.....

.....

Look it up you lazy lazy sloth.

Did I say look at wiki?  You first instinct is even lazy. Come up with a way to measure it yourself if you don't want to be brainwashed.

HINT: You can't do it with the second hands (the skinny one) on your watch.

You are so lazy you have to ask for an experiment to do? Do a bit of research and perform one yourself. Spoon fed much? Lol

Why should I give you an experiment. A 2 second google search will give you plenty. Get back to us when you have done one. Have fun.

Quote from: Pythagoras on April 09, 2013, 12:54:32 PM

You are so lazy you have to ask for an experiment to do? Do a bit of research and perform one yourself. Spoon fed much? Lol

Will you give me a simple experiment to do or are you going to call me lazy, copying off of Rama, or is it because you really don't know yourself?

The problem is, if we recommend something, you'll either say;

Well have you done this?

That's a load of BS?

Or I Don't believe in such and such thing for the experiment to be done.

You've lost pretty much all credibility until you bring something to the table.

One meter is defined as the length that light travels in 1/299,792,458 seconds. Therefore, by definition, the speed of light is exactly 299,792,458 meters per second.

 

Although you are not allowed to use a meter to verify the speed anymore since it would just be a circular experiment.

Although you are not allowed to use a meter to verify the speed anymore since it would just be a circular experiment.

Illogical experiments are the ones Scepti is best at, that's why I used that particular example.

If you want to design an experiment from the ground up, it's probably not worth it. As long as you know the basic concept, speed=distance/time, it's easy to think of an experiment. Shine a light. Measure the time it takes to reach a known distance away. Of course this is not so easy in practice. Make it easy on yourself. Read up on light speed experiments and see if they make sense. If you think the method is sound, and you see lots of people get the same results, you can be pretty confident it's right. The Michelson-Morely experiment was more complicated, but I think that's because they were trying to actually measure the difference in light speed going in different directions.

Quote from: Pythagoras on April 09, 2013, 12:54:32 PM

You are so lazy you have to ask for an experiment to do? Do a bit of research and perform one yourself. Spoon fed much? Lol

Will you give me a simple experiment to do or are you going to call me lazy, copying off of Rama, or is it because you really don't know yourself?

Seriously, what makes you think that measuring the speed of light is a simple task?

To the thread starter -

This is a gentle reminder that The Flat Earth Society is first and foremost a Zetetic society.

Zeteticism encourages one to perform experiments to find the true nature of phenomena, rather then subscribing to theories and believing as one is told.

You seem to have a lot of idle time - you should go outside and perform simple experiments then build on that foundation, rather then waste time with theory and conjecture.

Sceptimatic, you can look over an experiment and decide for yourself if it's executable or if you think it's flawed. You don't necessarily have to agree with the experiment or accept it but each will contain ideas and methods.

Looking over a number of experiments is like looking at different recipes to make chocolate chip cookies.

Some chocolate chip cookie recipes call for brown sugar; if brown sugar is not your cup of tea go on to the next experiment.

They should be simple enough that you can decide for yourself which elements you want to keep and which you think are flawed.

EDIT: All light-measuring experiments should arrive at the speed of light (if not it shouldn't be online). Some may vary in accuracy.  Same with chocolate chip cookies, they'll all lead to chocolate chip cookies but they'll vary in taste and methods of making them.

Also... you might want to start with something closer to human speeds.  How do we measure how fast we run? How does a spedometer in a car work?

Because chances are you aren't going to accept a device that measures the speed of light since our eyes cannot detect it, nor can our reflexes.

So if you start with something in the 60 mph range and decide that "Okay, this device is worthy of my belief" then you can move on to faster things.

How do they measure sound? Do you buy the 750 mph malarky?

Baby steps, Scepty, baby steps.

To the thread starter -

This is a gentle reminder that The Flat Earth Society is first and foremost a Zetetic society.

