# Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?

• 124 Replies
• 8408 Views

#### sandokhan

• Flat Earth Sultan
• Flat Earth Scientist
• 6762
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #90 on: June 11, 2018, 09:10:17 PM »
And Yeh even calls it a "fiber-loop" and the loop is closed by the PCM so that the light travels both directions in the loop - and light travelling in both directions is crucial.

Could a sane person claim something like this?

A physics illiterate could, and a chatbot could.

But not someone who is really interested in science.

Technology has really advanced since 1925.

Here are W. Macek and D. Davis using the the first ring laser gyroscope in 1963:

The 1.9 km perimeter size of the interferometer designed by Michelson and Gale was greatly reduced by the use of the laser.

The next great advancement came in the form of the phase conjugate mirror, which has the time reversal property, a nonlinear optical characteristic.

And Yeh even calls it a "fiber-loop" and the loop is closed by the PCM so that the light travels both directions in the loop - and light travelling in both directions is crucial.

It is not closed at all.

Points A and B do not coincide.

We have a single segment of light: the fiber loop was used to differentiate between the clockwise and counterclockwise movement of the light beams.

One can see that a single segment of light is used since, without the use of the phase conjugate mirror, the final formula would be simply 2kL.

The final formula is this:

4piRLΩ/c^2 = 4pivL/c^2

Professor Wang explains:

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609202.pdf

The phase-conjugate Sagnac experiment on a segment light path [16], not the closed path like that in the most Sagnac experiments, makes this argument even more serious.

ON A SEGMENT LIGHT PATH

NOT THE CLOSED PATH LIKE THAT IN MOST SAGNAC EXPERIMENTS

REFERENCE 16: [16] P. Yeh, I. McMichael, M. Khoshnevisan, Appl. Opt. 25 (1986) 1029.

If a closed path would have been used, then there would have been no need at all for the phase conjugate mirror.

Do you understand how a phase conjugate mirror works?

To claim a closed loop, means that you have no knowledge of how a phase conjugate functions.

There is NO NEED for a closed loop since the phase conjugate mirror reverses the phase.

To claim otherwise is a sure sign of physics illiteracy.

Professor Wang again:

While the conventional interferometers utilize beam splitters, mirrors and lenses that have linear optical properties, the utilization of the nonlinear optical properties brings a magnificent change to the interferometers. Phase-conjugate mirrors (PCMs), the nonlinear optical devices, have an important property of phase reversal.

Professor Yeh explains:

If there were no phase conjugation, the total round-trip phase shift due to regular mirror reflection would be 2kL.

This is possible ONLY FOR A SINGLE SEGMENT OF LIGHT.

The geometric form of the segment is very clear in the drawing provided by the authors:

NO CLOSED LOOP AT ALL. NO ENCLOSED AREA.

POINTS A AND B DO NOT COINCIDE.

WE HAVE A SINGLE SEGMENT OF LIGHT, WHICH FEATURES BOTH LINEAR AND CURVED PATHS.

Do not pretend you do not understand Professor Wang's very clear wording.

The phase conjugate mirror experiment has been performed, but not the one-way speed of light experiment.

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609202.pdf

PAGE 5

The experiment using a phase-conjugate Michelson interferometer is shown in Fig. 5.

This experiment shows us two important points. First, it confirms the phase reversal of a PCM and demonstrates the Sagnac effect in an arc segment AB, not a closed path.

Therefore the result of this experiment indicates what we could expect from the
phase-conjugate first-order experiment.

Two different experiments: the one-way speed of light has not yet been performed, but the phase conjugate Sagnac has been done.

Very easy to understand.

The Sagnac effect for a ROTATING LINEAR SEGMENT interferometer IS: 2vL/c^2, where v=RΩ.

The classic experiment done by Dr. Yeh shows that the Sagnac effect does not need either an area or a closed loop at all.

« Last Edit: June 11, 2018, 11:03:16 PM by sandokhan »

#### sandokhan

• Flat Earth Sultan
• Flat Earth Scientist
• 6762
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #91 on: June 11, 2018, 09:18:04 PM »
How can you expect anyone to take you seriously when you repeatedly ignore the FACT that this did have a LOOP??

You are a physics illiterate.

Clearly you do not understand the use of the phase conjugate mirror.

The PCM has the time reversal property.

Only A SINGLE SEGMENT OF LIGHT IS NEEDED.

It features a non-closed loop because the experiment had to differentiate between the clockwise and the counterclockwise movements of the light beams.

NO CLOSED LOOP, AND NO AREA AT ALL.

POINTS A AND B DO NOT COINCIDE.

Professor Wang explains:

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609202.pdf

The phase-conjugate Sagnac experiment on a segment light path [16], not the closed path like that in the most Sagnac experiments, makes this argument even more serious.

ON A SEGMENT LIGHT PATH

NOT THE CLOSED PATH LIKE THAT IN MOST SAGNAC EXPERIMENTS

REFERENCE 16: [16] P. Yeh, I. McMichael, M. Khoshnevisan, Appl. Opt. 25 (1986) 1029.

Professor Yeh:

If there were no phase conjugation, the total round-trip phase shift due to regular mirror reflection would be 2kL.

This is possible ONLY FOR A SINGLE SEGMENT OF LIGHT.

The geometric form of the segment is very clear in the drawing provided by the authors:

NO CLOSED LOOP AT ALL. NO ENCLOSED AREA.

POINTS A AND B DO NOT COINCIDE.

WE HAVE A SINGLE SEGMENT OF LIGHT, WHICH FEATURES BOTH LINEAR AND CURVED PATHS.

You are a physics illiterate who does not understand how a phase conjugate mirror functions.

In a collection of text with no peer review and no experiments backing them, all relying upon assumed properties of a PCM which are yet to be shown.

By contrast, Professor Ruyong Wang is one of the most famous experts on nonlinear optics in the world today.

no experiments backing them

Phase-conjugate fiber-optic gyro, P. Yeh, I. McMichael, M. Khoshnevisan, Applied Optics 25(7):1029-30 · April 1986

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a170203.pdf (appendix 5.4)

Dr. P. Yeh
PhD, Caltech, Nonlinear Optics
Principal Scientist of the Optics Department at Rockwell International Science Center
Professor, UCSB
"Engineer of the Year," at Rockwell Science Center
Leonardo da Vinci Award in 1985
Fellow of the Optical Society of America, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers

The first phase-conjugate Sagnac experiment on a segment light path with an external pump configuration.

Regular Sagnac experiments use closed loops (Michelson-Gale, Hammar, ring laser gyroscopes); the phase-conjugate mirror permits the experiment to be performed WITHOUT either a loop or an area (of the interferometer): just a single segment of light (containing both straight and curved paths).

THE SAGNAC EFFECT MEASURED IN A SINGLE LIGHT SEGMENT.

NO CLOSED LOOP.

NO AREA.

Your shameful claims have been totally refuted.

#### sandokhan

• Flat Earth Sultan
• Flat Earth Scientist
• 6762
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #92 on: June 11, 2018, 11:19:57 PM »
Yes, believe it or not, now I have to explain the difference between a CLOSED LOOP and an open-ended (non-closed) LOOP:

Closed loops:

Open-ended (non-closed) loops: a single segment from end to end

#### rabinoz

• 26528
• Real Earth Believer
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #93 on: June 11, 2018, 11:32:02 PM »
And Yeh even calls it a "fiber-loop" and the loop is closed by the PCM so that the light travels both directions in the loop - and light travelling in both directions is crucial.
Could a sane person claim something like this?
A physics illiterate could, and a chatbot could.
But not someone who is really interested in science.
So, you dare call Professor Yeh a "A physics illiterate, a chatbot and someone who is not really interested in science."

