Radar ranging in the Solar System

  • 234 Replies
  • 8623 Views
*

Yes

  • 604
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #30 on: November 20, 2019, 01:31:56 PM »
What is causing the ether density fluctuation such that no radar reflects off the Dome, radar reflects off the Moon on the order of seconds, and radar reflects off Venus on the order of minutes?

The density of ether around Venus is much higher than that around the Moon.
Very convenient that the density of ether around Venus changes perfectly to accommodate the heliocentric model.  And doubly convenient that the density of ether around Mercury changes perfectly to accommodate the heliocentric model.  And Mars.  And Jupiter.  And Jupiter's moons.  And Saturn and Saturn's moons.  Oh, and comets and asteroids.

The changes in ether density to alter the speed of light matches exactly in conjunction to heliocentric orbital mechanics.  Even though the heliocentric model is based primarily on orbital observations, not direct radar ranging.  Wow!

And what's event more spectacular is that the ether density from one luminary doesn't interfere with the ether density from another.  It's almost as if ether density has nothing at all to do with radar ranging.
Signatures are displayed at the bottom of each post or personal message. BBCode and smileys may be used in your signature.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6483
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #31 on: November 20, 2019, 01:36:44 PM »
Here is the SCHROETER EFFECT, the fact that the Morning Star and the Evening Star are two different planets:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1722427#msg1722427

*

EvolvedMantisShrimp

  • 926
  • Physical Comedian
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #32 on: November 20, 2019, 02:11:34 PM »
If I took a drink every time Sandokhan said 'sagnac' or 'allais', I'd be dead.
Nullius in Verba

Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #33 on: November 20, 2019, 02:39:38 PM »
Quote
Here is the SCHROETER EFFECT, the fact that the Morning Star and the Evening Star are two different planets:
Does Schroeters effect explicitly say anything about the morning and evening star being two different planets?  From what I have read it simply describes a very slight phase anomaly where the phase of Venus shows as being slight off exactly half when it should appear like that.  And one possible reason for such an anomaly is the atmosphere of Venus.  Just as the ashen light is.

Schroeter effect doesn't say anything about different planets. So I don't know where you have got that from as "fact".

Quote
If I took a drink every time Sandokhan said 'sagnac' or 'allais', I'd be dead.

If I had a £ or a $ for everytime the words Sagnac or Orbital or You must explain to your readers or You have not done your homework are said, I would be a multi-millionaire by now.

Quote
The "mirror" is a very small satellite which orbits in front of the Moon, on our side of the Dome, using the Biefeld-Brown effect.

Even Hollywood would struggle to think that one up.  Fascinating idea.  Totally ridiculous but fascinating. 
« Last Edit: November 20, 2019, 03:04:04 PM by Nucleosynthesis »

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #34 on: November 20, 2019, 02:52:45 PM »
There is none.

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f606/87008dd7b3e872c67770eaa9ada9128bbf8b.pdf

Journal of Electromagnetic Waves and Applications:

For the interplanetary propagation, earth’s orbital
motion contributes to the Sagnac effect as well. This local-ether model
has been adopted to account for the Sagnac effect due to earth’s
motions in a wide variety of propagation phenomena, particularly the
global positioning system (GPS), the intercontinental microwave link,
and the interplanetary radar.

The topic is "Radar ranging in the Solar System". How is any of that material on the Sagnac effect even slightly relevant to "Radar ranging in the Solar System"?

Now just what is your distance from Earth to the Moon and to Venus because a radar echo from the moon returns on about 2.5 seconds and from Venus around 6.5 minutes.

How is that possible?

You post this:
What is causing the ether density fluctuation such that no radar reflects off the Dome, radar reflects off the Moon on the order of seconds, and radar reflects off Venus on the order of minutes?

The density of ether around Venus is much higher than that around the Moon.
Evidence please!

Quote from: sandokhan
Mirrors were left on the moon, its possible to bounce lasers off the moon and measure the distance to the moon very precisely using these mirrors.

No.
Even there were no mirrors left on the moon radar and laser echos have been received from the moon before those retro-reflectors!
Obviously you haven't done your homework!

