Masanov

You do not observe others times slower, you calculate times so that to make them SLOWER and imagine LTC some 10 seconds ago. You take of million light pulses each pulse separately and give it separate time, different from LTC. So, you recalculate LTC time. Returning to the experiment, only remains to remember: For LTC time in S, we see all million pulses of S', going different distances with their different relative speeds. Say. You disagree? Then you recalculate this time LTC shows, and refer to "experiments", postulates and divide these distances by C!! YA? So, you do not receive real times, you do not observe you times, you make calculations and references. http://www.rainbow-calendar.hotmail.ru/Relativity_Experiment(9).htm

who read this? http://www.rainbow-calendar.hotmail.ru/Relativity_Experiment(9).htm

Scotland Yard tries to observe relative time Newton "filed a suit for great moral losses" from freuders. Relative times are SEEN or CALCULATED? LTC, based on MM experiment and postulates, should show in all inertial systems equal times, or time. If in all inertial systems time is equal, then it is absolute. TIME IS ABSOLUTE [deducing from all inertial systems]. If we experiment with million light pulses shot both in S and S' frames, http://www.rainbow-calendar.hotmail.ru/Relativity_Experiment(9).htm LTC in the frame S will fix equal distances to light pulses in S and relative different distances from the centre of S to light pulses in S'. This means that light pulses of S' go along these different relative distances with different relative speeds, during LTC time in S. [Excessive] demands of Einstein need these different distances be divided in C, to receive different relative times, not SEEN in any clocks, but calculated. You divide the distance, passed for common LTC time, in C to receive different relative time.[not seen, but calculated] So, if LTC time can be seen, relative times cannot be seen, but can be calculated, e.g. by Scotlandyard observers. So, if we invite some Scotlandyard observers and ask them to check relative times on their visibility, none of the relative times would be seen. Only LTC time could be seen. If relative times cannot be seen, then no experiments can be made. Calculations are just calculations, not experiments. Observers, seeing different relative times, do not see them. If, e.g. LTC time in frames S' is 100 seconds, and observed in S LTC time is 50 seconds, it means that the observer is not from Scotlandyard and violates postulates, demanding that light in LTC tubes of all inertial systems move with equal speed. You see the light pulse on the exit of the tube in S and S'. If you contract the distance passed with absolute speed, then you contract the speed proportionately, so that the light pulse got to the exit on time of LTC.

For what do you suffer hard, take equation from Newton by adding vectors of C and V to receive relative speed of one light pulse. Relative speed is C*Sin alpha, V is the speed of the observer which is C*cos alpha. So sin alpha is this equation. But only if the observer observes the light pulse at 90 degrees to the direction it moves. Call the reference pls. It's not true. If you place LTC into that spaceship, according to postulates C and cos alpha [as vector of speed] will remain the same in all inertial systems. So, your saying is a scientific lie, not investigated.

Try your patience. When I pointed to him three times and asked to explain why those times have angles (vectors), he got silent until now. So, he also agreed that the relative time [without vector] T' [as a combination of times to and from the reflector] cannot be applied separately in each case for example to the reflector. And to be a scientist one ought to have patience. Nevertheless, your impatience plays to my account.

[imath] \sqrt{\frac{c^2-v^2}{c^2}} [/imath], or [imath] \sqrt{1 -\frac{v^2}{c^2}} [/imath], or C'/C or T'/T

C' is sqr(c2-v2) a well documented expression meaning relative speed. Even if in a spaceship LTC showed different time, it would be not relative. Maybe cos alpha changed, may be accelaration influenced. By the way, do you think an article in a newspaper is a well-documented case? MM experiment showed and other experiments prove that light inside LTC should be constant, so pilots are not the proof. Sometimes pilots see visitors from Mars and other planes, and their meeting with marsians is also a well-documented case.

What posts? Name names, pls Have you been reading my posts, they have nice games for you to play.

Animation http://www.rainbow-calendar.hotmail.ru/Relativity_Experiment(7).htm Just pay attention to the fact mentioned by me several times we see and the observer S sees two light pulses of S and S' during LTC time/ These light pulses clearly enough pass different distances/ So thay have different speed' date=' not times.[/b'] Relative times are calculations not a reality. Reality is relative speeds. In Einstein formula T'/T=C'/C it is clear enough, that "discovered" by Einstein time is a substitution to C'. So, as many relative speeds we have, as many light pulses we observe, so such many times we have. Garbage, but I do not eat it. I believe in one time - LTC.

Thank you for the help! In another diagrams about three light pulses of S on three different relative distances seen by the observer S is clear that we have 3 different times, proven by Swansont and others, and me too. So, LTC will show none of these times. So, if you want to imagine larger the tube, it will not help. LTC does not show relative times. Relative times can coexist with LTC time, because they are hidden relative speeds: in the formula T'/T=C'/C it is as clear as... C' is SQR(C2-V2) and is relative speed. And LTC time is T=C'/CT' in all inertial systems. So, why and for what play with T'? This time T' cannot experimentally be proven, only calculated after we measure T, C' and C.