But, yes a sane person can claim something like this! Professor Yeh does!
And Dr Yeh even calls it a "fiber-loop" and the loop is closed by the PCM so that the light travels both directions in the loop - and light travelling in both directions is crucial.

Quote from: sandokhan
Technology has really advanced since 1925.
Here are W. Macek and D. Davis using the the first ring laser gyroscope in 1963:
The 1.9 km perimeter size of the interferometer designed by Michelson and Gale was greatly reduced by the use of the laser.

The next great advancement came in the form of the phase conjugate mirror, which has the time reversal property, a nonlinear optical characteristic.

And Yeh even calls it a "fiber-loop" and the loop is closed by the PCM so that the light travels both directions in the loop - and light travelling in both directions is crucial.
It is not closed at all.
Points A and B do not coincide.
I did not say "Points A and B do . . . coincide." I said it's a loop and Prof Yeh said it's a loop, effectively closed by the Phase Conjugate Mirror!

And I certainly know that "Technology has really advanced since 1925.". You really should read up on "GINGERino, a deep underground ring-laser".
See First Results of GINGERino, a deep underground ring-laser
The author list is a bit long to put in the link with all these J. Belfi1, N. Beverini, F. Bosi, G. Carelli, D. Cuccato, G. De Luca, A. Di Virgilio1, A. Gebauer, E. Maccioni, A. Ortolan, A. Porzio, R. Santagata, A. Simonelli, and G. Terreni.
And note that it starts with:
Quote
1. Introduction
Ring laser gyroscopes (RLG) are, at present, the most precise sensors of absolute angular velocity for an Earth based apparatus. They are based on the Sagnac effect
arising from a rigidly rotating ring laser cavity.
Yes, they claim that, "They are based on the Sagnac effect", not on the Coriolis effect!

The resolution is quite impressive.
Quote
The Gross Ring ”G” at the Wettzell Geodetic Observatory has obtained a resolution on the Earth rotation rate of 3 × 10−9 (about 15 × 10−14 rad/s with 4 hours integration time)

Figure 3b. the chamber is complete

That paper did not give the rotation rate, just the stability etc.
But this paper does: Ring-Lasers seismic rotational sensing, Angela Di Virgilio-INFN-Pisa

And the result is:
Quote
which is  guess what  a period of 23.93447 hours and the currently quoted sidereal day is 23.9345 hours - the GINGER result is more precise than that.

So the GINGERino deep underground ring-laser proves that the earth rotates on its axis at (7.2921150±0.0000001)×10−5 radians/sec.

And I wish you'd note that as far as I can see all of those refereed (and other) papers you quote from are written by authors who most certainly believe in the heliocentric solar system.

?

#### JackBlack

• 15977
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #94 on: June 11, 2018, 11:34:58 PM »
Points A and B do not coincide.
So what?
That doesn't magically mean it isn't a loop.
For the purpose of the light, no loop is closed. It doesn't keep going.
Instead, the light enters one end of the loop, travels around, and then comes out the other end.

It still relies upon relative motion, which is the key part of the loop.
The loop/segment doesn't simply translate as you need it to.
Notice how their formula still uses the radius of the loop, not some magic velocity in an absolute frame.

Professor Wang explains:
NO ONE CARES!
That paper is not peer reviewed.
It's entire premise is unfounded.
It hasn't been experimentally verified.
There is no reason for anyone to take it seriously.

It features a non-closed loop because the experiment had to differentiate between the clockwise and the counterclockwise movements of the light beams.
As do all Sagnac experiments.
If they didn't have to, there would be no shift.
Again, in that sense, no Sagnac experiment has ever used a closed loop.
There is always either a mirror, or a detector/emitter.

By contrast, Professor Ruyong Wang is one of the most famous experts on nonlinear optics in the world today.
Remember, if you want an appeal to authority, you have already lost as all those authorities/experts agree Earth is round and relativity works.
The simple fact is the work you are relying upon has not even been peer reviewed.
It amounts to nothing more than a baseless claim.
I don't care who is making it.

no experiments backing them
Phase-conjugate fiber-optic gyro, P. Yeh, I. McMichael, M. Khoshnevisan, Applied Optics 25(7):1029-30 · April 1986
Which still utilises a loop which rotates and as such is nothing like what you or Wang needs.
The experiment Wang proposes would be extremely simple for them to carry out, yet they didn't bother with it for that paper.
That either they tried it and it didn't work, or they don't have enough confidence to try it.
Either way, it is enough to doubt the entirety of their claims.

Regular Sagnac experiments use closed loops
Define exactly what you mean by closed loop.
Make sure you include what it means for the photon.

Do you think this is a closed loop:

because that is what most Sagnac experiments really have.

Your shameful claims have been totally refuted.
You are yet to refute anything.

And you continually provide distractions rather than doing a simple derivation.

Can you provide a derivation for the shift expected for a ring interferometer with normal mirrors rotating about a point outside the ring, doing so from first principles.

If you can't, stop repeating the same refuted claims.

#### sandokhan

• Flat Earth Sultan
• Flat Earth Scientist
• 6762
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #95 on: June 11, 2018, 11:56:25 PM »
A single experiment refutes all of your claims.

There is nothing else to discuss here.

The loop/segment doesn't simply translate as you need it to.

Only a physics illiterate would make a comment such as this.

Professor Yeh's paper is about the ROTATION OF SINGLE SEGMENT OF LIGHT.

NO CLOSED LOOPS.

NO AREA.

Professor Wang has extended this experiment to a single linear segment of light.

Very easy to follow.

I could use ONLY Professor Yeh's single segment of light interferometer, the same length as the Michelson-Gale interferometer, to detect the rotational Sagnac, or the orbital Sagnac.

As do all Sagnac experiments.
If they didn't have to, there would be no shift.
Again, in that sense, no Sagnac experiment has ever used a closed loop.

You are the biggest physics illiterate on this forum.

REFERENCE #1

http://www-3.unipv.it/donati/papers/2c.pdf

The idea of using a laser interferometer to read the Sagnac phase shift in a closed-cavity path can be traced back

high resolution readout of the Sagnac phase shift [17] induced between two counterpropagating waves in an optical closed path when the plane of propagation undergoes angular rotation

where A is the area enclosed by the optical path and N is the number
of turns.

REFERENCE #2

http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s2-07/2-07.htm

where A = pR2 is the area enclosed by the loop.

This phenomenon applies to any closed loop, not necessarily circular.

REFERENCE #3

http://www.cleonis.nl/physics/phys256/sagnac.php

Essential in the Sagnac effect is that a loop is closed. Because a loop is closed the velocity that is involved is essentially an angular velocity; it's circumnavigation of an area.

REFERENCE #4

http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Michelson-Gale/Michelson-Gale.html

In refining his argument, he proposed that it was not necessary for the light to go all the way around the globe - since there should be a velocity difference for any closed path rotating on the surface of the earth.

Only a physics illiterate would claim that the Sagnac effect, using regular mirrors, features AN OPEN-ENDED LOOP.

