Special spot for the Sagnac Effect

  • 18 Replies
  • 4082 Views
Special spot for the Sagnac Effect
« on: August 28, 2016, 12:34:48 AM »
This is a thread for Sandokhan to discuss the Sagnac Effect to his heart's content, instead of spamming unrelated threads with it.

Sandokhan, if you don't like the title, then just make your own darn thread!

---- Edit: For context, here is my original post ----
Quote
The Sagnac effect DESTROYS relativity, no doubt about that.

You have already been given the references which detail the orbital Sagnac effect, it is greater, of course, than the rotational Sagnac effect.

It is completely missing from the GPS satellites recordings.

A quick glance at this paper shows that the Sagnac effect is calculated based on a rotation rate of 7.2921151247 x 10-5 rad/s. This is the rotation rate of the earth with respect to the stars, not the sun. This takes into account both the rotation of the earth relative to the sun, and the rotation of the earth due to the orbit of the sun. There is no need for a separate "orbital Sagnac effect" calculation.
---- End Edit ----

You lack the most basic knowledge of astrophysics.

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2002/JasonAtkins.shtml

Yes, those values match the rotational speed that I provided quite nicely. What's the problem?

Quote
If we multiply, as an example, this value by the Earth's equatorial radius we will of course get an equatorial speed of 465.1 m/s, 1,674.4 km/h or 1,040.4 mph.

However, the orbital speed of the Earth around the Sun is some 30 km/s.

TWO DIFFERENT MOTIONS: the GPS satellites must incorporate both the rotational Sagnac effect AND the orbital Sagnac effect.

The Sagnac Effect arises from the different relative velocities of the satellite and the earth's surface. The rotation of the earth affects this. The linear velocity of the system as a whole does NOT affect this.
« Last Edit: November 14, 2016, 03:55:57 PM by TotesReptilian »

*

Definitely Not Swedish

  • rutabaga
  • 8309
  • Flat Earth Inspector General of High Fashion Crime
Re: Special spot for Sandokhan's copy-pasta related to the Sagnac Effect
« Reply #1 on: August 28, 2016, 02:40:18 AM »
For all the non-physicists and others that do not know the sagnac effect: Would you mind to briefly explain this effect and its importance (as well as generally as how it concerns the flat vs globe debate).

Ty.
Quote from: croutons, the s.o.w.
You have received a warning for breaking the laws of mathematics.

Member of the BOTD
Sign up here.

*

SpJunk

  • 577
Re: Special spot for Sandokhan's copy-pasta related to the Sagnac Effect
« Reply #2 on: August 28, 2016, 03:05:08 AM »
Sagnac set mirrors and prisms to send same light beam (split) around closed path in both directions.
When he rotated the whole table Doppler effect raised receiving frequency of one side of the beam
and reduced frequency of another side.
When they interfered the pattern was changeable depending on speed of rotation of the table.
The change in interference depending on speed of rotation is caled Sagnac Effect.

For example, the effect is used in Ring Laser Gyroscope.
No moving parts, only laser beam split back and forth through spiraled optical cable,
instead of table setting of prisms and mirrors.

Wiki on Sagnac.
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." - Albert Einstein

"Your lack of simplicity is main reason why not many people would bother to try to understand you." - S.M.

Re: Special spot for Sandokhan's copy-pasta related to the Sagnac Effect
« Reply #3 on: August 28, 2016, 11:32:55 AM »
how it concerns the flat vs globe debate

Round Earth proponents point to ring laser gyroscopes and fiber optic gyroscopes as evidence that the earth rotates, in an attempt to refute the Flat Earth observation that "it doesn't FEEL like the earth spins, therefore it doesn't spin".  In reply, some Flat Earth proponents (and Sandokhan, who agrees with neither RE nor the typical FE position and deserves his own category) contend that the Sagnac Effect is a demonstration of the existence of aether.

*

SpJunk

  • 577
Re: Special spot for Sandokhan's copy-pasta related to the Sagnac Effect
« Reply #4 on: August 28, 2016, 01:41:08 PM »
My mistake.
Fiber optic gyroscope I named Ring laser gyroscope.

(They use the same principle.)
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." - Albert Einstein

"Your lack of simplicity is main reason why not many people would bother to try to understand you." - S.M.

Re: Special spot for Sandokhan's copy-pasta related to the Sagnac Effect
« Reply #5 on: August 28, 2016, 04:45:23 PM »
how it concerns the flat vs globe debate

Round Earth proponents point to ring laser gyroscopes and fiber optic gyroscopes as evidence that the earth rotates, in an attempt to refute the Flat Earth observation that "it doesn't FEEL like the earth spins, therefore it doesn't spin".  In reply, some Flat Earth proponents (and Sandokhan, who agrees with neither RE nor the typical FE position and deserves his own category) contend that the Sagnac Effect is a demonstration of the existence of aether.

