Ham Radio and Moonbounce

The "retroreflectors" are simply very small satellites (which use the Biefeld-Brown effect to travel above the surface of the Earth) which orbit in front the Moon in order to reflect the laser beams.

Balderdash!

And retroreflectors are not needed in any case.

Really? The early laser measurements used 50 ns laser pulse length and a distance uncertainty of about 15 m. See below for after the retroreflectors were installed.

National Geographic Vol. 130 No. 6 December 1966

'The Lasers Bright Magic' by Thomas Meloy

Page 876
"Four years ago (1962) a ruby laser considerably smaller than those now available, shot a series of pulses at the Moon. The beams illuminated a spot less than two miles in diameter, and were reflected back to Earth with enough strength to be measured by ultra sensitive electronic equipment."

Mr Sandokhan, so often you post only half the story, hoping nobody will look further, well just look:

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Yes, the first laser pulse reflected from the moon was in 1962, but if you look into it, you will find a dramatic improvement in accuracy since the corner reflectors were installed.

You can read a bit about it in:
Reminescenses of Early Work at MIT and ESRIN 1963-1974
But these early experiments needed very high power and comparatively long pulse lengths (around 1 ms in the 1962 MIT case), so could not achieve very high accuracy. I could not find much of the accuracy of this one, bit a later one (still without corner reflectors) described in

Quote from: A. Orszag, Ecole Poly technique, Paris

On page 1687: 3 .1. Accuracy of Distance Measurement
This accuracy is limited by several factors:
(a) The duration of the pulse emitted by the laser, that is, about 50 nsec. This time interval corresponds to an uncertainty of 15 m in the distance.

From: Moon Distance Measurement by Laser

And have a look at:

Quote from: Brad Acker

HISTORY-TECH             May 9, 2015
Today in History: Laser travelled through space and bounced off Moon for first time, 1962
On May 9, 1962 — 53 years ago today and about 2 years after the first laser was invented — for the first time in history a laser travelled through space and laser pulses were bounced off the Moon and used to determine the most accurate measurement of distance between the Earth and the Moon to that date.This historical first was conducted by Louis D. Smullin and Giorgio Flocco as part of project “Luna See” at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
From: Brad Acker, HISTORY-TECH, May 9, 2015

The later measurements with the corner reflectors have achieved millimeter accuracy, enough to determine that the Moon is spiraling away from Earth at a rate of 3.8 cm per year - a figure unexpectedly high.

This is the improvement in precision of measurement from the first retro-reflectors:

Quote

In the early days one of the biggest challenges was discerning returning photons from "stray" photons. MLRS would fire 10¹⁴ or 10¹⁵ photons to the moon and only about 10 or so returned to the photodetector, so being able to verify them was absolutely essential. "We devised a four-filter system," says Peter Shelus, senior research scientist at UT-Austin's Center for Space Research and member of the MLRS team. "First, we opened the detector to the sky just before we thought the photons were due back - about 2.5 seconds later. Second, we used a pinhole aperture only a few arc seconds in diameter to look at a very small part of the surface of the moon. The third filter was spectral -- we fired red light from the ruby laser or green from neodymium and looked for those wavelengths coming back in. The fourth filter was mathematical to neutralize noise in the photodetector."

Figure 4.

Increasingly the trend at LLR stations has been toward narrower laser pulses and greater accuracy (Fig. 4). Today satellite laser ranging stations such as RGO (UK) and Graz (Austria) are favoring super-short pulse kiloHertz lasers. Apache Point Observatory Lunar Laser Ranging Operation (APOLLO), the most advanced LLR station in the world, uses a 3.5-meter telescope and 532 nm Nd:YAG laser (100 ps pulse duration, 115 mJ/pulse, 20 Hz). "We routinely achieve 1-mm precision with a 7-picosecond round-trip travel-time error," indicates Tom Murphy, director of APOLLO and associate professor of physics at University of California, San Diego. "Our APD array is a working prototype from MIT's Lincoln Labs in a 4x4 format with 30-µm diameters on 100-µm centers. Photon detection efficiency is about 50 percent."

From: Lunar laser ranging: 40 years of high-level science

So sure, laser moon distance measurements were made as early as 1962, but there has been a dramatic improvement in accuracy since corner reflectors were installed.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Yes, from:

• "an uncertainty of 15 m in the distance" with no reflectors,
• to about 300 mm with the earliest "big telescope, fat laser",
• 20 to 30 mm with later "small telescope, narrow pulse laser" and
• finally down to 1 or 2 mm uncertainty with "big telescope, narrow pulse laser".

 
The lunar reflectors are certainly there and make a massive differenc to the precision of the measurement.

No problem at all.

The "retroreflectors" are simply very small satellites (which use the Biefeld-Brown effect to travel above the surface of the Earth) which orbit in front the Moon in order to reflect the laser beams.

Here is an experiment performed by Dr. Daniel Gezari (CalTech) which poses a huge problem for the laser interferometry theory.