Phase-conjugate fiber-optic gyro, P. Yeh, I. McMichael, M. Khoshnevisan, Applied Optics 25(7):1029-30 · April 1986

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a170203.pdf (appendix 5.4)

Dr. P. Yeh
PhD, Caltech, Nonlinear Optics
Principal Scientist of the Optics Department at Rockwell International Science Center
Professor, UCSB
"Engineer of the Year," at Rockwell Science Center
Leonardo da Vinci Award in 1985
Fellow of the Optical Society of America, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers

The first phase-conjugate Sagnac experiment on a segment light path with an external pump configuration.

Regular Sagnac experiments use closed loops (Michelson-Gale, Hammar, ring laser gyroscopes); the phase-conjugate mirror permits the experiment to be performed WITHOUT either a loop or an area (of the interferometer): just a single segment of light (containing both straight and curved paths).

THE SAGNAC EFFECT MEASURED IN A SINGLE LIGHT SEGMENT.

NO CLOSED LOOP.

NO AREA.

Professor Yeh:

If there were no phase conjugation, the total round-trip phase shift due to regular mirror reflection would be 2kL.

This is possible ONLY FOR A SINGLE SEGMENT OF LIGHT.

The geometric form of the segment is very clear in the drawing provided by the authors:

NO CLOSED LOOP AT ALL. NO ENCLOSED AREA.

POINTS A AND B DO NOT COINCIDE.

WE HAVE A SINGLE SEGMENT OF LIGHT, WHICH FEATURES BOTH LINEAR AND CURVED PATHS.

You are a physics illiterate who does not understand how a phase conjugate mirror functions.

FINAL FORMULA IN THE PHASE CONJUGATE MIRROR EXPERIMENT:

4πRLΩ/c^2 = 4πvL/c^2

NO AREA, NO CLOSED LOOP.

ONLY THE RADIUS OF ROTATION AND THE LINEAR VELOCITY.

« Last Edit: June 12, 2018, 12:02:40 AM by sandokhan »

#### rabinoz

• 26528
• Real Earth Believer
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #96 on: June 12, 2018, 12:12:55 AM »
Yes, believe it or not, now I have to explain the difference between a CLOSED LOOP and an open-ended (non-closed) LOOP:

Closed loop:

Open-ended (non-closed) loops: a single segment from end to end

Loop closed with Phase Conjugate Mirror
The Phase Conjugate Mirror makes the light travel in both directions in the "loop".
The crucial issue here is not whether the loop is physically closed but that the signal is returned with the appropriate phase and polarisation and that is the crucial issue.
In the normal Sagnac loop that is done by splitting the signal with a half-silvered mirror or a coupler, but the PCM achieves the same end with possibly a great reduction in the noise.

But, you seem to have forgotten that the topic is not the Sagnac effect, but "Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?"

And one of the papers you insisted we read was:
Spinning Earth and its Coriolis effect on the circuital light beams: Verification of the special relativity theory And even the title includes
• the "Spinning Earth" and
• the "Verification of the special relativity theory".
Both of which you seem to disregard.

He closes with
Quote
The experiment will settle whether the relativity principle is correct or the electric and the magnetic
fields are carried with Earth from which we could easily decide as to which effect is responsible for the non-null result of the Michelson–Gale assisted by Pearson type experiment.
So are we to interpret from this that you accept the "Spinning Earth" and "the special relativity theory" because that seems to be what the paper set out to do.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2018, 01:19:40 AM by rabinoz »

?

#### JackBlack

• 15977
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #97 on: June 12, 2018, 12:33:52 AM »
A single experiment refutes all of your claims.
And Wang is yet to do it (or publish it), even though it is so simple.
So what a shame you have nothing.

Meanwhile, you have been completely unable to show anything wrong with my derivation for the expected time difference between the 2 counterpropagating beams of light in an annular interferometer rotating about a point; nor have you been able to provide your own.

If you really think there is nothing more to discuss, then run along.

The loop/segment doesn't simply translate as you need it to.
Only a physics illiterate would make a comment such as this.
Professor Yeh's paper is about the ROTATION
Do you understand the difference between rotation and translation?

I could use ONLY Professor Yeh's single segment of light interferometer, the same length as the Michelson-Gale interferometer, to detect the rotational Sagnac, or the orbital Sagnac.
Only if you made it a circular ring and noted that the radius of the loop (not the radius from the centre of rotation) and angular velocity are still there, which means you will still end up with the same formula and same result.

REFERENCE #1
Nothing indicating it is actually closed rather than the light entering the loop at one point and leaving it at another.
In fact the images provided indicate the latter, that the fibre optic coil used has 2 ends, rather than being a closed loop.
The closest you get to a closed loop is when you have a fibre optic coupler to join the 2 ends of a loop.
Also notice that the shift used in this reference is again based upon the area and angular velocity, not the linear velocity.

Copying text and ignoring the context and what the word means in context doesn't help your case.

REFERENCE #2
As above, but more generalised.
You can do it for an ideal loop, but the actual experiment cant as then you have no source and no detector.
Instead the light goes into the loop at one point and then comes out. It doesn't just keep circling around as it would for a closed loop.

And again, the formula is area and angular velocity.

REFERENCE #3
As above.
Again note: Angular velocity.

REFERENCE #4
As above.
Again note: Angular velocity and area.

If there were no phase conjugation, the total round-trip phase shift due to regular mirror reflection would be 2kL.
In a standard experiment it would be a mirror. It would be another source and detector or splitter or the like.
For a standard experiment the light would come in there and have a phase shift provided by the PCM.
The PCM is not taking the place of a mirror. It takes the place of the second light beam.

It is only possible for a single beam of light rather than the 2 separate ones for a standard interferometer.

Now then, do you have a derivation yet?
If not, all your claims remain baseless.

#### sandokhan

• Flat Earth Sultan
• Flat Earth Scientist
• 6762
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #98 on: June 12, 2018, 01:13:59 AM »
You provided a derivation with no peer review at all.

Professor Wang actually performed an experiment, but has not publish it yet.

It is very easy to follow.

Professor Wang used a curved segment with a phase conjugate mirror and simply rotate it in circular path: figure 5.

He obtained a formula.

Then he increased the radius of rotation, while the length of the segment stays the same.

He obtained the same formula.

Logically, if the radius of rotation is increased indefinitely, while the length of the segment stays the same and is slowly straightened out two things will happen:

1. We will obtain a linear segment AB

2. The circular motion will approach linear motion

At least he performed an experiment, while you did nothing at all in this regard.

Only if you made it a circular ring and noted that the radius of the loop (not the radius from the centre of rotation) and angular velocity are still there, which means you will still end up with the same formula and same result.

You are showing your true colors of a physics illiterate.

No circular ring.

Just a single segment of light.

Which detects rotation.

If the Earth was rotating around its own axis with a radius of spin of 6,378.164 km, the linear segment interferometer would certainly pick it up, a simple Sagnac effect.

Michelson and Gale did the same thing using regular mirrors.

Instead of a rectangular closed path, we have a single linear segment which is designed to detect the Sagnac effect.

Nothing indicating it is actually closed rather than the light entering the loop at one point and leaving it at another.

You are a physics illiterate.

You just claimed that the regular Sagnac effect does not enclose an area with a closed loop.

http://www.cleonis.nl/physics/phys256/sagnac.php

Essential in the Sagnac effect is that a loop is closed. Because a loop is closed the velocity that is involved is essentially an angular velocity; it's circumnavigation of an area.

http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Michelson-Gale/Michelson-Gale.html

In refining his argument, he proposed that it was not necessary for the light to go all the way around the globe - since there should be a velocity difference for any closed path rotating on the surface of the earth.