To add to this, before relativity was widely accepted, there were two dominant aether theories:

1. Aether is stationary. It doesn't move along with the earth. It provides an absolute frame of reference.
2. Aether is dragged along by moving mass. It is moving along with the earth.

The Sagnac Effect is compatible with a stationary aether, but NOT a dragged aether.
The famous Michelson-Morley experiment is compatible with a dragged aether, but NOT a stationary aether.

Oh no! Luckily, both experiments are compatible with Special Relativity, which is why luminiferous aether theories were discarded.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2016, 04:49:31 PM by TotesReptilian »

Re: Special spot for Sandokhan's copy-pasta related to the Sagnac Effect
« Reply #6 on: August 28, 2016, 08:56:48 PM »
This is a case study in how real science works, and reveals a misunderstanding in how the FE side thinks it works (or pretends to think).  See, not that long ago, everybody 'knew' that aether was a real thing, and I do mean everybody.  The only question was: is it stationary or does it move?  Whether or not it existed was not a serious question.  All the experiments designed to measure the speed of light were also attempts to determine the true nature of the aether.  Some of those experiments excluded a stationary aether, others excluded various forms of moving aether, until the unexpected conclusion eventually came to be accepted: both kinds of aether are excluded because there is no aether

This is not the only example of a notion that was once thought ridiculous (No aether?  How could there be no aether?  What transmits light without aether?) becoming accepted on the strength of the evidence, but it may be the example most relevant to our discussions here.  Science is nothing if not one long history of ridiculous ideas earning their place in the accepted knowledge through evidence in their favor overcoming what people 'know' to be true.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8781
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Special spot for the Sagnac Effect
« Reply #7 on: August 28, 2016, 10:05:54 PM »
What is quantum foam if not aether? You guys get so caught up in your dogma. "There is no Devil. But I wholely believe in Satan."  What's in a name? Small wonder the public is so confused. There are more fine points of obfuscation than in the entire doctrine of Catholicism.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

Re: Special spot for the Sagnac Effect
« Reply #8 on: August 28, 2016, 11:02:23 PM »
What is quantum foam if not aether? You guys get so caught up in your dogma. "There is no Devil. But I wholely believe in Satan."  What's in a name? Small wonder the public is so confused. There are more fine points of obfuscation than in the entire doctrine of Catholicism.

Brief history of aether:

Sound is nothing but pressure waves traveling through the air. Air is the medium through which sound travels. Sound always travels at a specific speed through air, relative to the velocity of the air: the speed of sound.

Scientists discovered that light also had wave-like properties. If it is a wave, then it must have a medium through which it propagates! This theoretical medium was named "aether". Just like sound, light waves must propagate through the aether at a specific speed relative to the velocity of the aether, right? Therefore, the aether should provide a definite frame of reference against which the speed of light is always consistent. If we are moving at half the speed of light, relative to the aether, then light should be moving at only half its top speed relative to us, right?

As it turns out, this last assumption is false. Light propagates at a specific speed relative to all frames of reference simultaneously. This is certainly strange and counterintuitive, but this is what led to the development of Special Relativity.

Quantum foam is describing a completely different concept. It has nothing to do with the speed of light. Instead, it is just a description of the "texture" (for lack of a better word) of spacetime. Basically, it is saying that at the tiniest levels, spacetime has a bunch of little bubbles in it that are constantly appearing and disappearing. Quantum Mechanics is weird. Really weird.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7255
Re: Special spot for the Sagnac Effect
« Reply #9 on: August 28, 2016, 11:17:49 PM »
What is quantum foam if not aether?

This is exactly the point of view held by quantum physicists:

https://web.archive.org/web/20101128012239/http://spinbitz.net/anpheon.org/html/AnpheonIntro2003.htm

A superb work on the misconceptions about the aether, the intentional mistakes committed by Einstein, the quantum foam quotes from some of the greatest quantum physicists, and much more.



Einstein said the following: "If the ether could be detected then his theory of relativity was in error".

Roland Clark, Einstein: The Life & Times, NY: World Publishing, 1971, p. 78


The ether drift experiments of Dr. Yuri Galaev:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1722791#msg1722791


Einstein's horrendous mistakes did not stop there: he assumed that the light is a constant based ON THE WRONG MAXWELL SET OF EQUATIONS.

Einstein, 1905:

"The principle of the constancy of the velocity of light is of course contained in Maxwell's equations”

The censored/modified Heaviside-Lorentz equations are not Maxwell's equations.

