Radar

  • 21 Replies
  • 4037 Views
Radar
« on: November 09, 2008, 02:55:25 PM »
How is it that radars have a radar-horizon which depends on the curvature of the earth?  Why aren't aircraft at a constant altitude detectable all the way out to the extreme boundary of detection for a given radar array, but rather "vanish" over the horizon?

?

Dr Matrix

  • 4312
  • In Soviet Russia, Matrix enters you!
Re: Radar
« Reply #1 on: November 09, 2008, 04:58:43 PM »
FET: "RADAR is affected in the same way as light of other frequencies from distant sources - it bends giving the impression of a horizon."
Quote from: Arthur Schopenhauer
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

Re: Radar
« Reply #2 on: November 09, 2008, 05:45:56 PM »
What are the physical rules/mathematics governing this phenomenon?  I'm unable to find anything on the forums anywhere defining how this works - not the cause, but the physics I could use to calculate anything regarding optics in this bendy light reality?

Does light bend more along the "face" of the earth, in which case, shouldn't the top and bottom sections of my theoretical radar cone exhibit widely different rates of "bentness", throwing out the accuracy of radar returns when calculating distances between objects etc?

?

Dr Matrix

  • 4312
  • In Soviet Russia, Matrix enters you!
Re: Radar
« Reply #3 on: November 09, 2008, 05:51:42 PM »
FET has no physically consistent argument to support bendy light.  The mere existence of Fabry-Perot interferometers strongly disagrees with light bending of a magnitude sufficient to account for the curvature of the Earth.
Quote from: Arthur Schopenhauer
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Radar
« Reply #4 on: November 10, 2008, 01:50:36 AM »
FET has no physically consistent argument to support bendy light.  The mere existence of Fabry-Perot interferometers strongly disagrees with light bending of a magnitude sufficient to account for the curvature of the Earth.

Light will not bend over the short distances within such interferometers due to quantum effects.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

Dr Matrix

  • 4312
  • In Soviet Russia, Matrix enters you!
Re: Radar
« Reply #5 on: November 10, 2008, 02:57:11 AM »
Light will not bend over the short distances within such interferometers due to quantum effects.

How about in LIGO?
Quote from: Arthur Schopenhauer
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Radar
« Reply #6 on: November 10, 2008, 06:14:23 AM »
How about in LIGO?

Yes.

So...

Light will not bend over short distances, but will bend over long distances.

Can you see how this is logically incorrect?

The strong nuclear force repels over short distances, but attracts over longer distances. Is this logically incorrect?
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Radar
« Reply #7 on: November 10, 2008, 06:29:47 AM »
The strong nuclear force repels over short distances, but attracts over longer distances. Is this logically incorrect?

Yes.

Plus scientifically incorrect.

I'd be delighted to hear your theory of how atoms stick together without collapsing into miniature black holes sometime. Until then, please stick with the accepted model for the sake of debate.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

Dr Matrix

  • 4312
  • In Soviet Russia, Matrix enters you!
Re: Radar
« Reply #8 on: November 10, 2008, 06:53:01 AM »
The strong nuclear force that defines how atoms stick together has nothing to do with how light behaves.

How is it that radars have a radar-horizon which depends on the curvature of the earth?

The FE answer to this question is pretty simple.

Actually the strong force is contained within quantum chromodynamics (QCD), which is cobined with the theory of light and matter interactions (QED) in the Standard Model of particle physics.  The only 'fundamental interaction' that is not consistently integrated with QED is general relativity.

LIGO is just as good an interferometer (in fact, somewhat better) than the little Fabry-Perot I can set up in my lab... does FET have some fundamental length scale over which quantum mechanical effects do not apply?
Quote from: Arthur Schopenhauer
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Radar
« Reply #9 on: November 10, 2008, 10:59:00 AM »
How is it that radars have a radar-horizon which depends on the curvature of the earth?

How do you know it does? Have you tested the radar horizon on planets of varying curvature?

LIGO is just as good an interferometer (in fact, somewhat better) than the little Fabry-Perot I can set up in my lab... does FET have some fundamental length scale over which quantum mechanical effects do not apply?

The trouble is, LIGO can't measure the curvature of light, because it is presumably constructed to account for the curvature of the Earth.
« Last Edit: November 10, 2008, 11:00:37 AM by Robosteve »
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Radar
« Reply #10 on: November 10, 2008, 11:57:39 AM »
It's an observation made on the planet we call Earth.

The value of the number 2 depends on the oxygen content of the air. I know this because it has always had the same value when the air has contained 21% oxygen.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Radar
« Reply #11 on: November 10, 2008, 12:02:50 PM »
It's an observation made on the planet we call Earth.

The value of the number 2 depends on the oxygen content of the air. I know this because it has always had the same value when the air has contained 21% oxygen.

Um. Wha?!

