jalaldn

Suppose we set up a flashlight on the io that blinks in a regular cycle: 30 minutes ON followed by 30 minutes OFF, repeating continuously. If we observe this flashlight from Earth, we would see a strange pattern: it appears to stay OFF for 41 minutes, then ON for only 19 minutes, then OFF for 41 minutes again, and so on. How would you explain this distorted timing using the concept of light-travel delay?

I have not published anywhere in full what the form of light is, and I will not publish it now. I am only talking about those things which have evidence to explain the properties of light.

Third possibility: We are observing Io and Jupiter in real-time before Io hides. After Io hides, we see Jupiter without Io. When Io reappears, we still see Jupiter. However, Io's light doesn't arrive, but Io continues its journey without stopping. But when the light arrives, we see Io at the position it is at that time.

In Ole Rømer's time, people believed that light does not take time to travel. He proved that it does take time, and also proved its speed to be 220,000 kilometers per second. Of the two things he proved, one is wrong—it is the speed of light. Nevertheless, the discovery that light takes time to reach a destination belongs to him. Here at this point, what we are talking about is those eleven minutes when Io disappeared after emerging from behind Jupiter, at a time when there was no occultation (by Jupiter)

What is real-time energy transfer? Suppose there is a wall clock on Jupiter. When it shows 12 o'clock on Jupiter, even if we look at it from Earth and the light takes 10 minutes to reach us, we still see that same 12 o'clock. (real-time)

Although Ole Rømer's discovery confirmed four things, as far as he was concerned, it only confirmed one thing: that light takes time to reach its destination (there is a delay). it had nothing to do with the speed of light c. Everything we see happens in delayed time — whether Io disappears for one minute or for a whole year, it proves the same thing. The only question is whether it disappeared or not. What Ole Rømer actually discovered through his observation was the time it takes light to travel the distance of Earth's diameter. The later confusion arose because subsequent scientists redefined that distance as 1 AU (astronomical unit). Rømer himself never wrote it that way in his original work. That is exactly why the original ~11-minute light delay later became ~22 minutes (diameter vs. radius of Earth's orbit). https://da.wikisource.org/wiki/Om_Ole_R%C3%B8mers_Opdagelse_af_Lysets_T%C3%B8ven

Alright, now let's look at it a different way. There is a clock on Io. That clock is running continuously, but no one knows exactly when it was last set or synchronized. As Io goes behind Jupiter (from Earth's perspective), it takes exactly one hour for Io to fully disappear behind Jupiter and re-emerge on the other side. When we observe from Earth: Just before Io starts disappearing behind Jupiter, the clock on Io shows 4:32. When Io reappears from behind Jupiter (exactly one hour later in real time), the clock on Io now shows 5:32. Using only this information, how would you prove that light takes exactly 10 minutes to travel from Io to Earth?

Draw a diagram with this scale in mind, and angles won't be a problem. If we scale the Earth down so that its diameter is exactly 1 meter: Jupiter’s diameter would be ≈ 11 meters (roughly the length of a city bus or a little longer than a standard tennis court). Average distance between Earth and Jupiter would be ≈ 49.3 kilometers (about 49–50 km, or roughly 30–31 miles).

You and I are discussing an event. You are trying to explain with an imaginary example, while I am trying to explain with a real one. Now I’m coming to your imaginary scenario itself. A person named J on Io sees a wall clock hanging there. When the clock shows exactly 12:00, Io goes behind Jupiter (enters eclipse). Exactly one hour later, when Io comes out of the shadow again, the same wall clock shows 1:00. From Earth, a person named S is watching that same wall clock through a telescope. Just before Io disappears behind Jupiter, sees the clock showing 12:00, but his own Earth clock reads 12:10. When Io reappears from behind Jupiter, sees the clock showing 1:00, but his own Earth clock now reads 1:10. How does the person on Earth (S) figure out that light takes exactly 10 minutes to reach him from Io?

We see this IO before it disappears behind Jupiter, and the event we see happened ten minutes ago. Assuming it has been hidden behind Jupiter for an hour, we see IO emerging from behind Jupiter ten minutes later, meaning the light reaches us 20 minutes later. (This is the claim that emerges from your argument.)

