Search   Memberlist   Usergroups
 Page 1 of 1 [1 Post]
Author Message
Klim
science forum beginner

Joined: 30 May 2006
Posts: 28

Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 11:56 am    Post subject: "Measuring Our Absolute Velocity"

"Measuring Our Absolute Velocity"

In the 19th century, science had concluded that reality was based upon
the Aether, a rigid medium that pervaded all of space. The Aether was
required to account for the ability of forces (electric, magnetic,
gravitational, etc.) to "act at distance" and through which the vibrational
disturbance known as light could propagate. Late in the century, the next
obvious step was taken. Attempts were made to measure our velocity through
the Aether. The most notable of those attempts was the Michaelson-Morley
experiment that, to everyone's chagrin, produced a null result.

The difficulty was first resolved in 1903 with conclusions by
Fitzgerald and Larmor. Fitzgerald concluded that what was happening was that
lengths became shorter in the direction of the velocity vector and Larmor
concluded that, if this were true, clocks must slow by a reciprocal amount.
The result was the Lorentz Transformation Aether Theory, which, in
conjunction with the fact that the velocity of light represented the most
rapid means of transferring information, insured that our absolute velocity
through space could not be measured. In 1905, Dr. Einstein showed that the
theory could be derived from fundamental principles and Special Relativity
was off and running. When examined objectively, both theories are found to
be identical (cross-derivable), and differ only in philosophical viewpoint.

Transformations and the limit on the transfer of information imposed by
the velocity of light, we could not, in principle, measure our velocity with
respect to it. The other viewpoint asserted that, because our velocity with
respect to the Aether could not be measured, it was not valid to include the
Aether in physical theory. This interpretation required that all velocity
reference frames were equally valid and reality did not consist of space and
time as separate entities but was a single entity that was named space-time.

The mathematics of space-time work as long as one does not make the
common abuse of arbitrarily jumping from one velocity reference to another
in the same problem without compensation for the effects, but science was
still left with the problem of explaining "action at a distance". This
difficulty was overcome by the addition of the concept of "virtual exchange
particles" (photons, gluons, gravitons, etc.) whose existence was of such
short duration that the laws of quantum mechanics allowed them to "pop into
and out of existence" without violating the Law of Conservation of Energy
and which acted to exchange momentum (force) between physically separated
entities.

The elimination of the Aether from realm of acceptable physical theory
did not result from observations or the application of rigorous logic. It
was eliminated instead by a consensus opinion upon the part of the
scientific community. Since the Lorentz Contraction-Aether Theory is a
special case solution of the Special Theory of Relativity, the existence of
the classical Aether cannot be disproved without also disproving Special
Relativity. The existence of the Aether can be verified, however, if
information can be transferred between physically separated locations at a
velocity that exceeds the velocity of light! If that can be accomplished,
all that is necessary to determine our "absolute velocity" through space is
to compare the synchronization of clocks set by the hyperluminal information
transfer method with the synchronization of clocks set by electromagnetic
means. The difference in their "now" readings would allow their "absolute
velocity" to be measured and the establishment of our absolute velocity
through space (i.e.- the Aether) by direct observation, exactly as
Michaelson and Morley wished to do.

In the 1980's experiments were performed which showed that the quantum
coupling of the polarization of "paired photons" could be observed as
propagating at a velocity at least 4 times the velocity of light (and
probably at an infinite velocity of one is to accept a current
interpretation of quantum theory). It must be recognized that, since
changing the polarization of a photon does not change its energy,
transferring information through the polarization coupling of photons
represents a transfer of information without the transfer of energy. Since
the transfer of energy is not involved, there is no theoretical restriction
currently known on the velocity of that transfer. The paired photons travel
at the velocity of light, but their polarization can travel at any velocity
(including infinite). The limitation on the velocity of energy encoded
information transfer results from the fact that the Lorentz Transformation
for Energy is 1/(1-V^2/C^2)^0.5 becomes infinite at the velocity of light.
This limitation clearly does not apply to quantum numbers such as the
polarization direction of photons.

