[Kryptid]

Do you know why the misconception that velocity of light is constant?

It's not a misconception. It's experimentally verified to be true (and the Michelson-Morley experiment isn't the only one to have verified this).

Can I show some Math other than that particular essential Math? No.

So what is your evidence?

[jan19th1980 (OP)]

Can I show some Math other than that particular essential Math? No. Why? I have Vascular Dementia. Celebration of being alive is my reality.

I am glad that you are celebrating being alive in spite of your illness!

Unfortunately that particular 'equation' does not make any sense by unit analysis.  Not sure exactly what you mean by 'gravity' in this case, but any there is no definition of gravity that has the units of kg.

   

Energy = Mass . Length . Length / Time . Time

Velocity = Mass . Length / Time

Gravity = Length / Time . Time

Velocity of object ... V = Mass . Gravity . Time [ Velocity is directly proportional to gravity ]

Velocity of light ... V .V = Mass . Mass . Length . Length / Time . Time = Mass . Energy

Energy = Mass . Length . Gravity

Mass = Energy / Length . Gravity

Velocity . Velocity = Energy . Energy / Length . Gravity

Velocity . Velocity / Energy . Energy = 1 / Length . Gravity

When you consider velocity of light you must consider energy in the proportionality as light is a form of energy.

Therefore velocity of light which is a form of energy is inversely proportional to gravity.

As gravity increases velocity of light decreases and as gravity decreases velocity of light increases.

[jan19th1980 (OP)]

Do you know why the misconception that velocity of light is constant?

It's not a misconception. It's experimentally verified to be true (and the Michelson-Morley experiment isn't the only one to have verified this).

Can I show some Math other than that particular essential Math? No.

So what is your evidence?

Michelson-Morley experiment is not a misconception.

Concluding that velocity of light is constant is a misconception.

Velocity of light is not constant. Velocity of light is relative.

[Kartazion]

...

Concluding that velocity of light is constant is a misconception.

Velocity of light is not constant. Velocity of light is relative.

Where in the universe does this variation in the velocity of light apply?

[Bored chemist]

Gravity = Length / Time . Time

No, it doesn't.

[Bored chemist]

I have Vascular Dementia.

I'm sorry to hear that, but I think you should consider the effect it has on how likely you are to be correct when arguing against a set of scientists.

[jan19th1980 (OP)]

...

Concluding that velocity of light is constant is a misconception.

Velocity of light is not constant. Velocity of light is relative.

Where in the universe does this variation in the velocity of light apply?

It applies in the entire Universe.

[jan19th1980 (OP)]

Gravity = Length / Time . Time

No, it doesn't.

That equation is for acceleration due to gravity. It is valid.

[Bored chemist]

Gravity = Length / Time . Time

No, it doesn't.

That equation is for acceleration due to gravity. It is valid.

That applies to any acceleration. but the formula for gravity is different.
f=G M1 M2 / R^2

It hardly matters; because the fact that satellite TV works proves that your idea about light and gravity is wrong.

[jan19th1980 (OP)]

Gravity = Length / Time . Time

No, it doesn't.

That equation is for acceleration due to gravity. It is valid.

That applies to any acceleration. but the formula for gravity is different.
f=G M1 M2 / R^2

It hardly matters; because the fact that satellite TV works proves that your idea about light and gravity is wrong.

What do you mean? When did I say that satellite TV do not work? Simply because velocity of light is relative, it never means that satellite TV do not work. They work. Velocity of light is relative simply means that velocity of light is not same number everywhere in the Universe.

It means, in the entire Universe velocity of light is a slightly faster where gravity is lower in comparison with velocity of light on the surface of the Earth.

Current value of velocity of light is only applicable on the surface of the earth.

If we go to earth's moon then velocity of light is higher than current value which is said to be constant through out the universe. It is not constant value. Velocity of light is relative value.

[jan19th1980 (OP)]

Gravity = Length / Time . Time

No, it doesn't.

It is the dimension of gravity, what ever the formula is dimension is same.

That equation is for acceleration due to gravity. It is valid.

That applies to any acceleration. but the formula for gravity is different.
f=G M1 M2 / R^2

It hardly matters; because the fact that satellite TV works proves that your idea about light and gravity is wrong.

[Bored chemist]

We know that the speed of light is not affected by gravity in the way you said it was because, if it was then the antennae on satellites would fail.

[Bored chemist]

If we go to earth's moon then velocity of light is higher than current value

Again, we know that is wrong.
We went to the moon.
We took radio equipment.
It worked.

[jan19th1980 (OP)]

We know that the speed of light is not affected by gravity in the way you said it was because, if it was then the antennae on satellites would fail.

I'm sorry, they do not fail. Velocity of light is relative only means that numbers will vary. They do work.

It is the dimension of gravity. Formula does not change dimension.

[jan19th1980 (OP)]

If we go to earth's moon then velocity of light is higher than current value

Again, we know that is wrong.
We went to the moon.
We took radio equipment.
It worked.

It works. Numbers change. They don't stop working. Value is different, that is all.

[Bored chemist]

Also, remember that some of the first measurements of the speed of light were not  done on the surface of the earth.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%B8mer%27s_determination_of_the_speed_of_light
Modern repetition of the experiments give the right answer.

[Bored chemist]

If we go to earth's moon then velocity of light is higher than current value

Again, we know that is wrong.
We went to the moon.
We took radio equipment.
It worked.

It works. Numbers change. They don't stop working. Value is different, that is all.

Do you have any idea how a radio antenna works?
Do you understand that it has to be the right size?
That size depends on the speed of light (and the frequency you are transmitting).
If the speed of light changed the antennae would be the "wrong" size.
They would not work.

[jan19th1980 (OP)]

If we go to earth's moon then velocity of light is higher than current value

Again, we know that is wrong.
We went to the moon.
We took radio equipment.
It worked.

It works. Numbers change. They don't stop working. Value is different, that is all.

Do you have any idea how a radio antenna works?
Do you understand that it has to be the right size?
That size depends on the speed of light (and the frequency you are transmitting).
If the speed of light changed the antennae would be the "wrong" size.
They would not work.

Velocity of light does change with gravity. On moon velocity of light is little faster than that on earth, this small change does not cause antennae failure. But, if you take it massive objects then the radio must face what you propose. And the measurements you talked about measuring velocity of light were agreed upon the value proposed by one guy and were dicarded which were proposed by other guys saying that they were inaccurate.

[Kryptid]

Concluding that velocity of light is constant is a misconception.

According to what experimental evidence?

Velocity of light is not constant. Velocity of light is relative.

According to what experimental evidence?

[Bored chemist]

Velocity of light does change with gravity.

No.
It was measured in space, far away from anything withy much gravity, and the speed was found to be the same.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%B8mer%27s_determination_of_the_speed_of_light

Why are you ignoring the experiment?