The original set of Maxwell equations state very clearly: light is variable.



The Speed of Light

http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Mechanics%20/%20Electrodynamics/Download/5373



https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=65085.msg1736864#msg1736864 (total demolition of STR/GTR)


The Sagnac effect demolishes the theory of relativity:


http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/NPA/Doug_Marett_Presentation_NPA18.pdf

http://qem.ee.nthu.edu.tw/f1a.pdf

http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/SagnacRel/SagnacandRel.html

http://lowenergytransmutations.org/documents/The_Real_Einstein_Monti_Cesarano.doc



Herbert Ives proved that the Sagnac effect also is valid for a straight path:


Herbert Ives (Bell labs):

http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Ives/Herbert_Ives_Light_Signals_Sent_Around_a_Closed_Path.pdf

http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Ives/HerbertIvesGenesis.pdf


For those who really want to understand the myth behind relativity theory, a classic work: The Einstein Myth and the Ives Papers

https://books.google.ro/books?id=-r5IGSTJVPcC&printsec=frontcover&dq=einstein+myth+ives+papers&hl=ro&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiK4riKzfTMAhUBVhQKHXAiA-YQ6AEIHTAA#v=onepage&q=einstein%20myth%20ives%20papers&f=false


Ether travels/propagates through aether.

Ether = subquark strings

A radio wave is a transversal wave THROUGH WHICH longitudinal waves pass/are being transmitted.

This is how we solve the light particle-wave duality dilemma.

Bosons travel through strings/waves which make up a subquark.


The Martin Ruderfer experiment of 1961 put an end to the debate about geocentrism vs. heliocentrism.

In this classic experiment, a spinning Mossbauer experiment, Ruderfer proved mathematically and experimentally the first NULL RESULT OF ETHER DRIFT THEORY.

The GPS satellites are a large scale spinning Mossbauer experiment.

Since they DO NOT record the orbital Sagnac effect, the HYPOTHESES OF THE RUDERFER EXPERIMENT ARE FULFILLED.

"Why is there no requirement for a Sagnac correction due to the earth’s orbital motion? Like the transit time in the spinning Mossbauer experiments, any such effect would be completely canceled by the orbital-velocity effect on the satellite clocks.

However, indirectly, the counteracting effects of the transit time and clock slowing induced biases indicate that an ether drift is present. This is because there is independent evidence that clocks are slowed as a result of their speed. Thus,
ether drift must exist or else the clock slowing effect would be observed."


Believe it or not, most scientists have begun to give up on the theory of relativity, as it no longer can explain the spinning Mossbauer effect encountered in the GPS satellites.

THE LATEST VIEWPOINT in cosmology today is this: MLET (Modified Lorentz Ether Theory).

THIS IS THE LAST STAND of the RE scientists.

Let me explain.

A modified Lorentz ether is a TRANSLATIONAL ETHER: that is, it surrounds the Earth like an envelope, but does NOT rotate along with the Earth around its own axis; while at the same time it travels WITH the Earth in its orbit around the Sun.

In this way, the orbital Sagnac spinning Mossbauer effect could be explained by this translational ether.


HOWEVER, there is no such thing as MLET.


None other than Dr. Hans Zweig (Stanford University) has exposed the fallacies inherent in Lorentz' approach:

The colossal mistakes committed by Lorentz and Einstein in deriving the Lorentz transformation/factor:

http://relativityunraveled.net/chapter-4-the-michelson-morley-experiment/

http://relativityunraveled.net/chapter-5-the-lorentz-transformation/

http://relativityunraveled.net/chapter-1-introduction/

Dr. Hans Zweig, Stanford University: http://wiki.naturalphilosophy.org/wiki/hans-j-zweig/


MLET (Modified Lorentz Ether Theory) is based on the Lorentz transformation (Lorentz factor/contraction), and as such, is equally invalid.

http://www.gsjournal.net/old/weuro/agathan5.pdf



And things don't stop here.

In addition to the fact that GPS satellites do not record the orbital Sagnac effect, we have an even greater problem: the GPS clocks DO NOT RECORD the Sun's gravitational potential.

It is assumed that the orbital velocity of the Earth as it orbits the Sun is a variable; however, the GPS clocks show that the this velocity MUST BE CONSTANT, as it does not record the Sun's gravitational potential effect upon these clocks.


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1782182#msg1782182

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1784780#msg1784780

*

Crouton

  • Flat Earth Inspector General of High Fashion Crimes and Misdemeanors
  • Planar Moderator
  • 16919
  • Djinn
Re: Special spot for the Sagnac Effect
« Reply #10 on: August 28, 2016, 11:35:35 PM »
What is quantum foam if not aether?

