and there is no way that both relativity and quantum theory are both correct. And the predictions extracted from both theories had been checked several times.

So what will happen if this is a real violation of the theory, and not an instrumental error, or something else? Eventually somebody will develop a new theory to encompass that data, with Einstein Theory of Relativity as an special case, such as Newtonian gravitation and mechanics is now considered an special case of Relativity. The predictions that we we'll get from taht new theory will be checked, and maybe, maybe in the future, we'll get FTL drives, but probably they're not gonna look like anything that we have seen in sci-fi.

Quote - plus it should be noted, the guys publishing this are saying "wtf, this can't be right, can someone check our work? we must be wrong!"

Yup.

After some 15,000 retests of their dimensions, distance, and other data. Personally, I hope it does stand up. Every branch of science needs to get kneecapped on a regular basis, to clean out the institutionalized arrogance. And finding faster than light phenomena detectable by current science (and thereby being a measurable, actual event of the universe) should keep the particle boys agitated for a good long time. And who knows what practical applications may come out of trying to patch over the oooops.....

If they are right does that mean the news posers are out of date and we'll have to upgrade again? Will even more nodes that I'll never get my head around be added to the mat. room to allow for how FLT particles are affecting the way things look? Will it mean yet another render pass?

Available on Amazon for the Kindle E-Reader Monster of the North and The Shimmering Mage

Today I break my own personal record for the number of days for being alive.
Check out my store here or my free stuff here
I use Poser 13 and win 10

Poser can't handle retro reflective, fluorescent or metamaterials yet so I wouldn't worry too much.

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery

The good news is that your downloads will finish before you start them, and you will get a free suntan from your cable modem if you sit real close to it. ;-)

Quote - Are you familiar with the Michelson-Morley experiment and the Lorentz transformations? That's where the speed limit of the Theory of Relativity comes.

Yep, that's what apparently some people don't know: Einstein came up with Special Relativity as a consequence of the speed limit. He didn't come up with that out of nowhere. His initial thought experiments were wondering what would happen when you started approaching the speed of light, and everything else falls from that.

Incidentally, that Einstein was right is proven every time you use anything that has a GPS.

Wow. And that latest hast how much?

we understand that, like aristotle and newton, einstein was fallible, hence einsteinian physics will eventually become obsolete. however, this latest news seems more along the lines of the rumours earlier this year of a few thousand data points alleging to show evidence of the higgs boson. this tendency towards sensational news leaks may occur every time their budget comes up for review. given the current euro-american debt crisis, one would suggest that Sarko and Merkel divert funds from CERN toward rehabilitating the PIGS and send the rumour mongers to re-education camp ASAP.

Quote - I've been working on the Off Topic Drive, myself, but I seem to be having trouble maintaining focus on the project.

@Cage, what you want is a really hot cup of tea.

Quote - we understand that, like aristotle and newton, einstein was fallible, hence einsteinian physics will eventually become obsolete.

@Miss Nancy, Newtonian physics isn't obsolete (still perfectly good enough to for many situations), but was refined to become Einsteinian physics, just as if this leads to something new, there'll be a further refinement that takes account of whatever is going on with this experiment.

Oh Fishsticks and Custard!

Quote - Are you familiar with the Michelson-Morley experiment and the Lorentz transformations? That's where the speed limit of the Theory of Relativity comes.

Yes, I know. The purpose of the Michelson-Morley experiment was to measure the absolute speed of Earth. The idea was as the Earth is moving, measuring the speed of light in the direction of the movement and the speed of light in the opposite direct with the difference of speeds we can know the absolute speed of Earth. Michelson-Morley planed carefuly the experiment and did it in 1887. The result was a failure, they were unable to see any difference in any direction of the measured speeds of light. The experiment was revisted, repeated many times and always failed.

This was the fundamental stone of Einstein's Theory of Relativity. As the Michelson-Morley experiment failed to give any differences in light speeds, Eistein postulate that the speed of light is always the same in any direction and independent of any movement. From this postulate Einstein created his theory.

