0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
As I posted already, other experiments searching for the aether either came up with ambiguous or negative results. So again I ask, how is your experiment superior to those that have already been performed?
Colin, Kryptid, and Bored Chemist, You guys provide zero useful information the two years I've been on here and you expect me to believe you on whether this a fake or not? ITS OFFENSIVE!!
A virtual camera looks like a real camera to me.
That's kind of what your writing on the page looks like Bored chemist, a bunch of sh1t.
pouring his ego down my throat like a baby birds mother vomiting down its chicks throat?
Maybe because the technology of a femto camera is a little more advanced then that of an inferometer.
And anyways why don't you try to boast with the world more to have your inferometer experiment recorded with a femto camera
Maybe; maybe not.But, since they didn't use one it hardly matters.What they actually used wasa software simulation of the image.So how could it matter how well the femtosecond camera (on a shelf, somewhere else) works?You seem not to be happy with the use of logic here.
Quote from: Bored chemist on 19/05/2019 16:59:57Maybe; maybe not.But, since they didn't use one it hardly matters.What they actually used wasa software simulation of the image.So how could it matter how well the femtosecond camera (on a shelf, somewhere else) works?You seem not to be happy with the use of logic here.Says right here "In Monte Carlo raytracing, Femto Photography is very simple to set up. First, we assign our virtual camera a time interval [t0, t1] during which the shutter is open. Rather than rendering all light that reaches the camera, we now only allow light that took between t0 and t1 seconds to reach the sensor."
Maybe because the technology of a femto camera is a little more advanced then that of an inferometer. That's like coming up to me with a vacuum tube cell phone.
And anyways why don't you try to boast with the world more to have your inferometer experiment recorded with a femto camera so you can once and for all be the first to know what's truly going on there.
It would be smarter then all your math equations that supposedly prove you right.
He uses important words llike "model" and "monte carlo" to make it absolutely clear to anyone who can read simple English, that this is a computer simulation, not an actual experimental film.
Quote from: alancalverd on 19/05/2019 18:02:54He uses important words llike "model" and "monte carlo" to make it absolutely clear to anyone who can read simple English, that this is a computer simulation, not an actual experimental film. Those filming techniques are still based on real scenes. So please answer why light is moving up faster then down on either side.
So please answer why light is moving up faster then down on either side.
Hi again, umm what were we talking about?
Well, you were telling us that a cartoon is real; and the rest of us were saying it isn't.Even now, a few years on frome when you are being absurdly wrong, the fastest cameras actually only shot at about a million frames per second.https://www.phantomhighspeed.com/products/cameras/ultrahighspeed/v2512
. Since then I've learned that the only thing that a virtual simulation is going to do to an actual video is add color or small effect like it does.
So, in all that time, you learned one thing, and it's wrong, or rather irrelevant.There is no "actual video" of the event depicted in that simulation- not least because the fastest cameras in the world are a million times too slow.
what is the problem with people and discussing the other side to the matter?
Then when you study for a long time and spend big money you grow an attitude
mainstream science seems geared toward accepting results from the very first tests that are seriously outdated
mainstream science seems geared toward accepting results from the very first tests