This is exactly the point of view held by quantum physicists:
...........
..........

Good God.  You really came through here.  Well I'll see you in 6 months after I'm done studying all these links.
Intelligentia et magnanimitas vincvnt violentiam et desperationem.
The truth behind NASA's budget

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8781
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Special spot for the Sagnac Effect
« Reply #11 on: August 29, 2016, 12:19:27 AM »
What is quantum foam if not aether? You guys get so caught up in your dogma. "There is no Devil. But I wholely believe in Satan."  What's in a name? Small wonder the public is so confused. There are more fine points of obfuscation than in the entire doctrine of Catholicism.

Brief history of aether:

Sound is nothing but pressure waves traveling through the air. Air is the medium through which sound travels. Sound always travels at a specific speed through air, relative to the velocity of the air: the speed of sound.

Scientists discovered that light also had wave-like properties. If it is a wave, then it must have a medium through which it propagates! This theoretical medium was named "aether".
And your suggesting photons (a specific quantum particle) do not propagate through the quantum foam? Is that not specifically what quantum foam is? How then are the quanta propagating or popping in and out of existence if not through the quantum foam?
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

Re: Special spot for the Sagnac Effect
« Reply #12 on: August 29, 2016, 12:58:30 AM »
What is quantum foam if not aether?

This is exactly the point of view held by quantum physicists:

https://web.archive.org/web/20101128012239/http://spinbitz.net/anpheon.org/html/AnpheonIntro2003.htm

I didn't read that entire thing, but from what I can tell, it actually agrees with me. That article never even mentions quantum foam. It does mention quantum vacuum.

If you want to compare aether with spacetime or quantum vacuum, that would be a slightly more apt comparison, assuming a rather loose definition of "aether". Those terms have on occasion been used interchangeably in the past, although most people would avoid mixing them up. If you really insist on referring to spacetime or quantum vacuum as "aether", fine. In that case, it would be more accurate to say that quantum foam describes the texture of aether, not that quantum foam is aether.

Quote
A superb work on the misconceptions about the aether, the intentional mistakes committed by Einstein, the quantum foam quotes from some of the greatest quantum physicists, and much more.

Like I said, that article didn't even mention quantum foam. Please stop misrepresenting your sources. It makes me inclined distrust everything you post.

Quote
Einstein said the following: "If the ether could be detected then his theory of relativity was in error".

Roland Clark, Einstein: The Life & Times, NY: World Publishing, 1971, p. 78

He was specifically talking about the pre-relativity luminiferous aether that prescribed an absolute reference frame. He was not referring to the quantum vacuum, or spacetime, or quantum foam.

Quote
The ether drift experiments of Dr. Yuri Galaev:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1722791#msg1722791

I don't have time to go through this now. Maybe later. However, considering the sheer quantity of aether experiments that have been done and resulted in no detection of the aether, I seriously doubt that Galaev's claims are correct.

Quote
Einstein's horrendous mistakes did not stop there: he assumed that the light is a constant based ON THE WRONG MAXWELL SET OF EQUATIONS.

Einstein, 1905:

"The principle of the constancy of the velocity of light is of course contained in Maxwell's equations”

The censored/modified Heaviside-Lorentz equations are not Maxwell's equations.

The original set of Maxwell equations state very clearly: light is variable.



Maxwell came up with both sets of equations. Heaviside/Lorentz merely cleaned up the notation. One set assumes motion of the aether, one doesn't. Einstein used the ones that didn't take into account aether because the experiments of the day had already disproved the aether.

Maxwell himself did assume that aether existed (like everyone else at the time), therefore focusing more on the "original" equations that you have presented.

Quote
The Speed of Light

http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Mechanics%20/%20Electrodynamics/Download/5373

I just read the abstract. That is just dumb as heck. I seriously doubt anything he says is based on any sort of physical evidence.

Quote
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=65085.msg1736864#msg1736864 (total demolition of STR/GTR)

The Sagnac effect demolishes the theory of relativity:

http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/NPA/Doug_Marett_Presentation_NPA18.pdf

http://qem.ee.nthu.edu.tw/f1a.pdf

http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/SagnacRel/SagnacandRel.html

http://lowenergytransmutations.org/documents/The_Real_Einstein_Monti_Cesarano.doc

Dude, if you want people to read the massive amount of material you toss out, you need to be more selective. Everything I have read so far that you have provided has turned out to be absolute junk. It doesn't make me inclined to read more of what you provide.

Also, at least give a basic overview of the material in your own words. Why does the Sagnac effect "demolish" relativity?
 