The diagram of the experimental setup is shown in
http://einsteinhoax.com/cf51.gif. This experiment can readily modified by
changing its instrumentation so as to allow the absolute velocity of the
setup to be measured directly without affecting the validity of its
operation. See http://einsteinhoax.com/cf52.gif. It does not seem
unreasonable, if a sufficient number of paired photons are observed, for the
errors in observation to be reduced to the point where our absolute velocity
through spaced could be measured to an accuracy of better than +/-400 miles
per second. (A recent report described a similar effect observed over a
distance of over 70 miles and should allow a much more accurate
determination.) THE SUCCESS OF SUCH A MEASUREMENT OF "ABSOLUTE VELOCITY"
DOES NOT DEPEND UPON PHYSICS SINCE THE NECESSARY RESULTS OF PHYSICAL
EXPERIMENTS HAVE ALREADY BEEN DEMONSTRATED, IT ACCOMPLISHMENT IS NOW A
ROUTINE ENGINEEERING PROBLEM WHICH IS EASILY SOLUABLE. The demonstration of
an "absolute velocity" would, however, throw the currently accepted idea of
space-time into a cocked hat (where it undoubtedly belongs since it is based
upon a consensus opinion and not provable fact) and return science to the
idea of the classical Aether. (The text associated with these diagrams can
be accessed at http://einsteihoax.com/hoax.htm.

Remember that Dr. Einstein warned, "We have not proven that the Aether
doesn't exist, we have merely proven we do not need it (for calculations).
Also remember that it took 25 years of peer pressure to cause Dr. Einstein
to relinquish the idea of "absolute time" (equivalent to believing the
Aether) and accepting the unproven consensus viewpoint of space-time as a
single entity.

The source material for this posting may be found in
http://einsteinhoax.com/hoax.htm/ (1997);
http://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm (1987); and
http://einsteinhoax.com/relcor.htm (1997). EVERYTHING WHICH WE ACCEPT AS
TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING ELSE WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS TRUE, IT
MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OBSERVATIONS, AND IT MUST BE MATHEMATICALLY
VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT ALWAYS MEET THIS REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS
ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF WORKMANSHIP FROM THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD
CLASS STATUS.

All of the Newsposts made by this site may be viewed at
http://einsteinhoax.com/postinglog.htm.

Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not monitored on
a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the same courtesy
as they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of our parts,
please do not raise objections that are not related to material that you
have read at the Website. This posting is merely a summary.

E-mail:- einsteinhoax@isp.com. If you wish a reply, be sure that your
mail reception is not blocked.

The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 8
years. In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF THE
MATERIAL PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by
individuals who have mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without
questioning it. If anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be
objectively answered, the material at the Website will be withdrawn.
Challenges to date have revealed only the responder's inadequacy with one
exception for which a correction was provided.

 Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First
 Page 1 of 1 [1 Post]
 The time now is Tue Nov 20, 2018 11:14 am | All times are GMT
 Jump to: Select a forum-------------------Forum index|___Science and Technology    |___Math    |   |___Research    |   |___num-analysis    |   |___Symbolic    |   |___Combinatorics    |   |___Probability    |   |   |___Prediction    |   |       |   |___Undergraduate    |   |___Recreational    |       |___Physics    |   |___Research    |   |___New Theories    |   |___Acoustics    |   |___Electromagnetics    |   |___Strings    |   |___Particle    |   |___Fusion    |   |___Relativity    |       |___Chem    |   |___Analytical    |   |___Electrochem    |   |   |___Battery    |   |       |   |___Coatings    |       |___Engineering        |___Control        |___Mechanics        |___Chemical

 Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post Similar Topics Estimating Errors in Measuring Volume arguani Math 0 Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:11 am Measuring Background Noise Doug Acoustics 3 Wed Jul 12, 2006 12:53 pm Speed vs velocity. brian a m stuckless Electromagnetics 1 Tue Jul 11, 2006 12:30 pm question with velocity. mina_world Math 3 Sun Jul 09, 2006 3:27 pm "The Lorentz Transformation for Velocity" Lij Relativity 1 Sun Jul 09, 2006 2:06 pm