This story is very well known, everybody knows and is repeated thousands of times, but there is more story that nobody knows and nobody tells you:

Do you think that Michelson-Morley were comformed with the failure of their experiment and were happy with Einstein's explanation and then dedicated to the garden of their houses ? Of course not ! They continued their work, revised their failled experiment, created new experiments and in 1926 they had success and were able to measure the absolute speed of Earth. Everybody knows about their failed experiment, but nobody knows about their successful experiment.

Michelson-Morley were not only the ones, other scientists created other experiments and among them was a guy named Georges Sagnac that in 1913 had also success in measuring the absolute speed of Earth.

As the successful experiments shows that the speed of light is not the same in any direction and this contradicts Einstein's basic postulate on which all his theory was built. In consequence the successful experiments were burried, ignored and send to dusty cold files where almost nobody knew that ever existed.

These experiments remained forgoten and nobody knew about their existence until the 70's. Sagnac experiment was resurrected by other reasons nothing to do with Relativity. Replacing the light sources of the Sagnac experiment by lasers it was posible to create a small, very cheap solid state without moving parts device that was able to measure the absolute speed of something with excellent precission. Something very useful for planes and missiles. It contradicst Eintein's theory ?, who cares, it works, is useful and so, everybody use it today.

Stupidity also evolves!

Quote - Incidentally, that Einstein was right is proven every time you use anything that has a GPS.

Is not in this way. GPS doesn't use Relativity, it gives wrong results and in case where Relativity is used the values must be corrected by the Sagnac effect (speed of light is not always the same)

Stupidity also evolves!

Quote -
Do you think that Michelson-Morley were comformed with the failure of their experiment and were happy with Einstein's explanation and then dedicated to the garden of their houses ? Of course not ! They continued their work, revised their failled experiment, created new experiments and in 1926 they had success and were able to measure the absolute speed of Earth. Everybody knows about their failed experiment, but nobody knows about their successful experiment.

Michelson-Morley were not only the ones, other scientists created other experiments and among them was a guy named Georges Sagnac that in 1913 had also success in measuring the absolute speed of Earth.

As the successful experiments shows that the speed of light is not the same in any direction and this contradicts Einstein's basic postulate on which all his theory was built. In consequence the successful experiments were burried, ignored and send to dusty cold files where almost nobody knew that ever existed.

These experiments remained forgoten and nobody knew about their existence until the 70's. Sagnac experiment was resurrected by other reasons nothing to do with Relativity. Replacing the light sources of the Sagnac experiment by lasers it was posible to create a small, very cheap solid state without moving parts device that was able to measure the absolute speed of something with excellent precission. Something very useful for planes and missiles. It contradicst Eintein's theory ?, who cares, it works, is useful and so, everybody use it today.

Really? Are you aware that the Sagnac effect was predicted using special relativity in 1911, by Max von Laue? Absolute speed needs an absolute frame of reference, are you proposing returning to the 19th century theory of ether? By the way, how do you know those measures were the "absolute speed" of Earth? Where did you got that notion?

By the way, the 70's experiment that your refers seem to be the one performed by notorious crackpot Stefan Marinov. Have somebody else, using a similar machine, obtained the same results?

A simple question, is the speed of light the same in any direction measured on the surface of the Earth ? If yes then Sagnac effect does not exist, if no then Relativity doesn't exist.

Anyway the Theory of Relativity has very little importance because has a very small use and in electronics has no use at all. You don't need Realtivity for television, cell phones, computers, comunications, robots, etc, etc, etc

Stupidity also evolves!

Quote - A simple question, is the speed of light the same in any direction measured on the surface of the Earth ? If yes then Sagnac effect does not exist, if no then Relativity doesn't exist.

Wrong! As I said earlier (and you ignored) a positive result using special relativity was predicted in 1911, two years before Sagnac made his experiment. So the Sagnac effect don't really contradict relativity, even if Sagnac himself thought so.

Quote - Anyway the Theory of Relativity has very little importance because has a very small use and in electronics has no use at all. You don't need Realtivity for television, cell phones, computers, comunications, robots, etc, etc, etc

GPS. And relativity is important in communications using satellites due to the fact that satellites are travelling at a significant fraction of the speed of light.

The design of cathodic tubes for TV must take in account relativistic mass increase due to the electrons travelling at a very considerable speed. The same is true for the design of free-electron lasers.There are probably many others that I don't know just now.