Only a physics illiterate would claim that the Sagnac effect, using regular mirrors, features AN OPEN-ENDED LOOP.

Of course it features the Coriolis effect formula: the pages do not make the crucial difference between the two different effects.

to show anything wrong with my derivation for the expected time difference between the 2 counterpropagating beams of light

You derived the Coriolis effect and claimed it was the Sagnac.

So everything is wrong with it.

Make sure you understand the difference.

The CORIOLIS EFFECT formula:

4ΩA/c^2

A = Lh

http://www.ias.ac.in/article/fulltext/pram/087/05/0071

Coriolis effect on the circuital light beams

The Coriolis force due to either the ether drift or the spinning of Earth must act on the propagation of light on the surface of Earth.

Since Michelson and Gale ONLY recorded the CORIOLIS EFFECT, and NOT the rotational Sagnac effect nor the orbital Sagnac effect, this means that the Earth is stationary: the CORIOLIS EFFECT is due to the ether drift above the surface of the Earth.

Another proof, using general relativity:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0103091.pdf

Coriolis Force and Sagnac Effect

Because of acting of gravity-like Coriolis force the trajectories of co- and anti-rotating photons have different radii in the rotating reference frame, while in the case of the equal radius the effective gravitational potentials for the photons have to be different.

For a standard experiment the light would come in there and have a phase shift provided by the PCM.
The PCM is not taking the place of a mirror. It takes the place of the second light beam.

Were you drinking something while you posted this crap?

You do not understand the physics of the phase conjugate mirror.

It has the phase shift REVERSAL PROPERTY.

It eliminates the need for either an area or a closed loop.

SAGNAC EFFECT WITHOUT AN AREA OR A CLOSED LOOP

Phase-conjugate fiber-optic gyro, P. Yeh, I. McMichael, M. Khoshnevisan, Applied Optics 25(7):1029-30 · April 1986

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a170203.pdf (appendix 5.4)

Dr. P. Yeh
PhD, Caltech, Nonlinear Optics
Principal Scientist of the Optics Department at Rockwell International Science Center
Professor, UCSB
"Engineer of the Year," at Rockwell Science Center
Leonardo da Vinci Award in 1985
Fellow of the Optical Society of America, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers

The first phase-conjugate Sagnac experiment on a segment light path with an external pump configuration.

Regular Sagnac experiments use closed loops (Michelson-Gale, Hammar, ring laser gyroscopes); the phase-conjugate mirror permits the experiment to be performed WITHOUT either a loop or an area (of the interferometer): just a single segment of light (containing both straight and curved paths).

THE SAGNAC EFFECT MEASURED IN A SINGLE LIGHT SEGMENT.

NO CLOSED LOOP.

NO AREA.

FINAL FORMULA IN THE PHASE CONJUGATE MIRROR EXPERIMENT:

4πRLΩ/c^2 = 4πvL/c^2

NO AREA, NO CLOSED LOOP.

ONLY THE RADIUS OF ROTATION AND THE LINEAR VELOCITY.

Professor Yeh's experiment is a total refutation of your failed claims.

#### rabinoz

• 26528
• Real Earth Believer
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #99 on: June 12, 2018, 01:59:52 AM »
You provided a derivation with no peer review at all.

Professor Wang actually performed an experiment, but has not publish it yet.
Please immediately present evidence that "Professor Wang actually performed an experiment" and the results obtained.

Quote from: sandokhan
Professor Yeh's experiment is a total refutation of your failed claims.
There is nothing Professor Yeh's experiment that refutes anything. If you are claiming it's about loops, don't bother!
A single experiment refutes all of your claims.
There is nothing else to discuss here.
The loop/segment doesn't simply translate as you need it to.
Only a physics illiterate would make a comment such as this.
Professor Yeh's paper is about the ROTATION OF SINGLE SEGMENT OF LIGHT.
NO CLOSED LOOPS.
NO AREA.
I repeat!
So, you dare call Professor Yeh a "A physics illiterate, a chatbot and someone who is not really interested in science."

But, yes a sane person can claim something like this! Professor Yeh does!
And Dr Yeh even calls it a "fiber-loop" and the loop is closed by the PCM so that the light travels both directions in the loop - and light travelling in both directions is crucial.
So who are you to say it's not a loop?

?

#### JackBlack

• 15977
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #100 on: June 12, 2018, 02:59:07 AM »
You provided a derivation with no peer review at all.
Yes, a derivation I provided myself, which obtains the same result as peer reviewed publications.
The shift is a function of area of the loop and angular velocity. It is not a simple function of linear velocity and length like you repeatedly claim.

So all those peer reviewed articles match me.

Professor Wang actually performed an experiment, but has not publish it yet.
The initial text discussing this was released in 2006. That means it has been roughly 12 years. (slightly less as it was initially put forward in September).
If they haven't published the results yet it means one of a two things:
1 - It disproved them and agreed with relativity and thus they did not want to publish it.
2 - They have no intention of ever doing the experiment (potentially because they know the result will refute them).

You have no basis to claim that they have done the experiment and just haven't published the results or what the results will be.

Until you have such a verification or a theoretical justification for the functioning of the PCM from first principles you have nothing.
Regardless that is not the interferometer being discussed.
Instead we are discussing a ring interferometer using 2 counterpropagating beams of light with normal mirrors which you are yet to show any derivation for or any problem with my derivation or that any of the multitude of sources used are wrong.

Rather than repeatedly insulting people, make clear what your distinction is between a closed loop and an open loop and actually see if it applies.

Or better yet, quit with all this distracting BS and provide a derivation yourself.

FINAL FORMULA IN THE PHASE CONJUGATE MIRROR EXPERIMENT:
4πRLΩ/c^2 = 4πvL/c^2
No it wasn't.
The final formula was:
phase shift=4πRLΩ/λc

If you note that it used a circular loop, then the length of the loop is given by 2πR, and if it had N turns, that gives 2πRN.
i.e. phase shift=4*2πRNπRΩ/λc=4*2πANΩ/λc.
Then to convert from a phase shift into a time difference you note that the phase is an angle measured in radians and thus, it can be converted into a fraction of the wavelength:
dλ=phase shift*λ/2π=4ANΩ/c
Then note that the time is related to the wavelength (or part thereof) by the velocity (c):
dt=dλ/c=4ANΩ/c^2.
i.e. area and angular velocity.
Sure, that isn't the final formula, but it shows that using the area and angular velocity is equivalent.

No where do they use a linear velocity as it is fundamentally an effect of angular velocity.

Now provide a derivation or quit with the nonsense.

#### sandokhan

• Flat Earth Sultan
• Flat Earth Scientist
• 6762
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #101 on: June 12, 2018, 04:13:54 AM »
If you note that it used a circular loop, then the length of the loop is given by 2πR

You are physics illiterate!

There is no circular CLOSED LOOP, THUS NO AREA AT ALL.

You do not know how to calculate the phase shift with a phase conjugate mirror.

then the length of the loop is given by 2πR, and if it had N turns, that gives 2πRN.
i.e. phase shift=4*2πRNπRΩ/λc=4*2πANΩ/λc.

THERE IS NO AREA AT ALL, NO TERM A.

There is no closed loop in the experiment.

Which means you were really drunk when you were writing this crap.

Can you please post a message while you are sober?

Yes, a derivation I provided myself, which obtains the same result as peer reviewed publications.