Quote from: sandokhan
The "mirror" is a very small satellite which orbits in front of the Moon, on our side of the Dome, using the Biefeld-Brown effect.
No!
Evidence please!
Especially as the distance to the moon measured by the earlier radar and lasers agrees with the far more precise measurement obtained after the retro-reflectors were installed on the moon by both the Russians and the Americans!

No evidence and your claims must be dismissed as simply dreamed up excuses!


*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #35 on: November 20, 2019, 05:14:28 PM »
Dr. Robert H. Romer, former Editor of the American Journal of Physics, also chastised the diagram shown above, purporting to illustrate the transverse plane wave traveling through 3-space. In endnote 24 of his noteworthy editorial, Dr. Romer takes that diagram to task as follows:

"…that dreadful diagram purporting to show the electric and magnetic fields of a plane wave, as a function of position (and/or time?) that besmirch the pages of almost every introductory book. …it is a horrible diagram. 'Misleading' would be too kind a word; 'wrong' is more accurate." "…perhaps then, for historical interest, [we should] find out how that diagram came to contaminate our literature in the first place."
So? But he says nothing to support you ideas.

Have you ever bothered to exactly what Dr Robert H. Romer, former Editor of the American Journal of Physics about "that dreadful diagram"? Probably not.
I cannot see where he is criticising current EM theory just "that dreadful diagram" for trying to show so much that it becomes quite misleading.

Here take a look, if you'll forgive a little copy-n-paste:
Quote from: Dr Robert H. Romer
24.  Here’s another of my reform efforts, as far as I know.
You all know that dreadful diagram purporting to show the electric and magnetic fields of a plane wave, as a function of position (and/or of time?) that besmirch the pages of almost every introductory book. Two mutually perpendicular sinusoids, one for E and one for B, both firmly attached to the x axis and apparently in a “perspective” view, are supposed to represent a plane monochromatic linearly polarized wave. Arrows are all over the place, some denoting x, y, and z axes, some E, and some B.

Physicists have trouble enough trying to show three quantities on a two-dimensional piece of paper, let alone nine or more. For examples of this sort of diagram, from two current and widely used texts, see Paul A. Tipler, Physics For Scientists and Engineers (Worth, New York, 1991), 3rd ed., Extended Version, p. 951, or David Halliday, Robert Resnick, and Kenneth S. Krane, Physics (Wiley, New York, 1992), 4th ed., Extended Version, Vol. 2, p. 877.
<< Read the rest on the site. >>
Please show where Dr. Robert H. Romer has the slightest objection to current EM propagation theory.
His objection is simply about "that dreadful diagram" and he shows not a trace of support for your ideas.



*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #36 on: November 20, 2019, 06:08:50 PM »
What is causing the ether density fluctuation such that no radar reflects off the Dome, radar reflects off the Moon on the order of seconds, and radar reflects off Venus on the order of minutes?

The density of ether around Venus is much higher than that around the Moon.
So, according to your Advanced Flat Earth Theory what are the distances to the Moon and to Venus.

I ask because the return time for a radar echo to the moon is roughly 2.5 seconds as in:
Quote
SP-4218 To See the Unseen - Chapter One - A Meteoric Start
[9] The Signal Corps tried several times, but without success. "The equipment was very haywire," recalled DeWitt. Finally, at moonrise, 11:48 A.M., on 10 January 1946, they aimed the antenna at the horizon and began transmitting. Ironically, DeWitt was not present: "I was over in Belmar having lunch and picking up some items like cigarettes at the drug store (stopped smoking 1952 thank God)." The first signals were detected at 11:58 A.M., and the experiment was concluded at 12:09 P.M., when the Moon moved out of the radar's range. The radio waves had taken about 2.5 seconds to travel from New Jersey to the Moon and back, a distance of over 800,000 km. The experiment was repeated daily over the next three days and on eight more days later that month.