And there is something that you should know about electronics. You have to take in account quantum mechanics to design computer circuits, right? Then, you should know that the Dirac equation, one of the fundamental equations of quantum mechanics, incorporates relativity.

oh not again..

A_C_C nothing you say will make any difference...

Yes, I know. I have deal with his ilk before. Until his last posts I didn't realize that I was dealing with a relativity denier, and not with a misinformed person.

Haven't atomic clocks been used to verify relativistic effects in different rates of the passages of time at different altitudes on Earth, as well? Could there be some other explanation for this kind of thing, if one type of particle exceeding the speed limit fells relativity altogether? Or would that be true? Would one deviant particle type invalidate relativity? (And whatever happened with the idea that tachyons move backwards in time? Invalid, still open? Would that break the current theory?)

I'm still a bit puzzled by all of this, I guess. The topic mainly seems to have spawned debates about the philosophy of science, where I've seen discussion. :unsure: But I'm also a bit of an ignoramus. :lol: An interested ignoramus, mind you, but still running up against the limits of his understanding.

===========================sigline======================================================

Cage can be an opinionated jerk who posts without thinking. He apologizes for this. He's honestly not trying to be a turkeyhead.

Cage had some freebies, compatible with Poser 11 and below. His Python scripts were saved at archive.org, along with the rest of the Morphography site, where they were hosted.

Cage, in all likelihood, Relativity will stand up to a point. After that a new set of laws may apply, in much the same way as Newtonian physics work up to a point, then Relativity takes over.

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery

So relativity is just an approximation based on limited information, much like Newtonian physics? Hmm.

===========================sigline======================================================

Cage can be an opinionated jerk who posts without thinking. He apologizes for this. He's honestly not trying to be a turkeyhead.

Cage had some freebies, compatible with Poser 11 and below. His Python scripts were saved at archive.org, along with the rest of the Morphography site, where they were hosted.

Quote - Haven't atomic clocks been used to verify relativistic effects in different rates of the passages of time at different altitudes on Earth, as well? Could there be some other explanation for this kind of thing, if one type of particle exceeding the speed limit fells relativity altogether? Or would that be true? Would one deviant particle type invalidate relativity? (And whatever happened with the idea that tachyons move backwards in time? Invalid, still open? Would that break the current theory?)

Atomic clocks have been flown on satellites and aircraft to demonstrate relativistic time dilation. Another experimental proof that people might not have heard of involves cosmic rays. When they hit the atmosphere, they produce the same sort of effect humans create in particle colliders, that is, a shower of particles resulting from the collision. Some of the these particles are extremely short-lived, so short that they shouldn't be detectable from the Earth's surface, but they are...because their velocity, causes time dilation, slowing their decay rate enough that detectors on the ground can see them before they decay away.

The same thing is seen in particle colliders. The Large Hadron Collider accelerates particles to slightly less than the speed of light in a vacuum, causing a dilation factor of around 7500: that is, a particle which at relatively slow speeds should decay in 1 nanosecond would take about 7500 nanoseconds to decay at that velocity. Again, experimentally confirmed.

As for the neutrinos being discussed, the current betting right now is that there's some kind of experimental error that will be shown to have occurred.

Quote - So relativity is just an approximation based on limited information, much like Newtonian physics? Hmm.

Pretty much. Physicists know where relativity starts to fail, basically where things got to the point where quantum effects start to get important.

Quote - So relativity is just an approximation based on limited information, much like Newtonian physics? Hmm.

Yes, but the confirmation that the approximation it is accurate has been confirmed to a fractionally minute level. There's not a whole lot of room left for something new to be discovered

Let's put it another way: suppose relativistic time dilation had not been theorized. When people started placing hyperaccurate clocks on satellites (and fast aircraft), they would have seen that something was wrong because those moving clocks would have slowed down when they were moving (relative to the ground), but functioned perfectly when "stationary". The faster the clock moved, the more pronounced the effect.

So normal ideas, such as that time was an unchanging constant (which is an assumption of Newtonian physics), would have shown problems when we had the capability to move fast enough, at, say kilometers per second and highter. So there was a lot of room (from kilometers per second to about 300,000 kilometers per second) where we could see there was a problem with the idea of a constant, unchanging, flow of time wherever you looked.