Suppose we set up a flashlight on the io that blinks in a regular cycle: 30 minutes ON followed by 30 minutes OFF, repeating continuously. If we observe this flashlight from Earth, we would see a strange pattern: it appears to stay OFF for 41 minutes, then ON for only 19 minutes, then OFF for 41 minutes again, and so on. How would you explain this distorted timing using the concept of light-travel delay? Perhaps you will say that this distorted time wouldn't happen — it would only appear as 30 minutes on and 30 minutes off. In that case, Ole Rømer couldn't have observed any difference at all. Think about it: when no difference occurs, what would he have recorded?

Ole Rømer research confirmed four things: But only one of these has come to our attention, the remaining three have never come to our attention. First, the speed of light is finite. Second, light transfers energy in real-time. Third, the speed of light involves acceleration. Fourth, light dependent of source. Measurement Data (Rømer's Records) August Closer (~4.2 AU) Earlier (than predicted) February Farther (~6.2 AU) Later (11 minutes after prediction) Ole Rømer (1644–1710) was a Danish astronomer. He is renowned for being the first to measure the speed of light in 1676. At that time, many scientists believed that light traveled instantaneously. Rømer’s research proved that the speed of light is finite. # First, the speed of light is finite – he confirmed that the speed of light is finite. Let’s look at the rest. # Second, light transfers energy in real-time – the 11-minute delay of Io proves it. For example, let's assume it takes one hour for Io to pass behind Jupiter. If we observe this event from near Jupiter (for example, at a distance of less than 10 million kilometers), Io would be invisible to our eyes for one hour. If we observe the same event from 179.88 million kilometers away, Io would be invisible to our eyes for one hour plus 10 minutes (i.e., 70 minutes). When we are closer, Io is hidden for 60 minutes, but when we are farther away, why is it hidden for 70 minutes? The delay should increase with distance, but why does it create a difference here? Given that light has the property of arriving with a delay, what is the reason for the additional 10 minutes of invisibility? That is, the light that left Io 10 minutes ago—why did it not reach us? If the property that light arrives with a delay proportional to distance is true, then for that invisible one hour, no matter how far Jupiter's Io travels, it will still be one hour. The entire event may be delayed, but the invisible time of Jupiter's Io should not increase. # Suppose we set up a flashlight on the io that blinks in a regular cycle: 30 minutes ON followed by 30 minutes OFF, repeating continuously. If we observe this flashlight from Earth, we would see a strange pattern: it appears to stay OFF for 41 minutes, then ON for only 19 minutes, then OFF for 41 minutes again, and so on. How would you explain this distorted timing using the concept of light-travel delay? Perhaps you will say that this distorted time wouldn't happen — it would only appear as 30 minutes on and 30 minutes off. In that case, Ole Rømer couldn't have observed any difference at all. Think about it: when no difference occurs, what would he have recorded? # Ole Roemer conducted an experiment and recorded it; now let's explore what possible factors could be involved in this. When Earth is close to Jupiter, Io appears at a specific time, but when Earth is far from Jupiter, Io is seen 11 minutes later. Let's consider only when Earth is far from Jupiter. First possibility: We see Io before it hides behind Jupiter, then we see Jupiter without Io when it's hidden, then we see Io reappear near Jupiter. We observed it 11 minutes later than the expected time. Since the light coming from Jupiter is already coming delayed, why should it be delayed an additional 11 minutes? This indicates that it's coming even later than the delay. Based on this, Ole Roemer must have lied about his experiment. Second possibility: Ole Roemer says he saw Io 11 minutes later. Perhaps when Earth is far away, Io remains hidden behind Jupiter for an additional 11 minutes. If so, the delay would increase by 11 minutes in each orbit. However, given approximately 1.769 days, this possibility seems impossible. Third possibility: We are observing Io and Jupiter in real-time before Io hides. After Io hides, we see Jupiter without Io. When Io reappears, we still see Jupiter. However, Io's light doesn't arrive, but Io continues its journey without stopping. But when the light arrives, we see Io at the position it is at that time. This is my claim. If Ole Roemer's experiment is true, it confirms that even though light takes time to travel, we see real-time events. If there are any other possible explanations, please provide them. ( "Please analyze with some AI to confirm whether the events and measurements included in this are accurate.") # Third, The speed of light involves acceleration The speed of light is not a constant value. Its speed involves acceleration Ole Rømer conducted a study. Based on the time he studied, there is a possibility that the Earth's orbital path and distances could be incorrect. In fact, they were incorrect. However, the times he specified were not wrong, and there is no necessity or possibility for them to be wrong. When the Earth's orbit diameter is larger, it is 3.04 × 10¹¹ m ; when it is smaller, it is 2.94 × 10¹¹ m The time taken for light to cross the Earth's orbital diameter when it is larger is 16.898 minutes, and when it is smaller, it is 16.342 minutes. Based on the current speed of light, it takes 16 minutes to cross the Earth's orbital diameter. Ole Rømer specified 11 minutes. However, light covered that distance in just 11 minutes, meaning the speed of light at this point is 1.45 times faster. Although it is traveling at a rate of 1.45, considering the distance from Jupiter to Earth, only one-third of the total journey comes to our attention. 9.68 × 10⁸ km ÷ 3.04 × 10⁸ km ≈ 3.184 That is, due to the presence of acceleration before entering Earth's orbit, it would have entered at a speed greater than the speed of light. Therefore, it can only be called acceleration, but for now, I am not in a position to specify what its ratio is. ( Maybe even if I set it to 25% for at least a quarter of an hour, its speed will double in hour. ) Let's look at it from another angle to prove that the measurements we are currently using are wrong. "What is the true speed of light: 299,792,458 m/s or 460,606,060 m/s? Based on Io’s orbital period (approximately 1.769 days), Ole Rømer observed that eclipses occurred 11 minutes earlier when Earth was closer to Jupiter and 11 minutes later when Earth was farther away. Using this time difference, he calculated that light takes 11 minutes to cross the diameter of Earth’s orbit around the Sun (approximately 186 million miles). From this, he estimated the speed of light to be about 220,000 kilometers per second. Ole Rømer stated that light takes 11 minutes to cross the diameter of Earth’s orbit. At that time, the distances of Earth’s orbit might not have been accurately calculated, but now we know them precisely, don’t we? Now, if we calculate using the correct measurements we know today, the speed of light comes to 460,606,060 m/s. This means one of these three must be wrong: Ole Rømer’s 11 minutes, the diameter of Earth’s orbit (304,000,000 km), or the speed of light (299,792,458 m/s). Which of these do you think is wrong?" Assuming that light travels at this speed (299,792,458 m/s) , it takes 16 minutes to cross the diameter of the Earth. But here the light has crossed in 11 minutes He may have been wrong about the speed of light or diameter of Earth’s orbit, but he had no chance of being wrong about time. The paper excludes where the energy for that acceleration comes from. SEARCH THIS WORD ON GOOGLE FOR THIS ARTICLE - #( Theory Of Nature: Unified Properties Of Magnetism, Electricity, And Light )# Discussion link https://www.researchgate.net/post/The_speed_of_light_involves_acceleration_and_that_even_though_light_takes_time_to_travel_we_see_real-time_events

