1

New Theories / A new interpretation for Michelson-morley experiment

« on: 27/07/2020 20:44:55 »

A new interpretation or conclusion section for Michelson - Morley interferometer experiment

As known, in the interferometer, the halves of light travel in different ways due to mirrors and form fringes on an interference screen. When the test subject is light, these fringes are always formed in the same number. This experimental result wrongs up the ether hypothesis. In fact, this experiment was repeated thousands of times with high precision conditions and the this had been generally accepted.

It is possible to interpret this experiment with the Light coordinate system method * (Figure):



As can be seen in the figure, the light (photon packet) coming from a star-like light source to the observer's eye has always travelled the intermediate distance with the light velocity of c. The speed of observer is not operational. Because the intermediate distance is determined at the  moment of perceiving. this is very important.

The same formation happens in the MM experiment.  Both two light halves arrive to the screen with the speed c. Even if the lengths of their travelling ways are different. Naturally these two light halves are not the belonging the a / same light. There is possibility that these light halves in this experiment begin to travel in Tx and Ty moments, and already it is. Light source is open along the exp.. İf this option had been understood at the beginning, there would be no need to repeat the experiment thousands of times.

 

* This method is simply to examine the motion relationships of experiment actors in a common reference frame (which is LCS or space).

2

New Theories / Weakest point of special relativity

« on: 23/02/2020 12:28:39 »

WEAKEST POINT OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY     

I got an impression that majority don't know the technical essence of SR from my former topic "Do you want to be clever than Einstein?" When the SR's mentality is not known, its flaws cannot  be comprehended. Therefore I prepared an article that tells its essence easily and its effective flaw: Weakest point of special relativity..
 
MOD EDIT: Please post your main arguments here for discussion rather than link out to external sites
Edit: Fixed a typo in the title...

3

New Theories / Do you want to be more clever than Einstein?

« on: 21/07/2019 18:06:35 »

Do you want to be more clever than Einstein?

This is possible.

If you examine and internalize the types of relativity  and light's relativity type; you can distinguish first flaw of SR.

(a) Genuine relativity: A vehicle gets its speed by pushing the road. The speed of this vehicle is defined as “genuine relative” to the road. The contribution of the road is essential. The power is applied to the road continuously for genuine relativity. The upper limit of genuine relative speed is ‘c’ (the value of light’s velocity).

(b) Hypothetical(pseudo/nominal relativity: The changing speed of the distance between two vehicles which are moving on the same road. This speed is defined as “hypothetical relative.” The vehicles do not apply power to each other. The upper limit of hypothetical relative speed is 2c (discussion section3.2).

(c) Momentary/temporary relativity: When a player throws a ball, the ball’s speed according to the player is “momentary relative”. The power has been applied momentarily. After throwing, the motion of the ball is transferred to the type of hypothetical relativity; the player can go anywhere freely. However, it can be said that the ball’s speed is “genuine relative” according to the ground. The ground is the co-reference frame for the player and ball. For genuine relativity, the starting point of the ball is marked on the ground, not by the existence of player (or his/her following positions).


Which one is significant for light (an identified photon)? SR prefers to use merely the concept of “genuine relativity” for the motion of light according to its source and every frame [4]. However, requirements of genuine relativity are not realized for light; the source and photons never apply a power for the motion. Further, the source can go in any direction freely after the photon was emitted, like the player (the increasing/decreasing speed of intermediate distance is the vectorial total of their speeds, but if an observer is an actor in the experiment he never can perceive a larger value than c). Eventually the velocity of a photon according to its source is “momentary relative” and then“hypothetical relative” in the following time.

Please read for more : http://vixra.org/pdf/1903.0044v1.pdf

Note: Please don't be provoked  by the title that is to aruse interest like metaphor.

4

New Theories / Which pecularity of Special Relativity is similar to flogiston theory?

« on: 06/03/2019 18:41:11 »

Which pecularity of Special Relativity (SR) is similar to flogiston theory?

As known, in first approach the flogiston theory had been adopted for burning event. After years, when the dusts of metal was burned; the weight of material had increased. And some scientists commented  that flogiston has negative weight.  This hypothesis kept until Lavoisier's  oxidation definition.