With relativity, we've vastly increased the range of sizes and speeds in which things can be tested, either directly or through observation of what nature does in comparison to current theories. We've directly measured time dilation effects on particles that have been accelerated to within fractions of a percentage of light speed, and they line up perfectly with the theory, so there's not much room left for something unanticipated to happen (taking into account quantum effects which take over in certain situations, as mentioned above).

Quote - GPS. And relativity is important in communications using satellites due to the fact that satellites are travelling at a significant fraction of the speed of light.

Significant fraction ??? How much is the speed of light and how much is the speed of Earth ?

How do you know that GPS are really using Relativity ? Much better, how do you know that the GPS products that are sold use satellites and not cell phone towers ?

Quote - The design of cathodic tubes for TV must take in account relativistic mass increase due to the electrons travelling at a very considerable speed.

Realtivity is noy used, nobody designs a cathode ray tube using Relativity and the cathode ray tube was, invented, designed and used well before Relativity was accepted by all the world and this happened only after WWII.

Quote - The same is true for the design of free-electron lasers.There are probably many others that I don't know just now.

Electron lasers???? This much be something very new, I never heard before and I am unable to imagine what it can be.

Quote - And there is something that you should know about electronics. You have to take in account quantum mechanics to design computer circuits, right? Then, you should know that the Dirac equation, one of the fundamental equations of quantum mechanics, incorporates relativity.

All Qunatics Physics used by Electronics is based on non-Relativistics Quantics. It is based on Schoedinger wave equation, Bohr, Pauli and Heisenberg work.

Dirac's Relativistic Quantics is never used in any electronic creation and no Electronic enginner studies Dirac*.* It has no use.*

Stupidity also evolves!

Quote - Yes, I know. I have deal with his ilk before. Until his last posts I didn't realize that I was dealing with a relativity denier, and not with a misinformed person.

I cannot say that I am exactly a realtivity denier, in some way I am. Once I was a great fan of Relativity and Einsteins, but it was long years ago. When I was 14 years old I learned General Relativity, with Special Relativity I was even more younger, don't remember how much younger.

Stupidity also evolves!

Quote - Haven't atomic clocks been used to verify relativistic effects in different rates of the passages of time at different altitudes on Earth, as well?

Yes it was verified, everyday we hear in the news that Relativity has been verified again, I read this since when I was born and able to read.

The question is, has been Relativity really verified ? If you analyze these verifications you will find that are flawed, if have really existed. I shall use Relativity itself to prove this.

There are two theories of Relativity, the Special and the General. What was "verified" millions times is the Special Relativity Theory. The General Theory of Relativity has been verified by only three astronomical observations. Other astronomical theories have produced results that were against with the consequence of the creation dozens of alternative theories (stings, worm holes, spinors,...) and even the need of a mythical dark matter that nobody was able to find until today neither God's particle (It's turning religion now ?). Let us return to what has been proved millions times: The Special Theory of Relativity.

The Special Theory of Relativity has a limited scope of application, the scope was defined by Einstein himself: The Special Theory of Relativity can only be applied to empty space without matter and to objects moving with uniform speed, in other words, no acceleration.

All those "verifications" were made in Earth, rockets, atomic clocks, etc. The Earth is not an empty space, the Earth has mass and so has gravity, you also have the Sun and the Moon, ignoring the other planets. The Earth is not moving with uniform speed, has at least two rotations and so it is a movement with acceleration. Any rocket is subjected to strong accelerations. The Special Theory of Relativity cannot be applied to observation made on Earth beacuse it is beyond the scope of application of the theory. Here is the flaw of these "verifications"

What must be applied to any experiment made on Earth is the General Theory of Relativity that is able to deal with gravitation and accelerarions as happens in Earth. The problem is that General Theory is impossible to apply to an Earth experiment, because it is very very complicated. The Earth is not so simple, it has a lot of movements, is not symetric, has irregular distribuition of mass, a dynamic moving mass that are the oceans amd is stronly inflenced by the Sun and the Moon. Even the Newton's theory that is very simple becomes very difficult to apply where more than two bodies are involved. The consequence is even the very well known and easy Newton's theory, satellites and space flight relies on hundreds of tabulated empirical data collected by observation. Imagine with General Relativity that is nothing easy !