He also obtained the same result as peer reviewed publications.

The equation which expresses the relationship between interference fringes and time differences is F=dt[c/λ] (where dt = 4vL/c2).

This experiment shows us two important points. First, it confirms the phase reversal of a PCM and demonstrates the Sagnac effect in an arc segment AB, not a closed path. Second, it gives us important implications: The result, φ = 4πRΩL/cλ, can be re-written as φ = 4πvL/cλ where v is the speed of the moving arc segment AB (where R is the radius of the circular motion, Ω is the rotational rate).

If we increase the radius of the circular motion as shown in Fig. 6, the arc segment AB will approach a linear segment AB, the circular motion will approach the linear motion, the phase-conjugate Sagnac experiment will approach the phase-conjugate first-order experiment as shown in Fig. 4, and the phase shift is always φ = 4πvL/cλ.

SAME FORMULA AS THAT OBTAINED BY PROFESSOR YEH.

By your own words, Professor Wang's results are correct.

And you published here a CORIOLIS EFFECT formula.

The CORIOLIS EFFECT formula:

4ΩA/c^2

A = Lh

http://www.ias.ac.in/article/fulltext/pram/087/05/0071

Coriolis effect on the circuital light beams

The Coriolis force due to either the ether drift or the spinning of Earth must act on the propagation of light on the surface of Earth.

Since Michelson and Gale ONLY recorded the CORIOLIS EFFECT, and NOT the rotational Sagnac effect nor the orbital Sagnac effect, this means that the Earth is stationary: the CORIOLIS EFFECT is due to the ether drift above the surface of the Earth.

Another proof, using general relativity:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0103091.pdf

Coriolis Force and Sagnac Effect

Because of acting of gravity-like Coriolis force the trajectories of co- and anti-rotating photons have different radii in the rotating reference frame, while in the case of the equal radius the effective gravitational potentials for the photons have to be different.

SAGNAC EFFECT WITHOUT AN AREA OR A CLOSED LOOP

Phase-conjugate fiber-optic gyro, P. Yeh, I. McMichael, M. Khoshnevisan, Applied Optics 25(7):1029-30 · April 1986

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a170203.pdf (appendix 5.4)

Dr. P. Yeh
PhD, Caltech, Nonlinear Optics
Principal Scientist of the Optics Department at Rockwell International Science Center
Professor, UCSB
"Engineer of the Year," at Rockwell Science Center
Leonardo da Vinci Award in 1985
Fellow of the Optical Society of America, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers

The first phase-conjugate Sagnac experiment on a segment light path with an external pump configuration.

Regular Sagnac experiments use closed loops (Michelson-Gale, Hammar, ring laser gyroscopes); the phase-conjugate mirror permits the experiment to be performed WITHOUT either a loop or an area (of the interferometer): just a single segment of light (containing both straight and curved paths).

THE SAGNAC EFFECT MEASURED IN A SINGLE LIGHT SEGMENT.

NO CLOSED LOOP.

NO AREA.

FINAL FORMULA IN THE PHASE CONJUGATE MIRROR EXPERIMENT:

4πRLΩ/c^2 = 4πvL/c^2

NO AREA, NO CLOSED LOOP.

ONLY THE RADIUS OF ROTATION AND THE LINEAR VELOCITY.

Professor Yeh's experiment is a total refutation of your failed claims.

Try and post while you are sober.

You assigned an area where there was none at all.

No area is present in the experiment performed by Dr. Yeh:

NO CLOSED LOOP, NO AREA.

L is the entire length of the fiber, Professor Yeh specifies that quite clearly, which means, in addtion to you posting while being under the influence, that you do not know how to read a scientific paper.

« Last Edit: June 12, 2018, 04:19:08 AM by sandokhan »

?

#### JackBlack

• 15977
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #102 on: June 12, 2018, 04:19:17 AM »
Stop just repeating the same nonsense as if it will magically make it true.

SAME FORMULA AS THAT OBTAINED BY PROFESSOR YEH.
No it isn't.
Yeh's formula did not have a linear velocity as the Sagnac shift is based upon angular velocity or relative linear velocity, not an absolute linear velocity.

By your own words, Professor Wang's results are correct.
No. No where have I ever indicated anything as insane as that.

Again, repeating the same nonsense doesn't make it true. If you would like a response for the rest of that post, feel free to look here:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=76270.msg2069002#msg2069002

Now can you provide a derivation?
Yes or no?

#### sandokhan

• Flat Earth Sultan
• Flat Earth Scientist
• 6762
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #103 on: June 12, 2018, 04:36:20 AM »
You really need to sober up.

Are so forgetful as to not remember what you posted earlier today?

Quit posting while you are drunk!

Yeh's formula did not have a linear velocity as the Sagnac shift is based upon angular velocity or relative linear velocity, not an absolute linear velocity.

What ?!

Here is Professor Yeh's final, peer-reviewed formula:

4πRLΩ/c^2 = 4πvL/c^2

v = RΩ

R is the radius of the fiber coil.

Ω is the angular velocity of rotation.

Use the definition from wikipedia:

If angle is measured in radians, the linear velocity is the radius times the angular velocity,  v=rΩ.

NO AREA, NO CLOSED LOOP.

ONLY THE RADIUS OF ROTATION AND THE LINEAR VELOCITY.

No where have I ever indicated anything as insane as that.

Here are you own very words, written today:

Yes, a derivation I provided myself, which obtains the same result as peer reviewed publications.

You also wrote:

Yes, a derivation I provided myself, which obtains the same result as peer reviewed publications.

The equation which expresses the relationship between interference fringes and time differences is F=dt[c/λ] (where dt = 4vL/c2).

This experiment shows us two important points. First, it confirms the phase reversal of a PCM and demonstrates the Sagnac effect in an arc segment AB, not a closed path. Second, it gives us important implications: The result, φ = 4πRΩL/cλ, can be re-written as φ = 4πvL/cλ where v is the speed of the moving arc segment AB (where R is the radius of the circular motion, Ω is the rotational rate).

If we increase the radius of the circular motion as shown in Fig. 6, the arc segment AB will approach a linear segment AB, the circular motion will approach the linear motion, the phase-conjugate Sagnac experiment will approach the phase-conjugate first-order experiment as shown in Fig. 4, and the phase shift is always φ = 4πvL/cλ.

SAME FORMULA AS THAT OBTAINED BY PROFESSOR YEH.

By your own words, Professor Wang's results are correct.

And you published a CORIOLIS EFFECT formula.

The CORIOLIS EFFECT formula:

4ΩA/c^2

A = Lh

http://www.ias.ac.in/article/fulltext/pram/087/05/0071

Coriolis effect on the circuital light beams

The Coriolis force due to either the ether drift or the spinning of Earth must act on the propagation of light on the surface of Earth.

Since Michelson and Gale ONLY recorded the CORIOLIS EFFECT, and NOT the rotational Sagnac effect nor the orbital Sagnac effect, this means that the Earth is stationary: the CORIOLIS EFFECT is due to the ether drift above the surface of the Earth.

Another proof, using general relativity:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0103091.pdf

Coriolis Force and Sagnac Effect

Because of acting of gravity-like Coriolis force the trajectories of co- and anti-rotating photons have different radii in the rotating reference frame, while in the case of the equal radius the effective gravitational potentials for the photons have to be different.

BY CONTRAST, THE TRUE SAGNAC FORMULA FEATURES NO AREA AND NO CLOSED LOOP.

