[mad aetherist]

Less obvious are lasers masers etalons etc which experience lots of problems, eg walkoff noise stability etc etc (i aint an expert).

You do realise they didn't just buy a cat-toy laser at the local supermarket, don't you?They found people who are experts in laser stability.

A fixed laser describes an ellipse over a day. I thort that everyone knew that.

And so does my left ear.

By Kevin Harkness.
Anisotropic one-way speed of light experiment that have been done
Recent one-way experiments favour anistoropy in the speed of light:
https://xxx.lanl.gov/pdf/astro-ph/0608223v1
1) In August 2006 C E Navia et al report on a search for anisotropic light propagation as a function of laser alignment relative to the Earth's velocity vector. A laser diffraction experiment was conducted to study light propagation in air. The experiment is easy to reproduce and it is based on simple optical principles. Two optical sensors (segmented photo-diodes) are used for measuring the position of diffracted light spots with a precision better than 0.1 µm. The goal is to look for signals of anisotropic light propagation as function of the laser beam alignment to the Earth's motion (solar barycenter motion) obtained by COBE. Two raster search techniques have been used. First, a fixed laser beam in the laboratory frame that scans due to Earth's rotation. Second, an active rotation of the laser beam on a turntable system. The results obtained with both methods show that the course of the light rays are affected by the motion of the Earth, and a predominant quantity of first order with a dc/c = -(betta)(1+2a) cos(theta) signature with a = -0.4106±0.0225 describes well the experimental results. This result differs in a amount of 18% from the Special Relativity Theory prediction and that supplies the value of a = -1/2 (isotropy). See
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0608223

2) In April 2006 Carlos. E. Navia and Carlos. R. A. Augusto report results on an "one-way light path" laser diffraction experiment as a function of the laser beam alignment relative to the Earth's velocity vector obtained by COBE measurements of the Doppler shift in the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR). An amplified Doppler shift is observed in the diffraction images, and the effect is compatible with a "dipole" speed of light anisotropy due to Earth's motion relative to the "CMBR rest frame", with an amplitude of dc/c = 0.00123. This amplitude coincides with the value of the dipole temperature anisotropy dT/T = 0.00123 of the CMBR obtained by COBE. Our results point out that it is not possible to neglect the preferred frame imposed by the cosmology and they are well described by the Ether Gauge Theory (an extension of the Lorentz's ether theory) and it satisfies the cosmological time boundary condition. See
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/0604/0604145v1.pdf

3) In 1991 Roland DeWitte carried out a one-way experiment using electrical signals rather than light. His results confirm wisp theory's prediction that the speed of light is affected by the ether flow passing the Earth.
(See Reasons why Einstein was wrong for further details).

4) In 1990 T. P. Krisher et al carried out a one-way experiment by sending modulated laser light down a fibre optics (fiber optics) cable. However, because of experimental noise the result was inconclusive, and the duration of the test was perhaps too short to detect the sidereal period variation, and could not rule out an ether flow that is at rest with respect to the CMBR.

[mad aetherist]

So that leaves us with some sort of seismic event.
On the other hand the guilty event only has to affect the disposition of the little detector, it doesnt have to affect the whole 4 km of pipeline. So it could be sonic. But photonic & em are probly not guilty.

Neither a seismic event nor sound waves can be blamed.
(1) Sound waves and seismic waves don't have the peculiar expansion/contraction characteristics of gravitational waves so they would not produce the same kind of signature. Seismic waves and sound waves cause an expansion and contraction parallel to the direction of movement, whereas gravitational waves cause an expansion and contraction perpendicular to the direction of movement.
(2) The event GW170814 was detected by both of the LIGO detectors (one in Washington state and one in Louisiana) and the Virgo interferometer in Italy all in a span of 14 milliseconds. An earthquake or sound wave would not be able to trigger detectors separated by thousands of miles in such a time span: https://journals.aps.org/prl/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.141101
(3) The event GW170817 was accompanied by the gamma ray burst GRB 170817 (which was detected 1.7 seconds later by multiple observatories). The gravitational wave signal lasted for about 100 seconds, becoming stronger as the two neutron stars neared each other and finally stopped after they collided. If sound waves or seismic waves were to blame, there would be no connection to cosmological events like this nor would the signal look like what was expected of two in-spiraling neutron stars coming closer and closer to each other as they orbited over a period of 100 seconds: https://www.ligo.org/detections/GW170817/paper/GW170817-PRLpublished.pdf
(4) Virgo has environmental sensors capable of detecting seismic or sonic interference. The scientists who run it would therefore know if a gravitational wave detection were accompanied by such a compromising event or not: https://www-sop.inria.fr/apics/sbpi/derosa.pdf
I apologize for derailing your thread, trevorjohnson42. This will be my last post here about gravitational waves.