Ole Rømer, based on Io’s orbital period (approximately 1.769 days), observed that eclipses occurred 11 minutes earlier when Earth was closer to Jupiter and 11 minutes later when Earth was farther away. Using this time difference, he calculated that light takes 22 minutes to cross the diameter of Earth’s orbit around the Sun (approximately 186 million miles). From this, he estimated the speed of light to be around 220,000 kilometers per second. Ole Rømer conducted an experiment and recorded it; now let’s examine what possible factors could be involved. When Earth is closer to Jupiter, Io appears at a certain time, but when Earth is farther from Jupiter, Io is observed 11 minutes later. Let’s consider this only when Earth is farther from Jupiter. First Possibility: We see Io before it disappears behind Jupiter, then we see Jupiter without Io when it is hidden, and afterward, we see Io reappear near Jupiter. We observe it 11 minutes later than the expected time. Since the light from Jupiter is already arriving late, why does it need to be delayed by an additional 11 minutes? This implies it arrives even later than the delay. Based on this, it seems Ole Rømer must have lied about his experiment. Second Possibility: Ole Rømer says he saw Io 11 minutes later. Perhaps when Earth is farther away, Io remains hidden behind Jupiter for an extra 11 minutes before . If that were the case, the delay would keep increasing by 11 minutes with each orbit. However, since it is stated (approximately 1.769 days), this possibility seems unlikely. Third Possibility: We are observing Io and Jupiter in real-time before Io disappears. Even after Io disappears, we see Jupiter without Io. When Io reappears, we still see Jupiter. However, Io’s light does not arrive, yet Io continues its journey without stopping. But when the light does arrive, we see Io where it is at that moment. This is my claim. Light takes time to reach a destination, but once it reaches its destination, its transmission is instantaneous. This claim suggests that Ole Rømer’s observation refers to real-time events. If there are any other possible explanations, please provide them. You say that the reason the Moon is not visible for 11 minutes is because it is the time when light is traveling towards us. Suppose we are recording the history of Io from Earth as a video, capturing its full orbit. Io takes approximately 2,547 minutes (or about 42.45 hours) to orbit Jupiter once. Since light takes time to reach us, we can assume that what we are capturing is a history. So, we can record Io orbiting, and we can also consider Io’s disappearance as part of that history. We can also consider Io, when it is behind Jupiter in occultation, as part of that history. Even after Io emerges from behind Jupiter, unobstructed, it is not visible for 11 minutes. That is, in this entire history of approximately 2,547 minutes, 11 minutes are missing. Light cannot even provide the history of an object that is just 11 minutes away. So, how can you all believe that an event that happened 4.25 years ago at Proxima Centauri, which is 4.25 light-years away, reaches us only after 4.25 years? I believe Ole Rømer conducted an experiment, and that’s why I’m making this post. I know you believe it too. In his experiment, Ole Rømer said that Io was not visible for 11 minutes. Whatever the reason may be, we all believe, including me, that Io was not visible for 11 minutes. For a long time, we have believed that light has properties: no matter how far it travels, it will definitely reach us. However, there will be a delay depending on the distance. If we observe Io’s orbit from near Jupiter, we can see Io at all times except when it is hidden behind Jupiter. But if we observe the same Io’s orbit from Earth, which is 300 million kilometers away, the same event we saw should happen 11 minutes later. There’s no need for Io to disappear in this case. An event that happens when we are near Jupiter, when observed from Earth 300 million kilometers away, must arrive with a delay. Why does this delay cause a change? This implies that the light is destroyed before reaching its target. At this point, do you wish to understand the properties of light, or do you desire that the majesty of light should not be diminished for any reason? Here, Ole Rømer has weakened the property of light. If Ole Rømer’s experiment is true, it is certain that light gets destroyed before reaching its target. link removed