SAGNAC EFFECT WITHOUT AN AREA OR A CLOSED LOOP

Phase-conjugate fiber-optic gyro, P. Yeh, I. McMichael, M. Khoshnevisan, Applied Optics 25(7):1029-30 · April 1986

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a170203.pdf (appendix 5.4)

Dr. P. Yeh
PhD, Caltech, Nonlinear Optics
Principal Scientist of the Optics Department at Rockwell International Science Center
Professor, UCSB
"Engineer of the Year," at Rockwell Science Center
Leonardo da Vinci Award in 1985
Fellow of the Optical Society of America, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers

The first phase-conjugate Sagnac experiment on a segment light path with an external pump configuration.

Regular Sagnac experiments use closed loops (Michelson-Gale, Hammar, ring laser gyroscopes); the phase-conjugate mirror permits the experiment to be performed WITHOUT either a loop or an area (of the interferometer): just a single segment of light (containing both straight and curved paths).

THE SAGNAC EFFECT MEASURED IN A SINGLE LIGHT SEGMENT.

NO CLOSED LOOP.

NO AREA.

FINAL FORMULA IN THE PHASE CONJUGATE MIRROR EXPERIMENT:

4πRLΩ/c^2 = 4πvL/c^2

NO AREA, NO CLOSED LOOP.

ONLY THE RADIUS OF ROTATION AND THE LINEAR VELOCITY.

Professor Yeh's experiment is a total refutation of your failed claims.

#### rabinoz

• 26528
• Real Earth Believer
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #104 on: June 12, 2018, 05:59:31 AM »
<< Why keep repeating the same information over and over? >>
Professor Yeh's experiment is a total refutation of your failed claims.
As I have said over and over, it does nothing of the kind. Professor Yeh's experiment had a loop and Professor Yeh said it did!

#### Ichimaru Gin :]

• Undefeated FEer
• Planar Moderator
• 8829
• Semper vigilans
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #105 on: June 12, 2018, 06:26:26 AM »
There is no area because there is no closed loop.
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

?

#### JackBlack

• 15977
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #106 on: June 12, 2018, 01:52:39 PM »
Here is Professor Yeh's final, peer-reviewed formula:
4πRLΩ/c^2 = 4πvL/c^2
Stop repeating the same lie.
That was not the final formula.
It didn't have c^2, it had lambda*c.
It did not have a linear velocity at all.
Repeating the same lie doesn't magically make it true.

Their results are not peer reviewed. If you bother reading, you note what the final formula is, with their claim that it can be re-written.

But they are ignoring that the PCM is not part of the loop and ignoring what that will do to the behaviour of the PCM.

Do you have a derivation? Yes or no?

Until you provide one from first principles, your claims amount to nothing.

#### rabinoz

• 26528
• Real Earth Believer
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #107 on: June 12, 2018, 06:16:28 PM »
There is no area because there is no closed loop.
True, but in the Sagnac Gyroscopes the path is not physically connected in a loop, though the loop is closed via half-silvered mirrors or 2+2 optical couplers as in:
The requirement is to have the same light "beam" propagating in both directions.

In the PCM Fibre Gyroscope the Phase Conjugate Mirror, reflects a beam in a way that it appears as the original beam fed in from the 2nd end.

Maybe I'm wrong to interpret it this way, but you can read some of the theory in United States Patent  Number: 4,681,446 by Pochi A. Yeh.
This is the same Professor Pochi A. Yeh that sandokhan refers to so often.  Professor Pochi A. Yeh's patented Phase Conjugate Mirror Fibre Gyroscope has this configuration:

PHASE CONJUGATE FIBER GYROSCOPE, Pochi A. Yeh, Fig 1
Quote from: Professor Pochi Yeh, from p 4
Such a rotation will produce a change of phase ∆φ which is proportional to the rotation rate Ω.
The phase shift ∆φ1 introduced during the clockwise trip from the beam splitter 12 to the reflector 16 is:

∆φ1 = kL - (2πLRΩ)/(λc)                              (1)

where L is the length of the fiber coil 14, R is the radius of the coil, Ω is the rotation rate, λ is the wavelength, k =(2πn)/λ,
and c is the velocity of light.
The phase shift ∆φ2 produced when the beam propagates from the reflector 16 back to the beam splitter 12 is:

∆φ2 = kL + (2πLRΩ)/(λc)                              (2)

Due to the phase reversing property of the phase conjugate reflector 16, the net phase shift ∆φ which occurs in a round trip of the beam 24 is therefore:

∆φ = φ2 - φ1   = (4πLRΩ)/(λc)   << I add "/" >>  (3)

#### sandokhan

• Flat Earth Sultan
• Flat Earth Scientist
• 6762
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #108 on: June 12, 2018, 09:18:56 PM »
You need to sober up.

Posting messages while under the influence makes you look very bad.

You must be drunk to post something like this.

It didn't have c^2, it had lambda*c.
It did not have a linear velocity at all.

The equation which expresses the relationship between interference fringes and time differences is F=dt[c/λ] (where dt = 4vL/c2).

Definition of linear velocity:

If angle is measured in radians, the linear velocity is the radius times the angular velocity,  v=rΩ.

v = RΩ

R is the radius of the fiber coil.

Ω is the angular velocity of rotation.

Are you telling us, that even while drunk, you do not understand the difference between the interference fringe formula and the time differences formula?

Professor Ruyong Wang:

Second, it gives us important implications: The result, φ = 4πRΩL/cλ, can be re-written as φ = 4πvL/cλ where v is the speed of the moving arc segment AB (where R is the radius of the circular motion, Ω is the rotational rate).

SAME FORMULA AS THAT OBTAINED BY DR. YEH.

Therefore, Professor Wang's results are correct.

Your tag team partner has not done you a favor by having posted this:

∆φ = φ2 - φ1   = (4πLRΩ)/(λc)

The very same formula published a year earlier by Professor Yeh:

4πRLΩ/c^2 = 4πvL/c^2

v = RΩ

R is the radius of the fiber coil.

Ω is the angular velocity of rotation.

It didn't have c^2, it had lambda*c.
It did not have a linear velocity at all.

What kind of booze are you drinking? It must be a very bad one, because it inadvertently reveals your physics illiteracy.

THERE IS NO AREA, NO CLOSED LOOP.

4πRLΩ/c^2 = 4πvL/c^2

v = RΩ

R is the radius of the fiber coil.

Ω is the angular velocity of rotation.

A single segment of light.

The Sagnac effect registered/measured WITHOUT THE NEED FOR EITHER AN AREA OR A A CLOSED LOOP.

but in the Sagnac Gyroscopes the path is not physically connected in a loop, though the loop is closed

Two physics illiterates are posting while under the influence.

http://www.cleonis.nl/physics/phys256/sagnac.php

Essential in the Sagnac effect is that a loop is closed. Because a loop is closed the velocity that is involved is essentially an angular velocity; it's circumnavigation of an area.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257979110_Ring-laser_gyroscope_without_the_lock-in_phenomenon

Sagnac effect states that two light waves traveling different optical paths inside the same closed cavity, accumulate different phase shifts

A Review of Optical Gyroscopes

According to the Sagnac effect, two light waves, propagating in opposite directions through the same closed optical path, show a traveling time difference proportional to the rotation rate of the optical path, relative to the inertial frame.

This device is built as a resonator, and the light circulates the closed path many times as the system resonance is being created.