LIGO Gravitational Wave Event as Observed by Network of Quantum Gravity Detectors
ReginaldT. Cahill – March 2016.

4 Data from Quantum Gravity Detectors
We now reveal the data from the GCP network [9] of Quantum Gravity Detectors, known as Random Event Generators (REG),but with better physics now known as Quantum Gravity Detectors (QGD).The LIGO event occurred at 9:50:45hrs UTC on September 14, 2015. Data from that day was downloaded from [10], which has data every 1 sec recorded against UTC for 47 detectors located in numerous countries.. An issue with these commercial detectors is that the orientation of the diodes is unknown, which means that the effect of the angle depend ence  k*v = kv cos() in (3) is unknown. So a detector response may vary from a decreased i, and so decreased signal, or an increased I and an increased signal, or even an unchanged i resulting in no change in signal. For this reason the data from the various detectors is split into three groups, and shown in Figs.5, 6, 7. The data in Figs.5 and 6 show a remarkable coincidence with the LIGO event, subject to the 1 sec nominal timing of the QG Ddata. However the data in Fig.5, Top, also shows another significant effect, namely in-phase responses of the detectors in the 2secs before and after the LIGO event. The LIGO reported data [1] does not reveal data during these times. Overall it is not possible to determine the origin of this event other than it could be consistent with a major Earth centred mass movement.

5 Conclusion
Most of physics of the last 100 years has been confused by the design flaw in the Michelson interferometer, but that is now understood, and the light speed anisotropy of500km/s has been repeatedly measured by using numerous techniques, and so invalidating the key assumption of SR and GR, and the supposed existence of spacetime [5]. A dynamical space does exist, and plays a key role in all phenomena. Dynamical space is the cause of gravity, a quantum phenomenon, as confirmed by experiment [8]. The QGD network, fortuitously run by the Global Consciousness Project (GCP), has confirmed the existence of a space flow event, but whose interpretation by LIGO remains doubtful. Note that the events in the 2sec interval before and after the LIGO event, in Figs.5 and 6, are inconsistent with the black hole merger interpretation. We are now entering an era of new physics.

[Bored chemist]

No, LIGO easily clips out most of the noise, they are looking for a chirp tween say 30 Hz to 300 Hz, & this nett signal is about 1/1000th of the noise, so they must clip 99.9% of the total signal.

No
https://dcc.ligo.org/public/0028/T970084/000/T970084-00.pdf

[mad aetherist]

No, LIGO easily clips out most of the noise, they are looking for a chirp tween say 30 Hz to 300 Hz, & this nett signal is about 1/1000th of the noise, so they must clip 99.9% of the total signal.

No
https://dcc.ligo.org/public/0028/T970084/000/T970084-00.pdf

That article is very complex, but i dont see any numbers that contradict any of my four numbers, & i dont see any wording that contradicts any of my 34 words.

[avanti]

<<<SPAM REMOVED>>> is one of the best <<<SPAM REMOVED>>> with high-quality coaching classes. For More Details, Contact us- <<<SPAM REMOVED>>>

[Colin2B]

<<<SPAM REMOVED>>> is one of the best <<<SPAM REMOVED>>> with high-quality coaching classes. For More Details, Contact us- <<<SPAM REMOVED>>>

Not the best attempt at spamming I’ve seen.
Along with your spam, you have been removed.

[trevorjohnson32 (OP)]

The density of a proton or neutron would slow light down to a crawl as it crossed through the particle. Time, in relation to size of the things inside the particle and their movement, might make it equivalent to the speed of life and light in our universe. 

[mad aetherist]

The density of a proton or neutron would slow light down to a crawl as it crossed through the particle.
Time, in relation to size of the things inside the particle and their movement, might make it equivalent to the speed of life and light in our universe.

I agree. Einsteinologists have it that de-localized electrons are vibrated by passing photons & provide an em feedback to the photon that slows & modifies the photon.
But in my photaeno-drag theory the photaenos emitted by the passing free photon interfere with photaenos emitted by confined-photons in quarks (ie in protons & neutrons) as well as in electrons (de-localized or knot)(both kinds), & the interference slows the propagation of the photaenos which feeds back to the free photon & slows that to less than c kmps.
Density (or mass) does play a big part in that there slowing.  A proton is say 2000 times the mass of an electron, & a neutron say 2001 times, which means that on average the mass of protons & neutrons in the medium (air water glass) is 4001 times the mass of the electrons, & hencely their photaenos have 4001 times the effect of the electron.
Any vibrational feedback slowing effect from de-localized electrons would be additional & praps minor.