Light has real-time energy transfer, Romer, based on Io’s orbital period (approximately 1.769 days), observed that eclipses occurred 11 minutes earlier when Earth was closer to Jupiter and 11 minutes later when Earth was farther away. Using this time difference, he calculated that light takes 22 minutes to cross the diameter of Earth’s orbit around the Sun (approximately 186 million miles). From this, he estimated the speed of light to be around 220,000 kilometers per second. Ole Rømer conducted an experiment and recorded it; now let’s examine what possible factors could be involved. When Earth is closer to Jupiter, Io appears at a certain time, but when Earth is farther from Jupiter, Io is observed 11 minutes later. Let’s consider this only when Earth is farther from Jupiter. First Possibility: We see Io before it disappears behind Jupiter, then we see Jupiter without Io when it is hidden, and afterward, we see Io reappear near Jupiter. We observe it 11 minutes later than the expected time. Since the light from Jupiter is already arriving late, why does it need to be delayed by an additional 11 minutes? This implies it arrives even later than the delay. Based on this, it seems Ole Rømer must have lied about his experiment. Second Possibility: Ole Rømer says he saw Io 11 minutes later. Perhaps when Earth is farther away, Io remains hidden behind Jupiter for an extra 11 minutes before . If that were the case, the delay would keep increasing by 11 minutes with each orbit. However, since it is stated (approximately 1.769 days), this possibility seems unlikely. Third Possibility: We are observing Io and Jupiter in real-time before Io disappears. Even after Io disappears, we see Jupiter without Io. When Io reappears, we still see Jupiter. However, Io’s light does not arrive, yet Io continues its journey without stopping. But when the light does arrive, we see Io where it is at that moment. This is my claim. This claim suggests that Ole Rømer’s observation refers to real-time events. If there are any other possible explanations, please provide them. He recorded the times when Jupiter’s moon (Io) became visible but did not note the observation locations because he didn’t need to. Let’s imagine this scenario: Look at this picture. (link deleted) If we were closer to Jupiter, we would see the moon before it reaches position 1. If light traveled with the event (carrying its history), we would observe the same delay from Earth. Ole Rømer would have seen no difference. But he did observe differences: When Earth was near Jupiter, the moon appeared at position 8. When Earth was farthest from Jupiter, the moon appeared at position 9. He used this discrepancy to calculate the speed of light. Key Insight: We only see Jupiter’s moon after its light reaches us—not its position when the light was emitted. For example: We cannot see the moon moving from positions 0 to 7 because that light hasn’t reached us yet. When the light arrives, we see the moon’s current position, not where it was when the light began its journey.