But the return times from Venus of about 5 minutes and 6.5 minutes have been measured:
Quote
SP-4218 To See the Unseen - Chapter Two - Fickle Venus

Venus or Bust
Kingston's maser was installed at Millstone Hill just in time for the inferior conjunction of Venus. However, a klystron failure left only 265 kilowatts of transmitter power available for the experiment. On 10 and 12 February 1958, the radar was pointed to detect Venus, then some 45 million kilometers (28 million miles) away. The radar signals took about five minutes to travel the round-trip distance. In contrast, John DeWitt's signals went to the Moon and back to Fort Monmouth, NJ, in only about 2.5 seconds.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dick Goldstein wanted to use the Venus radar experiment as his thesis topic at Caltech, but his advisor, Hardy Martel, was highly skeptical. The inability of Lincoln Laboratory to detect Venus was widely known. Although he thought the task indisputably impossible, Martel finally agreed to accept the topic, but with a firm admonition: "No echo, no thesis."

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

To verify that the deflection came from Venus and was not leakage from the transmitter or an instability in the receiver, the transmitter antenna was deliberately allowed to drift off target. Six and a half minutes later, the recording stylus on Goldstein's instrument returned to its zero setting. The experiment was immediately repeated with the same result. JPL had achieved the first real-time detection of a radar signal from Venus. And Dick Goldstein had his dissertation topic.

So, from "Millstone Hill just in time for the inferior conjunction of Venus. . . . On 10 and 12 February 1958, the radar was pointed to detect Venus, then some 45 million kilometers (28 million miles) away. The radar signals took about five minutes to travel the round-trip distance."

Then "On 10 March 1961, a month before inferior conjunction, the Goldstone radars were pointed at Venus. The first signals completed the round-trip of 113 million kilometers in about six and a half minutes."

So however could your "density of ether around Venus is much higher than that around the Moon" account for not only such a massive difference but quite a variable return time from Venus?


Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #37 on: November 21, 2019, 12:52:58 AM »
It proves everything
No, it proves nothing as it is just an equation.
You can make up an equation for any old nonsense. It wont make it correct.
What you need is evidence, and that is something you don't have.

Your derivation (which you have presumably just stolen from someone) is just as invalid as what you claim of Einstein (but lacks the empirical evidence to back it up).

You make a baseless assumption and try to run with it.

There is none.
Journal of Electromagnetic Waves and Applications:
That's right. There is none. No where in your source does it claim that there is any actual missing Sagnac effect.

Like I said, take your Sagnac lies where they belong.


Now, like I said, where is the evidence for this magic dome of yours made of a material which can't exist?

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6483
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #38 on: November 21, 2019, 01:13:58 AM »
derivation... is ... invalid

You are making a fool of yourself.

The derivation starts exactly from the integral equations published by two of the top textbooks of the 20th century:

Arnold S (1971) Electrodynamics, Lectures on Theoretical Physics, Academic Press, USA
Smirnov VI (2014) A course of higher mathematics. Pergamon Press, USA

Maxwell's equations in integral form.

Then, it's a straightforward calculation:

As noted in the previous chapter Maxwell’s equations (1.10) to (1.12), along with their derivatives (1.20) and (1.21), were formulated for static systems, namely: no motion relative to the RCS. Their wrong application to dynamic systems led to the Lorentz transformation and Einstein’s theory of relativity.

We proceed with the application of the corrected Maxwell equations to a planar wave in vacuum where all coordinate systems are inertial. It follows from the assumption that all coordinate systems, including the RCS, are inertial that the velocity vector V in equations (1.1) and (1.2) is constant. Equations (1.1) and (1.2) become:











as what you claim of Einstein

This is what Einstein claimed:

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

A. Einstein, 1905

Not Maxwell's equations, but the HEAVISIDE-LORENTZ EQUATIONS.

Maxwell's original set of equations are INVARIANT UNDER GALILEAN TRANSFORMATIONS, as has been directly proven in the above derivation.

The Heaviside-Lorentz equations apply only to a static system.

Maxwell's original set of equations apply to dynamical systems as well.


*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6483
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #39 on: November 21, 2019, 01:23:21 AM »
There is none. No where in your source does it claim that there is any actual missing Sagnac effect.

Let's put your word to the test.

https://web.archive.org/web/20170808104846/http://qem.ee.nthu.edu.tw/f1b.pdf

This is an IOP article.

The author recognizes the earth's orbital Sagnac is missing whereas the earth's rotational Sagnac is not.