Zeteticism encourages one to perform experiments to find the true nature of phenomena, rather then subscribing to theories and believing as one is told.

You seem to have a lot of idle time - you should go outside and perform simple experiments then build on that foundation, rather then waste time with theory and conjecture.

Then Zeteticism is ultimately useless. If nobody ever took advantage of all the accumulated knowledge already available, we'd never advance. Everybody would know next to nothing, compared to what there is to know. I'm all for skepticism and critical thinking, but you don't have to constantly reinvent the wheel. All this Zeteticism seems to do, at least on these forums, is allow you to reject out of hand any theory or data that conflicts with your preconceived idea that the world is flat, while still being able to claim some kind of intellectual integrity just because you adhere to this Zetetic philosophy. You're not gaining knowledge for yourselves, you're just rejecting knowledge.

Sceptimatic

What is speed to you, anyway?

If a human runs a 100-meter dash at 20 mph, who is to say he was running 20mph because he certainly didn't run 20 miles.

What do you think of this, Sceptimatic?

Quote from: FlatOrange on April 09, 2013, 03:14:17 PM

Sceptimatic

What is speed to you, anyway?

If a human runs a 100-meter dash at 20 mph, who is to say he was running 20mph because he certainly didn't run 20 miles.

What do you think of this, Sceptimatic?

I'd say . based on how we calculate mph, you can easily figure out that he's doing 20 mph.

I have no qualms about that but we are not talking about 20 mph or 50,000 mph are we?
We are talking about 186,000 miles per second and it's made out to be normal to us average humans.
All I'm asking is, someone to show me, very simply how it was arrived at, that all.

Use the search bar function.  Very simply it is.

Quote from: FlatOrange on April 09, 2013, 03:14:17 PM

Sceptimatic

What is speed to you, anyway?

If a human runs a 100-meter dash at 20 mph, who is to say he was running 20mph because he certainly didn't run 20 miles.

What do you think of this, Sceptimatic?

I'd say . based on how we calculate mph, you can easily figure out that he's doing 20 mph.

I have no qualms about that but we are not talking about 20 mph or 50,000 mph are we?
We are talking about 186,000 miles per second and it's made out to be normal to us average humans.
All I'm asking is, someone to show me, very simply how it was arrived at, that all.

Coming here to ask theoretical questions is rather like venturing into Victoria's Secret to look for fishing tackle.

If I were interested I check here.

Well it certainly contradicts most FErs model of the solar system.

"The first successful measurement of c was made by Olaus Roemer in 1676.  He noticed that, depending on the Earth–Sun–Jupiter geometry, there could be a difference of up to 1000 seconds between the predicted times of the eclipses of Jupiter's moons, and the actual times that these eclipses were observed.  He correctly surmised that this is due to the varying length of time it takes for light to travel from Jupiter to Earth as the distance between these two planets varies.  He obtained a value of c equivalent to 214,000 km/s, which was very approximate because planetary distances were not accurately known at that time."

Foucalt had a good method.

The basic technique is to send a beam of light on a path so that it bounces between a rotating mirror, a fixed mirror and back to the rotating mirror for a total distance 2D, as shown in the above illustration.  The time of flight of the light on this path implies that the rotating mirror will have turned very slightly between the two times of arrival of the light.  This small rotation will deflect the beam of light through a small angle θ from its original path, producing a measurable effect proportional to the mirror and inversely proportional to the speed of light.

 

If the rotational frequency (revolutions per unit time) of the mirror is given by υ, then the deflection angle is given by
,
where the second factor angular frequency of rotation and the last is the time to travel back and forth between the mirrors.