Dr. Daniel Gezari emitted a pulse of photons from a point on earth, bounced those photons off a reflector on the moon, and then recorded the photons’ arrival time at that same point on earth.

https://arxiv.org/vc/arxiv/papers/0912/0912.3934v1.pdf



One needs both the orbital and rotational Sagnac to calculate the correct timing, there is no way around that.

The lunar laser ranging experiment is an astronomical version of the Sagnac experiment.

However, G. Sagnac used the fringe-shift method to measure indirectly light travel time;
while Dr. Daniel Gezari uses clocks to measure directly light travel time in both directions.

Shooting light to the moon has to do with the behavior of light like GPS.

The arrival time of light to a receptor is influenced by the motion of
the receptor relative to the earth: this is the basic discovery of G. Sagnac.

This fact has to be incorporated into the lunar laser ranging calculations.

Here is a basic reference which confirms this fact:

Ring-laser tests of fundamental physics and geophysics, G.E. Steadman, 1997, pg 15


Motion of the Earth-Moon system in orbit around the Sun would average out in a two-way measurement, and only appear as a small (∼3 m/s) second-order residual.

Because of the two-way averaging, the orbital Sagnac effect registered is smaller than usual, however it is not 1/365 of the rotational Sagnac effect, in fact even in the diluted form permitted by the two-way averaging calculation, it represents a significant percentage of the rotational Sagnac effect.


THE SMALL (~3M/S) SECOND ORDER RESIDUAL IS THE ORBITAL SAGNAC.


For instance, the Earth’s full 30 km/s orbital velocity along the line-of-sight would produce a second-order residual velocity of only ~3 m/s, so we cannot preclude the possibility that some part of the 8.4 m /s difference between co and c measured here is a real second-order residual due to motion of the Earth-Moon system relative to an absolute frame.

THE 8.4 M/S DIFFERENCE IS THE ROTATIONAL SAGNAC.


Dr. Daniel Gezari:


For instance, the Earth’s full 30 km/s orbital velocity along the line-of-sight would produce a second-order residual velocity of only ~3 m/s, so we cannot preclude the possibility that some part of the 8.4 m /s difference


3/8.4 = 0.357

1/365 = 0.00274

0.357/0.00274 = 130.3


Moreover, Dr. Gezari found something as extraordinary: the speed of light is a variable.

Abstract: The speed of laser light pulses launched from Earth and returned by a retro-reflector on the Moon was calculated from precision round-trip time-of-flight measurements and modeled distances. The measured speed of light (c) in the moving observers rest frame was found to exceed the canonical value c = 299,792,458 m/s by 200±10 m/s, just the speed of the observatory along the line-of-sight due to the rotation of the Earth during the measurements. This result is a first-order violation of local Lorentz invariance; the speed of light seems to depend on the motion of the observer after all, as in classical wave theory, which implies that a preferred reference frame exists for the propagation of light. However, the present experiment cannot identify the physical system to which such a preferred frame might be tied.

Ham radio won't help.  Ham radio uses shortwave frequencies -- these bounce off the ionosphere to come back to earth, which is the whole point of shortwave and ham radio.  What you need is ultra-high frequency radio that goes through the ionosphere to reach outer space.  It is ultra-high freq that is used to communicate with the moon landings and the space station and satellites.  Shortwave, by design, won't punch through the ionosphere to get there.  Not so many people have ultra-high freq equipment; it's expensive and since it doesn't bounce off the ionosphere, about the only thing it's good for is outer space.

But with ultra-high frequency equipment several observatories and labs were and still are able to make use of the retroflectors set up by the astronauts on the moon.  These are very precisely made, and very precisely positioned, parabolic reflectors designed that any laser or maser beam from earth that hits them will be reflected back to the exact spot on earth from which it was sent.  These retroflectors have been used to precisely measure the moon's distance from earth.

For clarity here I have to say that Ham radio operators in the USA and Canada are license to use frequencies from long wave to medium wave to short wave to Very high freq (VHF) to Ultra high freq. (UHF) to microwaves.

See this chart please;  http://www.arrl.org/files/file/Regulatory/Band%20Chart/Band%20Chart%20-%2011X17%20Color.pdf

And there are people experimenting in the entire range. 

Many moon bounce rigs are using UHF or microwave frequencies so they can make high gain antennas that are not too big but some moon bounce has been done in the 2Metre VHF band.

<big SNIP>

Abstract: The speed of laser light pulses launched from Earth and returned by a retro-reflector on the Moon was calculated from precision round-trip time-of-flight measurements and modeled distances. The measured speed of light (c) in the moving observers rest frame was found to exceed the canonical value c = 299,792,458 m/s  by 200m/s +/-10% just the speed of the observatory along the line-of-sight due to the rotation of the Earth during the measurements. This result is a first-order violation of local Lorentz invariance; the speed of light seems to depend on the motion of the observer after all, as in classical wave theory, which implies that a preferred reference frame exists for the propagation of light. However, the present experiment cannot identify the physical system to which such a preferred frame might be tied.
[/quote]

That low error is an engineers dream!