Stupidity also evolves!

Kawecki not only denies a number of theories, he also denies the existance and usefulness of Google search. I have been biting my tongue because I know it is pointless to argue but really it's making me insane to just let these blatant falsehoods and confused ravings go unanswered.

Can you use Google Kawecki?

Google "GPS and relativity" - there are 911,000 results, which is a lot to read, but the first page is very enlightening.

In your rant above you respond to the question of verfication of relativistic effects with a diatribe against SR, and a claim that GR is so complicated it is unusable. It's clear that it is too complicated for you but not to the engineers who worked out, using SR and GR, what adjustment to make on the atomic clocks in orbit so they stay synchronized with the ground clocks.

I like this one - it sums things up pretty neatly:

http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html

Quote - To achieve this level of precision, the clock ticks from the GPS satellites must be known to an accuracy of 20-30 nanoseconds. However, because the satellites are constantly moving relative to observers on the Earth, effects predicted by the Special and General theories of Relativity must be taken into account to achieve the desired 20-30 nanosecond accuracy.

Because an observer on the ground sees the satellites in motion relative to them, Special Relativity predicts that we should see their clocks ticking more slowly (see the Special Relativity lecture). Special Relativity predicts that the on-board atomic clocks on the satellites should fall behind clocks on the ground by about 7 microseconds per day because of the slower ticking rate due to the time dilation effect of their relative motion.

Further, the satellites are in orbits high above the Earth, where the curvature of spacetime due to the Earth's mass is less than it is at the Earth's surface. A prediction of General Relativity is that clocks closer to a massive object will seem to tick more slowly than those located further away (see the Black Holes lecture). As such, when viewed from the surface of the Earth, the clocks on the satellites appear to be ticking fasterthan identical clocks on the ground. A calculation using General Relativity predicts that the clocks in each GPS satellite should get ahead of ground-based clocks by 45 microseconds per day.

The combination of these two relativitic effects means that the clocks on-board each satellite should tick faster than identical clocks on the ground by about 38 microseconds per day (45-7=38)! This sounds small, but the high-precision required of the GPS system requires nanosecond accuracy, and 38 microseconds is 38,000 nanoseconds. If these effects were not properly taken into account, a navigational fix based on the GPS constellation would be false after only 2 minutes, and errors in global positions would continue to accumulate at a rate of about 10 kilometers each day! The whole system would be utterly worthless for navigation in a very short time. This kind of accumulated error is akin to measuring my location while standing on my front porch in Columbus, Ohio one day, and then making the same measurement a week later and having my GPS receiver tell me that my porch and I are currently about 5000 meters in the air somewhere over Detroit.

The engineers who designed the GPS system included these relativistic effects when they designed and deployed the system. For example, to counteract the General Relativistic effect once on orbit, they slowed down the ticking frequency of the atomic clocks before they were launched so that once they were in their proper orbit stations their clocks would appear to tick at the correct rate as compared to the reference atomic clocks at the GPS ground stations. Further, each GPS receiver has built into it a microcomputer that (among other things) performs the necessary relativistic calculations when determining the user's location.

Relativity is not just some abstract mathematical theory: understanding it is absolutely essential for our global navigation system to work properly!

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

I like to cite my sources rather than just make wild unsubstantiated assertions like Kawecki.

Earlier he denied the importance of relativity in Cathode-Ray tube calculations.

Kawecki - do you know the speed of the electrons in a CRT? Does 1 * 10^8 m/s sound fast or what? It's 1/3 the speed of light. At such speeds, the mass of the electron is increased by 25%, and if you do not consider this in deciding how much force is needed to deflect it into the right position, it does not go into the right position.

Here's a guy who mentions both the GPS and his use of relativity in designing CRTs.

http://mathscinotes.wordpress.com/2010/11/05/gps-and-relativity/

Wow - is that guy an idiot or what, huh Kawecki?