The essence of Flogiston failure is the analyzing of burning event with inadequate factors.

While light kinematics is analyzing, if some  of essential factors  is neglected, is the one of probable inferences be the theory SR?

Please discuss that article at this link : http://vixra.org/abs/1903.0044  or http://vixra.org/pdf/1903.0044v1.pdf

5

Guest Book / What have I learned in (from) life

« on: 26/01/2019 15:07:40 »

https://lyricstranslate.com/tr/hayatta-neyi-%C3%B6%C4%9Frendim-what-have-i-learned-life.html

What have I learned in (from) life

I was born in (and from) in an endless darkness. I saw the light, I got scared. I cried.
In time I learned to live in (/with) the light.
I saw the darkness, I got scared.
There were some days that I sent my loved ones into the infinite darkness..
I cried.
**
I learned to live.
I learned that;
birth is the moment that life starts to end,
the part between (the birth and death) is the time that are stolen from death.
***
I learned the time.
I raced with it.
I learned in (or with) time,
that you can't compete with it, only concede with it.
*******
I learned human.
Later I learned that there are good and bad people,
and then, there are good and bad in every person.
***
I learned to love.
Then, to trust..
Later, I learned that trust is more permanent than love,
and love is only built on trust.
***
I learned human skin.
and then I learned there's a soul under the skin.
After that, I learned that soul is actually above the skin.
***
I learned the universe.
Then I learned the ways of illuminating it.
After that, I learned that you need to illuminate your surroundings if you want to illuminate the universe.
***
I learned bread (food).
Then that the bread should be produced in peace,
and then, I learned that sharing the bread (equally and fair) is as important as producing it.
***
I learned how to read.
Then I taught myself how to write..
And after a while, writing taught me who I am..
******
I learned to go (to leave),
Then I learned how to return,
And then I learned how to leave again, despite myself..
****
I learned to challenge the world (on my own) at an early age..
Then, I thought I should walk with the crowds in unity.
Later, I realized that I should actually walk against the crowds.
********
I learned to think.
Then I learned to think the way they told me.
Then I learned that the healthy thinking is unconditioned thinking. (Thinking in freedom, without being under the influence of people).
*********
I learned the importance of honor (also honesty/purity) at home..
Then I learned it's dishonesty to expect honesty from dishonest people,
and the real honesty (honor) is not touching it when the sin is right under your hand.
******
One day, I learned the truth.
And that the truth is bitter (painful)..
Later, I learned that the right amount of bitter (pain) gives life a taste just like spice gives taste to a meal.
*********
I learned that all living (creatures) will taste the death (one day), but only some of them will taste (learn) living..
 
 Mevlana   

6

Physiology & Medicine / What have I learned in (from) life

« on: 14/11/2018 14:24:09 »

 
 
sorry please remove thiz topic

 

7

New Theories / An extra amazing illusion of universe

« on: 09/06/2018 09:53:05 »

I have done a detailed analysis about BB cosmology ( http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013PhyEs..26...49E )

During this analysis, an intuition arose, I want to share it and take your thoughts:

Is it possible to see the images T₁, T₂, T₃ ..moments. of a celestial body in the same frame?

The postulates:

The universe is too big.

The universe is 19.3 billion years old (the result of my calculation).

The universe expands rapidly at a large fraction of the speed of light.

The speed of light is finited / limited. So we can see the celestial body's position and age in the past. (Although those objects are actually at another position right now).

Based on these preliminary assumptions, I did BB cosmology analysis. Of course I have considered some reductions and facilities. One of them was to handle the big explosion without turning. So I assumed the scatterings were linear.

However, rotational movements are common in the universal structure. If the general universe is spinning at the same time while it is swollen, that is, if it is growing by rolling. In this case, the current position of the world and the current (or recent) position of target formation may be close to each other. In this status, the photon packages that are starting at the moments of  T₁ and T₂ will can arrive to observers' eye at the same time.

Could you imagine this offer in your mind?

8

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Is an experiment possible for Fitzgerald contraction?

« on: 05/10/2017 16:15:57 »

Fitzgerald had submitted a saver claim (contraction) for aether concept against the negative result of Michelson - Morley experiment.