And the question remains:

How far away is the moon based on numerous moon bounce communications by ordinary technicians running equipment in their basements who hear reflections of their own signal in their radios a second or two after they send the transmission?

If the moon is not really 3000 miles above the earth then what does that say for the rest of our
FE ideas.  (they are not theories yet because they have no equations to define them so they are ideas)

The "retroreflectors" are simply very small satellites (which use the Biefeld-Brown effect to travel above the surface of the Earth) which orbit in front the Moon in order to reflect the laser beams.

Ha!

Quote from: sandokhan on February 05, 2018, 04:36:33 AM

The "retroreflectors" are simply very small satellites (which use the Biefeld-Brown effect to travel above the surface of the Earth) which orbit in front the Moon in order to reflect the laser beams.

Ha!

So he is saying that the moon is even further away then.

<big SNIP>

Abstract: The speed of laser light pulses launched from Earth and returned by a retro-reflector on the Moon was calculated from precision round-trip time-of-flight measurements and modeled distances. The measured speed of light (c) in the moving observers rest frame was found to exceed the canonical value c = 299,792,458 m/s  by 200m/s +/-10% just the speed of the observatory along the line-of-sight due to the rotation of the Earth during the measurements. This result is a first-order violation of local Lorentz invariance; the speed of light seems to depend on the motion of the observer after all, as in classical wave theory, which implies that a preferred reference frame exists for the propagation of light. However, the present experiment cannot identify the physical system to which such a preferred frame might be tied.

That low error is an engineers dream!

And the question remains:

How far away is the moon based on numerous moon bounce communications by ordinary technicians running equipment in their basements who hear reflections of their own signal in their radios a second or two after they send the transmission?

If the moon is not really 3000 miles above the earth then what does that say for the rest of our
FE ideas.  (they are not theories yet because they have no equations to define them so they are ideas)
[/quote]

A common figure on "Moon Bounce" is approximately 2.5 seconds for the time a signal is transmitted from the earth  to the moon, bounces off the moon, and is received back on the earth. The "one way time" for the signal to either reach the moon or sent back to earth or half that of the total time, or approximately 1.275 seconds. This times the speed of radio waves (186,000 miles per second) gives the distance at 238,150 miles, well within the  criteria for the criteria for the known distances from the earth to the moon.Since the moon's orbit is not perfect, the distances vary from 225,623 miles to 252,088 miles. Average is 238,855 miles.
For more information, see "Earth Moon Earth" (EME).
Or the American Radio Relay League, (   arrl.com )
 
The flat earth idea (not a theory, of course) were made visually from various latitudes , presuming the earth was flat.
This has all been discussed in previous forums.
The earth is known to be a globe and not a flat disc, any way.
Is this website really just a "spoof"

Quote from: JimmyTheCrab on February 05, 2018, 09:01:20 AM

Quote from: sandokhan on February 05, 2018, 04:36:33 AM

The "retroreflectors" are simply very small satellites (which use the Biefeld-Brown effect to travel above the surface of the Earth) which orbit in front the Moon in order to reflect the laser beams.

Ha!

So he is saying that the moon is even further away then.

This is incorrect. The retro-reflectors were placed on the moon's surface by astronauts on previous moon landings. They have been used by astronomical observatories for more precise measurements, using laser beams,  such as at the McDonald Observatory, to name one.(Another good source to check for more information)

If you have been on this website for any length of time , you get used to sandokhan's copy pasta, double talk, gobbledegook, etc.
LOL. Just disregard it as an attempt to derail a subject. LOL.

Quote from: EvolvedMantisShrimp on February 05, 2018, 09:15:33 AM

Quote from: JimmyTheCrab on February 05, 2018, 09:01:20 AM

Quote from: sandokhan on February 05, 2018, 04:36:33 AM

The "retroreflectors" are simply very small satellites (which use the Biefeld-Brown effect to travel above the surface of the Earth) which orbit in front the Moon in order to reflect the laser beams.

Ha!

So he is saying that the moon is even further away then.

This is incorrect. The retro-reflectors were placed on the moon's surface by astronauts on previous moon landings. They have been used by astronomical observatories for more precise measurements, using laser beams,  such as at the McDonald Observatory, to name one.(Another good source to check for more information)

If you have been on this website for any length of time , you get used to sandokhan's copy pasta, double talk, gobbledegook, etc.
LOL. Just disregard it as an attempt to derail a subject. LOL.

Hehehe. I know they are on the moon. But I found his claim that they were between the Earth and the Moon to be amusing because it doesn't shorten the distance to the moon. It actually lengthens it.

Fun fact: there is only one stable orbital point that would keep a satellite positioned exactly between the Earth and the Moon: the L1 Lagrange point.

Fun fact: there is only one stable orbital point that would keep a satellite positioned exactly between the Earth and the Moon: the L1 Lagrange point.

Not if you are using the Biefeld-Brown effect.