In GPS the actual magnitude of the Sagnac correction
due to earth’s rotation depends on the positions of
satellites and receiver and a typical value is 30 m, as the
propagation time is about 0.1s and the linear speed due
to earth’s rotation is about 464 m/s at the equator. The
GPS provides an accuracy of about 10 m or better in positioning.
Thus the precision of GPS will be degraded significantly,
if the Sagnac correction due to earth’s rotation
is not taken into account. On the other hand, the orbital
motion of the earth around the sun has a linear speed of
about 30 km/s which is about 100 times that of earth’s
rotation. Thus the present high-precision GPS would be
entirely impossible if the omitted correction due to orbital
motion is really necessary.


Meanwhile, as in GPS, no effects of earth’s orbital motion
are reported in these links, although they would be
easier to observe if they are in existence. Thereby, it is evident
that the wave propagation in GPS or the intercontinental
microwave link depends on the earth’s rotation, but
is entirely independent of earth’s orbital motion around
the sun or whatever
. As a consequence, the propagation
mechanism in GPS or intercontinental link can be viewed
as classical in conjunction with an ECI frame, rather than
the ECEF or any other frame, being selected as the unique
propagation frame. In other words, the wave in GPS or the
intercontinental microwave link can be viewed as propagating
via a classical medium stationary in a geocentric
inertial frame.



Published by the BULLETIN OF THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY, one of the most prestigious journals in the world today.

C.C. Su, "A Local-ether model of propagation of electromagnetic wave," in Bull. Am. Phys. Soc., vol. 45, no. 1, p. 637, Mar. 2000 (Minneapolis, Minnesota).

Both the rotational and the orbital motions of the earth together with the orbital
motion of the target planet contribute to the Sagnac
effect. But the orbital motion of the sun has no effects
on the interplanetary propagation.
On the other hand, as
the unique propagation frame in GPS and intercontinental
links is a geocentric inertial frame, the rotational motion
of the earth contributes to the Sagnac effect. But the orbital
motion of the earth around the sun and that of the
sun have no effects on the earthbound propagation.
By
comparing GPS with interplanetary radar, it is seen that
there is a common Sagnac effect due to earth’s rotation
and a common null effect of the orbital motion of the sun
on wave propagation. However, there is a discrepancy in
the Sagnac effect due to earth’s orbital motion.
Moreover,
by comparing GPS with the widely accepted interpretation
of the Michelson–Morley experiment, it is seen that
there is a common null effect of the orbital motions on
wave propagation, whereas there is a discrepancy in the
Sagnac effect due to earth’s rotation.


Based on this characteristic of uniqueness and switchability of the propagation frame,
we propose in the following section the local-ether model
of wave propagation to solve the discrepancies in the in-
fluences of earth’s rotational and orbital motions on the
Sagnac effect
and to account for a wide variety of propagation
phenomena.


Anyway, the interplanetary Sagnac effect is due to
earth’s orbital motion around the sun as well as earth’s
rotation.
Further, for the interstellar propagation where
the source is located beyond the solar system, the orbital
motion of the sun contributes to the interstellar Sagnac
effect as well.

Evidently, as expected, the proposed local-ether model
accounts for the Sagnac effect due to earth’s rotation and
the null effect of earth’s orbital motion in the earthbound
propagations in GPS and intercontinental microwave link
experiments. Meanwhile, in the interplanetary radar, it accounts
for the Sagnac effect due both to earth’s rotation
and to earth’s orbital motion around the sun.


Based on the local-ether model, the propagation is entirely
independent of the earth’s orbital motion around
the sun or whatever and the velocity v for such an earthbound
experiment is referred to an ECI frame and hence
is due to earth’s rotation alone. In the original proposal,
the velocity v was supposed to incorporate earth’s orbital
motion around the sun. Thus, at least, v2/c2
=~ 10-8. Then the amplitude of the phase-difference variation
could be as large as π/3, when the wavelength is
0.6 µm and the path length is 10 m. However, as the velocity
v is the linear velocity due to earth’s rotation alone,
the round-trip Sagnac effect is as small as v2/c2∼ 10-12 which is merely 10-4 times that due to the orbital motion.



The Sagnac effect is a FIRST ORDER effect in v/c.

Even in the round-trip nature of the Sagnac effect, as it was applied in the Michelson-Morley experiment, thus becoming a second order effect within that context, we can see that the ORBITAL SAGNAC IS 10,000 TIMES GREATER than the rotational Sagnac effect.


