0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
There was a 6.7ms delay between experiments.16.68 minus 6.7 = 9.989.98 minus earth's gravity 9.807 = 0.173
1600km plus tiny distance of contraction, divided by speed of light = (?) (my phone calculator cannot handle this equation)1600km divided by speed of light = 5.34ms(?) minus 5.34ms = (?) multiplied by 400 = (?)
The gravity wave did not travel in a circle.
But considering I have stated this as being just a side issue of interest to me, why is it that you think this is the factor worthy of your consideration?
Sorry if my response is unwanted, it was just background interest!
When you measure a cesium atom in elevation, are you measuring what time is doing in the space the atom is located, or are you just measuring what time is doing for the atom located in that space?
My theory renders length, or distance, as constant.
My theory renders length, or distance, as constant. Albeit for the fact of bodies of mass rolling around, within their constant lengths, in this constant distance, changing the parameters of gravitational field and time aspects of these constant distances as they progress upon their gravitational trajectories. ie: the universe is not expanding...but has been slowly contracting in its spacial dimensions since the moment of inflation, due to a sea of individual particle masses clumping together. ie: a cyclic universe that finds its beginnings and ends of cycle within the black hole phenomenon.
Yes - and how they measured this contraction in length is by using the phenomenon of light, and recording the interference patterns in the light caused by the disturbance to the 'length'...And... I'm saying that a gravitational increase caused by the gravity wave will cause that light to blueshift. That blueshift is indicative of a 'faster' rate of time. This will cause the lights progression, at the speed of light, during the duration of the gravity wave hit, to be making a 'shorter' journey 'time'.If one does not realise that a blueshift causes an increase in time, then one would 'have' to conclude that the tube itself has contracted, by the exact amount that the journey time was shorter!!!My related calculation gives a premiss for calculating by how much the time contracted, by using the data of by how much the tubes are 'supposed' to have contracted.The logic is simple!
I'm open to your concept timey, but there are a few details that we need to straighten out first. Allow me to first establish that; "I would be extremely pleased" to see this model verified because I favor the cyclical model. But proceeding via the scientific method, we first need to try and disprove it.1. I don't think we should totally dismiss the malleability of matter. (a) Even in our frame of reference, matter is composed of mostly ru space and is very compressible. (b) Can we then assume to illuminate other forces such as velocity and gravitational influence to also effect the structural geometry of material objects?2. I think it more reasonable, in view and in support of your theory, to suggest that there may exist an equilibrium between time and structural geometry taking place. And if that be the case, how in the world could we ever determine which competing entity is the greater influence?Please understand timey, I'm asking these questions in hopes that answers might be forth coming and in no way am I attacking your theory. In view of my fondness for the cyclical model, I would be very pleased if your model were proved correct.
The theory is best viewed in relation to Hubble and the light cone.
There is no length contraction for this very simple reason, the length is always constant on a graph or reading. [ Invalid Attachment ]
Quote from: Thebox on 05/03/2016 16:06:51There is no length contraction for this very simple reason, the length is always constant on a graph or reading. [ Invalid Attachment ] I doubt if the bed or patient are travelling fast enough for it to be apparent.
I think you missed the point there Jeff, any computer readout is normally defined between a set distance of points, in the example the set length is the computer screen. The length is constant //www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZNrWolSoBo