Have you ever seen the sunset from the ISS?

Quote from: theearthisrounddealwithit on November 13, 2014, 08:28:45 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 13, 2014, 07:43:55 AM

Quote from: theearthisrounddealwithit on November 13, 2014, 07:32:24 AM

You can measure the speed of light using a bar of chocolate and a microwave.

Tell me how.

Quote from: theearthisrounddealwithit on November 13, 2014, 07:32:24 AM

If it is something that can be measured, how is it not constant?

Can you measure a receding tide as a constant?

Quote from: theearthisrounddealwithit on November 13, 2014, 07:32:24 AM

It is not indoctrination if you can test it yourself. As for sound, what about echos? If you shout in a canyon or a deep place, the sound of your voice will bounce back.

Yes it'll bounce back. So what? do you know why it bounces back? and also what does this prove?

Quote

Tell me how

http://www.planet-science.com/categories/over-11s/physics-is-fun!/2012/01/measure-the-speed-of-light-using-chocolate.aspx

Quote

Can you measure a receding tide as a constant?

I was saying if light is measured using the above experiment and always comes back as roughly 299,792,458 meters/s how is it NOT a constant?

Quote

Yes it'll bounce back. So what? do you know why it bounces back? and also what does this prove?

Did you know that the speed of sound can be measured using echos?

Explain the microwave and chocolate. Just a brief and simple description how the speed of light is measured.

Also a brief description of the echo speed of sound measurement.
Once you do this, I'll show you why there is no constant.

Here is a copy/paste for both experiments:

Speed of light:How to:

Take the turntable out of the microwave. You need the chocolate to stay still whilst you heat it.
Put a plate upside down over the thing that rotates the turntable (does that have a name? For now I'm going with 'rotator').
Put your chocolate in the middle of the plate.
Heat the chocolate until it starts to melt in two or three places. This should take about 20 seconds.
Take the chocolate out of the microwave - carefully! It will be hot. Measure the distance between the melted spots.
If your microwave is a standard model, it will have a frequency of 2.45 gigahertz. This means that the microwaves move up and down 2.45 billion times per second. Check in your microwave manual if you're not sure of the frequency.
Multiply the distance between the spots on the chocolate bar by two. Multiply that by 2,450,000,000 (2.45 gigahertz expressed as hertz).
Distance between two melted spots of chocolate x 2 x 2450000000 = z

What answer do you get for z? The speed of light is 299,792,458 metres per second.

Remember, if you measured the distance between the melted spots in centimetres, z will be in centimetres per second. To get an answer in metres per second, divide z by 100.

Was your answer close to the speed of light?

What's happening?

Microwaves are a type of electromagnetic radiation, just like light waves. Microwaves also travel at the speed of light. If you measure how fast they are travelling, you should get a result close to the speed of light.

Speed of sound:
a The experimenter stands as far away as possible from a large reflecting wall and claps their hands rapidly at a regular rate.

b This rate is adjusted until each clap just coincides with the return of an echo of its predecessor, or until clap and echo are heard as equally spaced.
 
c Use a stopwatch to find the time between claps, t. Make a rough measurement of distance to the wall, s. Thus the speed of sound, v = 2s/t in the first case.

Scepti, you avoided this last time:

Would a person stood under a thunderclap hear it at exactly the same time as someone 10 miles away?

Have you ever been stood with a dog in the distance and someone has shouted that dogs name. It springs its ears up and yet you are oblivious to what's going on.
It's only when the distant person gets nearer that you realise why your dogs ears pricked up.
Try using your brain.

Yes scepti. We have established that dogs have better hearing than humans do. They can hear things that people can't. Your claim was that dogs can hear things BEFORE people do. This means that you are saying that for things that both humans and dogs can hear, dogs will hear it before. Your examples are avoiding this distinction.

Scepti, you avoided this last time:

Would a person stood under a thunderclap hear it at exactly the same time as someone 10 miles away?

Legit question. I expect the same kind of answer though in the form of "Light is sound and its speed is not a constant therefore it is humans that cannot perceive things from afar" or something in that ballpark.

Funny thing is if you record a lightning strike on video, the light and the thunder  are seen/heard exactly the same as you heard it in the video playback. Are we to believe that ALL recording devices were calibrated to the tune of human perception?

Scepti, you avoided this last time:

Would a person stood under a thunderclap hear it at exactly the same time as someone 10 miles away?

No they wouldn't. They would hear it before the person 10 miles away.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 13, 2014, 08:22:07 AM

Have you ever been stood with a dog in the distance and someone has shouted that dogs name. It springs its ears up and yet you are oblivious to what's going on.
It's only when the distant person gets nearer that you realise why your dogs ears pricked up.
Try using your brain.

Yes scepti. We have established that dogs have better hearing than humans do. They can hear things that people can't. Your claim was that dogs can hear things BEFORE people do. This means that you are saying that for things that both humans and dogs can hear, dogs will hear it before. Your examples are avoiding this distinction.

Dogs have more sensitive hearing. It's as basic as you can get.

So the speed of sound is directly proportional to how acute your hearing is. Very sensible.

Quote from: rottingroom on November 13, 2014, 09:11:02 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 13, 2014, 08:22:07 AM

Have you ever been stood with a dog in the distance and someone has shouted that dogs name. It springs its ears up and yet you are oblivious to what's going on.
It's only when the distant person gets nearer that you realise why your dogs ears pricked up.
Try using your brain.

Yes scepti. We have established that dogs have better hearing than humans do. They can hear things that people can't. Your claim was that dogs can hear things BEFORE people do. This means that you are saying that for things that both humans and dogs can hear, dogs will hear it before. Your examples are avoiding this distinction.

Dogs have more sensitive hearing. It's as basic as you can get.

Are you able to comprehend what I'm saying? We have established and all agree that dogs have more sensitive hearing. They can hear things that humans can't. We agree on this.

This has nothing to do with dogs hearing a sound that both humans and dogs can hear (such as thunder) BEFORE another human. Which they don't.

Quote from: rottingroom on November 13, 2014, 09:11:02 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 13, 2014, 08:22:07 AM

Have you ever been stood with a dog in the distance and someone has shouted that dogs name. It springs its ears up and yet you are oblivious to what's going on.
It's only when the distant person gets nearer that you realise why your dogs ears pricked up.
Try using your brain.

Yes scepti. We have established that dogs have better hearing than humans do. They can hear things that people can't. Your claim was that dogs can hear things BEFORE people do. This means that you are saying that for things that both humans and dogs can hear, dogs will hear it before. Your examples are avoiding this distinction.

Dogs have more sensitive hearing. It's as basic as you can get.

How does more sensitive hearing make you able to hear things BEFORE everyone else?

So the speed of sound is directly proportional to how acute your hearing is. Very sensible.

The speed of sound is reliant on the pressure and frequency of the wave. It's simply not a constant.
It's like someone bouncing a ball at you. If they do it slow, you will receive that ball a lot later than if it was bonuced at you with more energy. And so on and so on. There is no end to how fast a wave can go or the frequency of it.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 13, 2014, 09:48:39 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on November 13, 2014, 09:11:02 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 13, 2014, 08:22:07 AM

Have you ever been stood with a dog in the distance and someone has shouted that dogs name. It springs its ears up and yet you are oblivious to what's going on.
It's only when the distant person gets nearer that you realise why your dogs ears pricked up.
Try using your brain.

Yes scepti. We have established that dogs have better hearing than humans do. They can hear things that people can't. Your claim was that dogs can hear things BEFORE people do. This means that you are saying that for things that both humans and dogs can hear, dogs will hear it before. Your examples are avoiding this distinction.

Dogs have more sensitive hearing. It's as basic as you can get.

Are you able to comprehend what I'm saying? We have established and all agree that dogs have more sensitive hearing. They can hear things that humans can't. We agree on this.

This has nothing to do with dogs hearing a sound that both humans and dogs can hear (such as thunder) BEFORE another human. Which they don't.

Yes they do. They simply hear what we can't. As in, they hear the sound from a further distance before we hear it.

Dogs have more sensitive hearing. It's as basic as you can get.

Oh dear.  How to explain this?  As to a little child?

Dogs—and many other animals—can hear sounds at far higher frequencies than humans.  Which explains the "silent" dog whistle.  Dogs can hear sounds in the 67 Hz to 44 kHz range, (and cats up to 79 kHz).

Thunder however falls well within the range of a human's hearing frequencies of around 20 Hz to 20 kHz.  Hence we hear the thunder at precisely the same time as the dog.  As a matter of interest, the typical deep rumbling of thunder is in the 70-80Hz range which means that humans can actually hear extremely low rumbling thunder better than dogs.

All which totally destroys sceptimatic's claims.  Which is not surprising.   

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 13, 2014, 09:48:39 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on November 13, 2014, 09:11:02 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 13, 2014, 08:22:07 AM

Have you ever been stood with a dog in the distance and someone has shouted that dogs name. It springs its ears up and yet you are oblivious to what's going on.
It's only when the distant person gets nearer that you realise why your dogs ears pricked up.
Try using your brain.

Yes scepti. We have established that dogs have better hearing than humans do. They can hear things that people can't. Your claim was that dogs can hear things BEFORE people do. This means that you are saying that for things that both humans and dogs can hear, dogs will hear it before. Your examples are avoiding this distinction.