Romantic scientists had liked this brillant claim; and they said that someone (who finds an experiment for indicating the Fitzgerald contraction) will gain Nobel prize. This phrase had motived many young scientists.

I have an experiment.  I wish, if I would lived before 120 years.

Has someone else?

9

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / When will photons from the Sun and the Andromeda Galaxy meet?

« on: 22/09/2017 13:04:04 »

When will the Sun's and Andromeda's photons meet?

Two photons (which have been emitted from the Sun and Andromeda on the same moment To) approach to each other.

The distance to the Andromeda Galaxy is 2.54 million light-years.

When will these photons meet?     Tı = ? 

10

New Theories / Is a cosmological analysis possible?

« on: 20/08/2017 16:03:58 »

Asknown the theory SR never allows an analysis about cosmological scale because of asynchoronous data.

However if we overcome the restrictions of SR, we can perform to analyze cosmos and we can better  calculate the age of universe.

We must consider the space as co-reference frame  for the analysis :

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013PhyEs..26...49E

11

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Can the gravitational lens be possible without accelerating?

« on: 08/08/2017 08:59:28 »

Gravitational lens without accelerating


As known, in the theory GR the acceleration and gravity are mentioned at identical meaning.

And a light has a curved path in an accelerating elevator cabinet according to GR mentality; and this event is called "gravitational lens".

However if the cabinet has fixed speed (acceleration = 0) the light will has an inclined path instead of curved path in accordance with same GR mentality.

Please look at the figure.

12

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / What is the evidence for an accelerating Universe?

« on: 07/07/2017 08:31:06 »

I want to know What are the  evidences of accelerating of the Universe?

I want to read the scientific articles about this subject for the evidences especially.

I looked for this on the "search section" of the forum. But I could not find a topic. If it is presented I'll remove this message.

13

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Are the spectrums of the Sun, Moon, Jupiter, Saturn etc. similar?

« on: 05/07/2017 08:08:38 »

Are the spectrums of Sun, Moon, Jupiter, Saturn etc. similar?

The lights of The Moon, Jupiter and other planets must give similar results on spectrometer, because they are reflects of sun light.

Well, may be some potential useful details  possible because of spherical reflecting surface?

14

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Is the Michelson-Morley (M-M) experiment futile?

« on: 04/07/2017 16:15:45 »

Is the M-M experiment futile?

Michelson-Morley interferometer experiment had been repeated thousands of times by more/most precision; but the amount of interference fringes did not change for different directions.

In accordance with aether concept, we would hope different interference images for different directions.

In the texts about this experiment it is mentioned that the light is separated two parts, they travel different paths due to mirrors and they interference on a surface. I had supposed that these two lights are the halves of a light how it is released at the moment Ti. I guess that so much person have same opinion; whereas it cannot be guaranteed.

If we examine the figure at attachment we will see that the light comes to an observer/receiver by always the velocity c absolutely, although the speeds of source and observer. So, the light halves are belonging to two different lights which releases at different moments (the light is used uninterrupted form).

If we set a similar interference experiment with two light which one of them comes from a distant star and the other comes from a local source, the interference fringes image does not change. 

Is the M-M experiment futile?

15

New Theories / LCS concept instead of SR

« on: 07/06/2017 12:19:53 »

LCS concept instead of SR

How was the LCS concept generated?

We had wanted to analyze the motion of two photons - that they were emitted at the same moment but opposite directions- according to their source and by SR mentality (Please examine the figure at attachment):


 


Lorentz transformations (Coordinates of a photon according to new position of its source):

x’ = (c – v) t / (1 – v²/c²)½

t’ = (1 – v/c) / (1 – v²/c²)½

Confirmation :     x’/ t’ = c 


If we consider reverse option : The photon travels toward + x while the source goes to - x  (use the parameter v by negative mark); or the photon at the direction - x, source at + x (use the parameter c by negative mark).

x’’ = (- c  -  v) t / (1 – v²/c²)½

t’’ = (1 + v/c) / (1 – v²/c²)½

Confirmation:         x’’/ t’’ =  - c


 Well. We find the coordinates of the photons (that travel toward +x and –x directions) while their source (that has uniform motion) goes toward +x.  And we provided confirmations of these calculations:

x / t = x’ / t’ = Ι x’’ / t’’ I =  c   

Already the aim of theory SR and Lorentz was this result: The relative velocities of light are same and fixed value according to any moving body that has uniform motion.