Then, ANY orbit below the dome will suffice, or any stable stationary position in the atmosphere can be attained.

Thomas Townsend Brown:

You have asked several questions which I shall try to answer. The experiments in vacuum were conducted at "Societe Nationale de Construction Aeronautique" in Paris in 1955-56, in the Bahnson Laboratories, Winston-Salem, North Carolina in 1957-58 and at the "General Electric Space Center" at King of Prussia, Penna, in 1959.

In the Paris test miniature saucer type airfoils were operated in a vaccum exceeding 10-6mm Hg. Bursts of thrust (towards the positive) were observed every time there was a vaccum spark within the large bell jar.

These vacuum sparks represented momentary ionization, principally of the metal ions in the electrode material.

The DC potential used ranged from 70kV to 220kV.

Condensers of various types, air dielectric and barium titanate were assembled on a rotary support to eliminate the electrostatic effect of chamber walls and observations were made of the rate of rotation. Intense acceleration was always observed during the vacuum spark (which, incidentally, illuminated the entire interior of the vacuum chamber). Barium Titanate dielectrique always exceeded air dielectric in total thrust. The results which were most significant from the standpoint of the Biefeld-Brown effect was that thrust continued, even when there was no vacuum spark, causing the rotor to accelerate in the negative to positive direction to the point where voltage had to be reduced or the experiment discontinued because of the danger that the rotor would fly apart.

In short, it appears there is strong evidence that Biefeld-Brown effect does exist in the negative to positive direction in a vacuum of at least 10-6 Torr. The residual thrust is several orders of magnitude larger than the remaining ambient ionization can account for.

In subsequent years, from 1930 to 1955, critical experiments were performed at the Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC.; the Randall-Morgan Laboratory of Physics, University of Penna., Philadelphia; at a field station in Zanesvill, Ohio, and two field stations in Southern California, of the torque was measured continuously day and night for many years. Large magnitude variations were consistenly observed under carefully
controlled conditions of constant voltage, temperature, under oil, in magnetic and electrostatic shields, not only underground but at various elevations. These variations, recorded automatically on tape, were statistically processed and several significant facts were revealed.

There were pronounced correlations with mean solar time, sideral time and lunar hour angle. This seemed to prove beyond a doubt that the thrust of "gravitors" varied with time in a way that related to solar and lunar tides and sideral correlation of unknown origin. These automatic records, acquired in so many different locations over such a long period of time, appear to indicate that the electrogravitic coupling is subject to an extraterrestrial factor, possibly related to the universal gravitational potential or some other (as yet) unidentified cosmic variable.

The experiments performed in Paris several years later, proved that ion wind was not entirely responsible for the observed motion and proved quite conclusively that the apparatus would indeed operate in high vacuum.

Later these effects were confirmed in a laboratory at Winston-Salem, N.C., especially constructed for this purpose. Again continuous force was observed when the ionization in the medium surrounding the apparatus was virtually nil. In reviewing my letter of April 5th, I notice, in the drawing which I attached, that I specified the power supply to be 50kV. Actually, I should have indicated that it was 50 to 250kV DC for the reason that the experiments were conducted throughout that entire range. The higher the voltage, the greater was the force observed. It appeared that, in these rough tests, that the increase in force was approximately linear with voltage. In vaccum the same test was carried on with a canopy electrode approximately 6" in diameter, with substantial force being displayed at 150 kV DC.

The Biefeld-Brown effect moves air. See the Ionic Breeze Air Purifier. If it works off ether, why does it affect air?

Fun fact: there is only one stable orbital point that would keep a satellite positioned exactly between the Earth and the Moon: the L1 Lagrange point.

Not if you are using the Biefeld-Brown effect.

Then, ANY orbit below the dome will suffice, or any stable stationary position in the atmosphere can be attained.

Thomas Townsend Brown:

You have asked several questions which I shall try to answer. The experiments in vacuum were conducted at "Societe Nationale de Construction Aeronautique" in Paris in 1955-56, in the Bahnson Laboratories, Winston-Salem, North Carolina in 1957-58 and at the "General Electric Space Center" at King of Prussia, Penna, in 1959.

In the Paris test miniature saucer type airfoils were operated in a vaccum exceeding 10-6mm Hg. Bursts of thrust (towards the positive) were observed every time there was a vaccum spark within the large bell jar.

These vacuum sparks represented momentary ionization, principally of the metal ions in the electrode material.

The DC potential used ranged from 70kV to 220kV.

Condensers of various types, air dielectric and barium titanate were assembled on a rotary support to eliminate the electrostatic effect of chamber walls and observations were made of the rate of rotation. Intense acceleration was always observed during the vacuum spark (which, incidentally, illuminated the entire interior of the vacuum chamber). Barium Titanate dielectrique always exceeded air dielectric in total thrust. The results which were most significant from the standpoint of the Biefeld-Brown effect was that thrust continued, even when there was no vacuum spark, causing the rotor to accelerate in the negative to positive direction to the point where voltage had to be reduced or the experiment discontinued because of the danger that the rotor would fly apart.