This page discusses the CRT math, including the increased mass of these very fast electrons.

http://www.antonine-education.co.uk/physics_a2/options/Module_8/Topic_1/topic_1.htm

also here:

http://www.exo.net/~pauld/activities/physics/relativitytelevision.htm

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Quote - > Quote - The same is true for the design of free-electron lasers.There are probably many others that I don't know just now.

Electron lasers???? This much be something very new, I never heard before and I am unable to imagine what it can be.

He didn't say electron lasers. He said free-electron lasers. And remember I said there's this thing called Google? Perhaps you find it hard to use. Here I'll help you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-electron_laser - FELs use a relativistic electron beam as the lasing medium which moves freely through a magnetic structure, hence the term free electron.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/02/18/navy-breaks-world-record-futuristic-laser-getting-real/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWdGkb7r1iA

http://www.lightsources.org/cms/?pid=1001328 - Free Electron Lasers (FELs) represent an increasingly important kind of light source with a brightness that can be up to one billion times higher than that of ordinary synchrotron light. FEL’s differ from conventional lasers in that they use the electron beam as the lasing medium rather than a gas or a solid.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Quote - Do you think that Michelson-Morley were comformed with the failure of their experiment and were happy with Einstein's explanation and then dedicated to the garden of their houses ? Of course not ! They continued their work, revised their failled experiment, created new experiments and in 1926 they had success and were able to measure the absolute speed of Earth. Everybody knows about their failed experiment, but nobody knows about their successful experiment.

You know there's this thing called Google and it's really easy to check your non-facts, right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson%E2%80%93Morley_experiment

Morley was not convinced of his own results, and went on to conduct additional experiments with Dayton Miller. Miller worked on increasingly large experiments, culminating in one with a 32 m (effective) arm length at an installation at the Mount Wilson observatory. To avoid the possibility of the aether wind being blocked by solid walls, he used a special shed with thin walls, mainly of canvas. He consistently measured a small positive effect that varied with each rotation of the device, the sidereal day and on a yearly basis. His measurements amounted to approximately 10 km/s instead of the nearly 30 km/s expected from the Earth's orbital motion alone. He remained convinced this was due to partial entrainment, though he did not attempt a detailed explanation.

Though Kennedy later also carried out an experiment at Mount Wilson, finding 1/10 the drift measured by Miller, and no seasonal effects, Miller's findings were considered important at the time, and were discussed by Michelson, Lorentz and others at a meeting reported in 1928 (ref below). There was general agreement that more experimentation was needed to check Miller's results. Lorentz recognised that the results, whatever their cause, did not quite tally with either his or Einstein's versions of special relativity. Einstein was not present at the meeting and felt the results could be dismissed as experimental error (see Shankland ref below). To date, no-one has been able to replicate Miller's results, and modern experimental accuracies are considered to have ruled them out.[7]

Quote - Michelson-Morley were not only the ones, other scientists created other experiments and among them was a guy named Georges Sagnac that in 1913 had also success in measuring the absolute speed of Earth.

No - it was rotational speed, not absolute speed. The Sagnac effect is about rotation - not linear motion. Further, the effect is easily predicted both by relativity theory and traditional Newtonian physics.

Quote - Wiki - The Sagnac experiment placed a modified apparatus on a constantly rotating turntable; the main modification was that the light trajectory encloses an area. In doing so any ballistic theories such as Ritz's could be tested directly, as the light going one way around the device would have a different length to travel than light going the other way (the eyepiece and mirrors would be moving toward/away from the light). In Ritz's theory there would be no shift, because the net velocity between the light source and detector was zero (they were both mounted on the turntable). However in this case an effect was seen, thereby eliminating any simple ballistic theory. This fringe-shift effect is used today in laser gyroscopes.

All the rest of what you said is just fantasy piled upon fantasy. You haven't got the least little facts right even on the history of relativity, let alone its use in engineering.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Quote - Realtivity is noy used, nobody designs a cathode ray tube using Relativity and the cathode ray tube was, invented, designed and used well before Relativity was accepted by all the world and this happened only after WWII.

Do you ever actually tell the truth? Do you enjoy for reasons that I cannot fathom being so wrong all the time? It would be fine to be wrong, except you're so persistent and annoying about it, shoving your weird beliefs into every conversation, and throwing around little factoids as if they were not things you just made up.