Quote
Herbert Ives proved that the Sagnac effect also is valid for a straight path:

Herbert Ives (Bell labs):

http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Ives/Herbert_Ives_Light_Signals_Sent_Around_a_Closed_Path.pdf

http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Ives/HerbertIvesGenesis.pdf

Closed path = circular path. NOT a straight path.

Quote
<lots of other vaguely related stuff>

ZZZZzzzzz...

Quote
Believe it or not, most scientists have begun to give up on the theory of relativity, as it no longer can explain the spinning Mossbauer effect encountered in the GPS satellites.

Really? I have not heard of any scientists giving up on the theory of relativity. There have always been a handful of scientists that deny relativity, but they are hardly in the majority.

Quote
THE LATEST VIEWPOINT in cosmology today is this: MLET (Modified Lorentz Ether Theory).

...


I have never heard of MLET. Googling it comes up with very few references to it. It seems that only one or two people support it. I think you are misrepresenting the "latest viewpoint in cosmology". (as usual)

Hey, I think I found where you stumbled on the concept of an "orbital Sagnac effect"! page 22. Bahaha. Keep in mind this orbital Sagnac effect is only predicted "when a sun centered frame is used".

Quote
HOWEVER, there is no such thing as MLET.

Finally, something we can agree on.

Quote
<another giant list of links>

Seriously, just explain in your own words. Provide links as a backup to what you are saying. No one is going to read through the hundreds of hours worth of material that you link to.

Quote
In addition to the fact that GPS satellites do not record the orbital Sagnac effect, we have an even greater problem: the GPS clocks DO NOT RECORD the Sun's gravitational potential.

It is assumed that the orbital velocity of the Earth as it orbits the Sun is a variable; however, the GPS clocks show that the this velocity MUST BE CONSTANT, as it does not record the Sun's gravitational potential effect upon these clocks.

Please show the calculations that you performed that prove that the sun's gravitational potential should have a significant effect on GPS clocks.

Re: Special spot for the Sagnac Effect
« Reply #13 on: August 29, 2016, 01:08:38 AM »
And your suggesting photons (a specific quantum particle) do not propagate through the quantum foam? Is that not specifically what quantum foam is? How then are the quanta propagating or popping in and out of existence if not through the quantum foam?

I think you missed my point. Quantum foam is a description of the texture of spacetime.

Think of it like this. You walk on a carpet. The carpet is fuzzy. "Fuzzy" is a description of the carpet. You could say that you walk on the fuzziness, if you wanted to. However, it would be sort of wrong to say that carpet and fuzzy are the same thing. One describes the other.

Likewise, quantum foam is a description of spacetime. It's foamy. It's full of bubbles. You could say that light propagates through the quantum foam. But it would be sort of odd to say that spacetime/aether and quantum foam are equivalent terms. If you really want to refer to spacetime as aether, then you could say "quantum foam describes the texture of the aether".

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7255
Re: Special spot for the Sagnac Effect
« Reply #14 on: August 29, 2016, 01:13:50 AM »
Obviously a new case of cognitive dissonance.

What are we going to do with you totes?

Likewise, quantum foam is a description of spacetime.

When are you going to understand that there is no such thing as a spacetime continuum?

Tesla underlined that time was a mere man-made reference used for convenience and as such the idea of a 'curved space-time' was delusional, hence there was no basis for the Relativistic 'space-time' binomium concept.

Motion through space produces the 'illusion of time'.

He considered time as a mere man-made 'measure' of the rate at which events occur such as a distance travelled (in miles or kms) in a certain period of time, for a frame of reference. He considered the 'curving' of space to be absurd (putting it in gentle terms) saying that if a moving body curved space the 'equal and opposite' reaction of space on the body would 'straighten space back out'.

'... Supposing that the bodies act upon the surrounding space causing curving of the same, it appears to my simple mind that the curved spaces must react on the bodies, and producing the opposite effects, straightening out the curves. Since action and reaction are coexistent, it follows that the supposed curvature of space is entirely impossible - But even if it existed it would not explain the motions of the bodies as observed. Only the existence of a field of force can account for the motions of the bodies as observed, and its assumption dispenses with space curvature. All literature on this subject is futile and destined to oblivion. So are all attempts to explain the workings of the universe without recognizing the existence of the ether and the indispensable function it plays in the phenomena.'


G.F. Riemann introduced the additional variables as a supporting theory for his logarithm branch cuts, NOT ever to present time as a new variable.





http://www.maths.tcd.ie/pub/HistMath/People/Riemann/Geom/WKCGeom.html

the abstract concept of n-dimensional geometry to facilitate the geometric representation of functions of a complex variable (especially logarithm branch cut). 'Such researches have become a necessity for many parts of mathematics, e.g., for the treatment of many-valued analytical functions.'

