[guest39538]

From the perspective of Sarah , if we add smoke to the space between Sarah and Adam, Sarah observes a linearity of up and down and doe's not observe a V path of the light.


This can be experimentally proven by using a laser  and smoke.

?

 [ Invalid Attachment ]

[Colin2B]

if we add smoke to the space between Sarah and Adam, Sarah observes a linearity of up and down and doe's not observe a V path of the light.


This can be experimentally proven by using a laser  and smoke.

No it can't be proved that way because it doesn't happen the way you describe it. You are making the same error you made in a new theories post, the light doesn't travel instantaneously.
I hope you are not going to try introducing a new theory into this thread!

[guest39538]

if we add smoke to the space between Sarah and Adam, Sarah observes a linearity of up and down and doe's not observe a V path of the light.


This can be experimentally proven by using a laser  and smoke.

No it can't be proved that way because it doesn't happen the way you describe it. You are making the same error you made in a new theories post, the light doesn't travel instantaneously.
I hope you are not going to try introducing a new theory into this thread!

Where do I say light travels instantaneous?  I do not, that is something you have just imagined.  ( I say sight is instantaneous, because we see through the constant-'constant)

The nature of light is not exactly as the video describes it either.

Do you deny the constant-'constant axiom?

I have  a laser spirit level here, I am pretending the apparatus is the spaceship, I turn the laser on it shines vertical to the ground, A y-axis

I move the apparatus the laser remains a linearity, only  if I angle the laser  then do I observer a V shape, and only if I add smoke do I observe any  beam , which is washed out by daylight in normal circumstances.   You say I can not test this, I just have, I smoke and blew smoke, I can see the linearity remains a linearity. So please explain where my experiment fails in regards to the video?


My parameters are the exact same as the video, an exact mimic of the thought experiment.

[Ethos_]

if we add smoke to the space between Sarah and Adam, Sarah observes a linearity of up and down and doe's not observe a V path of the light.


This can be experimentally proven by using a laser  and smoke.

No it can't be proved that way because it doesn't happen the way you describe it. You are making the same error you made in a new theories post, the light doesn't travel instantaneously.
I hope you are not going to try introducing a new theory into this thread!

This is Mr. Box's "modus operandi", an agenda to sneak in under the radar to expound upon his own personal theories. Typical behavior from him and quite dishonest if I may so. He should be admonished to take his thoughts to the New Theories board and discontinue these underhanded efforts.

[alancalverd]

I say sight is instantaneous,

Obviously wrong. Or perhaps you don't watch television.

[guest39538]

if we add smoke to the space between Sarah and Adam, Sarah observes a linearity of up and down and doe's not observe a V path of the light.


This can be experimentally proven by using a laser  and smoke.

No it can't be proved that way because it doesn't happen the way you describe it. You are making the same error you made in a new theories post, the light doesn't travel instantaneously.
I hope you are not going to try introducing a new theory into this thread!

This is Mr. Box's "modus operandi", an agenda to sneak in under the radar to expound upon his own personal theories. Typical behavior from him and quite dishonest if I may so. He should be admonished to take his thoughts to the New Theories board and discontinue these underhanded efforts.

Nothing to do with a new theory, and nothing dishonest.  I have watched this particular video lots of time, and I do not understand how they dictate a v shape path without angling the  light source itself. I want to believe science and will happily  believe science if my questions are answered to my own satisfaction.

If I repeat the experiment using a laser the results I have stated are the results of the experiment .

So why am I getting a different result?

I fail to see where I doing the experiment wrong according to the video.

[guest39538]

I say sight is instantaneous,

Obviously wrong. Or perhaps you don't watch television.

I watch television, it sounds to me like you want to challenge my constant-'constant?

[Ethos_]

it sounds to me like you want to challenge my constant-'constant?

Nope..................What's being challenged is your understanding.

[guest39538]

it sounds to me like you want to challenge my constant-'constant?

Nope..................What's being challenged is your understanding.

My understanding is the constant_,'constant, my understanding is that video I repeated what they propose, my understanding is different results, my understanding is avoidance of clarification or even an answer to what I ask.

[Ethos_]

My understanding is the constant_,'constant, my understanding is that video I repeated what they propose, my understanding is different results, my understanding is avoidance of clarification or even an answer to what I ask.

You've been given many answers Mr. Box, your problem is; They were not the answers you would prefer to hear.

[guest39538]

My understanding is the constant_,'constant, my understanding is that video I repeated what they propose, my understanding is different results, my understanding is avoidance of clarification or even an answer to what I ask.

You've been given many answers Mr. Box, your problem is; They were not the answers you would prefer to hear.

Well generally I prefer the answers to the actually question I ask. All you seem to give answers to questions I have not even asked.
So yes they are not the answers I want to hear, because I have not asked that particular question.

I asked the question is the V shape a parlour trick , I explained my reasons and even drew a diagram to show it is a parlour trick.

replies - you don't understand, our ''bible'' does not say this


Not once discussing why the V shape could be wrong according to my diagram and logic.

Relatively Sarah see's no beams of light from the spaceship.  Relatively if the spaceship accelerates, the ball flies to the back of the spaceship.

Relatively the original thought process is incomplete.

[Colin2B]

Where do I say light travels instantaneous?  I do not, that is something you have just imagined.
 

No, it is a consequence of your experiment being correct

( I say sight is instantaneous, because we see through the constant-'constant)

Do you deny the constant-'constant axiom?
 

If it says "sight is instantaneous, because we see through the constant-'constant" then yes I deny it is true, it certainly isn't an axiom.
We will not discuss New Theories here.

I have  a laser spirit level here, I am pretending the apparatus is the spaceship, I turn the laser on it shines vertical to the ground, A y-axis

I move the apparatus the laser remains a linearity, only  if I angle the laser  then do I observer a V shape, and only if I add smoke do I observe any  beam , which is washed out by daylight in normal circumstances.   You say I can not test this, I just have, I smoke and blew smoke, I can see the linearity remains a linearity. So please explain where my experiment fails in regards to the video?


My parameters are the exact same as the video, an exact mimic of the thought experiment.

If you understand anything about relativity you would know that with the measuring equipment you have the effects are only noticable at very high speeds.
If you moved your laser at say 0.5c you would certainly measure a different path. If you measured a straight path at this speed you would have proved that light travels instantaneously, as I said.
Please provide details of the relativity drive you used to move your laser and explain how it works. Fame and fortune await you.

Relatively if the spaceship accelerates, the ball flies to the back of the spaceship.

Yes, relative to the spaceship.
Well, at least you got one thing right.

[guest39538]

Where do I say light travels instantaneous?  I do not, that is something you have just imagined.
 

No, it is a consequence of your experiment being correct

Ok I will go over to new theories , we need to discuss the constant -'constant


Understand this and you will then see why I trying to re-write everything I read and learn.