Your statement has just been refuted and debunked: the orbital SAGNAC effect is missing.


THE ORBITAL SAGNAC EFFECT IS MUCH GREATER THAN THE ROTATIONAL SAGNAC EFFECT.

LISA Space Antenna



The LISA interferometer rotates both around its own axis and around the Sun as well, at the same time.

That is, the interferometer will be subjected to BOTH the rotational Sagnac (equivalent to the Coriolis effect) and the orbital Sagnac effects.

Given the huge cost of the entire project, the best experts in the field (CalTech, ESA) were called upon to provide the necessary theoretical calculations for the total phase shift of the interferometer. To everyone's surprise, and for the first time since Sagnac and Michelson and Gale, it was found that the ORBITAL SAGNAC EFFECT is much greater than the CORIOLIS EFFECT.

The factor of proportionality is R/L (R = radius of rotation, L = length of the side of the interferometer).



Algebraic approach to time-delay data analysis: orbiting case
K Rajesh Nayak and J-Y Vinet

https://www.cosmos.esa.int/documents/946106/1027345/TDI_FOR_.PDF/2bb32fba-1b8a-438d-9e95-bc40c32debbe

This is an IOP article, published by the prestigious journal Classic and Quantum Gravity:

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0264-9381/22/10/040/meta

In this work, we estimate the effects due to the Sagnac phase by taking the realistic model for LISA orbital motion.

This work is organized as follows: in section 2, we make an estimate of Sagnac phase
for individual laser beams of LISA by taking realistic orbital motion. Here we show that, in general, the residual laser noise because of Sagnac phase is much larger than earlier estimates.

For the LISA geometry, R⊙/L is of the order 30 and the orbital contribution to the Sagnac phase is larger by this factor.



The computations carried out by Dr. R.K. Nayak (over ten papers published on the subject) and Dr. J.Y. Vinet (Member of the LISA International Science Team), and published by prestigious scientific journals and by ESA, show that the orbital Sagnac is 30 times greater than the rotational Sagnac for LISA.


CALTECH acknowledges that the ORBITAL SAGNAC EFFECT is not being registered by GPS satellites.


https://web.archive.org/web/20161019095630/http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/ptti/2003papers/paper34.pdf

Dr. Massimo Tinto, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Principal Scientist

In the SSB frame, the differences between back-forth delay times are very much larger than has been previously recognized. The reason is in the aberration due to motion and changes of orientation in the SSB frame. With a velocity V=30 km/s, the light-transit times of light signals in opposing directions (Li, and L’i) will differ by as much as 2VL (a few thousands km).

SSB = solar system barycenter

Published in the Physical Review D

http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/ is the U.S. Naval Observatory website


https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0310017.pdf

Within this frame, which we can assume to be Solar System Barycentric (SSB), the differences between back-forth delay times that occur are in fact thousands of kilometers, very much larger than has been previously recognized by us or others. The problem is not rotation per se, but rather aberration due to motion and changes of orientation in the SSB frame.

The kinematics of the LISA  orbit brings in the effects of motion at several orders of magnitude larger than any previous papers on TDI have addressed. The instantaneous rotation axis of LISA swings about the Sun at 30 km/sec, and on any leg the transit times of light signals in opposing directions can differ by as much as 1000 km.

Aberration due to LISA’s orbit about the Sun dominates its instantaneous rotation.

The ORBITAL SAGNAC calculated at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory amounts to an admitted difference in path lengths of 1,000 kilometers.

The difference in path lengths for the rotational Sagnac is 14.4 kilometers:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0306125.pdf (Dr. Daniel Shaddock, Jet Propulsion Laboratory)

https://gwic.ligo.org/thesisprize/2011/yu_thesis.pdf (pg. 63)

Therefore the difference in path lengths for the ORBITAL SAGNAC is some 60 times greater than the difference in path lengths for the rotational Sagnac, according to these calculations.


You have to accept reality: CALTECH/NASA/ESA is telling you that THE ORBITAL SAGNAC EFFECT IS MISSING. Then, the Earth is stationary. Or you have to accept the local-ether model.

Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #40 on: November 21, 2019, 02:09:41 AM »
derivation... is ... invalid
Wow, needing to cut down the post that much.
At that point you may as well just make it say anything.