We have seen in equation (1.5) that the Sagnac effect is proportional to the flux of the rotation vector through the closed light path.

?

#### JackBlack

• 15977
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #109 on: June 12, 2018, 10:01:23 PM »
You need to sober up.
No that would be you.
You are claiming the final formula as it appeared in a paper is one thing, while it is actually something else.
You are blatantly misrepresenting the paper to pretend it is a function of linear velocity instead of angular velocity.

That is worse than showing it can be represented as a function of area.

If angle is measured in radians, the linear velocity
Technically it is the tangential velocity.

Are you telling us, that even while drunk, you do not understand the difference between the interference fringe formula and the time differences formula?
If that was the case would I have explained how you can switch between them when pointing out your claim about the final formula is wrong.

Professor Ruyong Wang:
Again, the work is not peer reviewed and I have explained why it is baseless.
Stop bringing up the same refuted nonsense. It doesn't make your position any stronger.

SAME FORMULA AS THAT OBTAINED BY DR. YEH.
Therefore, Professor Wang's results are correct.
If that was the case, you would also say my results are correct and not have any issue with it. You would have admitted that the sagnac shift expected for a loop is 4*A*w/c^2

the same closed optical path
Notice how it is a closed optical path, not a closed loop.

That means that there isn't an open end.
A PCM closes the light path, as would a normal mirror.

Essential in the Sagnac effect is that a loop is closed.
If you seriously believed this you wouldn't be posting such crap.
That indicates the Sagnac effect requires a closed loop and thus anything that wasn't a closed loop is not the Sagnac effect.

You are trying to pick and choose what sources you want to try and pretend you have a case.

Grow up.

Provide a derivation for the shift expected for a ring interferometer with normal mirrors or fibre optics rotating about a point outside the loop, from first principles.

Until you do that, you have no argument.

#### rabinoz

• 26528
• Real Earth Believer
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #110 on: June 12, 2018, 10:41:02 PM »
but in the Sagnac Gyroscopes the path is not physically connected in a loop, though the loop is closed

Two physics illiterates are posting while under the influence.
Mr Sandokhan, please refrain from the unfounded allegations and insults!
One who claims that the sun is only 10-12 km above the earth is hardly in a position to accuse others of being physics illiterates!

Quote from: sandokhan
http://www.cleonis.nl/physics/phys256/sagnac.php

Essential in the Sagnac effect is that a loop is closed. Because a loop is closed the velocity that is involved is essentially an angular velocity; it's circumnavigation of an area.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257979110_Ring-laser_gyroscope_without_the_lock-in_phenomenon

Sagnac effect states that two light waves traveling different optical paths inside the same closed cavity, accumulate different phase shifts

A Review of Optical Gyroscopes

According to the Sagnac effect, two light waves, propagating in opposite directions through the same closed optical path, show a traveling time difference proportional to the rotation rate of the optical path, relative to the inertial frame.

This device is built as a resonator, and the light circulates the closed path many times as the system resonance is being created.

We have seen in equation (1.5) that the Sagnac effect is proportional to the flux of the rotation vector through the closed light path.

According to you, Professor Yeh's phase-conjugate fiber-optic gyro doesn't have a loop, yet Professor Yeh labels it a loop and it measures rotation.

And Dr Yeh even calls it a "fiber-loop" on his figure 1.
The PCM has the property of making the reflected beam look as though it's a copy of the incident beam.
There is no physical "closure of the loop" but it's almost as though there was a connection from the source to the second end and light travelling in both directions is crucial.

If there were nothing else to the PCM, of course, there would be no point using it but it can also correct much of the noise inherent in the usual fibre-loop gyro.

#### sandokhan

• Flat Earth Sultan
• Flat Earth Scientist
• 6762
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #111 on: June 12, 2018, 11:31:20 PM »
You must be drunk, there is no other possibility.

Even a chatbot would know better.

You are claiming the final formula as it appeared in a paper is one thing, while it is actually something else.
You are blatantly misrepresenting the paper to pretend it is a function of linear velocity instead of angular velocity.

Here is the final formula:

Do you understand the concept of LINEAR VELOCITY?

Definition of linear velocity:

If angle is measured in radians, the linear velocity is the radius times the angular velocity,  v=rΩ.

v = RΩ

R is the radius of the fiber coil.

Ω is the angular velocity of rotation.

In the final formula, THERE IS NO AREA AT ALL.

4πRLΩ/c^2 = 4πvL/c^2

Again, the work is not peer reviewed

See, this is another proof that you are posting under the influence.

You do not remember what you posted yesterday.

Yes, a derivation I provided myself, which obtains the same result as peer reviewed publications.

You also wrote:

Yes, a derivation I provided myself, which obtains the same result as peer reviewed publications.

The equation which expresses the relationship between interference fringes and time differences is F=dt[c/λ] (where dt = 4vL/c2).

This experiment shows us two important points. First, it confirms the phase reversal of a PCM and demonstrates the Sagnac effect in an arc segment AB, not a closed path. Second, it gives us important implications: The result, φ = 4πRΩL/cλ, can be re-written as φ = 4πvL/cλ where v is the speed of the moving arc segment AB (where R is the radius of the circular motion, Ω is the rotational rate).

If we increase the radius of the circular motion as shown in Fig. 6, the arc segment AB will approach a linear segment AB, the circular motion will approach the linear motion, the phase-conjugate Sagnac experiment will approach the phase-conjugate first-order experiment as shown in Fig. 4, and the phase shift is always φ = 4πvL/cλ.

SAME FORMULA AS THAT OBTAINED BY PROFESSOR YEH.

By your own words, Professor Wang's results are correct.

That indicates the Sagnac effect requires a closed loop and thus anything that wasn't a closed loop is not the Sagnac effect.

That is the definition which excludes the technical advances made since 1925.

With the phase conjugate mirror you do not need EITHER AN AREA OR A CLOSED LOOP.

Phase-conjugate fiber-optic gyro, P. Yeh, I. McMichael, M. Khoshnevisan, Applied Optics 25(7):1029-30 · April 1986

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a170203.pdf (appendix 5.4)

Dr. P. Yeh
PhD, Caltech, Nonlinear Optics
Principal Scientist of the Optics Department at Rockwell International Science Center
Professor, UCSB
"Engineer of the Year," at Rockwell Science Center
Leonardo da Vinci Award in 1985
Fellow of the Optical Society of America, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers

The first phase-conjugate Sagnac experiment on a segment light path with an external pump configuration.

Regular Sagnac experiments use closed loops (Michelson-Gale, Hammar, ring laser gyroscopes); the phase-conjugate mirror permits the experiment to be performed WITHOUT either a loop or an area (of the interferometer): just a single segment of light (containing both straight and curved paths).

THE SAGNAC EFFECT MEASURED IN A SINGLE LIGHT SEGMENT.

NO CLOSED LOOP.

NO AREA.

Your useless claims have been refuted.

#### sandokhan

• Flat Earth Sultan
• Flat Earth Scientist
• 6762
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #112 on: June 12, 2018, 11:37:21 PM »
please refrain from the unfounded allegations and insults!
One who claims that the sun is only 10-12 km above the earth is hardly in a position to accuse others of being physics illiterates!

You must be drunk to claim that the Sun has a spherical shape:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1939765#msg1939765

Full proof using the Clayton equation that the extremely low pressure in the chromosphere cannot be explained by astrophysics.