Dogs have more sensitive hearing. It's as basic as you can get.

How does more sensitive hearing make you able to hear things BEFORE everyone else?

Why does a hearing aid pick up a conversation that a person standing next to them cannot pick up?

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 13, 2014, 09:48:39 AM

Dogs have more sensitive hearing. It's as basic as you can get.

Oh dear.  How to explain this?  As to a little child?

Dogs—and many other animals—can hear sounds at far higher frequencies than humans.  Which explains the "silent" dog whistle.  Dogs can hear sounds in the 67 Hz to 44 kHz range, (and cats up to 79 kHz).

Thunder however falls well within the range of a human's hearing frequencies of around 20 Hz to 20 kHz.  Hence we hear the thunder at precisely the same time as the dog.  As a matter of interest, the typical deep rumbling of thunder is in the 70-80Hz range which means that humans can actually hear extremely low rumbling thunder better than dogs.

All which totally destroys sceptimatic's claims.  Which is not surprising.   

Except that you are simply not grasping what I'm saying, either intentionally or you simply do not know.

As in, they hear the sound from a further distance before we hear it.

Nope.  Totally erroneous.  And laughably so.

I will play a little devi'ls advocate here. I believe what scepti's is trying to say is since dogs have a more refined ear than the average human, if not all, it will detect a thunder slightly before than a human. Way too different than hearing diffrent ranges of frequency.

Quote from: theearthisrounddealwithit on November 13, 2014, 09:54:14 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 13, 2014, 09:48:39 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on November 13, 2014, 09:11:02 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 13, 2014, 08:22:07 AM

Have you ever been stood with a dog in the distance and someone has shouted that dogs name. It springs its ears up and yet you are oblivious to what's going on.
It's only when the distant person gets nearer that you realise why your dogs ears pricked up.
Try using your brain.

Yes scepti. We have established that dogs have better hearing than humans do. They can hear things that people can't. Your claim was that dogs can hear things BEFORE people do. This means that you are saying that for things that both humans and dogs can hear, dogs will hear it before. Your examples are avoiding this distinction.

Dogs have more sensitive hearing. It's as basic as you can get.

How does more sensitive hearing make you able to hear things BEFORE everyone else?

Why does a hearing aid pick up a conversation that a person standing next to them cannot pick up?

What does that have to do with anything? We'Re talking about picking up sounds before someone else, Are you saying that someone with a hearing aid will pick up the sound of thunder before other people?

I will play a little devi'ls advocate here. I believe what scepti's is trying to say is since dogs have a more refined ear than the average human, if not all, it will detect a thunder slightly before than a human. Way too different than hearing diffrent ranges of frequency.

Thank you. That's all I was saying.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 13, 2014, 10:07:37 AM

Quote from: theearthisrounddealwithit on November 13, 2014, 09:54:14 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 13, 2014, 09:48:39 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on November 13, 2014, 09:11:02 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 13, 2014, 08:22:07 AM

Have you ever been stood with a dog in the distance and someone has shouted that dogs name. It springs its ears up and yet you are oblivious to what's going on.
It's only when the distant person gets nearer that you realise why your dogs ears pricked up.
Try using your brain.

Yes scepti. We have established that dogs have better hearing than humans do. They can hear things that people can't. Your claim was that dogs can hear things BEFORE people do. This means that you are saying that for things that both humans and dogs can hear, dogs will hear it before. Your examples are avoiding this distinction.

Dogs have more sensitive hearing. It's as basic as you can get.

How does more sensitive hearing make you able to hear things BEFORE everyone else?

Why does a hearing aid pick up a conversation that a person standing next to them cannot pick up?

What does that have to do with anything? We'Re talking about picking up sounds before someone else, Are you saying that someone with a hearing aid will pick up the sound of thunder before other people?

I'll let you figure it out, or not.

I will play a little devi'ls advocate here. I believe what scepti's is trying to say is since dogs have a more refined ear than the average human, if not all, it will detect a thunder slightly before than a human. Way too different than hearing diffrent ranges of frequency.

This is true if and only if the thunder is producing accoustic waves below or above the range of human hearing that arrive before the audible part. The way in which scepti states it is mis-leading and unclear.  The parts of the thunder that both humans and dogs can hear are heard virtually simultaneously.

Quote from: rottingroom on November 13, 2014, 09:53:03 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 13, 2014, 09:48:39 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on November 13, 2014, 09:11:02 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 13, 2014, 08:22:07 AM

Have you ever been stood with a dog in the distance and someone has shouted that dogs name. It springs its ears up and yet you are oblivious to what's going on.
It's only when the distant person gets nearer that you realise why your dogs ears pricked up.
Try using your brain.