Animation of spheres S and S' discussed in RR thread. Hold everything. The speed of light in the Light Time Clock in all inertial systems is the same [C*cos alpha], this means that all inertial systems have one equal time! Michelson and Morley experiment helped greatly. More to it, the Postulates demand that the speed of light C and the vector [cos alpha] be observed as unchanged in all inertial systems! Remember: C* cos alpha is the speed of light in the mirror tube of LTC, which has a ruler of time on its surface (longitudinally). Angle Alpha should be a little smaller than 90 degrees so that LIGHT could go from entrance to the exit of LTC with the small speed (1 cm per second). - It is possible, judging from V1-v2/c2 and experiment with parallel mirrors of Einstein. If LTC is 1 m long, then the time of light from its entrance to exit is 100 seconds. In all inertial systems light in LTC light with the speed 1 cm per second will go this distance for 100 seconds (See Michelson and Morley experiment for reference, Swansont:no need to repeat experiments). info about the mirror tube of LTC - see here http://www.rainbow-calendar.hotmail.ru/... Next animation. In this animation of S and S' ... http://www.rainbow-calendar.hotmail.ru/Relativity_Experiment(7).htm LTC proves that two light pulses S and S' along the blue distance passed different distances!!!! We have along the blue direction two different speeds of light pulses: different distances for one LTC time. Along the blue distance we do not see different LTC times, we see different speeds of light pulses. So if you want to say that these relative speeds of light pulses are hidden relative times, it is as simple as that, just use the formula: T'/T=C'/C [relative speed/absolute speed], or knowing that C'/C=V1-v2/c2!, go next...to your paradoxes. But these relative times will differ from each other by angles the light pulses will be observed and they will exist together with LTC time! This is the main paradox: your relative times - alongside with LTC time.

I am not going to discuss here pseudoscience. You can visit my thread Light Time Clock and see that it cannot show times derived from relative speeds from the formula T'/T= C'/C. Light Time Clock Time can exist along with relative times. More over LTC can be used to check Michelson and Morely experiment. In the following short animation http://www.rainbow-calendar.hotmail.ru/MMexp(wind).htm I presented MM experiment MAIN idea very shortly. 4th idea) The scientists imagined that light is not conveyed by EATHER, the light moves in the same inertial system as the MOVING SOURCE, not with EATHER. Eather wind is trying to shift the light. 3rd idea) But from the first steps of the experiment EATHER WAS imagined as a light conveyer, and the light did not move with the source. So, there's a BIG miscomprehension: having not found Eather wind, MM stated that there's no EATHER and all the scientists surported the idea. BUT the third idea, when light shifts off the moving source, because it spreads [conveyed] in EATHER was not checked by MM at all. To check this third idea, one ought to introduce the second light source [into MM exp], or use LTC.

Is there a difference between the light speed in the mirror tube C*cos alpha and C? Einstein himself took speed V as C*cos alpha in his parralel mirrors experiment, his mirrors "caught up with the light pulse". So it's not a suprise, that angle alpha could be such to allow the speed V to be 1 cm per second!!!! I personnaly also doubt that one can see the light moving with the relative speed 1 cm per second in the direction V, but it's a science, you know. Enjoy it!

Light Time Clock has a ruler on a tube. Light shot strictly perpendicular inside the mirror tube will not move to the exits. Guys who do not believe that light can move 1 cm per second, simply cannot believe in the C*cos alpha. Alpha is the angle of the light speed to the mirror surface, acc. to postulates the angle also should be taken into account when judging the constancy of the light speed, analyzed by observers. So, as we have Light Time Clocks in both frames S and S', the observer of S' can see his Clock and also the Clock S. Only one light pulse was shot in Clock S and also in Clock S'. On exit the light pulse S' will show 20 seconds total time. The same time the light pulse S will show on exit from the tube S. Why? Because of postulates, demanding the speed C and cos alpha be unchanged. There should be the ruler, and the ruler should prove the above said. Providing that tubes are the same in production. If Light Time Clock is made, it will not depend of observers, and will show common for all inertial systems time.in previous discussions we stated that theoretically there can be three times observed by one observer. Just judge in the animation three different distances, passed by light. S': S: Light Time Clock will show only ONE time, not three or million times, only one time.

Pls read everything. Ether like the mean of waves transer should be immobile to space (3 case). Michelson and Morley decided to separate waves from Ether: in their case light should be taken by Ether wind away, as if a hand is taken by rapid waters (4 case). To verify the 3rd case, one ought to have two sources of light in Michelson and Morley experiment, not one. Better to use Light Time Clock, because with it it is better to prove the Ether existence or non-existence. Let's agree that MM exp proved there's no "wind" blowing light away off the source of light, but it does not mean that Ether cannot exist as no wind, just simply a mean of light transfer, immobile to space. In this case light could spread relatively to space, not to a mobile source. Then why did not you analize animation, which shows that in MM experiment there could be misleading proportions? I see, there's still a long way to wait, until I read 10000 visitor approval.