You must be drunk to claim that the Sun has been orbiting the galaxy for billions of years.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1707290#msg1707290

You must be drunk, or very uninformed, to claim that the Sun is being powered by a nuclear furnace:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1827377#msg1827377 (the CNO cycle defies the solar nuclear furnace hypothesis)

You have a choice: either claim that you are writing under the influence, or that your level of understanding of physics is very low.

?

#### JackBlack

• 15977
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #113 on: June 12, 2018, 11:49:22 PM »
Here is the final formula:
Yes. Notice how it is not what you claimed?
Notice how it is using angular velocity, not linear velocity?
Notice how it is reporting a phase shift, not a time difference?

i.e. your prior claim of the final formula is pure bullshit.

Manipulating a formula from a peer reviewed publication to get a fundamentally different concept is quite different to deriving a formula which is the same as that which appears in many peer reviewed publications.

φ = 4πvL/cλ.
SAME FORMULA AS THAT OBTAINED BY PROFESSOR YEH.
Stop lying.
That is not the formula obtained y Professor Yeh.
As your image shows the formula obtained by Yeh is:
φ = 4πRΩL/cλ.

That is fundamentally different, replacing a rotational motion with a linear motion.

That is the definition which excludes the technical advances made since 1925.
No, it is over simplification designed to teach people, rather than formally stating the Sagnac shift.
Like I said, present an actual experiment which has a closed loop for the light path, i.e. the light continues to propagate around a loop rather than enter and leave it.

You must be drunk to claim that the Sun has a spherical shape:
Again, quit with the distractions which just further shows how ignorant of physics you actually are.

Now can you provide a derivation rather than continuing with these pathetic distractions?

#### sandokhan

• Flat Earth Sultan
• Flat Earth Scientist
• 6762
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #114 on: June 13, 2018, 12:01:48 AM »
Only a very confused person, posting while under the influence, would write these words:

That is fundamentally different, replacing a rotational motion with a linear motion.

Professor Yeh's paper deals with the detection of rotation while using a single segment of light and a phase conjugate mirror: no area, no closed loop.

You are confusing linear motion with linear velocity, a sure sign of drunkenness.

Notice how it is using angular velocity, not linear velocity?

Either you blew up a fuse, or you are exhibiting another sign of drunkenness.

4πRLΩ/c^2 = 4πvL/c^2

The formula features these physical quantities:

4

π

L, the length of the single segment of light

Ω angular velocity

c^2, speed of light squared

DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE DEFINITION OF LINEAR VELOCITY?

Even while drunk, you must have some faint memories of the days when you were taught the following definition:

Definition of linear velocity:

If angle is measured in radians, the linear velocity is the radius times the angular velocity,  v=rΩ.

v = RΩ

R is the radius of the fiber coil.

Ω is the angular velocity of rotation.

4πRLΩ/c^2 = 4πvL/c^2

Notice how it is reporting a phase shift, not a time difference?

Even while drunk, you must have some faint memories of the days when you were taught the following definition:

The equation which expresses the relationship between interference fringes and time differences is F=dt[c/λ] (where dt = 4vL/c2).

Manipulating a formula

Completely wrong. An equivalent substitution, not manipulation.

A simple use of the definition of linear velocity.

Are you saying that the following definition is wrong?

If angle is measured in radians, the linear velocity is the radius times the angular velocity,  v=rΩ.

v = RΩ

4πRLΩ/c^2 = 4πvL/c^2

With the phase conjugate mirror you do not need EITHER AN AREA OR A CLOSED LOOP.

Phase-conjugate fiber-optic gyro, P. Yeh, I. McMichael, M. Khoshnevisan, Applied Optics 25(7):1029-30 · April 1986

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a170203.pdf (appendix 5.4)

Dr. P. Yeh
PhD, Caltech, Nonlinear Optics
Principal Scientist of the Optics Department at Rockwell International Science Center
Professor, UCSB
"Engineer of the Year," at Rockwell Science Center
Leonardo da Vinci Award in 1985
Fellow of the Optical Society of America, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers

The first phase-conjugate Sagnac experiment on a segment light path with an external pump configuration.

Regular Sagnac experiments use closed loops (Michelson-Gale, Hammar, ring laser gyroscopes); the phase-conjugate mirror permits the experiment to be performed WITHOUT either a loop or an area (of the interferometer): just a single segment of light (containing both straight and curved paths).

THE SAGNAC EFFECT MEASURED IN A SINGLE LIGHT SEGMENT.

NO CLOSED LOOP.

NO AREA.

Your useless claims have been refuted.

?

#### JackBlack

• 15977
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #115 on: June 13, 2018, 12:16:56 AM »
Notice how it is using angular velocity, not linear velocity?
Either you blew up a fuse, or you are exhibiting another sign of drunkenness.
Notice how you can't even answer simple questions and instead need to resort to insulting people.

Again, repeating the same nonsense doesn't magically make it true.

Now can you provide a derivation?

#### rabinoz

• 26528
• Real Earth Believer
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #116 on: June 13, 2018, 01:18:09 AM »
please refrain from the unfounded allegations and insults!
One who claims that the sun is only 10-12 km above the earth is hardly in a position to accuse others of being physics illiterates!

You must be drunk to claim that the Sun has a spherical shape:

If you want to debate the shape of the sun, please make a separate thread of your own.
Also the topic happens to be "Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?" so If you want to continue debating the Sagnac effect, please make another thread of your own.

#### markjo

• Content Nazi
• The Elder Ones
• 41861
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #117 on: June 13, 2018, 12:40:03 PM »
Ω is the angular velocity of rotation.
Just a nit to pick.  The symbol for angular velocity is ω (lower case omega).  Ω (upper case omega) is used for electrical resistance, solid angle or the rate of precession in a gyroscope.  Please correct and update your copy-pasta library accordingly.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

#### rabinoz

• 26528
• Real Earth Believer
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #118 on: June 13, 2018, 02:57:57 PM »
Ω is the angular velocity of rotation.
Just a nit to pick.  The symbol for angular velocity is ω (lower case omega).  Ω (upper case omega) is used for electrical resistance, solid angle or the rate of precession in a gyroscope.  Please correct and update your copy-pasta library accordingly.
That's true, but in sandokhan's defence, I believe that the Ω came from the papers that both sandokhan and I were quoting from.

#### sokarul

• 18764
• Extra Racist
##### Re: Why do flat earthers seem to like Einstein so much?
« Reply #119 on: June 13, 2018, 07:47:24 PM »
please refrain from the unfounded allegations and insults!
One who claims that the sun is only 10-12 km above the earth is hardly in a position to accuse others of being physics illiterates!

You must be drunk to claim that the Sun has a spherical shape:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1939765#msg1939765

Full proof using the Clayton equation that the extremely low pressure in the chromosphere cannot be explained by astrophysics.

You must be drunk to claim that the Sun has been orbiting the galaxy for billions of years.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1707290#msg1707290

You must be drunk, or very uninformed, to claim that the Sun is being powered by a nuclear furnace:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1827377#msg1827377 (the CNO cycle defies the solar nuclear furnace hypothesis)

You have a choice: either claim that you are writing under the influence, or that your level of understanding of physics is very low.
You must be drunk to say colors don’t exist but then use the fact that colors exist as evidence for your claims.

You must be drunk to claim atoms don’t exist but then use the fact that electrons change orbits In hrdrogen in a predictable way noticed by Balmer.
« Last Edit: June 13, 2018, 07:51:33 PM by sokarul »
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.