Never did he think to introduce TIME as a separate dimension or variable.

How was this done?

In contrast Riemann’s original non-Euclidian geometry dealt solely with space and was therefore an “amorphous continuum.” Einstein and Minkowski made it metric.

Minkowski's four-dimensional space was transformed by using an imaginary (√-1.ct ) term in place of the real time ( t ). So the coordinates of Minkowski's Four-Dimensional Continuum, ( x1, x2, x3, x4 ) are all treated as space coordinates, but were in fact originally ( x1, x2, x3, t ) or rather ( x1, x2, x3,√-1.ct ), therefore the 4th space dimension x4 is in fact the imaginary √-1.ct substitute. This imaginary 4-dimensional union of time and space was termed by Minkowski as 'world'. Einstein called it 'Spacetime Continuum'. In fact, Minkowski never meant it to be used in curved space. His 4th dimension was meant to be Euclidean dimensions (straight), because it was well before the introduction of General Relativity. Einstein forcibly adopted it for 'curved' or 'None Euclidean' measurements without giving a word of explanations why he could do it. In fact, if there was an explanation Einstein would have given it. Yet, this was how 'Time' became 'Space' or '4th dimensional space' for mathematical purpose, which was then used in 'Spacetime Curvature', 'Ripples of Spacetime' and other applications in General Relativity, relativistic gravitation, which then went on to become Black Hole, etc., ...



EINSTEIN HIMSELF ON THE ABSURDITY OF THE SPACE TIME CONTINUUM CONCEPT:

Einstein, following Minkowski, welded space and time together into what critics have called ‘the monstrosity called space-time’. In this abstract, four-dimensional continuum, time is treated as a negative length, and metres and seconds are added together to obtain one ‘event’. Every point in the spacetime continuum is assigned four coordinates, which, according to Einstein, ‘have not the least direct physical significance’. He says that his field equations, whose derivation requires many pages of abstract mathematical operations, deprive space and time of ‘the last trace of objective reality’.


ALBERT IN RELATIVITYLAND

http://www.gsjournal.net/old/ntham/amesbury.pdf

However, space-time as a fourth dimension is nothing more than the product of professor Minkowski's cerebral and mathematical imagination.


Do your homework my friend before posting nonsense here.

Re: Special spot for the Sagnac Effect
« Reply #15 on: August 29, 2016, 01:18:55 AM »
Obviously a new case of cognitive dissonance.

What are we going to do with you totes?

Likewise, quantum foam is a description of spacetime.

When are you going to understand that there is no such thing as a spacetime continuum?

Tesla underlined that time was a mere man-made reference used forrrrrrrrzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZzzzzZZZZzzzzzz...

This has nothing to do with what I said. We were talking about the equivalence of quantum foam with spacetime/aether. We were NOT discussing whether spacetime actually exists.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7255
Re: Special spot for the Sagnac Effect
« Reply #16 on: August 29, 2016, 01:33:39 AM »
You have chosen to live in a fantasy world, of your own making.

In this, the real world, there are plenty of ether detection experiments, performed by some of the greatest physicists of the 20 century:

Dr. Dayton Miller (Princeton)

Dr. Maurice Allais (Nobel prize winner)

Dr. Bruce DePalma (MIT, Harvard)

Dr. Nikolai Kozyrev (the greatest astrophysicist of the 20th century)

Dr. Steve Lamoreaux (Yale)

Dr. Paul Biefeld (classmate of A. Einstein)

and much more...


There is a very basic reason why most other ether drift experiments failed: the equipment used.

Dr. Yuri Galaev explains:

So it happened, but all the attempts
in order to repeat Miller's experiment, except the experiment
[11], were performed by the devices, which
were placed in metallic chambers. R.D. Kenedy [12,
7] increased the interferometer sensitivity. The device
was placed in the pressurized metallic chamber.

In 1929 the work by A.A. Michelson,
F.G. Peas, F. Pirson appeared [11]. In this experiment,
at the same observatory Mount Wilson, the bands displacement
of an interference pattern value no more than
1/50 of the expected e ffect was measured with the interferometer
having the optical path length about 26
m, connected with the solar System motion having the
speed 300 km/s. In other words, the speed of relative
motion of the value 6 km/s was measured. The interferometer
has been placed into a fundamental building of
the observatory optical workshop for work temperature
regime stabilization. The pressurized metallic chamber
was not applied.


Dr. Dayton Miller SPECIFICALLY requested that all future ether drift experiments be performed without using metal chambers: you can bet that ALL the other experiments were in fact done in metal chambers in order to compromise the experiments.