You agreed with 3 times. Janus also, so do not retreat. I can thank Janus for the animation of three relative speeds of light. In the rest he is disagreeable. You also were right, when you said that the Light Time Clock should be checked. But everywhere, first there was an idea first, then volunteers to spend money... If LTC is feasable, then it's a sensation, and a great deal.

See the thread "Light Time Clock" or http://www.rainbow-calendar.hotmail.ru/Light_Time_Clock.htm Light Time Clock is the best solution for checking times in inertial frames!

Light Time Clock The mirror tube with the light pulse inside is a simple Light Time Clock. The speed of the light pulse inside is C* cos alpha {alpha is angle to the mirror surface}. One can divide the tube in 20 scales. When light pulse in frames S’ comes close to the exit of the tube, it could be 20 seconds… Then in frames S the light pulse in the tube S also will have 20 seconds measurement, because postulates demand absolute speed to be constant. So along the orange distance we see relative speed of the light pulse S’ for the time 20 seconds, measured in both tubes, or Light Time Clocks. To say that time of the orange distance is bigger than in both tubes is nonsence, because Light Time Clocks cannot measure times bigger or smaller than the time that have been already measured. The orange distance was passed by the light at time t measured by both tubes with some relative speed. With other incline of the tube S’ we receive another relative orange distance and another relative speed at time t. New incline of the tube S’ cannot change measurement of time in S and S’. In the theory of relativity new incline of the tube changes time of the orange distance. More over, the time of the orange distance is prescribed to the observer of S as if his age is measured by this time. So, if we have a lot of orange distances, we have a lot of times that can be prescribed simultaneously to the observer S. If an observer sees two orange distances simultaneously (if he is cross-eyed) he can have two times prescribed by A.Einstein. These strange Einstein times exist simultaneously with the time t, measured by both tubes S and S’, and cannot be measured by devices, they can be only calculated. So no experiments checking the theory of relativity can be made, and never been made honestly without tricks. So, the only experiment, proving that times of the orange distance cannot be measured and is fake, is to measure time of the orange distance by both tubes with several inclines. Be sure this time wiil be equal.

ANIMATION OF MICHELSON AND MORLEY POSSIBLE FAILURE!!! Eye of Michelson and Morley experiment sees incoming waves, in two cases of the table turn. The "ether wind" could exist and change the length of waves, contract or stretch them, but the wave length is proportionate to the speed of the wave in the eye: the speed of waves also changed. So, because of such proportion, though the speeds of the waves before the turn of the table and after could be different, the change cannot be noticed. BECAUSE ALL INCOMING WAVES SEEM COHERENT!!! http://www.rainbow-calendar.hotmail.ru/MMExpEye(1).htm So, I repeat the already said, it is better to use a mirror tube for checking the "wind". This mirror tube can be used also as a Light Time Clock with a ruler for time passed (see separate thread).

I will discuss this mirror tube in Michelson and Morley thread. MAIN POINT: inside this mirror tube one can have light pulses zigzag movements 12 cm per second and even less. One can check both Michelson and Morley experiment and the Theory of Relativity using this tube. As for MM experiment, this tube is good, and very good, because it is very quickly reacts to changes in its velocities. E.g. if with one tube's speed the light reflection occurs on one wall, with another speed it could occur on the opposite wall, which seems very convincing. Any opinions?

I gonna be a little slower in Refutations, because I have already proved my alegations, and see no other contradictions to my position. I will discuss this mirror tube in Michelson and Morley thread and here. MAIN POINT: inside this mirror tube one can have light pulses zigzag movements 12 cm per second and even less. One can check both Michelson and Morley experiment and the Theory of Relativity using this tube. So, who can propose a good experiment proving relativity of time? We can check it. As for MM experiment, this tube is good, and very good, because it is very quickly reacts to changes in its velocities. E.g. if with one tube's speed the light reflection occurs on one wall, with another speed it could occur on the opposite wall, which seems very convincing.

Light pulses shot in frames S and S' reach the circles at times t. It appears that time t of the frame S is the same as time t of the frame S'. The observer S judges the alpha-distances 1 and 2 passed by the pulses S' by his time t, when his two pulses reached the circle S. Alpha-factor of these distances [relative light speed along this distance/absolute speed] cannot go to time t to create a relative time. If we do so, then pulses S and S' would be seen by the observer S at different times, e.g. time t and time t*alpha-factor1. This is not true: the pulses along alpha-distance 1 of both frames are seen by the observer S at one time. So alpha-factor should go to the speed of the pulse S' to create its relative speed at the alpha-distance. If to suppose that t of S and t of S' are not equal, than pulses S and S' (seen by the observer along certain alpha-distance) should pass distances ct1 and ct2*alpha-factor. If t1 and t2 not equal, than alpha-factor should go to C. Since these times t1 and t2 along alpha1-distance are equal, then alpha-factor also goes to C (because as was said pulses S and S' cannot be seen at different times). http://www.rainbow-calendar.hotmail.ru/Relativity_Refutation(6).htm