Relativity was not accepted until after World War II? Seriously - that's what you think?

Did you forget the little bit about the atomic bomb being the result of relativity theory - the bomb that ended WW II?

Man - I just can't believe how far you stick your neck out and you still strut around here like you have any credibility whatosever.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_special_relativity

Quote - Eventually, around 1911 most mathematicians and theoretical physicists accepted the results of special relativity. For example, already Planck (1909) compared the implications of the modern relativity principle — especially Einstein's relativity of time — with the revolution by the Copernican system. As a result, the fundamental difference between the dynamic approach of Lorentz and the kinematic one of Einstein was pointed out, and the term "Lorentz-Einstein-Theory" wasn't used anymore. Only a few theoretical physicists like Lorentz, Poincaré, Abraham or Langevin, still believed in the existence of an aether in any form.

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)

Quote - The speed of light was never the "Maximum Speed limit" for the universe anyway.

Sorta... it just keeps turning out to be one for all practical purposes.

There are ways around that, though most of them involve either punching a hole through space-time, or bunching it up in odd ways. Problem is, most of these theories require two things: a metric sh!tload of energy, and a means to counteract an intertial reaction that would turn every human passenger into a runny red jelly on the nearest bulkhead or seat behind each one.

Funny thing is, we really don't have to bust the speed of light to get anywhere important. If you can just make it to, say, 95% of light speed, time-dilation starts taking care of the rest (at least from the passenger POV). Get up to 98%, and the difference becomes even better. 99%? Way better still. So, a trip to a star 100-light-years off suddenly comes down to a small handful of decades (counting acceleration/deceleration time) for the occupants of the spacecraft, and even insofar as the spacecraft itself. It'd be well within a reasonable lifetime of the typical traveler, and a reachable service lifetime of a reasonably-equipped spacecraft. 'course, according to us back home, it'd still look like it took multiple centuries.

The beauty of it is, we're finding habitable planets within 50 light-years, and even closer in some cases. That cuts the time down even more if we can find one worth moving some folks out to.

To paraphrase Wolfgang Pauli, he's not even wrong.

Quote - Earlier he denied the importance of relativity in Cathode-Ray tube calculations.
Kawecki - do you know the speed of the electrons in a CRT? Does 1 * 10^8 m/s sound fast or what? It's 1/3 the speed of light. At such speeds, the mass of the electron is increased by 25%, and if you do not consider this in deciding how much force is needed to deflect it into the right position, it does not go into the right position.

Did you know that magnets around a CRT have not an uniform magnetic field, magnetic materials used for the magnets are non-linear ? All these errors make electrons go to other place that is not the correct one, so we need to put auxiliary magnets and adjust then manually to make electros go to the right place. Any error introduced by the electron mass increase with speed is insignificant compared to the errors introduced by the real world magnetic field. Perfect magnetic fields only exist in books and are for academics and not engineers.

The second point is that the increase of electron mass with speed was not discovered by Einstein and his Theory, this was afact known many years before Einstein. Also Einstein based his theory on Lorentz's work that has nothing to do with Relativity and it was an aether theory.

Stupidity also evolves!

Quote - his page discusses the CRT math, including the increased mass of these very fast electrons.http://www.antonine-education.co.uk/physics_a2/options/Module_8/Topic_1/topic_1.htm
also here:

http://www.exo.net/~pauld/activities/physics/relativitytelevision.htm

What are you going to do? create an assassin TV set ?

Did you know that electrons traveling at very high speed have high energy and what does happen when a high energy hits a target? It produce X Rays, higher the energy harder the X rays. You are making a X ray generator and not a Television CRT tube !!!!

PS1- Who was right and who was wrong, Einstein or Heisenberg ? Forget Tesla, he was crazy.

PS2- My new LED monitor has three gammas: gamma1, gamm2 and gamma3, which one is the right one ?

Stupidity also evolves!

Well, this one is long enough, I guess. Thank you for participation, the thread is locked.

A ship in port is safe; but that is not what ships are built for.
Sail out to sea and do new things.
-"Amazing Grace" Hopper

Avatar image of me done by Chidori.

Forum: Poser - OFFICIAL

Subject: Waaaay OT - Speed of light (possibly) broken.