[Bored chemist]

Alright forget that for a second and step outside your relativity box

The speed of the best available camera is barely related to relativity.

Nor is the fact that a simulation is not actually real.

So how have you got the idea of relativity muddled into this?

[Kryptid]

step outside your relativity box

Why would you want us to step outside empirically-observed reality?

mainstream science seems geared toward accepting results from the very first tests that are seriously outdated

Mainstream science does not do that. Replication of experimental results is considered very important in science. Many of the experiments supporting relativity have been performed many times over the decades with increasingly accuracy. They still show relativity to be correct.

and making a runaway with GR fantasy.

If general relativity was a fantasy, its predictions would not have matched up with reality. So far, they have (to very high precision). So it isn't a fantasy.

[trevorjohnson32 (OP)]

It's not a cartoon fools! basic F*ing photshop 101. Maybe we should study art a litlle more or I guess studying something tangible would be mind boggling.

[Bored chemist]

.... Maybe we should study art a litlle more ...

Spelling is an art.

basic F*ing photshop 101. ... I guess studying something tangible would be mind boggling.

Is there anything less tangible than a computer simulation?
It has no presence in the real world.

It's not a cartoon fools! basic F*ing photshop 101.

Yes, as you say it's photoshop 101.
And the thing about photoshop is it lets you make pictures of things that are not real.
If you make lots of pictures of things that are not real, and put them together, you can make a video of something that is not real.

They did.
And you somehow still think it is real.

[trevorjohnson32 (OP)]

Yes but I freely admit with my intellect in photoshop that virtual could simply mean they added the line that shows the laser and that would be virtually alternating the REAL WORLD. End of discussion for me.

[Bored chemist]

End of discussion for me.

Bye

The rest of us know it's impossible, because there simply isn't a fast enough camera for it to be a real film, and the makers of the film are careful to  point out that it is a simulation.
As I said earlier.

"we created a virtual camera that was fast enough"
"we could capture light as it spreads through the virtual scene"
" 2D light transport simulator "
"Monte Carlo raytracing"
"we assign our virtual camera"
"To keep track of time along light paths, I will be using a slightly modified geometric optics model"
"on top of our existing 2D renderer with only a few lines of code."
"we use a conventional 2D renderer"
"We annotate each vertex on these light paths with a timestamp"
"store these in memory"
"we iterate over all segments"
"splat the line segment to the screen"
"we could do it in a vertex shader"

[Kryptid]

Whether or not the video is a simulation is a moot point: we already know that the experiment proposed by the OP would come up null because several experiments that looked for the exact same aether have come up null as well (which are much more recent and far more sensitive than the original Michelson-Morley experiment). But the OP seems to be a conspiracy theorist when it comes to scientific results, so I doubt there'd be any convincing him of that.

[trevorjohnson32 (OP)]

Well like I said this isn't the only site where people argue about this experiment with me. In fact I've yet to find someone who doesn't argue. I honestly believe that all the arguements come from people having to overcome mainstream thoughts and swim against the current. Be the first to amaze me world! This experiment is the cornerstone of my proof for gravity fields and EMR being density on the space medium. Again it is science fiction I'm writing but like other ideas I've written about this one does seem to be backed up by experiment. Anyone have the guts to agree with me? trust me its not a fun journey other then moments of enlightenment, its all people arguing, and I''ve talked to THOUSANDS of those fish that pretty much swiming in all directions. Maybe chaos is the mainstream consensus on space as a medium.

[Bored chemist]

In fact I've yet to find someone who doesn't argue.

That's because you are clearly wrong.

This experiment is the cornerstone of my proof for gravity fields and EMR being density on the space medium.

It's not an experiment, it's a cartoon.

this one does seem to be backed up by experiment.

Where?
All you have shown here is a computer graphic.

Anyone have the guts to agree with me?

It doesn't take "guts", just  determination not to let balderdash go unchallenged.

[trevorjohnson32 (OP)]

I'm keeping this post live for discussion. The one truth that can be said is that it bears repeating in order ffor the experiment's results to truly be a proof. Nevertheless if it proves true that the experiment does show light moving along space as its medium, I think its time to move forward on the subject to it implications in science.

[Bored chemist]

The one truth that can be said is that it bears repeating in order ffor the experiment's

It's not an experiment, it's a cartoon.

[Bored chemist]

I'm keeping this post live for discussion.

Then discuss.

Comment on my observation that  you seem to have mistaken a cartoon for a real experiment.

Up to now, you have not discussed anything you have just ignored reality, and repeated yourself.

[trevorjohnson32 (OP)]

I'm keeping this post live for discussion.

Then discuss.

Comment on my observation that  you seem to have mistaken a cartoon for a real experiment.

Up to now, you have not discussed anything you have just ignored reality, and repeated yourself.

Nobody else on the internet argues that its a cartoon. You are alone on that one. Repeating the experiment is the biggest arguement.

[Bored chemist]

Repeating the experiment

It's not an experiment.
It is an animation- a cartoon in other words.

The guy who made it said so.

You are the only one trying to argue that it is an experiment.

The man who made the original video is a specialist in computer  simulations.
https://benedikt-bitterli.me/

If you really think that you are right, it's very simple.
He has contact details.
Ask him if it's real.

[Kryptid]

Nobody else on the internet argues that its a cartoon. You are alone on that one.

I suppose that depends upon how you define a cartoon, but it isn't real in either case. It's computer-generated.

[Origin]

Nobody else on the internet argues that its a cartoon.

Yes Trevor, it's an animation.

[Colin2B]

Nobody else on the internet argues that its a cartoon. You are alone on that one.

I suppose that depends upon how you define a cartoon, but it isn't real in either case. It's computer-generated.

I would call it an animation, but cartoon is ok and used for drawings as well (eg da Vinci).
No matter what you call it, it isn’t real.

[trevorjohnson32 (OP)]

So y'all are suggesting that someone drew in the dimensions that I'm looking for in a frame by frame animation? Is this a legitimate science forum? Where am I?

[Bored chemist]

So y'all are suggesting that someone drew in the dimensions that I'm looking for in a frame by frame animation?

No.

Everyone except you realises that the use of words and phrases like these

"we created a virtual camera that was fast enough"
"we could capture light as it spreads through the virtual scene"
" 2D light transport simulator "
"Monte Carlo raytracing"
"we assign our virtual camera"
"To keep track of time along light paths, I will be using a slightly modified geometric optics model"
"on top of our existing 2D renderer with only a few lines of code."
"we use a conventional 2D renderer"
"We annotate each vertex on these light paths with a timestamp"
"store these in memory"
"we iterate over all segments"
"splat the line segment to the screen"
"we could do it in a vertex shader"

Make it utterly obvious that they used a computer to generate the animation.

I'm also still saying this

The man who made the original video is a specialist in computer  simulations.
https://benedikt-bitterli.me/

If you really think that you are right, it's very simple.
He has contact details.
Ask him if it's real.

Don't bother coming back until you have at least tried to do that.