Let the others be wrong until I answer. I have explained about magnetism, please give your opinion about it. If I make an opinion, don't think that I'm a know-it-all, I don't need that. It doesn't affect me if you call me stupid or shut up or if you don't know anything. Instead, if you tell me where the research I did is wrong, how is it wrong, and if it is wrong, I will correct it. This will affect me -I will answer this. We'll talk about the others later. Now tell us your opinion about magnet. I'm leaving this site to, thank you.

by my practical research in document One wave cycle life time - 0.0000000025 s Maximum travel distance - 0.749481145 m The time it takes to tell the voltage at this end of the wire to the next end is not even 0.0000000025 s, because half of that 0.0000000025 s is the opposite charge, so it must go within 0.00000000125 s The speed of electricity at this point 40,000,000,000 m/s (- for 400 MHz) if is as particles or waves how can this speed be achieved?

studiot - i have proven those two studies to the point that anyone can examine and confirm them. Jupiter moon Io doesn't seem like what you're saying, so let's just say what you're saying is wrong. Let's just say what's actually happening. Otherwise, it's going to be like physics magic. Copper CAT 6A Cable, Capable Operates at bandwidth of 500MHz. This cable is in use in many places. The oscilloscope is now in most places. If the input and output test proves that there is more than one wave or at least one wave, - I will say that all this is a lie and leave. Phi for All - Fire is an event, not a thing by itself. = I don't understand what you are saying (the deeper meaning). Do you recognize electrons as being "an electrical particle"? = Electron Electric charge−1 e To ensure this, you need an opposite charge. Electrons alone cannot give you energy. What mass do the electrons from the generator come from? No matter how many electrons you have, you can't create a milligram of matter. This is the real truth.

(This is not something I wrote just now, it's old) Atom building blocks are not electric particles , Proof- Electric particles cannot create an object with weight , Just as we cannot look at a piece of burning wood and say that the wood is made of fire - similarly, if electricity is produced from a chemical, that chemical cannot be said to be an electrical particle. A repels A and B repels B but A attracts B - The current world of physics has found the solution without finding the cause An electron or a proton is not a whole substance. It is a part of an object.A place where electric charge is present or generated is called pothu.Pothu has kai force so its counter charge Will not try to approach. So the electron orbiting concept is not necessary to here Why even in magnetism there are two opposite poles that attract each other. in the magnet. Why can't they get closer to each other? if is Atom building blocks are electric particles, There would have been no such thing as metals in this world - Because It has hardness and conductivity pothu plays a role in objects shifting and binding together For example , H2O, indicates that each of its molecules contains one oxygen and two hydrogen atoms, it needs some form of pothu to come together and. although its need to break up, its need some form pothu but they are not always needed I'll come back in the morning and talk about the rest. Tell me your opinion.

I published a study that said light is real-time. Why don't you prove that it's wrong? It would be very helpful if you could tell me why it is wrong and give me a reason. I also published a study that confirmed electricity in real time. If you could prove it wrong to me, I would be happy to give this study a reason to burn. I am doing this as my duty and I have no right to destroy it. I believe it has ruined a part of my life. I need a good reason to throw this away, so please help me.

Theory of Nature (8).pdf