In 1933, Miller has marked the shielding property
of metal covers in his work [6]. However the scienti c
community did not react properly to such peculiarity,
shown by him in this work, as, perhaps, the positive
work results [11], as there was a lot of experiments with
zero results obtained with the interferometers, screened
by metallic chambers by that time. The physical shielding
phenomenon interpretation was given by V.A. Atsukovsky
[16] for the rst time, having explained it by
the fact, that the electrons in metals will create so called
Fermi's surface".



You simply haven't done your homework on this one, just like all the topics you have the audacity to get involved in, even though you lack the basic knowledge to do so.


Closed path = circular path. NOT a straight path.

You are embarrassing yourself beyond redemption.

The path the receiver
followed during the time of flight of the signal is
completely irrelevant. This is consistent with the
argument of Ives [8] that even the original Sagnac
experimental results were not specifically due to rotation.
Ives suggested an experimental proof designed to show
the effect did not require rotation. In a beautiful
modification of Ives suggestion, Wang [9] has constructed
what he calls a Fiber Optic Conveyer (FOC) which
directly verifies that linear motion has the same effect as
circular motion.

Here is the seminal paper published by Professor Ruyong Wang:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242479763_First-Order_Fiber-Interferometric_Experiments_for_Crucial_Test_of_Light-Speed_Constancy


Einstein used the ones that didn't take into account aether because the experiments of the day had already disproved the aether.

Do you really understand what you are saying here?

The entire COURSE OF MODERN PHYSICS was set on a certain path just because Einstein based his entire concept of light propagation on the WRONG SET of equations.

The original set of equations include not only the ether, but also the fact that light is variable.

Dr. Frederick Tombe is one of the eminent physicists in the world at this time, for your information: it was his painstaking work that uncovered the original set of Maxwell equations.


« Last Edit: August 29, 2016, 01:35:10 AM by sandokhan »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7255
Re: Special spot for the Sagnac Effect
« Reply #17 on: August 29, 2016, 01:46:16 AM »
You don't stand a chance with me here, totes.

Please show the calculations that you performed that prove that the sun's gravitational potential should have a significant effect on GPS clocks.

Such calculations constitute classic material, obviously way beyond your primitive understanding of modern physics.


First, the gradient of the solar gravitational effects upon clocks on the surface of the earth is such that the clocks will speed up and slow down in precisely the correct way to retain the appropriate up-wind and down-wind clock biases. Thus, the clocks must be biased or else the solar gravitational effects would become apparent.

Second, as Charles Hill has shown, clocks on the earth clearly vary their rate as
the speed of the earth around the sun varies. Earth clocks run slower when the earth’s
speed increases and the earth’s distance from the sun is decreased near perihelion. The
earth’s clocks run faster near aphelion. This variation must be counteracted via an ether
drift effect else it could be detected in GPS and VLBI experiments.

http://ivanik3.narod.ru/GPS/Hatch/EtherDrift.pdf

However, upon further reflection, it became
apparent that one significant complication with respect to
the two frames was not dealt with. Specifically, GPS was
compared in the two frames assuming that the earth’s
orbital velocity was constant.

What is the significance of this interim conclusion? We
have shown that, assuming the speed of light is isotropic
in the sun’s frame, the velocity of clocks on the spinning
earth will cause them to be biased by just the amount
needed to make it appear as if the speed of light is
actually isotropic on the earth.

However, the true believer in
SRT can argue that this is simply a coincidence and that it
is still the magic of SRT which automatically causes the
speed of light to be isotropic on the earth. There is no way
to refute his argument in this simplified case where we
have assumed that the direction of the orbital velocity
vector is constant. But, when the change in the orbital
velocity direction is allowed, we get an astonishing result.

By contrast, if SRT/GRT is
correct, we would expect that the clocks on earth and in
the GPS system would require an adjustment for the
effect of the sun’s differential gravitational potential.
Since clocks on earth and in the GPS system function
properly by ignoring the effect of the sun’s gravitational
potential, we must conclude that SRT/GRT is wrong.



http://file.scirp.org/pdf/JMP20120800006_80885197.pdf (pg. 718-720, 744)