How about you try and actually address what has been said?
Better still, how about you provide evidence of your magic dome of impossibility?

Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #41 on: November 21, 2019, 02:38:36 AM »
If I'm not mistaken, Sandys most recent post in this discussion is a virtual carbon copy of several other posts he published under the solar energy source discussion under FE Debate.  It certainly looks essentially identical.

So if Sandy want's to persist in his analysis of Orbital Sagnac effects and LISA Space antennas etc, then perhaps he should post them under their own thread and stop infecting other discussions in which those topics are totally irrelevant.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #42 on: November 21, 2019, 03:35:02 AM »
derivation... is ... invalid
<< The topic is "Radar ranging in the Solar System". Irrelevant material deleted >>
So you are making a fool of yourself.

There is none. No where in your source does it claim that there is any actual missing Sagnac effect.
<< The topic is "Radar ranging in the Solar System". Irrelevant material deleted >>
Are we to assume that you have no answer to the vastly different radar echo return times even though the Moon and Venus are presumably at similar distances from Earth in your "Advanced flat Earth Theory".

At least, according to your theory Venus is certainly closer than the Sun because we see regular see Venus transit the Sun.
And you seem to support that in Venus/Mercury/Iss-Atlantis Sun Transit - True distance Earth - Sun « Message by sandokhan »

Now post something relevant to the topic, eg answer Radar ranging in the Solar System « Reply #36 on: Today at 11:08:50 AM »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6483
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #43 on: November 21, 2019, 03:49:40 AM »
Not me.

It was you who was unceremoniously dumped in AR, and everyone there took a swipe at you.

You are the inspector Clouseau of this forum, a bumbling and amateurish clown who pokes his nose into every thread. But it doesn't take long to painfully remind everyone that your tehnical "expertise" is woefully lacking, you get to be defeated in each and every discussion in which you ever participated, a very sad record.

You, the RE, brought the discussion to this very point: you are demanding to see the proofs of the existence of the Dome, of the local-ether model.

If those proofs are being provided, you then start to complain bitterly about the content of my messages, while your continuous trolling goes on unabated.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #44 on: November 21, 2019, 03:56:36 AM »
Not me.
So, you have no answer to return echoes from the Moon taking about 21/2 SECONDS an those from Venus taking from 5 to 61/2 MINUTES.

Even though, according to YOU, Venus is closer than 15 km (or is it 10 km?) from Earth.

Thought not!

Can we now claim that your aetheric claims pure guesswork and hence bunkum?
« Last Edit: November 21, 2019, 04:00:22 AM by rabinoz »

*

rvlvr

  • 1962
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #45 on: November 21, 2019, 04:01:35 AM »
~15 kilometers?! Like less than two Everests?

What the hell?

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6483
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #46 on: November 21, 2019, 04:02:23 AM »
Those issues were answered a long time ago.

Between the Moon and Venus/Mercury, you have the rotating ether field. Furthermore, you have another ether field spinning around Venus, while there is none swirling around the Moon.

None of you here are able to explain the Schroeter effect, which does prove my statements:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1722427#msg1722427

The readings for the Morning and the Evening stars are totally DIFFERENT, and you cannot bring the Venusian atmosphere into the discussion.

Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #47 on: November 21, 2019, 04:05:13 AM »
.. I was going to say you couldn't even make this stuff up if you tried...  but evidently someone can!

*

rvlvr

  • 1962
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #48 on: November 21, 2019, 04:07:48 AM »
.. I was going to say you couldn't even make this stuff up if you tried...  but evidently someone can!
Sheesh.

Let's see. It was about 16 kilometers to the office, and back. Depending on which bike I chose in the morning (and the time of the year), it took me between 40 to 50 minutes in total to cycle that distance. Did not know I can get to Venus in that time!

Live and learn...
« Last Edit: November 21, 2019, 04:13:21 AM by rvlvr »

Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #49 on: November 21, 2019, 04:15:55 AM »
Visions of a silhouetted cyclist flying past Venus just like on ET come to mind...  sorry but just had to say that!

*

rvlvr

  • 1962
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #50 on: November 21, 2019, 04:23:23 AM »
Visions of a silhouetted cyclist flying past Venus just like on ET come to mind...  sorry but just had to say that!
I lack the basket, but it is a nice picture!