Whereas Einsteinologists say that protons & neutrons have no effect on the speed of light.

U say that density would slow light down to a crawl as it crossed through the particle. This might or might not be true.
One old fashioned idea re Fresnel slowing is that the slowing of light in air water glass happens in two stages. The strongest stage is when in or very close to the densest bits (eg the nucleus), plus a weaker or zero slowing stage when in between the dense bits (eg tween the nucleus & electron)(or in the space tween atoms)(or in the space tween molecules).
I dont know whether u have a similar meaning. Anyhow there might be such an effect.

Re the speed of life, time does not exist, what we have is ticking.  And life would recognize ticking by virtue of our tickerthalamus, more accurately by virtue of the distance from our sensor to tickerthalamus to brain & finally to the bit of the brain that is me (plus possibly the distance back to the sensor).
This kind of ticking effect would involve total distance, which must be related to d, it aint related to d*d (ie area), nor to d*d*d (ie volume). Hencely a big bullant that is twice the length of a jumping-jack would feel time pass half as fast, not 4 times or 8 times as fast.

[trevorjohnson32 (OP)]

I agree. Einsteinologists

Mad aetherist what is yoour opinion of the first three paragraphs of the OP. Do you think magnetism works like a fan with one side being the draw and the other the push?

[mad aetherist]

I agree. Einsteinologists

Mad aetherist what is your opinion of the first three paragraphs of the OP. Do you think magnetism works like a fan with one side being the draw and the other the push?

Light is just waves of density in space. All waves are expanding density through a medium. Light's medium is space, so all light is is a wave of density in space with a certain frequency.
Protons and neutrons are made of super dense space. There density squeezes the surrounding space of the universe they are in. The region of squeezing creates its gravity field. When two gravity fields touch the same squeezing of space on space occurs and it pulls two objects together based on their mass.
In a magnet, all the electrons in the atoms circle in the same direction, this creates a fan like churning that sends outward waves of density along space in the pattern of the magnetic field.
An electron is a slice of energy that fits an atom's electron shell. It's density as a wave adds to the overall weight of the atom. The electron may collect energy gradually until it is 'full' and needs no more energy. Positively charged protons may vibrate producing waves in the nucleus's gravity field which capture electron's while a neutron with the same weight repels electrons.

I have never studied the exact known relationships tween charge & electromagnetism & electric fields & magnetic fields.  There might be four kinds of different fields, dunno.  It would take me at least a month to read up on this stuff, & then i might be able to invent an explanation worthy of a Nobel (probly knot, it looks too complicated for me).

I would firstly read up on Williamson's ideas re free photons & confined photons (electrons & quarks etc) giving charge & em fields.

Free photons are an excitation & annihilation of the aether.  Charge & electric & magnetic fields are due to photaenos, which are a different kind of excitation & probly annihilation of aether.  em fields are somehow at 90 deg or something (ie a different direction), & act in a different way to each other, & at a different time.  I dont understand any of that.

Excitation of photaenos can probly take many forms -- vibration, spin, tornado, vortex, pulse etc.  But what we measure (in  the far-field) is always the nett excitation.  For a free photon the photaenic excitations mostly cancel (in the far-field), hencely a free photon is neutral re charge etc in most instances.  Not so a confined photon, where the looping happens such that the positive or negative charge always  aims mostly inwards or mostly outwards, the outwards being what we measure, the inwards annihilating or disappearing in some way.

Gravity & mass  have little or nothing to do with charge-electro-magneto stuff.  They are due to the acceleration of the bulk flow of aether into mass where the aether is annihilated, they are not due to any excitation of aether.  Inertia is almost a mirror image of gravity, it is due to the acceleration of mass in the aether, but inertia does not involve any annihilation of aether.  Hencely gravitational attraction & gravitational mass is not the same thing as inertial resistance & inertial mass.
It might help if u keep in mind that all quantum things have mass (eg photons, & probly photaenos), because all quantum things annihilate aether.

