The posting of this topic contravenes forum rules and has been locked
The following users thanked this post: Halc
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
It should be fairly easy to calculate the one-way speed of light. The problem is doing so with any reasonable amount of accuracy.
Here's how I would do it.
SpeedOfLight.gif (9.32 kB . 669x311 - viewed 28765 times)
Light (strong laser) passes through two shaft connected spinning discs, hits a cylindrical (conical) mirror, and is projected onto a wall to record. Mostly interested in the trailing edge of the light spot.
So I wouldn't waste time trying to take a picture of it.How about you stop wasting our time by posting your nonsense in the main part of the forum.
They fine tune the inclination of the orbit according to its altitude ( in other words, it is not a perfectly polar orbit). That way, the Earth's own equatorial bulge produces the desired precession. Solar synchronous orbits are not put at geo-sync altitudes. They are much lower. They can orbit the Earth multiple times a day. (for weather and surveillance satellites this means you can image multiple points on the Earth's surface) You just want consistent lighting for any given region on every pass.He seems to be referring to a Solar-synchronous orbit. This is a polar orbit which precesses at a rate equal to a Solar day.Ah, I was picturing something that hovered over one point on the sun, for some unfathomable reason. This is something orbiting Earth, not the sun.
How do they get a polar orbit to precess all the way around once per year? Expend energy?
Seems like it would be at geosync altitude on average, but different orbital axis.
It need not be a circular orbit at all, and would benefit from being furthest from Earth in the day to give more time to measure stuff. Such an eccentric orbit also keeps it out of the high-contention geosync path.
Was the light speed problem really solved by Einstein in 1905 ?Then you haven't studied Einstein much.
Einstein did not truly succeed in eliminating the ether, and Einstein himself never realized this. Few, if any, physicists realize this. The ether always haunted the thinking of the physicists.
Appealing to statistics is the last refuge of incompetent PhysicsThis is beginning to more and more like a simple "sour grapes" attitude. Modern physics has grown beyond your understanding, so you you respond by claiming that modern physics isn't worth understanding.
lim_n→∞ π(n)/∫1/ln(t) = 1The first statement is a measure of Relative Error.
∫1/ln(t) - π(n) has infinitely many sign changesThe second statement is a measure of Absolute Error.