Yes, these results are mathematical successful performance of Lorentz and SR.

However this calculation indicates that;          t’’ >  t’   


The source’s or moving body’s clock/chronometer has to show two number of time  simultaneously for providing the fixed value of light’s velocity.

But this result is impossible.  

Earlier example was on the Earth; the source was in a train/rocket and its speed (v) is relative value according to rails/world. The times t, t’, t’’ represent a single/same moment in accordance with entity of photon. In this experiment train’s clock had to show two or three different numbers of time, simultaneously.

If we prefer an outer and sequential reference frame (solar system or the Sun). The orbital motion of the Earth can be supposed a uniform motion for small distances. And resultant speed of train will be the value V(earth) +/- v. On this experiment, train’s clock is obliged to show 5 or 6 different numbers of time, simultaneously.

..........

We can go on by other sequential reference frames. All relative values of light’s velocity are fixed value  c (according to each one of all sequential reference frames). But, the source’s relative speed will get different values.

At last, we will arrive / consider the most external reference frame (space) *.

Why did NOT we consider this major reference frame at the beginning? Is it anthropocentric attitude or captivity of locality?


*  Here is alternative/new theory for light kinematics: the concept of LCS (Light coordinate system)

16

New Theories / Reduction the redshifts for radial speeds

« on: 19/05/2017 16:00:43 »

 


The radial speeds of sky objects are important parameter. The redshifts represent radial speeds and the measured values of redshifts must be reduced. The theory SR uses the value c for the top limit of radial speeds on reducing operation. Whereas radial speed has two components; one of them is the speed of observing object; and the other component is belonging to observer (or our local cluster); thus the distance between observer and object can increase up to 2.c at simultaneous layout (or by God’s eyes). But SR persists for single c. I had perceived the first flaw of SR.

The value 2c (for the top limit of increasing/decreasing speed for the distance between two independent moving bodies) presents better/logical result  for analyzing space time.


The graphic of the redshifts are curved upward on a diagram redshifts/distance. After SR reduction the graphic of radial speeds takes a form as a positive inclined and it becomes asymptote to the value c. But on the derived diagram (Hubble constant values according to their distance) the graphic (SR originated) is a negative inclined line; whereas it would be a horizontal line for simultaneous layout. My solution or reduction method provides this requirement.

17

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / An experiment for the bigger velocity than light

« on: 14/12/2008 08:42:51 »

An experiment for the bigger velocity than light


The velocity of relative magnetic area was determined bigger (> 4c) than light due to an experiment by Prof. Tolga Yarman, Prof Metin Arık and Prof. Alexander Kholmetski.

Other interactions (gravity, information) without energy may have bigger speed than light.

This new experiment menaces the theory of general relativity.

The announce will be realized at December 18 on Okan University (www.okan.edu.tr)

18

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Visible form of Universe

« on: 25/11/2008 19:08:48 »

 

The master idea:If the absolute form of universe is a spherical surface How is the visible form by the reason of limited value of light's velocity.

Effectice form of universe is an asymmetric elipsoidal surface. 

Visible form ------

Absolute form ------





And If we analyze this form; for example we can find the speeds and distances of cosmic units and set a diagram velocity-distance, we will have similar graphic of observational data.

 
 

19

New Theories / Are there flaws in the theory of special relativity?

« on: 09/08/2008 18:30:33 »

The collapse of Special Relativity [1]

I study upon light kinematics and I have some new results/methods for space-time. One of them menaces the SR seriously.

I have followed forums about special relativity. I am glad for finding some objectors. My determination will approve their arguments.

In the forums which I joined, I tested the ability of understanding of my statement. The new concept was declared in few forums and by my book (at April 2008).

The new concept/master key will declare at August 25, 2008 (at the end of Beijing Olympics) on this thread.