Yes scepti. We have established that dogs have better hearing than humans do. They can hear things that people can't. Your claim was that dogs can hear things BEFORE people do. This means that you are saying that for things that both humans and dogs can hear, dogs will hear it before. Your examples are avoiding this distinction.

Dogs have more sensitive hearing. It's as basic as you can get.

Are you able to comprehend what I'm saying? We have established and all agree that dogs have more sensitive hearing. They can hear things that humans can't. We agree on this.

This has nothing to do with dogs hearing a sound that both humans and dogs can hear (such as thunder) BEFORE another human. Which they don't.

Yes they do. They simply hear what we can't. As in, they hear the sound from a further distance before we hear it.

Except we totally can hear thunder and dogs don't react to thunder before people do. Stop lying.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 13, 2014, 10:06:07 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on November 13, 2014, 09:53:03 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 13, 2014, 09:48:39 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on November 13, 2014, 09:11:02 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 13, 2014, 08:22:07 AM

Have you ever been stood with a dog in the distance and someone has shouted that dogs name. It springs its ears up and yet you are oblivious to what's going on.
It's only when the distant person gets nearer that you realise why your dogs ears pricked up.
Try using your brain.

Yes scepti. We have established that dogs have better hearing than humans do. They can hear things that people can't. Your claim was that dogs can hear things BEFORE people do. This means that you are saying that for things that both humans and dogs can hear, dogs will hear it before. Your examples are avoiding this distinction.

Dogs have more sensitive hearing. It's as basic as you can get.

Are you able to comprehend what I'm saying? We have established and all agree that dogs have more sensitive hearing. They can hear things that humans can't. We agree on this.

This has nothing to do with dogs hearing a sound that both humans and dogs can hear (such as thunder) BEFORE another human. Which they don't.

Yes they do. They simply hear what we can't. As in, they hear the sound from a further distance before we hear it.

Except we totally can hear thunder and dogs don't react to thunder before people do. Stop lying.

Dogs can also be sensitive to drop in barometric pressure which they could then associate with the coming of a thunderstorm. The sensitivity of animals towards the weather does not disprove in any way that the speed of sound has nothing to do with the speed of light.

Quote from: neimoka on November 13, 2014, 09:52:44 AM

So the speed of sound is directly proportional to how acute your hearing is. Very sensible.

The speed of sound is reliant on the pressure and frequency of the wave.

It is dependent on the medium it travels through, not it's "pressure" 

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 13, 2014, 10:04:30 AM

Quote from: neimoka on November 13, 2014, 09:52:44 AM

So the speed of sound is directly proportional to how acute your hearing is. Very sensible.

The speed of sound is reliant on the pressure and frequency of the wave.

It is dependent on the medium it travels through, not it's "pressure" 

And how do you think it travels through a medium?

I don't want to play your games - if you have a point to make, then make it.

And how do you think it travels through a medium?

It propagates as a wave at a constant speed regardless of it's frequency or amplitude. Speed is solely determined by the properties of the medium. You have zero data to support your view. Go ahead and prove otherwise; measuring the speed is not beyond diy solutions. Post back with your results so we can repeat the experiment.

edit, fixed the quote

p.s if you're next going to suggest that frequency isn't proportional to relative speed, you can measure that yourself as well. Just pointing that out before it enters the discussion 

Quote from: Göebbels on November 13, 2014, 10:19:44 AM

I will play a little devi'ls advocate here. I believe what scepti's is trying to say is since dogs have a more refined ear than the average human, if not all, it will detect a thunder slightly before than a human. Way too different than hearing different ranges of frequency.

Thank you. That's all I was saying.

A dog's hearing is not necessarily "more refined" than human hearing.  As I've already explained for sceptimatic's benefit (yeah, yeah, I know—total waste of time LOL) humans can actually hear lower frequencies—such as thunder—better than dogs.

sceptimatic seems to have no idea at all about the propagation and/or reception of sound by mammalian ears.

Sound—as we and dogs perceive it—is actually a wave front composed of air molecules travelling towards our ear drums.  It doesn't matter whether it's a human's eardrum or a dog's;  that physical wave reaches our ears at precisely the same instant.

sceptimatic's idea of some sort of time delay between species is truly ludicrous—as are the vast majority of his pseudo-scientific claims.

Have you ever seen the sunset from the International Space Station?
Or asked the grinning actornaut why he grinned?
Can you sync all the videos of the Apollo Missions?
Can you paint with all the CGI of the conspiracy?
Can you paint with all the CGI of the conspiracy?

Read more: Vanessa Williams - Colors Of The Wind Lyrics | MetroLyrics