In short, it appears there is strong evidence that Biefeld-Brown effect does exist in the negative to positive direction in a vacuum of at least 10-6 Torr. The residual thrust is several orders of magnitude larger than the remaining ambient ionization can account for.

In subsequent years, from 1930 to 1955, critical experiments were performed at the Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC.; the Randall-Morgan Laboratory of Physics, University of Penna., Philadelphia; at a field station in Zanesvill, Ohio, and two field stations in Southern California, of the torque was measured continuously day and night for many years. Large magnitude variations were consistenly observed under carefully
controlled conditions of constant voltage, temperature, under oil, in magnetic and electrostatic shields, not only underground but at various elevations. These variations, recorded automatically on tape, were statistically processed and several significant facts were revealed.

There were pronounced correlations with mean solar time, sideral time and lunar hour angle. This seemed to prove beyond a doubt that the thrust of "gravitors" varied with time in a way that related to solar and lunar tides and sideral correlation of unknown origin. These automatic records, acquired in so many different locations over such a long period of time, appear to indicate that the electrogravitic coupling is subject to an extraterrestrial factor, possibly related to the universal gravitational potential or some other (as yet) unidentified cosmic variable.

The experiments performed in Paris several years later, proved that ion wind was not entirely responsible for the observed motion and proved quite conclusively that the apparatus would indeed operate in high vacuum.

Later these effects were confirmed in a laboratory at Winston-Salem, N.C., especially constructed for this purpose. Again continuous force was observed when the ionization in the medium surrounding the apparatus was virtually nil. In reviewing my letter of April 5th, I notice, in the drawing which I attached, that I specified the power supply to be 50kV. Actually, I should have indicated that it was 50 to 250kV DC for the reason that the experiments were conducted throughout that entire range. The higher the voltage, the greater was the force observed. It appeared that, in these rough tests, that the increase in force was approximately linear with voltage. In vaccum the same test was carried on with a canopy electrode approximately 6" in diameter, with substantial force being displayed at 150 kV DC.

Dome. Lol.

None other than your idol, I. Newton made it very clear that he believed that there are TWO GRAVITATIONAL FORCES at work: terrestrial gravity and planetary/stellar gravity. One is a force of pressure, the other one a force of rotation.

As such, you need some kind of barrier/shield between the two: that is the dome.

Here is Newton himself telling that terrestrial gravity is due to the pressure of ether:

Here is a letter from Newton to Halley, describing how he had independently arrived at the inverse square law using his aether hypothesis, to which he refers as the 'descending spirit':

....Now if this spirit descends from above with uniform velocity, its density and consequently its force will be reciprocally proportional to the square of its distance from the centre. But if it descended with accelerated motion, its density will everywhere diminish as much as the velocity increases, and so its force (according to the hypothesis) will be the same as before, that is still reciprocally as the square of its distance from the centre'



I. Newton dismisses the law of attractive gravity as pure insanity:

A letter to Bentley: “That gravity should be innate, inherent, and essential to matter, so that one body can act upon another at a distance through a vacuum without the mediation of anything else, by and through which their action and force may be conveyed from one to another, is to me so great an absurdity that I believe no man, who has in philosophical matters a competent faculty of thinking, can ever fall into it.”


Newton believed that there are TWO GRAVITATIONAL FORCES AT WORK:

1. Terrestrial gravity

2. Planetary/stellar gravity

Newton still thought that the planets and Sun were kept apart by 'some secret principle of unsociableness in the ethers of their vortices,' and that gravity was due to a circulating ether.

Isaac Newton speculated that gravity was caused by a flow of ether, or space, into celestial bodies. He discussed this theory in letters to Oldenburg, Halley, and Boyle.


Ionic

Ion wind/excess ions/heavy ions cannot be responsible for the Biefeld-Brown effect:





The calculations indicate that ionic wind is at least three orders of magnitude too small to explain the magnitude of the observed force on the capacitor (in open air experiments).
In the Paris test miniature saucer type airfoils were operated in a vaccum exceeding 10-6mm Hg. Bursts of thrust (towards the positive) were observed every time there was a vaccum spark within the large bell jar.

VIDEO: BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT, balancing a condenser on a beam balance

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/elghatv1.htm (includes three videos of the experiment)

None other than your idol, I. Newton made it very clear that he believed that there are TWO GRAVITATIONAL FORCES at work: terrestrial gravity and planetary/stellar gravity. One is a force of pressure, the other one a force of rotation.

As such, you need some kind of barrier/shield between the two: that is the dome.