We've only ever observed a radar horizon on Earth, which - if RE is correct - has curvature that remains the same over time. Therefore, we cannot observe any relationship between the radar horizon and the curvature of the Earth.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Radar
« Reply #12 on: November 10, 2008, 12:12:52 PM »
Now you need to account for it.

I have.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Radar
« Reply #13 on: November 10, 2008, 12:20:09 PM »
The "strong nuclear forces cause light to bend" ?

Was my hearty laughter not loud enough?

Uh... I never said that. :-\
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Radar
« Reply #14 on: November 10, 2008, 02:15:13 PM »
Light will not bend over the short distances within such interferometers due to quantum effects.

The strong nuclear force repels over short distances, but attracts over longer distances. Is this logically incorrect?

Maybe my mistake was assuming that there was some kind of coherence and continuity in your posts...

Your mistake was failing to notice that I was simply illustrating the point that just because things happen one way over short distances doesn't mean they'll work the same way over long distances.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Radar
« Reply #15 on: November 10, 2008, 03:40:32 PM »
So care to explain these "quantum effects" you've discovered?

There is uncertainty in the position of photons over short distances which is larger than the curvature caused by Dark Energy. When the waveform collapses as they are observed, they collapse to travel in a straight line.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

Re: Radar
« Reply #16 on: November 12, 2008, 01:35:41 PM »
I would hate to be you Robosteve, you have dug yourself so deep in a pit of lies, you don't really know what you're writing about half the time do you?

?

Dr Matrix

  • 4312
  • In Soviet Russia, Matrix enters you!
Re: Radar
« Reply #17 on: November 13, 2008, 12:41:05 AM »
The trouble is, LIGO can't measure the curvature of light, because it is presumably constructed to account for the curvature of the Earth.

Come on Goldstein, are you seriously telling me you can't argue against this? For shame!!
Quote from: Arthur Schopenhauer
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

?

jools

Re: Radar
« Reply #18 on: November 13, 2008, 01:23:06 AM »
Hello I'm new here,,,,,,,, well,,,,,,, I think I am, but maybe,,,,,,,,,,,,,,?


anyway,,,,,,,,,, you guys appear to be making up a lot of fancy words to try and explain the "apparent" curvature of the earth but I think that the explanation is much closer to home,

If you will try this simple experiment then I'm sure my theory will gain acceptance,


sit comfortably and raise one arm out straight with the first two fingers of the hand in the classic "V" shape so beloved of chavs when I blast them with my air-horns,,,,,,,,  (it is not nessessary to scowl or mouth foul words)

concentrate on the two finger tips and then with a sharp and rapid bending of the elbow , poke yourself in the eyes,

Now then,,,,,,, can you see straight?    8) no you can't   ;D    This temporary effect I have called the "jools why the hell did I do that" effect and to me is irrefutable proof that it is our own eyes have an inbuilt ability to bend perceived vision and confuddle our brains into thinking that the Earth has a curvature.


I thank you   :) 

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Radar
« Reply #19 on: November 13, 2008, 07:55:39 AM »
Steve seemed to be pitching the idea that light doesn't bend over short distances (how short?) yet bends over long distances. Yet long distances are made of the sum of many short distances. Hmm.

Again - and I'll emphasise my point this time so you don't misunderstand it, this is AN ILLUSTRATION OF HOW SHORT-RANGE AND LONG-RANGE EFFECTS CAN BE DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT - the strong nuclear force is repulsive over short distances, but attractive over longer ones. Yet long distances are made of the sum of many short distances. Shouldn't it always be either repulsive or attractive?
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42602
Re: Radar
« Reply #20 on: November 13, 2008, 08:14:05 AM »
Steve seemed to be pitching the idea that light doesn't bend over short distances (how short?) yet bends over long distances. Yet long distances are made of the sum of many short distances. Hmm.

Again - and I'll emphasise my point this time so you don't misunderstand it, this is AN ILLUSTRATION OF HOW SHORT-RANGE AND LONG-RANGE EFFECTS CAN BE DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT - the strong nuclear force is repulsive over short distances, but attractive over longer ones. Yet long distances are made of the sum of many short distances. Shouldn't it always be either repulsive or attractive?

Steve, you may want to brush up on the Strong Force:
Quote from: http://www.vias.org/physics/bk4_03_04.html
The reason all the nuclei in your body are not spontaneously exploding at this moment is that there is another force acting. This force, called the strong nuclear force, is always attractive, and acts between neutrons and neutrons, neutrons and protons, and protons and protons with roughly equal strength.

That is unless the strong force is different in FE physics.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

?

Dr Matrix

  • 4312
  • In Soviet Russia, Matrix enters you!
Re: Radar
« Reply #21 on: November 13, 2008, 08:39:00 AM »
Feynman and Wheeler postulated that photons that do not mediate an interaction between observers do not exist - a 'free photon' that is destined to fly into free space forever is a meaningless concept.
Quote from: Arthur Schopenhauer
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.