For our demonstration, we used a He-Ne laser as the source (a much better source than Foucault had!).  At these distances, the laser acts essentially as a point source of light, so it is necessary to focus the beam so that the points of focus are the fixed mirror (M) and source and observation point (S).  Let D’ be the distance between the rotating mirror and the source/observation point, G be the distance between the lens (L) and fixed mirror (M) and G’ be the distance the light travels from the lens to the source point (LR+RS).  Then the lens makers’ equation tells us that the focal length, f, of the lens must be:

For our setup, we used a lens with a focal length of 5m, and set G and G’ to be 10m.  We set the distance D to be approximately 13m and D’ to be 7m.  In order to observe the deflection of the beam, we inserted a thin (to minimize internal reflections) microscope slide beam splitter just before the source.  Our rotating mirror is based on a Bosch router motor, with a peak speed of 27000rpm at 120V AC.

Alignment is slightly tricky.  I suggest establishing the beam to the rotating mirror first, and then moving the rotating mirror to point approximately at the desired location of the fixed mirror.  The beam should go to the center of the lens and the fixed mirror, and then (harder) the spot returning from the fixed mirror must be aligned on the rotating mirror.  At this point, the returned beam should be visible after the beam splitter! Chalk dust and water mist make great diagnostics for finding the beam and small variations in the lens position sometimes can compensate for small mirror misalignments.  This takes some patience and good clamps for the lens and fixed mirrors!

One you have established a view of the beam after the beam splitter, I suggest measuring the beam spot position at high and low frequency.  The deviation of the beam spot, δx, will be

where δυ is the difference between the high and low frequencies.  For our setup, we found deviations of about 2-3mm with δυ of about 300Hz.

Sceptimatic

How close do you live to a college or university?  I recommend asking them if they have an apparatus to measure the speed of light.

Scepti plays by his own rule-book though.

Another way it was figured out as pure physics. Someone, I believe James Maxwell, realized that if magnetism causes electricity and electricity causes magnetism, then they must be intrinsically related. He did the math on how fast something would have to be moving to be an electromagnetic wave, which we now know to be light, and arrived at the speed of light.

Quote from: FlatOrange on April 09, 2013, 04:32:57 PM

Scepti plays by his own rule-book though.

So do all the Flat Earth members of  the Flat Earth Society Forum.

Ever notice how they try to derail such simple questions with a lot of unrelated garbage ?

Scepti only believe what he is spoon fed from the "official" FAQ, so we have the authors and editors of the FAQ to blame.

Is the speed of light just a made up load of tosh in terms of the 186,000 miles per second and if not, just how did they really calculate it on earth to come to this.
Forget about space, I'm talking about how it was calculated on the earth and with what device?
For all we know, it could only be something like 10,000 miles per second or something like that and is the reason why we get the delays we do over the earth.
I mean, there's even a 2 second delay with the fake ISS and that's only supposed to be 230 miles above the earth as we are sheepishly led to believe.

What reasons do you have to believe that the documented and verified speed of light is vastly wrong?

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 09, 2013, 12:41:10 PM

Is the speed of light just a made up load of tosh in terms of the 186,000 miles per second and if not, just how did they really calculate it on earth to come to this.
Forget about space, I'm talking about how it was calculated on the earth and with what device?
For all we know, it could only be something like 10,000 miles per second or something like that and is the reason why we get the delays we do over the earth.
I mean, there's even a 2 second delay with the fake ISS and that's only supposed to be 230 miles above the earth as we are sheepishly led to believe.

What reasons do you have to believe that the documented and verified speed of light is vastly wrong?

It's the same old stuff.  He'll say he doesn't believe one thing or the other, he's just asking a question.

He's getting a bit repetitive, to be honest.

It's not the speed of light I have a problem with,

Is the speed of light just a made up load of tosh in terms of the 186,000 miles per second and if not, just how did they really calculate it on earth to come to this.
Forget about space, I'm talking about how it was calculated on the earth and with what device?
For all we know, it could only be something like 10,000 miles per second or something like that and is the reason why we get the delays we do over the earth.
I mean, there's even a 2 second delay with the fake ISS and that's only supposed to be 230 miles above the earth as we are sheepishly led to believe.

Make your mind up.