Here is Newton himself telling that terrestrial gravity is due to the pressure of ether:

Here is a letter from Newton to Halley, describing how he had independently arrived at the inverse square law using his aether hypothesis, to which he refers as the 'descending spirit':

....Now if this spirit descends from above with uniform velocity, its density and consequently its force will be reciprocally proportional to the square of its distance from the centre. But if it descended with accelerated motion, its density will everywhere diminish as much as the velocity increases, and so its force (according to the hypothesis) will be the same as before, that is still reciprocally as the square of its distance from the centre'



I. Newton dismisses the law of attractive gravity as pure insanity:

A letter to Bentley: “That gravity should be innate, inherent, and essential to matter, so that one body can act upon another at a distance through a vacuum without the mediation of anything else, by and through which their action and force may be conveyed from one to another, is to me so great an absurdity that I believe no man, who has in philosophical matters a competent faculty of thinking, can ever fall into it.”


Newton believed that there are TWO GRAVITATIONAL FORCES AT WORK:

1. Terrestrial gravity

2. Planetary/stellar gravity

Newton still thought that the planets and Sun were kept apart by 'some secret principle of unsociableness in the ethers of their vortices,' and that gravity was due to a circulating ether.

Isaac Newton speculated that gravity was caused by a flow of ether, or space, into celestial bodies. He discussed this theory in letters to Oldenburg, Halley, and Boyle.


Ionic

Ion wind/excess ions/heavy ions cannot be responsible for the Biefeld-Brown effect:





The calculations indicate that ionic wind is at least three orders of magnitude too small to explain the magnitude of the observed force on the capacitor (in open air experiments).
In the Paris test miniature saucer type airfoils were operated in a vaccum exceeding 10-6mm Hg. Bursts of thrust (towards the positive) were observed every time there was a vaccum spark within the large bell jar.

VIDEO: BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT, balancing a condenser on a beam balance

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/elghatv1.htm (includes three videos of the experiment)

Isaac Newton also dabbled in alchemy and bible prophesy.

It requires explanation within the FE model.
I cannot think of a way.

Original set of Maxwell's equations:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1918701#msg1918701 (five consecutive messages)

Structure of the potential: Whittaker scalar waves

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1994059#msg1994059 (four consecutive messages)

During the Chicago World's Fair of 1893, the Westinghouse exhibit set up by Tesla was visited by Hermann von Helmholtz, the first director of the Physico-Technical Institute of Berlin and one of the leading scientists of his time. When Tesla "asked the celebrated physicist for an expression of opinion on the feasibility of the [transmission] scheme. He stated unhesitatingly that it was practicable." In 1897, Lord Kelvin visited New York and stopped at the Tesla laboratory where Tesla "entertained him with demonstrations in support of my wireless theory."

Suddenly [Kelvin] remarked with evident astonishment: 'Then you are not making use of Hertz waves?'

'Certainly not', I replied, 'these are radiations.' ... I can never forget the magic change that came over the illustrious philosopher the moment he freed himself from that erroneous impression. The skeptic who would not believe was suddenly transformed into the warmest of supporters. He parted from me not only thoroughly convinced of the scientific soundness of the idea but strongly exprest his confidence in its success."


Whittaker proved mathematically the existence of the hidden substructure of the potential of the e/m/g (electrogravitational) waves.

A scalar wave is a bidirectional longitudinal wave = a non-Hertzian wave.

A Hertzian wave is just a ripple in the sea of ether.

Ether = subquark strings = telluric currents

A telluric current is a transversal wave, through which flow/propagate longitudinal waves.

A non-Hertzian wave is just such a longitudinal wave, propagating through the transversal wave.

This is true wireless.

Tesla used exclusively non-Hertzian waves, and none of the Hertzian waves.

The speed of a radio wave is completely and absolutely linked to the density of aether in the atmosphere.

I have hand it to you sandy, that was almost a relevant and coherent post that kind of addressed the question.
Are you saying the timing of the radio waves being bounced off the moon match what RE would expect because they are slowed down by a denser ether?

None other than your idol, I. Newton made it very clear that he believed that there are TWO GRAVITATIONAL FORCES at work

Where, exactly, did he make this "very clear"?  And even if he did, so what?

Are you saying the timing of the radio waves being bounced off the moon match what FE would expect because they are slowed down by a denser ether?

The Aharonov-Bohm effect proved that vector fields are caused by the potential.

None of the RE would expect for an electron, or a neutron, or a photon, to undergo a phase shift in the absence of any forces.

Yet it happens.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263850559_Aharonov-Bohm_effect_for_light_in_a_moving_medium

Are you saying the timing of the radio waves being bounced off the moon match what FE would expect because they are slowed down by a denser ether?

The Aharonov-Bohm effect proved that vector fields are caused by the potential.

None of the RE would expect for an electron, or a neutron, or a photon, to undergo a phase shift in the absence of any forces.

Yet it happens.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263850559_Aharonov-Bohm_effect_for_light_in_a_moving_medium

Sorry but was that a yes or a no?

No problem at all.

That's right. No problem at all. Now stop lying and pretending there is.

The "retroreflectors" are simply very small satellites (which use the Biefeld-Brown effect to travel above the surface of the Earth) which orbit in front the Moon in order to reflect the laser beams.