However i would not discount the possibility that em fields do have a link to gravity, if em fields are for example due to an excitation-vibration of aether arising from a quickly changing gravity field. After all excitations are a frantic micro-form of aetheric acceleration whereas gravity is due to a lazy macro-form of aetheric acceleration.  Yes, i have never thort of it quiet that way, but if i were to devote the next few days to thinking re this then i would start here. The key is that every quantum thing has mass (& inertia).
That would be funny.  I have always said that em stuff cant be unified with gravity.  But here above i am now starting to think that they can be unified.  And that the unification is of a shocking kind.  c.e.m stuff is due to gravity & mass.
Of course it could be put the other way around, ie that gravity is due to c.e.m effects. But that wouldnt be shocking.

I dont understand how electrons can orbit a nucleus the way they are supposed to do.  I can sort of imagine that an electron can have a spin.  I can imagine how orbit & spin can affect the ordinary static charge field & produce a complicated excitation in the nearfield at least.  That excitation giving electric effects & magnetic effects.  The measured effect in some instances depending on whether a large number of electrons have somehow aligned orbits or spins or something, ie whether their fields cancel or add. 
Bearing in mind that cancellation can take a number of forms, eg at any one location a field might not cancel at any one instant but might cancel over time (if the fluctuation has a high enough frequency).

So if u re-read your OP in the light of my ideas then u can probly figure out what i might say. 

But u wont make much progress unless u firstly realize that a photon is not an em field &
an em field is not a photon.  Not that your OP said that, but i know that u believe that because everyone else does & u have no reason to give that a second thort, what with it being settled Einsteinian dogma & canon, until now. 
As i said above & elsewhere, charge-electro-magneto fields etc are all due to photaenos, they are not due to photons, photaenos being the emitted outer half of the photon.

I aint meaning to sound as if i am talking down to u or anyone, as if i am smarter, i am sure that we can all learn from each other, but i have the advantage of not being brainwashed, & i am happy to try to save everyone else from hurting themselves. U have all been blinded by Einsteinian Triffids, but i aint.  Take my hand.

[seeker3]

What is light?

Light is energy, energy must coexist with matter. There is no light in the space between hot plasma on the Sun and atmosphere on Earth.

All scientists thought light is EM wave or photon particle or both traveling in space at light speed. They are all wrong. There is no wave, no photon, nothing traveling in space at light speed. Energy jumps from matter to matter instantly, becomes light wave traveling in medium at light speed. Light speed in vacuum space is infinite. Therefore, relativity, QM and electromagnetism are all wrong.

By using MIT 10 trillion frame per second high speed camera, scientists can measure light speed in a vacuum glass bottle to prove light speed in vacuum is infinite. But they won't do it, because if the truth is out, they will be in big trouble.

Electromagnetic Radiation

Electrons are on the surface of all matters. Electrons are constantly vibrating due to the thermal energy atoms carried. The higher temperature the higher vibration frequency.

Vibrating electrons carry kinetic energy, that energy can transfer to distant electrons through the repulsion force between line of sight electrons, science call it electromagnetic radiation. In Fact, there is only electrostatic radiation, there is no electromagnetic radiation. 

Between 2 electrons at distance r, the repulsion force F=Ke x ee/rr is the conductor of electrostatic radiation. This force is acting as a mass less stiff rod, entangled the two electrons as 1.

There are two kinds of radiation. When an electron vibrating at right angle to the radius of the atom, it produces transverse radiation. When electron vibrating at radius direction, it produces longitudinal radiation. Both radiation must coexist with matter.

In transverse radiation, this force is acting as mass less stiff rod, if 1 electron is moving the other electron will instantly receiving an opposite direction emf.

In longitudinal radiation, this force is acting as mass less stiff rod, instantly transfer emf between electrons.

When radiation/emf moving in a medium, it causes mechanical wave in the medium, science call it EM wave.

The Sun does not radiate EM wave into space, only radiate emf to matters.

[Kryptid]

All scientists thought light is EM wave or photon particle or both traveling in space at light speed. They are all wrong. There is no wave, no photon, nothing traveling in space at light speed. Energy jumps from matter to matter instantly, becomes light wave traveling in medium at light speed. Light speed in vacuum space is infinite. Therefore, relativity, QM and electromagnetism are all wrong.

You seem to have forgotten where I pointed out the time delay that is present when communicating with spacecraft from Earth. So signals must not move at infinite speed through space. I am also waiting for you to present evidence that there is some kind of grand, global conspiracy that lied to the public about these time delays. Nations all over the world have sent spacecraft to other planets, satellites and asteroids, so it absolutely would have to be a conspiracy of global proportions.