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #51 on: November 21, 2019, 04:56:27 AM »
Those issues were answered a long time ago.

Between the Moon and Venus/Mercury, you have the rotating ether field. Furthermore, you have another ether field spinning around Venus, while there is none swirling around the Moon.
Are you claiming that your totally unproven "rotating ether field" causes a FIVE MINUTE delay in the light propagation even though Venus is closer than 15 km from earth according to YOU!

Quote from: sandokhan
None of you here are able to explain the Schroeter effect, which does prove my statements:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1722427#msg1722427
No, it does not prove anything of the kind. At the most is show an unexpectedly wider limb of Venus!

Quote from: sandokhan
The readings for the Morning and the Evening stars are totally DIFFERENT, and you cannot bring the Venusian atmosphere into the discussion.
Where does Schroeter mention that "the Morning and the Evening stars are totally DIFFERENT".

I'll call that rubbish until you come up with some evidence far better than "the Schroeter effect".

You mentioned the "Venusian atmosphere", not I but I'll "bring the Venusian atmosphere into the discussion" if I so choose.

Now, please come up with some plausible explanation as to why radar echoes take over 5 minutes to return from Venus when it is closer to Earth than the Sun.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6483
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #52 on: November 21, 2019, 05:04:37 AM »
Listen to Newton:

Newton believed that there are TWO GRAVITATIONAL FORCES AT WORK:

1. Terrestrial gravity

2. Planetary/stellar gravity

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

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

The LOCAL-ETHER MODEL is completely proven by RUDERFER's theorem, which is the modern version of Newton's ideas on the subject.

Venus has a spinning ether field, the Moon does not.

Where does Schroeter mention that "the Morning and the Evening stars are totally DIFFERENT".

You were offered the bibliographical references which tell you that you are wrong and that you haven't done your homework on the subject at all.

Unless you can explain the Schroeter effect, I win.

Official astronomy science:

"In 1793, J. H. Schroeter reported, for the first time, observing the southern limb of the planet Venus remaining concave up to about eight days before or after its conjunction with the Sun, according to his best estimate.

In general, the time difference between the time of theoretical dichotomy and the time of observed dichotomy is about four to six days."

The various theoretical interpretations of this long-standing anomaly, whether they be atmospheric, kinematic or optical, have not been able to explain the basic Schroeter effect: they cannot explain in any way the extended Schroeter effect.


Nonetheless, the phase anomaly of Venus is much wider than the Schroeter's effect, and can produce differences of ± 0.10 for all phases from near 0.1 Phase to 0.9 Phase; and not just at 0.5 Phase alone.


Eastern elongation Venus Schroeter effect data:

http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/2005JBAA..115...79H/0000080.000.html

Western elongation Venus Schroeter effect data:

http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/2005JBAA..115...79H/0000081.000.html


Notable differences observed:

http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/2005JBAA..115...79H/0000082.000.html


The superb analysis of the Schroeter effect in the context of geocentrism:

http://web.archive.org/web/20120726101423/http://www.realityreviewed.com/Schroter.htm (it includes a different proof of the fact that the Schroeter effect can only take place within the geocentric context, many other quotes concerning the Schroeter effect)


*

rvlvr

  • 1962
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #53 on: November 21, 2019, 05:16:06 AM »
I don’t think you win even if someone here cannot explain something to you. Needs a bit wider audience than that.

*

Yes

  • 604
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #54 on: November 21, 2019, 05:17:17 AM »
Listen to Newton:

Newton believed that there are TWO GRAVITATIONAL FORCES AT WORK:

1. Terrestrial gravity

2. Planetary/stellar gravity
My understanding is that the idea of terrestrial gravity being different from whatever the planets orbiting the sun was not uncommon at the time.  However, it was in fact Newton (and colleagues) who unified them in his Principia.  As I've said before, it would be a lot less embarrassing for you if you googled your wild claims first.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_law_of_universal_gravitation

Perhaps you should Listen to Newton and realize the heliocentric model explains and predicts the motions of the planets, including the planet earth, as well as can be measured.