Which would require them to be magically int he right spot at the right time to intercept all the signals and would make it appear much closer.
This also prevents a huge problem for you because as you pointed out, it was done before the retro-reflectors were installed. Was that by other satellites?

I'm skipping over your copy pasted crap as you clearly have no idea what you are talking about as it is just incoherent fragments.

Are you saying the timing of the radio waves being bounced off the moon match what FE would expect because they are slowed down by a denser ether?
The Aharonov-Bohm effect proved that vector fields are caused by the potential.
None of the RE would expect for an electron, or a neutron, or a photon, to undergo a phase shift in the absence of any forces.
Yet it happens.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263850559_Aharonov-Bohm_effect_for_light_in_a_moving_medium

Please show just where in that paper it proves that your aether slows light, radar and radio frequencies down by a factor of over 25,000.

Quote from: sandokhan on February 05, 2018, 11:38:56 AM

Are you saying the timing of the radio waves being bounced off the moon match what FE would expect because they are slowed down by a denser ether?
The Aharonov-Bohm effect proved that vector fields are caused by the potential.
None of the RE would expect for an electron, or a neutron, or a photon, to undergo a phase shift in the absence of any forces.
Yet it happens.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263850559_Aharonov-Bohm_effect_for_light_in_a_moving_medium

Please show just where in that paper it proves that your aether slows light, radar and radio frequencies down by a factor of over 25,000.

One of the replies on that old Moon Bounce thread said something to the effect that "Radio waves slow down on the way to the moon."
I suppose, since if they slow down and therefor would take longer and I suppose this is  the flat earth answer why the hams get 238,150 miles instead of 3,000 miles. I suppose this is  true of the laser beams, too, and why the astronomical observatories get about the same results as the amateur radio operators.

I think some flat earthers should go to McDonald (not the Big Mac place, but the place with the big telescopes on top of Mount Locke)
They might learn something......No!......I don't believe they'd believe anything those evil, satanics, satan worshippers at McDonald would just tell them a bunch of lies such as the world is a globe.

Quote from: rabinoz on February 05, 2018, 04:37:48 PM

Quote from: sandokhan on February 05, 2018, 11:38:56 AM

Are you saying the timing of the radio waves being bounced off the moon match what FE would expect because they are slowed down by a denser ether?
The Aharonov-Bohm effect proved that vector fields are caused by the potential.
None of the RE would expect for an electron, or a neutron, or a photon, to undergo a phase shift in the absence of any forces.
Yet it happens.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263850559_Aharonov-Bohm_effect_for_light_in_a_moving_medium

Please show just where in that paper it proves that your aether slows light, radar and radio frequencies down by a factor of over 25,000.

One of the replies on that old Moon Bounce thread said something to the effect that "Radio waves slow down on the way to the moon."
I suppose, since if they slow down and therefor would take longer and I suppose this is  the flat earth answer why the hams get 238,150 miles instead of 3,000 miles. I suppose this is  true of the laser beams, too, and why the astronomical observatories get about the same results as the amateur radio operators.

I think some flat earthers should go to McDonald (not the Big Mac place, but the place with the big telescopes on top of Mount Locke)
They might learn something......No!......I don't believe they'd believe anything those evil, satanics, satan worshippers at McDonald would just tell them a bunch of lies such as the world is a globe.

What's this "3,000 miles"? As far as I can gather Sandokhan thinks that the sun and moon are 12 to 15 km high.
It would seem as though aircraft might have to dodge them!

I've never heard of a collision yet, but seriously, there is a flat-earth video claiming a plane was seen flying out of the sun!

I am awaiting a report from the Texas Aggies team. They should be able to give us some accurate figures from their landing on the sun and their survey of the sun. Of course they will be doing this during the night by moon light.

None other than your idol, I. Newton made it very clear that he believed that there are TWO GRAVITATIONAL FORCES at work: terrestrial gravity and planetary/stellar gravity. One is a force of pressure, the other one a force of rotation.

As such, you need some kind of barrier/shield between the two: that is the dome.

Here is Newton himself telling that terrestrial gravity is due to the pressure of ether:

Here is a letter from Newton to Halley, describing how he had independently arrived at the inverse square law using his aether hypothesis, to which he refers as the 'descending spirit':

....Now if this spirit descends from above with uniform velocity, its density and consequently its force will be reciprocally proportional to the square of its distance from the centre. But if it descended with accelerated motion, its density will everywhere diminish as much as the velocity increases, and so its force (according to the hypothesis) will be the same as before, that is still reciprocally as the square of its distance from the centre'



I. Newton dismisses the law of attractive gravity as pure insanity:

A letter to Bentley: “That gravity should be innate, inherent, and essential to matter, so that one body can act upon another at a distance through a vacuum without the mediation of anything else, by and through which their action and force may be conveyed from one to another, is to me so great an absurdity that I believe no man, who has in philosophical matters a competent faculty of thinking, can ever fall into it.”