Another observation that also clearly conflicts with the
constancy and isotropy of the velocity of light was discovered
during the implementation and calibration of
set-ups for Very Long Baseline Interferometry (VLBI)
radio astronomy observations. The resolution of optical
and radio astronomy observations can be improved by
orders of magnitude by analyzing the data recorded in
different observatories over the earth surface using interferometric
methods. The condition is that these data be
synchronous. The method consists in superposing coherently
the data recorded in different observatories with the
help of computers taking into account the instantaneous
position of the antennas etc. For the (VLBI) radio astronomy
observations clock synchronization at intercontinental
distances via the GPS achieve 0.1 ns. Nevertheless,
on testing the so synchronized clocks by confronting
them with the arrival of the wave fronts from distant
pulsars, which according to the TR may be synchronous,
it was observed that the pulsar signal reaches the foregoing
side of Earth 4.2 μs before the rear side along the
orbital motion of Earth. This discrepancy exceeds
the time resolution by more than four orders of magnitude.
Nevertheless along the transverse direction the arrival
of the pulsar signal was synchronous. This apparent
discrepancy in the GPS clock synchronization is again
raising very hot debates about the nature of space. Some
people speak of scandalous clocks that are biased
along the Earth’s orbital motion, others see in these
facts definitive prove that the velocity of light along different
directions within the solar system is not the same.


Many people believe that GR accounts for all the observed
effects caused by gravitational fields. However, in
reality GR is unable to explain an increasing number of
clear observational facts, several of them discovered recently
with the help of the GPS. For instance, GR
predicts the gravitational time dilation and the slowing of
the rate of clocks by the gravitational potential of Earth,
of the Sun, of the galaxy etc. Due to the gravitational
time dilation of the solar gravitational potential, clocks in
the GPS satellites having their orbital plane nearly parallel
to the Earth-Sun axis should undergo a 12 hour period
harmonic variation in their rate so that the difference
between the delay accumulated along the half of the orbit
closest to the Sun amounts up to about 24 ns in the time
display, which would be recovered along the half of the
orbit farthest from the Sun. Such an oscillation exceeds
the resolution of the measurements by more than two
orders of magnitude and, if present, would be very easily
observed. Nevertheless, contradicting the predictions of
GR, no sign of such oscillation is observed.
This is the
well known and so long unsolved non-midnight problem.
In fact observations show that the rate of the
atomic clocks on Earth and in the 24 GPS satellites is
ruled by only and exclusively the Earth’s gravitational
field and that effects of the solar gravitational potential
are completely absent.
Surprisingly and happily the GPS
works better than expected from the TR.


Obviously the gravitational
slowing of the atomic clocks on Earth cannot be due to
relative velocity because these clocks rest with respect to
the laboratory observer. What is immediately disturbing
here is that two completely distinct physical causes produce
identical effects, which by it alone is highly suspicious.
GR gives only a geometrical interpretation to the
gravitational time dilation. However, if motions cause
time dilation, why then does the orbital motion of Earth
suppress the time dilation caused by the solar gravitational
potential on the earthbased and GPS clocks? Absurdly
in one case motion causes time dilation and in the
other case it suppresses it. This contradiction lets evident
that what causes the gravitational time dilation is not the
gravitational potential and that moreover this time dilation
cannot be caused by a scalar quantity. If the time dilation
shown by the atomic clocks within the earthbased
laboratories is not due to the gravitational potential and
cannot be due to relative velocity too then it is necessarily
due to some other cause. This impasse once more
puts in check the central idea of the TR, according to
which the relative velocity with respect to the observer is
the physical parameter that rules the effects of motions.
The above facts show that the parameter that rules the
effects of motions is not relative velocity but a velocity
of a more fundamental nature.


See also http://www.hrpub.org/download/20150510/UJPA2-18403649.pdf (pg. 147)



Keep in mind this orbital Sagnac effect is only predicted "when a sun centered frame is used".

I do not know how to make it simpler for you.

"The term “Sagnac effect” is part of the vocabulary of only the observer in the rotating reference frame. The corresponding correction applied by the inertial observer might be called a “velocity correction.” While the interpretation of the correction is different in the two frames, the numerical value is the same in either frame."

https://web.archive.org/web/20130218082359/http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/ptti/ptti2006/paper28.pdf


Re: Special spot for the Sagnac Effect
« Reply #18 on: August 29, 2016, 02:06:30 AM »
You have chosen to live in a fantasy world, of your own making.

In this, the real world, there are plenty of ether detection experiments, performed by some of the greatest physicists of the 20 century:

Dr. Dayton Miller (Princeton)

Dr. Maurice Allais (Nobel prize winner)

Dr. Bruce DePalma (MIT, Harvard)

Dr. Nikolai Kozyrev (the greatest astrophysicist of the 20th century)

Dr. Steve Lamoreaux (Yale)

Dr. Paul Biefeld (classmate of A. Einstein)

and much more...

I can only find a reference to ether experiments for one of those people. Miller.

Literally every single time I bother to verify something you say, it turns out to be false. Every. Single. Time.

Alrighty, that's enough sandokhan bullcrap for one day...