The Lunar Laser Ranging experiment has also demonstrated that it takes time for a beam of light to travel through space. There is a retroreflector on the Moon that can reflect laser beams back towards the Earth. Scientists have used the time it takes for the laser beam to reach the Moon and be reflected back to the Earth in order to more accurately calculate how far away the Moon is. One of their discoveries is that the Moon is moving away from the Earth at a rate of about 38 millimeters per year. If the speed of light in space was infinite, this experiment would not have worked.

[guest39538]

What is light?Light is energy, energy must coexist with matter. There is no light in the space between hot plasma on the Sun and atmosphere on Earth.All scientists thought light is EM wave or photon particle or both traveling in space at light speed. They are all wrong. There is no wave, no photon, nothing traveling in space at light speed. Energy jumps from matter to matter instantly, becomes light wave traveling in medium at light speed. Light speed in vacuum space is infinite. Therefore, relativity, QM and electromagnetism are all wrong.

You are confused , there is two types of light , visible light and invisible light .  The invisible light between the sun and the earth is invisible .   

[trevorjohnson32 (OP)]

You are confused , there is two types of light , visible light and invisible light .  The invisible light between the sun and the earth is invisible . 

Light illuminates an area, if there is no matter in the area it illuminates then light itself is invisible and you see nothing. It's source gives off color from the gas illuminating but looking out away from the source you will just see darkness unless something absorbs and reflects the light or is another star.

[seeker3]

All scientists thought light is EM wave or photon particle or both traveling in space at light speed. They are all wrong. There is no wave, no photon, nothing traveling in space at light speed. Energy jumps from matter to matter instantly, becomes light wave traveling in medium at light speed. Light speed in vacuum space is infinite. Therefore, relativity, QM and electromagnetism are all wrong.

You seem to have forgotten where I pointed out the time delay that is present when communicating with spacecraft from Earth. So signals must not move at infinite speed through space. I am also waiting for you to present evidence that there is some kind of grand, global conspiracy that lied to the public about these time delays. Nations all over the world have sent spacecraft to other planets, satellites and asteroids, so it absolutely would have to be a conspiracy of global proportions.

The Lunar Laser Ranging experiment has also demonstrated that it takes time for a beam of light to travel through space. There is a retroreflector on the Moon that can reflect laser beams back towards the Earth. Scientists have used the time it takes for the laser beam to reach the Moon and be reflected back to the Earth in order to more accurately calculate how far away the Moon is. One of their discoveries is that the Moon is moving away from the Earth at a rate of about 38 millimeters per year. If the speed of light in space was infinite, this experiment would not have worked.

I suggest you to watch all Apollo videos, look for shadows right under the objects. Which means the Sun is over head when they took the videos. Then check out the fabric analysis of the LM. Open your mind, don't lie to yourself.

[Kryptid]

I suggest you to watch all Apollo videos, look for shadows right under the objects. Which means the Sun is over head when they took the videos. Then check out the fabric analysis of the LM. Open your mind, don't lie to yourself.

Yep, you're a conspiracy theorist alright.

That is, however, beside the point. Regardless of how it got there, there is a retroreflector on the Moon that can reflect laser light back to Earth. So my point still stands (as do my points about signal delay from spacecraft).

[seeker3]

OK, if you think so.

Did you watched Apollo videos?

[Kryptid]

OK, if you think so.

No, I don't just think so. There is a retroreflector on the Moon. Its presence can be detected from Earth:

Did you watched Apollo videos?

The claims of Moon lander conspirators has been soundly refuted. There is nothing about the shadows that is evidence for a hoax. But I am not interested in claims of a Moon landing hoax here.

[trevorjohnson32 (OP)]

No

 you still haven't convinced me that the time taken for light to travel back and forth added together in the M and M experiment should be different for any path. Your comparison of light to a boat on a river only made sense comparing the boat in stagnant water vs a moving current. If all paths have equal resistance from the current you would be creating energy like a beginner out of nothing, as if one path was weaker. You could build a free energy device from a passing void current, actually that's probably possible anyways sort of a water wheel for empty space.

[Bored chemist]

No

 you still haven't convinced me that the time taken for light to travel back and forth added together in the M and M experiment should be different for any path. Your comparison of light to a boat on a river only made sense comparing the boat in stagnant water vs a moving current. If all paths have equal resistance from the current you would be creating energy like a beginner out of nothing, as if one path was weaker. You could build a free energy device from a passing void current, actually that's probably possible anyways sort of a water wheel for empty space.

Your quote from me isn't relevant to your statement.