Newton believed that there are TWO GRAVITATIONAL FORCES AT WORK:

1. Terrestrial gravity

2. Planetary/stellar gravity

Newton still thought that the planets and Sun were kept apart by 'some secret principle of unsociableness in the ethers of their vortices,' and that gravity was due to a circulating ether.

Isaac Newton speculated that gravity was caused by a flow of ether, or space, into celestial bodies. He discussed this theory in letters to Oldenburg, Halley, and Boyle.


Ionic

Ion wind/excess ions/heavy ions cannot be responsible for the Biefeld-Brown effect:





The calculations indicate that ionic wind is at least three orders of magnitude too small to explain the magnitude of the observed force on the capacitor (in open air experiments).
In the Paris test miniature saucer type airfoils were operated in a vaccum exceeding 10-6mm Hg. Bursts of thrust (towards the positive) were observed every time there was a vaccum spark within the large bell jar.

VIDEO: BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT, balancing a condenser on a beam balance

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/elghatv1.htm (includes three videos of the experiment)

Do you actually know anything about thrust? Why would you look at one atom or electron? It's a combination of all of them. Please note this before you claim air cannot be responsible.


Edit: How can you be so dumb? You parade around thinking you are so smart and then you use the force from one atom? Do that to spacex's rocket. OMGZOR they can't work.

Figure it out yet?

If I’m wrong I’m wrong. Still waiting.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Ionic

Ion wind/excess ions/heavy ions cannot be responsible for the Biefeld-Brown effect:





The calculations indicate that ionic wind is at least three orders of magnitude too small to explain the magnitude of the observed force on the capacitor (in open air experiments).
In the Paris test miniature saucer type airfoils were operated in a vaccum exceeding 10-6mm Hg. Bursts of thrust (towards the positive) were observed every time there was a vaccum spark within the large bell jar.

If you really believe that the Biefeld-Brown effect is genuine, but not being exploited, Why don't get off your backside and make a fortune exploiting it yourself?

If you really believe that Nikola Tesla's Device to Harness Cosmic Energ. is genuine, but not being exploited, Why don't get off your backside and make a fortune exploiting it yourself?

Yes I know, SandyBot is all talk and no action.

Am I the only one that sees it this way , if light slows by any significant amount , no antenna built on earth will work in space, c/f=lambda ,as basic as this is, this is how you build an antenna , so if you change c, then f and lambda will also change and would not work on the specified frequency, the VSWR would become high, and the antenna wouldn’t resonate at its designed fundamental frequency, now as the telemetry track on the satellite shows the VSWR is within spec, and the antenna does transmit on the frequency it was designed for then c has not changed by any significant amount.
 Ergo c is 299792458m/sec, the metre is 1/c and the frequency of the transmitter is on the specified frequency + or - 0.5ppm. Then the moon is where it should be,384,400km on average. Or approx as was recorded on my last contact 1272ms each way from ground to moon and back.
 Where is this 3000mile /5000km distance that you speak of?

Ergo c is 299792458m/sec, the metre is 1/c and the frequency of the transmitter is on the specified frequency + or - 0.5ppm. Then the moon is where it should be, 384,400km on average. Or approx as was recorded on my last contact 1272ms each way from ground to moon and back.
Where is this 3000mile/5000km distance that you speak of?

The Flat Earth excuse for the 2.5 sec plus round trip for the moon bounce pales into insignificance compared to the time for radar echoes from Venus.

Here is a reply to the then Site Garbage Collector (AKA Custodial Engineer ) on this topic:

Quote from: jroa on August 19, 2016, 04:39:01 PM

SpJunk, you assume that radio signals travel the same speed all the time because that is what you were told to believe.  You never consider that perhaps RF signals may slow down while traveling through the aetheric whirlpool, making the moon much closer.

So radar signals are slowed down so much by it takes 2.5 secs for a 10,000 km round trip to you moon! Wow, that's a bit slow, but,

Take a gander at:

Quote

To See the Unseen, - Chapter Two - Fickle Venus
On 10 March 1961, a month before inferior conjunction, the Goldstone radars were pointed at Venus. The first signals completed the round-trip of 113 million kilometers in about six and a half minutes. During the 68 seconds of electronic signal integration time, 1 of 7 recording styluses on Goldstein's instrument deviated significantly from its zero level and remained at the new level.

From: SP-4218 To See the Unseen, Chapter Two - Fickle Venus, full document: SP-4218 To See the Unseen.

Now we know that even on the Flat Earth model, Venus at its closest approach to must be considerably closer to Earth that the sun. After all, we regularly get transits of Venus across the sun.

But a radar signal from Earth to Venus and back, even when not at conjunction took about six and a half minutes.

You are surely not going to claim that your "Aetheric Whirlpool" is slowing radar signals so much that it takes 6 ¹/₂ minutes for them to travel less than 10,000 km.

That is completely and utterly ridiculous, so please come up with a plausible explanation - one that even YOU can believe!

They just ignore contrary evidence and carry on as usual.

Sandokhan , are you saying ham radio operators are all liars in finding the moon is  238,150 miles from the earth ?