light propagates at c + v?

Discussion in 'Alternative Theories' started by BdS, Nov 21, 2015.

  1. RJBeery Natural Philosopher Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,222
    Well...we may not know the speed of gravity but "instantaneous" has no distinct meaning without reference to a frame.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. BdS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    512
    Its my opinion that the way we calculate the orbit will prove the c + v. Experiment triumphs all speculation, anything sensible you wish to say about the experiment? And its not a problem that a theory ignores the c + v, but it is important to understand for future development. Just because your model doesn't say c + v doesn't mean that it doesn't travel at c + v in nature.
    care to show why? or do you expect me to believe your speculation, assumptions and postulates blindfolded?
    where else should I be? I listen to nature not your BS... its amazing how when you conduct an experiment, the right experiment of course, nature is forced to concede a answer. I cant even get past the beginning to discuss the important bits, guess I'll have to wait a decade or two for the apes to evolve as is normally the case, before they start throwing it back at me. I dont wish, lol, to gain anything from this, just asking questions and entertaining myself at your expense while marinating my liver.
    Im not religious, I only believe in God and dont follow any specific religious beliefs. It seems you are the most religiously motivate person here, anti-religious religious... tomatoes(us) tomatoes(uk)... why such a anti-religious stance? Maybe you got alter-boyed or something like that and why would you marry a religious person? best you could do with your anti-religious views? or do you wish to keep that closeted? Practice what you preach and all that. Im sure the prejudiced mods will be around shortly to wipe your a$$... We must be some of the self confessed clowns here that you mentioned

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Did you just tuck tail with all your knowledge? or maybe you the fool? I dont mind being the fool on this planet, I'll fit right in...

    Why? its not a theory, its a fact!
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. BdS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    512
    I see it the complete opposite, since gravitational fields extend infinitely.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. RJBeery Natural Philosopher Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,222
    But there isn't room for an opinion here. "Instantaneous" does not have a distinct meaning. I'm going to guess that you have not studied the math behind SR, is this true?
     
  8. BdS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    512
    Why?
    Ok, you got me. whats SR and whats math?
     
  9. RJBeery Natural Philosopher Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,222
    Real cute. But gravity effects moving "instantaneously" would have to do so by the definition of "instantaneous" of a preferred frame since it would be producing real local observable effects everywhere. Perhaps you are advocating for an arbitrary preferred frame? If so, which one?
     
  10. BdS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    512
    A universal frame
     
  11. RJBeery Natural Philosopher Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,222
    Hmm, I reread your original post. Detecting a drift would literally contradict SR. It doesn't matter if we're people on a galaxy moving through the universe or people sitting on Einstein's thought experiment train moving along its rails. I don't really have time or energy to convince someone of Relativity.
     
  12. BdS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    512
    Is it that hard to convince someone about it? Just time dilate it and it wont take long at all...
     
  13. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    You do not have a model. You have a speculative nonsensical scenario to support your God delusion.
    Evidence is overwhelming for time dilation and length contraction.
    You are able to goolge?
    Ignoring your rather childish nonsense, if you had anything of any substance, you would via the scientific methodology, be getting it peer reviewed.
    Instead, you prefer to post in a forum such as this, open to any Tom, Dick or Harry, to delude yourself with some semblance of credibility.
    Your belief in your magical pixie is the agenda driving your nonsensical unsupported delusional claims...simple as that.
    Not at all. I do not venture into the religious forum. I will though show up our nutty fanatically religiously driven friends when they venture into the sciences with fabricated nonsensical scenarios, supposedly invalidating accepted science.
    You speaking from experience?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    But yes I was an Altar boy but got sacked for drinking the Altar wine.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    You seem rather desperate my friend....But yes, my wife is highly religious, and also is tolerant of other views, just as I'm not anti religious, except when fanatical religious nuts try and disprove science as you have already been informed.
     
  14. RJBeery Natural Philosopher Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,222
    Just curious but how do you account for a null result in the Michaelson/Morley type experiments? Aether detection methods would also detect a preferred frame and light's velocity being direction dependent.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson–Morley_experiment
     
  15. BdS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    512
    Yes I dont, when I speak science I use nature as my model and it is the only true model.
    You have a speculative nonsensical scenario to support your NO God delusion.
    If I slow down will my thing get longer? I better appreciate that quickly and get a snapshot, because time will go by really quick?
    Thats that thingy on the internet, I'll check it out.
    Im not a qualified scientist and thats why I post in the fringe sections. I just enjoy thinking about nature. You came along and implied that because I was posting there my posts deserved no respect and I went up to the science sections.
    Your belief in your NO magical pixie is the agenda driving your nonsensical unsupported delusional claims...simple as that.
    Im not the one who keeps bringing it up...
    So why do you keep bring up religion in a science forum and giving it more attention than you claim it deserves.
    Why? just report it and the mods must sort it out, are you a mod? instead you start posting and making a big deal out of it. just like you came here and introduced religion again, when theres no religious intent behind my posting here and I have no friends here. I dont care if they move this to the cesspool TBH. Actually I'd post there if I could, but I cant create threads there I've tried.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Ok, if you want to believe that fine.
    She sound awesome.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Can we please stop this now?
     
  16. BdS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    512
    I dont need to account for it, it supports my claim...
     
  17. RJBeery Natural Philosopher Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,222
    Oh well there ya go!! In your world MMX would generate a null result but bouncing a light off the wall a meter away would generate a drift? Wow, can I unsubscribe from this thread fast enough?
     
  18. BdS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    512
    It doesnt drift because it travels at c + v, the whole experiment is moving with the earth at v. If there was a drift then it would only be traveling at c.
     
  19. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    You speak pseudoscience, prompted by your magical pixie in the sky.
    We do not need God, simple as that...and Ocamm's razor.
    That has already been explained to you with relation to sub relativistic scenarios and relativistic scenarios.
    You do that, but remember the net just like this forum, is also open to any Idiot that thinks he is able to dispute and/or invalidate accepted science.
    Wrong, I implied that no one is going to modify/discover/invalidate and scientific theory on a science forum, for obvious reasons.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Wrong again...ain't doing to well are we? We have no evidence for your silly magic pixie and in fact science has pushed the myth back into near oblivion, and will continue to push as we further understand the mysteries and awe of this universe.
    Simply to expose the fools and their ideas and myths.
    Why? simply because religious extremists, cranks and those suffering with delusions of grandeur need exposing.
    You have no friends and you do not care...Interesting.
    Oh and if there is no religious intent or religious agenda behind your silly anti science rants, then you probably suffer from some other malady...But I see it as a religious agenda, as is obvious with most science cranks.
    Sure, you started the game though.
     
  20. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    Totally false. Time dilation and length contraction have been shown to occur in numerous experiments, as is the constant speed of light.
    In fact it applies at all scenarios including sub relativistic gravity and speeds, although mostly undetectable at Earthly those scales.
    c+v is a contradiction in terms, and reality.
     
  21. BdS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    512
    Ironic since a razors main function is to cut things into 2 pieces...

    1. I HATE IRONY!
    2. I HATE LISTS!
    3. I HATE SPAM!
     
  22. BdS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    512
    Really, so why does light travel at c + v then?
     
  23. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     

Share This Page