By the way, that still doesn't explain whatsoever how ether density would affect radar ranging with such an extreme effect.  You keep getting lost in your own posts!
Signatures are displayed at the bottom of each post or personal message. BBCode and smileys may be used in your signature.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6483
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #55 on: November 21, 2019, 05:23:55 AM »
Perhaps you should Listen to Newton and realize the heliocentric model explains and predicts the motions of the planets, including the planet earth, as well as can be measured.

You must be joking.

Here is the derivation of KEPLER'S FIRST LAW OF PLANETARY MOTION from NEWTON'S HYPOTHESIZED LAW OF GRAVITATION:




But the entire Nova Astronomia was faked/falsified, each and every entry:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1776670#msg1776670

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1776680#msg1776680

“After detailed computational arguments Donahue concluded the results reported by Kepler . . . were not at all based on Brahe’s observational data; rather they were fabricated on the basis of Kepler’s determination that Mars’s orbit was elliptical."

"The fabricated data appear in calculated positions for the planet Mars, which Kepler used as a case study for all planetary motion. Kepler claimed the calculations gave his elliptical theory an independent check. But in fact they did nothing of the kind."

''He fudged things,'' Dr. Donahue said, adding that Kepler was never challenged by a contemporary. A pivotal presentation of data to support the elliptical theory was ''a fraud, a complete fabrication,'' Dr. Donahue wrote in his paper. ''It has nothing in common with the computations from which it was supposedly generated.''

*

Yes

  • 604
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #56 on: November 21, 2019, 05:24:38 AM »
Wait a second.  Sandokhan, does ether density affect light exactly equally at all wavelengths?  And this would be light across the spectrum at least from visible to radio.

In real life, when light is refracted and slowed in a medium, such as water, the different wavelengths are refracted to different amounts.  That's why you see chromatic aberrations in water or glass or other transparent media.

But apparently your ether density theory doesn't account for this.  Otherwise, we'd see obvious color warping around the Moon.  Whoops!
Signatures are displayed at the bottom of each post or personal message. BBCode and smileys may be used in your signature.

*

Yes

  • 604
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #57 on: November 21, 2019, 05:32:39 AM »
Here is the derivation of KEPLER'S FIRST LAW OF PLANETARY MOTION from NEWTON'S HYPOTHESIZED LAW OF GRAVITATION:




That is pretty funny, man.  Maybe you should read through the course where you stole those images from.
http://radio.astro.gla.ac.uk/a1dynamics/

Signatures are displayed at the bottom of each post or personal message. BBCode and smileys may be used in your signature.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6483
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #58 on: November 21, 2019, 05:36:30 AM »
Not funny at all.

Kepler fudged/faked each and everyone of his entries in the Nova Astronomia.

That first law of planetary motion can be derived from Newton's law of gravitation.

One is as fake as the other.

does ether density affect light exactly equally at all wavelengths?

https://books.google.ro/books?id=3sT0flMVEzcC&pg=PA92&lpg=PA92&dq=ether+affects+light+at+all+wavelengths&source=bl&ots=V2xzYi4DMw&sig=ACfU3U2mWuyYB1jFW3ISbvfgjl4tDg3lhw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjHlL_2s_vlAhVYQkEAHS_2CSYQ6AEwEHoECAoQAg#v=onepage&q=ether%20affects%20light%20at%20all%20wavelengths&f=false

*

Yes

  • 604
Re: Radar ranging in the Solar System
« Reply #59 on: November 21, 2019, 06:01:34 AM »
I'm not sure what you want me to glean from that pseudoscience book.  That page isn't talking about slowing down light in ether.  It's discussing the author's incorrect understanding of light observed from a source or observer in relative motion.  (Are you implying that the motion of the luminaries is causing the ether density changes which causes radar slowdown in lockstep to the expected ranging results from the heliocentric model?)

By the way, there's a big difference from "affects light at all wavelengths" and "affects light at all wavelengths exactly equally".

So I'll leave it up to you to derive an ORBITAL SAGNAC CORIOLIS ALLAIS RADAR SUBQUARK PARADOX to explain away how slowing down light results in optical dispersion in all cases except near the unobserved Dome.  Can't wait to read about it!
Signatures are displayed at the bottom of each post or personal message. BBCode and smileys may be used in your signature.